In a stop over in Alaska on his way to Asia, Bush addressed the troops, and continues to hit hard at some in the Democratic party. Here is an excerpt that the RNC distributed prior to the remarks.

Reasonable people can disagree about the conduct of the war –­ but it is irresponsible for Democrats to now claim that we misled them and the American people. Leaders in my Administration and members of Congress from both parties looked at the same intelligence on Iraq –­ and reached the conclusion that Saddam Hussein was a threat. Let me give you quotes from three senior Democrats: First, quote, “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons.” End quote. Here’s another one, quote, “The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as [Saddam Hussein] is in power.” End quote. And here’s the way another Democratic leader summed it up, quote, “Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his nose at the world community. And I think that the President’s approaching this in the right fashion.”

The truth is that investigations of the intelligence on Iraq have concluded that only one person manipulated evidence and misled the world –­ and that person was Saddam Hussein. In early 2004, when weapons inspector David Kay testified that he had not found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he also testified that, quote, “Iraq was in clear material violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1441. They maintained programs and activities, and they certainly had the intentions at a point to resume their programs. So there was a lot they wanted to hide because it showed what they were doing that was illegal.” Eight months later, weapons inspector Charles Duelfer issued a report that found, quote, “Saddam Hussein so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone. He wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction when sanctions were lifted.”

Some of our elected leaders have opposed this war all along. I disagree with them, but I respect their willingness to take a consistent stand. Yet some Democrats who voted to authorize the use of force are now rewriting the past. They are playing politics with this issue and sending mixed signals to our troops and the enemy. That is irresponsible.

As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them. Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory.

DafyDD:

[T]he Democratic Party has a terrible problem: they desperately want to paint Bush as a mindless warmonger who was in possession of credible intelligence that Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction (despite the fact that we actually found those “large stockpiles” that were promised — see here and here, most recently), but who “lied” about it just to get us into that war. But they have no answer for the large number of very big-profile Democrats who either looked at the intel and agreed with Bush — or who couldn’t even trouble themselves to look at the intel before voting.

Also at Suitaby Flip, Blogs For Bush, PowerPundit, Michelle Malkin, Ex-Donkey Blog, N.Z. Bear

UPDATE: Full transcript of his remarks here.

UPDATE 2: Ian has the video of Brian Williams exposing the hypocrisy of the Senate Democrats.

And Paul pushes back on Froomkin’s pushback.

But Froomkin goes beyond arrogance and audacity when he reaches the merits of the pre-war intelligence issue. First, he asserts “Far from being baseless, the charge that [Bush] intentionally misled the public in the run-up to war is built on a growing amount of evidence.” Froomkin points to no such evidence. Instead, he hides behind the story by Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus. But Froomkin knows that this story provides no evidence that Bush intentionally misled the public about WMD. In fact, Milbank and Pincus concluded that

The administration’s overarching point is true: Intelligence agencies overwhelmingly believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and very few members of Congress from either party were skeptical about this belief before the war began in 2003. Indeed, top lawmakers in both parties were emphatic and certain in their public statements.

Froomkin lacks the integrity to mention this dispositive admission. If the overwhelming intelligence consensus was that Saddam had WMD, then Bush did not mislead the American people in making that claim. On this crucial point, Froomkin shows himself to be more partisan and less honest than Milbank and Pincus.

UPDATE: Michelle mocks Al Franken’s Denver Post article.

The LA Times has five good questions for Muslims. Here is the first one, to give you a taste of the article.

(1) Why are you so quiet?

Since the first Israelis were targeted for death by Muslim terrorists blowing themselves up in the name of your religion and Palestinian nationalism, I have been praying to see Muslim demonstrations against these atrocities. Last week’s protests in Jordan against the bombings, while welcome, were a rarity. What I have seen more often is mainstream Muslim spokesmen implicitly defending this terror on the grounds that Israel occupies Palestinian lands. We see torture and murder in the name of Allah, but we see no anti-torture and anti-murder demonstrations in the name of Allah.

There are a billion Muslims in the world. How is it possible that essentially none have demonstrated against evils perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam? This is true even of the millions of Muslims living in free Western societies. What are non-Muslims of goodwill supposed to conclude? …

It concludes with:

Hundreds of millions of non-Muslims want honest answers to these questions, even if the only answer you offer is, “Yes, we have real problems in Islam.” Such an acknowledgment is infinitely better — for you and for the world — than dismissing us as anti-Muslim.

