Oldest person alive changing more rapidly than top ranked 2008 Democratic presidential contenders ...

Yone Minegawa

Like staying on the top of the heap of Democrats running for the 2008 presidential nomination, being the oldest person alive in the world is about the quickest changing title around.

Just yesterday, the fourth "oldest person" since December took over the title. (Let's see, by comparison ... Hillary, Obama, Al-baby and John Edwards were all momentary phenoms, right?) Anyway, Yone Minagawa, now 114, has lived through the reigns of four Japanese emperors and now spends most of her time in bed at a nursing home in the south-western city of Fukuoka. She was recognised as the oldest person known to be alive, following the death yesterday of Emma Faust Tillman, who was six weeks older but only lasted four days in the position. Tillman lived somewhere near my brother in Connecticut, but was a lifelong non-drinker, non-smoker and ... oh yes, like most in the Guinness list for longevity, was a woman, of course.

(Sung to the Vietnam era tune of "Where have all the young men gone?") Where have all the Sunnis gone; gone to Jordan every one!

Victory? This, friends is what we apparently are fighting for ... a photo taken earlier this week in Mansour, Baghdad in Iraq ... as Peter, Paul and Mary would indeed ask: "Where have all the flowers gone? Long time passing ..."

Having lived in the Middle East for a decade (the 90s) before returning to America, my heart aches for all of the homeless, hurting and hungry children of Baghdad. Saddam was indeed a butcher, but his autocratic rule at least held the country together and the Al-Qaida in check. And we held both Saddam and his regime in check with our sanctions, north and south no-fly zones and inspections. Not a single American was killed by a single Iraqi for almost twelve years.

Then came Shock and Awe. We lit the fuse.

Where are the Sunnis? Well, those who aren't fighting for a piece of their homeland are either dead, dying or have fled to Jordan, Syria and other countries in the region. And who are we fighting this week? Well, if I am to believe CNN, it is largely the Shiites this week. We have apparently defeated the Sunnis.

Sad.

To hell with politics and the Middle East ... let's talk TIGER!!!

Tiger Woods wins at Torrey Pines -- huh? It's spring already?

Although Tiger doesn't count it as a streak, the PGA does. That is, the PGA looks at his seven straight PGA Tour wins as a streak ... and it sees Tiger as within four of tying Byron Nelson's eleven straight back in 1945. Tiger, on the other hand, sportsman that he is, regards his losses in Europe and in Asia as "counting" and his "streak" as only beginning.

He also announced that if his wife has the baby during the week of the British Open, he will skip even that -- and even if it means not having a chance at a Grand Slam. Now that's an American hero!

Anyway, he blistered the course today as I listened to the "play-by-play" on my XM radio (XM 146) while driving into Aberdeen to pick up some totes to begin emptying my living room into the bomb shelter (a.k.a. new utility room) out in back.

As I listened excitedly, Tiger shot a final round six-under-par 66 today (January 28th) to win the Buick Invitational for the third straight year and win his seventh consecutive PGA Tour title.

Now wasn't that nicer than my reporting on the deaths in Iraq or the premature Democratic (and Republican) races for the 2008 Presidential elections?

Hafnium ... takes us halfway there -- that is, to the blog posting of last Thursday.

Pretty looking stuff, isn't it?

Of course, you all remember hafnium from the song, "The Elements" written and sung [sic] by Tom Lehrer in the mid-sixties ... don't you? "Hafnium, titanium (pause, gasp for breath) zirconium and radium" was one of the lines as I recall (NOT!).

But that silliness aside, Intel announced a breakthrough in microprocessor manufacturing today (yesterday, according to my watch--it's after midnight in Ocean Shores), essentially the discovery of a new molecular compound material that will replace silicon dioxide in microprocessors using 45 nm and smaller lithographies. What I said in what I posted a little earlier this week was pointed towards 10 to 20 years from now; this new announcement by Intel will revolutionize chips only a year or so from about ten this morning ... or yesterday morning in Ocean Shores, Washington.

That was even before I saw The Queen (last posting) that so moved me.

If you wish to read the original three-page article and announcement (and skip what's below), go to the article that is linked here.

