NOTE: This is an unfortunately necessary response to a personal affront in today’s Cincinnati Enquirer, and does not in any way constitute an opinion on the merits of the 2006 Ohio Elections Commission complaint mentioned at this post, or on the politics or positions of the four candidates in Ohio’s Second District GOP congressional primary contest.
_____________________________

• Number of posts at BizzyBlog since June 17 of last year (counting this one), after the wrap-up to the 2005 Second District Congressional Primary in Ohio, containing the last name of this guy running for Congress in the 2006 Second District Primary — 25
• Number of posts during that time period containing the name of Paul Hackett — 43
• Total number of BizzyBlog posts since June 17, 2005 — 1,205
• Percentage of BizzyBlog posts since June 17, 2005 containing the name of Paul Hackett — 3.6%
• Number of times Paul Hackett has referred to BizzyBlog’s proprietor in public as having a “preoccupation” with his candidacy — zero
• Percentage of BizzyBlog posts since June 17, 2005 containing the last name of that guy running for Congress in the 2006 Second District Primary — 2.1%
• Number of times that guy has referred to BizzyBlog’s proprietor in public as having a “preoccupation” with his candidacy — 1
• Number of times Paul Hackett or that guy has won the right to represent the people of Ohio’s Second Congressional District in Washington — zero
• Number of times that guy allowed himself to be referred to as “Congressman” in violation of Ohio law during the 2005 primary campaign:
  - in two radio ads — 3 (two in first, one in second)
  - in his first TV ad — 2
  - in his campaign flyer — 7
• Number of consecutive days that guy’s Endorsements page at his campaign web site referred to him as “Congressman McEwen” or “Congressman Bob McEwen” during the 2005 primary campaign (the Endorsements page was NOT a subject of the Ohio Elections Commission complaint that was decided Thursday): at least 14

(The time period involved was the last two weeks of the campaign after this June 1, 2005 Channel 5 Cincinnati report on the law-violating radio, TV, and campaign-flyer uses of the word “Congressman” aired. The video at the link still works as long as you have a compatible plug-in for your browser.)

• Number of consecutive days the first two or three words at that guy’s Endorsements page were “Congressman McEwen” or “Congressman Bob McEwen” since he declared his 2006 candidacy on January 18 — 58 or 59

(Note: The first three words on that page are “Former Congressman McEwen” now. Preserved for your viewing pleasure are pictures of the top portions of the page as they existed on January 20 and March 16.)

• Number of times that guy, his campaign staff, and his out-of-state web designer/developer must have looked at that Endorsements page during that 58- or 59-day period without acting to change it — a whole bunch.

_______________________

Note: Trackbacks are welcome (subject to review). Comments, though welcome, preferably by direct e-mail, will be read but not posted. Use a real e-mail address if you want a real e-mail response.

No, not a pork roll, a good post roll:

• “When Inequality Matters” points to a Cato-Unbound piece that nukes the “zero sum game” mindset and points to its stark dangers (shameless plug: a previous BizzyBlog post on income inequality is here).
• “Compassionate Conservatism Run Amok” — Here he finds a Peggy Noonan piece at OpinionJournal.com that questions whether President Bush was ever legitimately interested in controlling government spending. Noonan “lifts” a post title Porkopolis used months to describe the spendfest of Katrina relief.
• “WSJ: Trade Deficit Disorder” goes to a subscription-only Wall Street Journal editorial that makes the historical case that trade deficits, rather than being a bad thing, are indicators of a strong economy (since it’s subscription, I’ll lift a key paragraph that Porkopolis didn’t grab:
  

  Here we go again. For at least the past 30 years protectionists have warned that the trade deficit will lead to ruin, but it’s closer to the truth to say this has it exactly backward: Since the mid-1980s the trade deficit has risen when the economy has grown and receded when the economy has faltered. The lowest annual U.S. trade deficit in recent times was recorded in 1991, a recession year. Dan Griswold of the Cato Institute recently ran the numbers and discovered that “there is a strong correlation between rising trade deficits and falling unemployment.”