In all of the attention being brought to Alito’s comments that the Washington Times found and Drudge splashed, remember that his comments pre-dated Casey. Whether or not that has any real bearing on the issue, I’m not sure at the moment as I haven’t had much chance to focus on it, but it seemed worth noting.

Prof Bainbridge does think it’s important:

it’s critical to recognize that the 1985 memorandum pre-dates the SCOTUS’ decision in Casey, which changed the legal landscape considerably by strengthening the argument that Roe is a settled precedent buttressed by considerations of stare decisis. Alito’s reported decisions and statements indicate that he is not an activist bent on overturning precedent willy-nilly. His track record suggests he will be guided by precedent, influenced by stare decisis, and therefore cautious.

*** UPDATE: ***

And if you didn’t catch Dean’s MTP appearance, check out this disingenous quote (via RCP).

This could be a defining moment. Judge Alito is a hard-working man, a good family man, but his opinions are well outside the mainstream of American public opinion. He condones a strip-search of a 10-year-old when the police had no such warrant or indication to do so.

He is obviously referring to Doe v. Groody, but it is clearly apparent (yes, I know that’s pleonastic), that Dean is either clueless or deceptive (though I’m not necessarily making the case those two are mutually exclusive). Or maybe he just isn’t reading Myopic Zeal as much as he should be. As we noted back in early November, from Powerline:

Groody was a lawsuit by two “Jane Doe” plaintiffs against four police officers. The plaintiffs claimed that they were illegally searched by the officers, and asked for money damages. The officers moved for summary judgment, arguing that the search did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights. By a two-to-one vote, the 3rd Circuit panel upheld the trial court’s denial of the officers’ motion to dismiss the case. Alito was the dissenter.

The case arose out of the execution of a search warrant on a meth house. In the affidavit that the officers submitted to obtain the warrant, they noted that when drug dealers see that they are being raided, they commonly hide drugs on the persons of whoever may also be on the premises, hoping that the search warrant won’t allow the officers to search them. So, in this case, the officers requested permission to search anyone they found on the premises, not just the drug dealer who was the target of the raid.

Dr. Dean is well outside of the mainstream, it seems.

UPDATE: Here is his job app from 1985 (via PoliPundit, who reminds us that it doesn’t matter, the numbers are there for confirmation)

Pizza may now be classified as a health food. I’ve been saying this for years. :-)

In my earlier post, where Jay Rockefeller admitted to coordinating with Syrian president Bashar Assad after 9/11 and before we entered Iraq, I completely missed another major point of fact that Wallace hammered Rockefeller on. And it’s a great point. (Via Flopping Aces)

WALLACE: Senator Rockefeller, the President says that Democratic critics, like you, looked at pre-war intelligence and came to the same conclusion that he did. In fact, looking back at the speech that you gave in October of 2002 in which you authorized the use of force, you went further than the President ever did. Let’s watch.

SEN. ROCKEFELLER (October 10, 2002): “I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11th, that question is increasingly outdated.”

WALLACE: Now, the President never said that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat. As you saw, you did say that. If anyone hyped the intelligence, isn’t it Jay Rockefeller?

And that is when he went on to say that he discussed our plans for war with Syria, which, as a CQ reader noted, “may have given Saddam Hussein 14 months to collude on the transfer of WMD to Syria, rather than the 6 we assumed he got when Bush wasted five months trying to get the UN to enforce its own resolutions.”

UPDATE: Wow, it gets even better. This transcript is incredible.

WALLACE: But you voted, sir, and aren’t you responsible for your vote?

ROCKEFELLER: No. I’m…

WALLACE: You’re not?

ROCKEFELLER: No. I’m responsible for my vote, but I’d appreciate it if you’d get serious about this subject, with all due respect. We authorized him to continue working with the United Nations, and then if that failed, authorized him to use force to enforce the sanctions.

We did not send 150,000 troops or 135,000 troops. It was his decision made probably two days after 9/11 that he was going to invade Iraq. That we did not have a part of. And yes, we had bad intelligence, and when we learned about it, I went down to the floor and I said I would have never voted for this thing.

WALLACE: But my only point, sir — and I am trying to be serious about it — is as I understand phase two, the question is based on the intelligence you had, what were the statements you made.