But whatever the time where you might be, on Friday morning Intel announced that it has developed working 45 nm processor samples running Microsoft Windows Vista, Mac OS X, Linux and God-only-knows what other operating systems, where this material, a compound based on the element hafnium, serves as the dielectric gate between the current source and the current drain. Hafnium or Hf has the atomic number 72 and is actually found in fake diamonds. Damn! Just when I had finally thrown away all of those pieces of jewelery that I picked up in Dubai while teaching for the American University there.

Hmm ... sounds like that Tom Lehrer song again. Hafnium is also found naturally in the impurities of, you guessed it -- zirconium.

(quoting here from Intel's announcement) With the hafnium material serving as the gate, Intel will then replace the polysilicon electrode layer with a metal electrode, the exact alloy used here also being kept secret. As a result, transistors for 45 nm semiconductors starting with Intel's Penryn family will be fabricated at half the size of those used in today's 65 nm Core 2 processors. At the same time, transistor switching power can be reduced by as much as 30%, while still obtaining a performance improvement of as much as 20%. And current leakage at the gate will be reduced by a factor of 10.

Intel's current processor roadmap leaps between processor technology families every two years. We saw the latest leap just last summer, from the last of the Pentium D dual-core processors at 90 nm, to the Conroe/Merom/Woodcrest series at 65 nm. But while this "high-k + metal gate" (HK+MG) development does play into Intel's planned leap to the Penryn architecture, Friday's revelation literally marks only the start of a second era in metal oxide semiconductor production.

Since the 1960s, the "gates" in chips have been made using silicon dioxide (SiO2), and electrodes have been made with polysilicon. Substrates are the third major material; Intel has used silicon or silicon germanium (SiGe), and the industry has experimented with gallium arsenide. HK+MG replaces two of the three compounds used in semiconductor transistors since the 1960s.

"These are not laboratory devices," Intel's director of process architecture and integration, Mark Bohr, announced Friday morning. "These are not just research results. We've actually made these transistors in a fully-integrated 45 nm CMOS process flow. We have high-k metal gate PMOS transistors [positive flow] and NMOS transistors [negative flow], both providing higher performance than the previous generation and lower leakage than the previous generation. This integrated process flow also meets our reliability requirements and is manufacturable in high volume."

The "k" in the term "high-k dielectrics" refers to a material's relative ability to hold an electric charge. In electrodynamics, it's actually written with the Greek lower-case letter kappa. The "kappa," if you will, of silicon dioxide is about 3.9. That number means nothing until you compare it to that of hafnium compounds. Intel has not revealed whether the compound it discovered is based a hafnium silicate or hafnium oxide. The "kappa" for pure hafnium silicates has been observed in a range between 15 and 25, while pure hafnium oxides have been observed at 40. Intel is likely using an "impure" compound for the sake of structural integrity; laboratory tests on hafnium oxides yielded observed "kappa" of over 16. So it's quite possible that Intel's new compound may be as much as four times more efficient than silicon dioxide at holding a charge. (Quote from Intel statement)

For the geeks among you, the diagram below (lifted from Intel's announcement) shows why such a metal will about double the speed of next year's chips while halving their sizes. The diagram (courtesy of Intel) depicts the differences between a first-generation MOS transistor and an HK+MG transistor to be used in Intel's Penryn 45 nm CPUs.

Okay ... my eyes teared at the slaughter of the 14-point stag in The Queen

Although the movie itself was a combination of human-level high political drama and subtle (and not-so-subtle) high political comedy, the most powerful scenes in the just now Oscar-nominated film, The Queen, dealt with Queen Elizabeth's inadvertent run-in with a 14-point stag deer that her husband and two grandsons were stalking so as to take the boys' minds off of the loss of their mother (Princess Di) in the days following her tragic death.

As those of you who know me know full well, I'm an animal lover through and through. The scenes of the beautiful 14-point stag in its majestic splendor stirred my soul as nothing I've seen recently in a movie has. And the scenes in the slaughterhouse of the headless corpse of the once splendid animal brought tears to my eyes as no recent movie has. How and why, for the love of God, do "sportsmen" find pleasure in stalking and murdering such beautiful and intelligent of their fellow travelers on this, God's green earth?