  I agree with the pure economic argument, but I worry, and I believe legitimately, about who we are running the trade deficit with and the potential for mischief on their part. I do like the “rabbits in a vault” analogy though, which you’ll have to read to appreciate.

So go there, and to the source material. And, besides, that flying pig is the neatest effect I’ve seen at any blog, anywhere.

On Thursday, Investors Business Daily (HT Instapundit) said that the jig should be up on the “no Weapons of Mass Destruction Crowd” crowd once enough is known of the contents of Saddam Hussein’s document stash:

Declassified Truth
Posted 3/16/2006

The War On Terror: The government is finally getting around to unloading some of Saddam Hussein’s secret documents. A look at just a few pages already leads to some blockbuster revelations.

In the early stages of the war that began three years ago, the U.S. captured thousands of documents from Saddam and his spy agency, the Mukhabarat. It’s been widely thought the documents could shed light on why Saddam behaved as he did and how much of a threat his evil regime represented.

Yet, until this week, the documents lay molding in boxes in a government warehouse. Now the first batch is out, and though few in number, they’re loaded with information.

Among the enduring myths of those who oppose the war is that Saddam, though murderous when it came to his own people, had no weapons of mass destruction and no terrorist designs outside his own country. Both claims now lie in tatters.

As we’ve reported several times, a number of former top military officials in Saddam’s regime have come forward to admit that, yes, Saddam had WMD, hid them and shipped them out of the country so they couldn’t be detected. And he had plans to make more.

Now come more revelations that leave little doubt about Saddam’s terrorist intentions. Most intriguing from a document dump Wednesday night is a manual for Saddam’s spy service, innocuously listed as CMPC-2003-006430. It makes for interesting reading.

Here, for instance, are the marching orders for Directorate 8, the Mukhabarat’s “Technical Affairs” department: “The Eight Directorate is responsible for development of materials needed for covert offensive operations. It contains advanced laboratories for testing and production of weapons, poisons and explosives.”

It goes on. Directorate 9, we discover, “is one of the most important directorates in the Mukhabarat. Most of its work is outside Iraq in coordination with other directorates, focusing on operations of sabotage and assassination.”

The document also discusses the Mukhabarat’s Office 16, set up to train “agents for clandestine operations abroad.” The document helpfully adds that “special six-week courses in the use of of terror techniques are provided at a camp in Radwaniyhah.”

Got that? Terror techniques.

Even as the media studiously avoid these new documents — just as they avoided 500 hours of Saddam’s personal tapes showing his scheming on WMD — it’s clear the U.S. did the right thing in invading Iraq and taking out a formative terrorist threat.

Saddam had close ties to al-Qaida. That’s not just our opinion, but also that of the 9-11 Commission Report that so many in the media have selectively cited to bolster the case against the war.

BizzyBlog readers know that the case that Saddam had WMDs is already an open and shut case, based only on media reports in 2004 and 2005 that showed U.S. and other coalition forces uncovering:

* 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
* 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents
* 17 chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times more deadly than sarin gas)
* Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal over populated areas
* Roadside bombs loaded with mustard and “conventional” sarin gas, assembled in binary chemical projectiles for maximum potency

I’ve just checked all the links above. They still work.

Anyone in the “no WMD” crowd is welcome to comment here as soon as they can refute the contents of EVERY ONE of the articles in question — remember, your claim is that there were “no WMDs,” so until you get it down to zero, you remain on the wrong side of the truth. (Richard Miniter, author of the book “Disinformation,” says that the above is only a partial list, but I’m confident debunkers won’t get far enough for me to have to look into what is on the rest of his list).

But thanks to the Saddam documents, as IBD noted, all of you “no WMD” holdouts out there won’t be done. You’ll have to go to work on those too. Good luck.

As to answering the question in this post, I’m certain that the WORMs (Worn-Out Reactionary Media, known to most as The Mainstream Media) will do everything in their power to make it “when there’s no more political advantage to be gained from denying the obvious truth.”

From The Navy Times (HT S.O.B. Alliance member MilTracker):

(more…)