You had the National Intelligence Estimate which expressed doubts about Saddam’s nuclear program, yet you said he had a nuclear program. The president did the same thing.

More at Sophispundit, Mark Kilmer.

Ken Blanchard at South Dakota politics sums it up this way: “In short, Rockefeller is shamelessly lying about what actually happened. ”

Perish the Thought sees the need for more dress rehearsals: “The DNC needs to hold a few more rehearsals if they expect die-hards to follow the party line on I-voted-for-the-war-but-Bush-lied, etc.”

Bizblogger points out that Bush actually said “while the threat may not be imminent, we cannot wait for threats to materialize…”

Matthew Heidt, at Froggy Ruminations, says “Liberals Are Unpatriotic” and then backs it up with an extensive look at the facts.

UPDATE: If you haven’t seen Tiger Hawk’s detailed re-review of Steven Den Beste’s Strategic Overview of the war on Islamic fascism yet, check it out.

Jay Rockefeller, on yesterday’s Fox News Sunday, publicly admitted to acts that are tantamount to treason: conspiring with the enemy during a state of war.

During an interview with Chris Wallace, on Fox News Sunday, this exchange took place (h/t Powerline).

WALLACE: Now, the President never said that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat. As you saw, you did say that. If anyone hyped the intelligence, isn’t it Jay Rockefeller?

SEN. ROCKEFELLER: No. The – I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I’ll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq – that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.

He went to Syria?

Captain Ed, discusses here and here.

If this is true, Rockefeller should get ejected from the Senate and possibly stand trial for treason. In 2002, we were at war against Islamofascist terrorists, and Syria has long been listed by the US State Department as a terrorist-supporting state. What Rockefeller admitted was conspiring with the enemy during a state of war — and he should be held accountable, especially considering his admission of the act on national television.

[Note: edited to corrected mistake listing wrong news show appearance as Face the Nation]

UPDATE: Michelle says Bush’s speech is paying dividends, and “It’s about … time!”

UPDATE 2: More on what Rockefeller said in 2002 here. Turns out he was even more “alarmist” than Bush.

UPDATE 3: Insty doesn’t think is that big of a deal, and points to Jim McDermott’s comments from 2002, in Baghdad as an example of a real problematic activity. Though he does conclude with: “It was just irresponsible behavior, which sadly is nothing unusual where the Senate is concerned. Nor do I think it did much harm — if I recall correctly, Saddam nonetheless didn’t think we’d invade until we did, and I don’t think this tipped him off to anything. Indeed, had Saddam taken Rockefeller’s advice to heart, it might have helped.”

Here at Myopic Zeal we’re attempting to mix things up a little, provide some zest, and add a dash of something a little different, and so we decided to taste test hosting a Carnival. What better way to start than with the Carnival of the Recipes!

So without further ado, “Welcome to this week’s Carnival of the Recipes!”

In a nod to the elections held earlier in the week and Veteran’s Day on November 11th, we decided to do a Patriotic Themed Recipe Carnival, though it turns out that to make most of these into patriotic themed dishes was quite a stretch. No matter… but we’ll start with the themed dishes first!

Patriotic Themed Dishes

We’ll start with Keewee of Keewee’s Corner, who has definitely put an effort into making a patriotic pie! Mmmmmm…..

Donna over at Pajama Pundits, too, remembered the patriotic theme and offers up Red Beans, White Rice, and the Blues. She’s not kidding about the blues either, check it out!

And interpreting the “patriotic theme” a bit differently than just “red, white and blue,” Shawn Lea at Everything and Nothing has provided us with a recipe for Hummingbird Cake that she makes every Thanksgiving (a “uniquely American holiday, after all”).

In another entry that stretches the bounds of the theme, but does make into the first section, is the Pasta with Salmon that Riannan offered. She adds, in her email, “the red is the salmon, the white is the pasta, and it will
have to be served on a blue plate.”

Sun Comprehending Glass’s Taleena shares some Cranberry Blueberry Scones.

Substantial enough to take off the edge, light enough to wear off for that big holiday meal. In keeping with this week’s Carnival of Recipe theme for Veteran’s Day, red white and blue to boot.

Punctilious, who struggled with the red, white and blue thing, came up with a creative solution. Green bean casserole without the beans! Yep, that’s right, “… a dish that is mostly in the white category and also fills the traditional American food category as well.” And it sounds great too, go check it out.