As for the movie, it was surely one of the best I've seen in my lifetime and showed the British Royal Family in all its ugly splendor ... certainly in comparison with the stag deer who was a great counterpoint to the petty concerns of Queen Elizabeth, the "Queen Mum" and the rest of the "royal" family.

Dame Helen Mirren was terrific in her portrayal of QE II ... probably this year's Oscar winner for Best Actress. QE II's husband, Prince Phillip and Princess Dianna's ex, Prince Charles (played by James Cromwell and Alex Jennings, resp.) could probably sue the film's producers for the unflattering portraits we got of them and Tony Blair (played by Michael Sheen) never looked so good as a politician and as a person ... certainly not like the current groveling image we have of him as one of President Bush's lap-dogs vis-a-vis his continuing support of ours and Britain's involvement in the Iraq Civil War.

Anyway, the film is a must see, IMHO, and was certainly a wonderful diversion from my teaching up "on the hill."

I guess I'll be checking dirty fingernails for electronic games ...

Two-state rotaxane molecules designed in the UCLA laboratory of J. Fraser Stoddart act as switches (right) to store information in an ultra-dense 160-kilobit memory made up of a 400 x 400 grid of nanowires (left). Stoddart has been called the 'Maestro of Molecules.'

Holy moley (molecule, that is)! Some scientists at Caltech and UCLA say that they have created a memory circuit no larger than a human white blood cell but with 160,000 bits of capacity. At 100 billion bits per square centimeter, the chip is about 100 times more tightly packed than current memory circuits. Researchers say advancements in the field are overtaking Moore's Law. And since our "appetite" for electronic "junk" races after technology (see Le Rouge et le Noir comment), the next twenty years will be something to watch. [Moore's Law originally stated that the density of "transistors" on a chip will double every two years.]

I only finished discussing Moore's Law to my "students" about three "shifts" ago and now ... obsolete information! And to think I was worrying about them sneaking an iPod into the classroom ... hellfire, I'll have to check the dirt under their (often pretty filthy) fingernails.

Sorry that I didn't have a political tidbit to pass on at this moment.

And if you thought that the US versus the Shiites and Sunnis is bad ...

The unstoppable Benjamin versus the immovable Mahmoud

Youch! If you thought that the pre-Armageddon ongoing in Iraq is bad, wait till Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clash.

As of yesterday, Israel's opposition leader (former Prime Minister and likely next "Commander-in-Chief") is calling for the the president of Iran to be brought to trial in an international court. Netanyahu says he and his compadres are trying to bring Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to trial for incitement to genocide. Netanyahu said Ahmadinejad is an international war criminal because he has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map." True enough.

As if to accent Netanyahu's concerns, Iran conducted missile tests yesterday as its leadership escalated its warnings of a possible military confrontation with both Israel and the United States. In another show of defiance, Tehran said Monday it had barred 38 U.N. nuclear inspectors from entering the country. This was obviously in retaliation for the U.N. Security Council resolution in December imposing sanctions on Iran.

The drumbeat I hear suggests that Iran does not intend to back down in its standoff with Israel and the West. Iran's leaders have warned of the possibility of a U.S. attack since President Bush announced Jan. 9 the deployment of a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf region, a move U.S. officials have said is a show of strength directed at Iran.

And as for Israel? Well, again I ask ... just how many nukes does Israel have in its arsenal anyway?

What began yesterday in Iran were five days of maneuvers near the northern city of Garmsar, about 60 miles southeast of Tehran. The military tested its Zalzal-1 and Fajr-5 missiles, and God-only-knows what else. The Zalzal-1, able to carry a 1,200-pound payload, has a range of 200 miles. That would put Iraq, U.S. bases in the gulf, and yes ... some mighty important oil fields ... in its range. The Fajr-5, with a 1,800-pound payload, has a range of only 35 miles.

Neither of these missiles could reach Israel, but Iran has other missiles that can.

And the USS Stennis continues to head toward the gulf, joining the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in a beefed-up U.S. military presence. The Stennis is expected to arrive in late February.

Further, the United States is deploying Patriot missiles (remember President Bush's mention of them in his "surge" speech a week or so ago?) and nuclear submarines to the Persian Gulf and F-16 fighter planes to one of my old haunts, the Incirlik airbase in Turkey.

And this evening's speech (the "State of the Union") by Mr. Bush added fuel to the fire, I think.

Iran is next, folks; it's only a question of whether our second aircraft carrier reaches the region before Israel's nukes reach Tehran. The only thing missing in this arena containing Benjamin Netanyahu, George Bush and Mohmoud Ahmadinejad is the late Saddam Hussein ... who would have been the most predictable of the lot!

Please Lord! Let 2008 be tomorrow!

You choose! We win either way! I love 'em both ...

Iraq in 2007 ... still descending to the pit of Hell!

Iraq in 2007

For Dante, treason was the worst of crimes! Yeh, that's Judas Iscariot along with Brutus and Cassius (assassins of Julias Ceasar) hanging out of Satan's mouth at the very pit of Hell in the mind's eye (and in the painting of Dante's Pilgrim reaching the pit of hell). I won't suggest who might belong there today, but a lot of persons come to mind as the carnage rages on in Baghdad and environs as well as the rest of Iraq.

For starters, more than 25 of our soldiers were killed yesterday across Iraq in one of the bloodiest days for US troops even as the Pentagon announced that 3,200 new troops had been dropped into Baghdad to stem the violence.

This time, the US military, in a series of statements tallying up the body count, listed a helicopter crash, insurgent attacks (in American uniforms this time) and roadside bombs as being responsible for the high number of casualties. At last count, 12 servicemen were killed in a helicopter crash, five in a clash with gunmen in the holy Shi'ite city of Karbala and five more in separate incidents in western Anbar, heartland of the Sunni insurgency, whose deaths were announced yesterday.
One soldier was killed when a roadside bomb hit his patrol north of Baghdad and two others died elsewhere.

Ironically, President George W Bush is expected to use his State of the Union address to Congress to argue (again) for his plan to send thousands more troops to Iraq, despite opposition from Democrats who now control both houses of the legislature. I wonder just where the 3,200 who just "dropped in" on Baghdad fit in this new escalation ...

Armed insurgents also set an oil well ablaze yesterday near the disputed northern city of Kirkuk. Gunmen overpowered soldiers guarding an oil field 45km west of Kirkuk, planted explosives at a well head and set them off.

Yeh ... watch for more attacks on the Iraqi oil industry as the full understanding of the laws being passed by our lackeys in the Iraqi Government to send the money to American oil companies begins to sink home with the Iraqis who until now have been totally clueless.

And have I bothered to yet mention that another three or four dozen Iraqis have been blown up or found dead around Iraq (almost all of the ones found dead having been tortured)?

Of all of the above, it will surely be the the fire at the oil well that will catch Mr. Bush's attention and insure that he will send another 25,000 to 30,000 American boys and girls into the heart of Iraq's Civil war (into the pit of hell) to save the day for the Texas oilmen who made sure that he would win a couple of elections in 2000 and 2004. My guess is that he will boost the number beyond 21,500 when he addresses us all on Tuesday. That damned oil fire yesterday probably sealed the fate of another thousand of our kids in Iraq ...

Can anybody stop the madness?

Obama's hustle with Mama's muscle ... Obama-Clinton is the ticket for me today!

Please don't remind me; this photo is indeed a repeat, but I just love it!

Okay, okay ... I know my leanings are like the temperatures in America of late -- up one day and down the next on nearly everyone running -- but, an Obama - Clinton ticket sounds pretty good today.

Just blame it on Global Warming ...

These are the words spoken by Barack Obama on his website that has me excited:

As many of you know, over the last few months I have been thinking hard about my plans for 2008. Running for the presidency is a profound decision - a decision no one should make on the basis of media hype or personal ambition alone - and so before I committed myself and my family to this race, I wanted to be sure that this was right for us and, more importantly, right for the country.

I certainly didn't expect to find myself in this position a year ago. But as I've spoken to many of you in my travels across the states these past months; as I've read your emails and read your letters; I've been struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics.

So I've spent some time thinking about how I could best advance the cause of change and progress that we so desperately need.