The Glittering Eye points out that there is no such things as blue food, and compromises with a white(-ish) Three Mushroom soup, and a link to previous recipe that is red.

El Capitan, the Baboon Pirate, says “Break Out The Rolaids, You’re Gonna Need ‘Em!” He shares one of his grandmother’s specialties, Spicy Cheesy Grits. Incidentally, the El Capitan did at least remember the them of the week after he submitted his recipe (which is better than most of you)!

The cayenne pepper’s red. The grits are white. It was too hot to eat right out of the oven, so I blew on it. So there!

Another participant who went with the “serve it on a blue background” idea, is Triticale who has Turnip Pick Quickles. Triticale also expands on The Glittering Eye’s George Carlin comment.

It is interesting to note that the George Carlin assertion regarding the absence of blue food has been brought up in the context of mushrooms. I am willing to wager that George Carlin has seen the color blue occuring naturally on some of the mushrooms he has eaten.

Martin Lindeskog, of EGO, has Patriotic Pork Chops with Sam Adam beer.

Red… at least.

Next, we have Brian B, of Memento Moron. Brian says he has come close to duplicating Davide’s tomato basil zuppa, from one of his favorite restaurants, All Italiana in La Mesa.

VW Bug over at One Happy Dog, has Porcupine Meatballs. Yes, you read that right. What are they? You’ll have to hop on over there and find out, but they sound great!

The Deputy Headmistress of the Common Room offers Red Flannel Hash. “Red Flannel Hash is an old ‘use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without’ recipe.”

And Michelle, of Dubious Wonder offers a Kickin’ Chile that was the first prize winner in her office’s chile cookoff..

Main Course

Army Wife (and toddler mom!) wants a deer and she wants one now. That’s because this mouthwatering recipe requires it. She offers a recipe for Venison Medallions with Orange and Summer Berry Sauce.

And while we’re on the Venison theme, The Countertop Chronicles has two this week. First, a quick bachelor ready recipe for Venison Roast, and she also provides an Herb Roasted Chop, for the non-bachelor looking to impress a date.

Sides, Soups, Breads and Salads

Suzi Chen at Special Fried Rice presents a healthier version of one her favoriate foods: Special Fried Rice For One. And not only does she have a recipe, she has the blow by blow photo instructions!

Blame it on the Vinaigrette Salad, from Booklore, is beautifully discribed with step by step photos!

Cathy at CFO: Chief Family Officer presents Sweet Sesame Soy Dressing, a versatile dressing that can be used for almost any Asian-style salad.

And in a brief flashback to last week’s carnival (where soups reigned supreme), Marsha Hudnall at A Weight Lifted provides a delicious sounding Lentil Stew.

Elisson, too, decided to share a soup in honor of the autumnal weather. It is a different Soup of Many Onion.

Amanda, the Aussie Wife, makes an Italian Pesto Butter (which calls for lightly salted butter, and then adds salt?).

David Needham, of ThirdWorldCountry, has some Lemon Poppy Seed scones.

In about 10 minutes, they’re ready to pull from the oven, butter and disappear down appreciative gullets. The lemon zest isn’t overpowering, and the lemon juice souring the milk adds just a little lightness (acidic reaction with the baking powder) to the finished prooduct. The sugar assures that, eaten without jams or jellies, they’re a lightly sweet treat.

ALa, Blonde Sagacity, says no wrinkling your nose until you try her Apple Cheddar Melt, an adaptation of a famous felon’s recipe.

Desserts

And a mouthful in more ways than one, Jordana offers “Jordana’s Modified Hippie German Kindergarten Cake.” (Say that 10 times fast!)

John at SilverBlue has a Swiss Chocolate Cake.

And, the uncategorizable Joan……

Joan, who writes at Oasis of Sanity, offers a couple of old favorites, and something new. She has one for grown-ups (crab-stuffed mushrooms) and one for kids (playdough), plus a link to a very nice decorator icing recipe that works well with organic shortening. (Joan is also recovering from surgery, so send a note her way if you get a chance).

That wraps it up for this week. Next week’s Carnival of the Recipes will be hosted by Rocket Jones!

UPDATE: I messed up on the timing of this, but can’t change the post slug since everyone has been pinged. Sorry about that.