The decisions that have been made in Washington these past six years, and the problems that have been ignored, have put our country in a precarious place. Our economy is changing rapidly, and that means profound changes for working people. Many of you have shared with me your stories about skyrocketing health care bills, the pensions you've lost and your struggles to pay for college for your kids. Our continued dependence on oil has put our security and our very planet at risk. And we're still mired in a tragic and costly war that should have never been waged........

And with Clinton's bankroll in his corner -- once Hillary sucks in her breath and takes a swig of humble-juice -- even the projected ticket of Cheney - Gore in November of 2008 couldn't stop their bandwagon.

Whatcha think, brother Richard?

Adding to the complexities of my most recent posting ...

Hugo Chavez (left) greeting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Caracas

If you weren't convinced by my posting of last night, you will surely be convinced now. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (double gasp) have agreed to create a $2 billion social investment fund. This is only the latest sign that there are ever-deepening ties between the oil-rich, anti-American states, Iran and Venezuela. Worse yet, the fund will finance such destructive efforts as the building of hospitals, automobile plants (likely competing with GM, Ford and Chrysler) and tractor factories. I like that last one. Say "tractor factories" quickly ten times in a row.

Further, both men (in their speeches when greeting one another) made statements like, "We have the potential of being among the most advanced countries in the world."

If that isn't a direct threat against the United States of America, I don't know what is.

I wonder which will happen first now ... our bombs falling on Tehran or our paratroopers dropping into Caracas. If only one of them were to begin building an aspirin factory ...

Let's take a closer look at the "Attack Iran!" option, if it is indeed an "option."

Let's look at the facts: (1) Iran (more specifically, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) is 'threatening" to develop nuclear power, not nuclear weapons necessarily, (2) MA also rants and raves about Israel every chance he gets and (3) Iranian extremists have likely infiltrated Iraq (making the same mistake that the US is making) in support of the Shiite militias there.

As a result of the above "facts," a likely Israeli/US bombing raid on nuclear installations in Iran appears to be in the cards. Indeed, the news that the Pentagon is sending a second aircraft carrier to increase the already huge US naval build-up in the Gulf region (and the Eastern Mediterranean), increasingly suggests that Bush's last gasp in the Middle East is not just the extra 21,500 US troops to try to bring "victory" (whatever that is) in Iraq, but a long-planned settling of some old grievances with the real Biblical era enemy, Persia (a.k.a. Iran).

In a previous posting I pointed to many reports that the Pentagon (under Rumsfeld at the time) believes that after only five nights of bombing, the nuclear targets could be destroyed. One of them cautioned that "because of the gaps in US intelligence on Iran, there can be no certainty about how much of the Iranian nuclear program might survive. Furthermore, to limit likely retaliation, the target range would have to be substantially expanded. Iran's medium-range ballistic missiles that have recently been moved closer to Iraq would have to be hit, as well as 14 airfields with sheltered aircraft. And in order to protect Gulf shipping, Iranian cruise missile sites, diesel submarines, and other naval assets would need to be targeted. In addition, Iran's two chemical weapons production plants would no doubt be added to the hit list."

That was before Christmas, wasn't it?

Now think back to 2002. Isn't the rhetoric about Iran (going back for about a year) and aren't the recent maneuvers just a little bit reminiscent of Bush's rush to war in Iraq at that time? And the revelation this week of a US military raid on the Iranian consulate in the Iraqi town of Irbil is only one additional twig being tossed on the fire.

But the real question that should be asked, I think, is "if the United States is looking at Iran-after-Iraq, why?" That is, why is George Bush so eager to attack Iran?

I can only come up with two possibilities: One is that President Bush clearly sees his role in the Middle East in messianic terms. Think about it -- first Babylon and next Persia! That might explain why he has pursued the Iraq War after each strategy or tactic had gone pffft. He obviously does not let common sense stand in his way as regards his manifest destiny. That is probably also why Joe Lieberman, an otherwise reasonable liberal and anti-war person, is so gung-ho when it comes to our activities in the Middle East.

The other possible rationale for Bush's eagerness to attack Iran is (you guessed it!) OIL.

Iran just happens to be the third largest oil producer in the world. Saudi Arabia is #1, Iraq is (would be) #2 and Iran is #3.

And the beauty of such a plan is that blowing up a couple dozen Iranian facilities would allow Bush to crow to the world and to the American people (the most gullible of them would drool) that "I have saved the world from the Iranians." And he could achieve his manifest destiny without needing to produce verifiable evidence. He might even get support from the Israelis who would be only too willing to share with Bush the Apocalyptic Dream ... until whenever it no longer suited their purposes.

And that last little remark isn't just idle chatter. The Israelis have long memories and surely remember just who it was that allowed their fathers, mothers, grandfathers and grandmothers to be so cruelly exterminated. Guess what? It wasn't the Arabs. I wouldn't want to be around when scores start being settled with the weaponry we have provided the Israelis.

Just how many nuclear and/or thermonuclear bombs does Israel have anyway? In all my years with the highest of clearances, I never was able to get a handle on that question or even the question of their having just one Hiroshima-style atom bomb. Best kept secret in the world, I'd say.

Yes, brother Richard, we indeed live in "interesting times."

As I listened today to some of Condoleezza Rice's testimony at the hearings ...

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that she was ready to meet "any time, anywhere" with Iran's leaders if it suspended its enrichment of uranium. That is a first, I think, although they played some additional words that she spoke wherein she suggested that that was exactly what she has stated over and over before. Huh? When, where?

Thinking back on Bush's words (referenced in the previous posting), I have to ask, "just what are you guys up to anyway?"

The mention of Patriot Missiles in his big speech on Wednesday together with the buildup of a task force in the Persian Gulf ... together with his not-so-veiled threats against Iran (and Syria) make me more suspicious than ever that he envisions a bigger involvement in the Middle East (sorry about that, brother Richard) rather than an ultimate draw down.

Yeh ... scary!

Some small items in "Bush's Plan" worry me ...

You know? I wasn't nearly so worried about the overall numbers going up (by roughly 22,000) as I am by the manner in which they will be fighting and the long-term prospects of youngsters being "embedded" in/with Iraqi "friendly" forces.

President Bush's speech to us all on Wednesday night on his escalation plan for the Iraq Civil War was probably the worst speech I've ever seen him give -- and he's given some pretty bad ones over the years. Of course, it will probably win him a little time, which was the best he could have hoped for anyway in the current political and military situation. Watching it over the heads of my "students" (long story) made it difficult to fully digest and understand at the time, and I simply thought that it was a poor speech, but of little import, even if another 20,000 of our military would be living in the Green Zone.

That was what I thought moments after we turned off the telly and returned to listening to red-neck music from the radio in the high window at the back of the classroom.

It was only during the long ride home afterwards when I listened to most of the "talk" a second time that the tactical nature of our future in Iraq hit me. "Patriot Missiles" did he say? And what about the increased exposure of the new combat troops to actual "combat" in Baghdad? Are we planning on taking on the Sunni warriors in Baghdad and environs at the same time we are combating the Shiite militias?

Whoa!

And why did he have to poke a finger in the Iranians' eyes (and the Syrians' too, of course) while discussing "negotiating with Saudi Arabia, the UAE and others of our "friends" close by Iraq? Hmmm ... maybe that explains his mentioning Patriot [sic] Missiles ... Forgetting for the moment just who are friends are in the Middle East, aren't "negotiations" all about talking with our enemies? And oh yes, my brother Richard in Connecticut constantly reminds me that the term "Middle East" is becoming harder and harder to define as the Iraq Civil War drags on.

The speech wasn't just poor from the point of view of its delivery (as is suggested by the grainy photograph of a television screen above) ... it was downright dangerous ... actually scary, I think.

Maybe we really should be thinking about impeachment this soon--at least in the recesses of our subconscious minds.

Then again, all that being said, I guess we should give this latest "direction" a chance, to the extent it is a really new direction ... as long as Congress keeps closer track of what's happening in the months ahead than they have in the past.

With Myers, Abizaid and Casey out of the picture ... (and Rummy after the midterms) who will be left? Cheney? Not in 2008, me thinks ...

The little clip from of a letter written by General John Abizaid (clipped from the Reid-Pelosi letter referenced in the previous posting) suggested that Abizaid and Casey were sure to disappear from the Iraqi "scene," don't you think?

“I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It's easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future.”

The difference between this clip and the Reid-Pelosi letter is that Casey and Abizaid know what the situation on the ground actually is.

"Disappearing" those who disagree with your predispositions as to what should be done is not the way a really good "decider" decides matters as serious as the upcoming surge of forces in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq.

I really fear what the spring and summer will bring for our young men and women in Iraq ... not to mention the Iraqis. And if the Israelis and Iranians go at it ... Katie bar the door!

I think my brother Richard in Connecticut is right about that letter written by Senator Reid and House Speaker Pelosi ...

By now you have all read the letter to Mr. Bush written by Senator Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (both above) relating to their unhappiness about the likely surge to be announced on Wednesday or Thursday. If they had written the letter as a personal opinion of two Americans, I would have little concern. However, they are writing the letter in a manner and tone that suggests that it reflects (1) the American people's opinion as reflected in the midterm elections and (2) the sense of Congress on the issue -- an issue which is and should be made by the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces (Mr. Bush).

I too am generally opposed to the "surge" but am only a concerned American with an opinion. I don't know all of the "facts" as regards the situation on the ground in Iraq and I certainly don't speak for the American people or Congress.

My brother is right on as regards the tone of the letter.

Surely Mr. Bush will convince israel that it's in everyone's best interest to hold off on nuking (or even attacking) Iran ... right?

Britain's Sunday Times seems to think they will! According to the Times, Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons. From Mediawingnuts ... a big YIKES!!

Citing what the Times said were several Israeli military sources, the paper said two Israeli air force squadrons had been training to blow up an enrichment plant in Natanz using low-yield nuclear "bunker busters." Two other sites, a heavy water plant at Arak and a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, would be targeted with conventional bombs, the Sunday Times said. (Make that a double-YIKES!!)

What are the sanctions all about, guys? And what about both Mr. Bush's and Mr. Olmert's statements made as regards negotiations being the only logical way forward? Both president George Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert have been talking negotiations now since early November (before the midterm elections here in the US anyway) and an attack -- especially one using nuclear weapons -- seems dishonest ... besides being reckless and dangerous!

History in the making: First Italian-American Speaker of the House of Representatives

A new chapter in American history was written yesterday when California's Nancy Pelosi (left) was formally chosen as the first Italian-American speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. It's took more than 200 years for the "the marble ceiling," (as Pelosi herself described it) described, to be shattered by an Italian-American.

And from a practical standpoint too, this is a major step upwards for an Italian-American. She is third in line of succession for the job as (gasp) President of the United States. And my brother from Connecticut reminded me that he noticed that she is a woman. And that is a first too, he thinks, although I personally haven't had time to check on that last point.

But of even more importance than her proud Italian-American roots was the message sent by the voters in November: No more cantankerous bickering and gridlock ... let's solve some of the real problems facing guys like me and the rest of America.

Two places to start: Iraq and the illusion of a great economy ... but not for 75% of the American people who happen not to be earning more than $250,000 per year!

He's only aiming for Second Place ... right? ... uhhh ... right?

Whatta way to start the new year ... we just might have another Bush coming along, me thinks!

Although this picture was taken way back on November 6, 2006 (remember the "midterms"?) and we are in an entirely new era today ... and ... and ... uhh ... well, why not?

Even Jeb seemed to be saying "no way, Jose!" when he said "No tengo futuro!" (translated to "I have no future!") to some Spanish speaking reporters last week. And indeed, the long looming and obviously dark shadow of his older, more esteemed [sic] brother was surely in the back of his mind as he thought momentarily about his future.

Still, his close relationship with Mitt Romney (Republican Governor of Massachusetts, below right) makes the likelihood of his slipping in as the Vice-presidential candidate quite possible ... and a Catholic running mate (Bush) might soften the idea/worry of having a Mormon (Romney) running for the top spot.

In a strange way, they need each other and if they play their cards right, the Republicans will be tired of listening to McCain diss their party at just about the time that just about everyone is tiring of names like "Hillary" and "Obama." Let's not count the GOP out of the 2008 race just yet, me thinks.