The early reports from Iraq (UPDATED)

Amidst the whirl and rush on health care, Iraq’s votes are slowly being counted, but we do have some initial trends out of the released partials (Institute for the Study of War).

Here’s what we have so far:

• State of Law (Maliki’s list): 74-79 MPs
• Iraqiya (Allawi’s List): 69-79 MPs
• INA (formerly UIA, essentially Iran’s list): 60-63 MPs
• Kurdistan List (the established Kurdish parties): 33-36 MPs
• Gorran (opposition Kurdish list): 8-10 MPs
• Other parties: 11-18 MPs
• 50-68 MPs unallocated at this time

From what I can tell, the unalloacted split is even between Shiite provinces and non-Shiite provinces, with 5-8 seats still up for grabs in the three-way melee that is Baghdad.

Assuming the numbers don’t generally change (and they could, one could even see Iraqiya pass State of Law), it means that the INA has enough MPs to serve as kingmaker – unless Maliki and Allawi form a Grand Coalition, in which case, they could govern on their own without anyone else.  It does not appear that either of the top two parties can govern without the other or the INA.

I would also be stunned if Allawi and the INA form a government together, but it’s politics, so you never know.

Bad news: Tehran’s favorite (INA) will either be the junior coalition partner or the lead opposition.  Their complete marginalization was not acheived.

Good news: The INA isn’t nearly as powerful as they were after 2005.  In part, this is because Maliki took his Dawa faction out, but also because more and more voters are leery of Tehran.

Biggest surprises: Anbar – where Maliki managed to get the Anbar Awakening group in his State of Law coalition, and he still appears to have been shut out;  Allawi waxed him – and Kirkuk – where Gorran seems to have peeled enough votes away from the Kurdistan List to give Allawi 1st place.

Party to watch: Fadhila – a religious Shiite party (and thus part of INA) which is not particularly fond of Iran.  We don’t know the strength of the smaller factions within the Big Four, but because Iraq went with an open list format (voters could select candidates individually as well as go with straight-list voting), the factions within can each claim their own mandates, as it were.  This might have mattered with the Anbar Awakening crew possibly bolting State of Law, but Anbar voters appear to have made that moot by shutting State of Law out.  Fadhila (and some independents) could decide Tehran mullahs are a bigger problem than American troops or secular parties, in which case they could bolt INA and completely upset the apple cart.

Making a long story short: Things will be better in 2010 than they were in 2009, and could get even better still.

Cross-posted to VV

UPDATE: Bill Roggio has a projection from Reidar Visser which shows Iraqiya (INM) could indeed pull ahead of State of Law.  The numbers are close enough that it could go either way, but scoring in first could be a major symbolic victory for Allawi, and possibly enough to reclaim the title of Prime Minister.  Also, if these projections hold, INA would not have enough seats mathematically to play kingmaker (although they’d be very close, assuming they hold together – see above).

Obamacare could drive nearly one-third of all primary care doctors out of business

Note: the initial post title had “nearly half,” not “nearly one third,” for reasons shown below.

If you can contact a wavering Democrat, make sure they see this (New England Journal of Medicine Medicus Firm via Weekly Standard Blog, emphasis in original):

46.3% of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force them out of medicine or make them want to leave medicine.

If health reform passes without the public option, 7.4% of physicians stated that they would quit practicing medicine, unless they were nearing retirement, in which case 21.8% said they would retire early, bringing the total loss of physician workforce to nearly one-third of physicians leaving medicine.

Read that again: 46.3% 29.2%.  That’s nearly half one third of all primary care physicians who could leave the field if the House “deems” Obamacare passed.

Lean hard on those Dems; the doctor you save could be your own.

Cross-posted to VV

Actually, Tim, it’s worse than you think

My friend and fellow VVer Tim Watson is miffed – to say the least – about the fact that the upcoming budget leaves Caroline County without a Circuit Court judge for two years.  Tim found it especially galling that the judgeships are left vacant while over $13 million is set aside for corporate welfare.

As it turns out, it’s actually worse than that.

Here’s the budget language:

Page 26, after line 38 insert:
A.1 Notwithstanding the provisions of §§ 16.1-69.6:1 or 17.1-507, Code of Virginia, the total number of authorized judges in any judicial district or circuit shall be reduced by a number equal to the number of judges retiring, dying or resigning from that district or circuit for any authorized judgeship which was vacant or became vacant on or after February 15, 2010, and before July 1, 2010, effective upon the resignation, death or retirement date of each such judge.
2. Furthermore, notwithstanding the provisions of §§ 16.1-69.6:1 or 17.1-507, Code of Virginia, the total number of authorized judges in any judicial district or circuit shall be reduced by a number equal to the number of judges retiring, dying or resigning from that district or circuit on or after July 1, 2010, and on or before June 30, 2012, effective upon the resignation, death or retirement date of each such judge.

Read the verbiage carefully (emphasis added): “the total number of authorized judges in any judicial district or circuit shall be reduced by a number equal to the number of judges retiring, dying or resigning from that district or circuit for any authorized judgeship which was vacant or became vacant on or after . . .”

In other words, unless I read this wrong, the judgeships don’t just stay vacant; they go away, never to be filled again.  I suppose they could be resurrected in the next budget, but then again, I didn’t think they’d be eliminated in this one.

All for savings of $10.5 million over two years ($4M in FY10, $6.5M in Fy11: see budget language again).

Was the Governor’s Opportuity Fund ($12.1 million) really worth this?  Or the full 100% LCI-”hold harmless” provision ($116.5M), when 96% ($111.9M) would have freed up the money to fund the judges in FY11 (full disclosure, my county – Spotsylvania – came out ahead on the LCI)?

Don’t get me wrong.  I am thrilled that this budget avoided most of the tax increases DNC-Chairman Kaine tried to inflict upon us (although one did survive), but am I really supposed to believe that no one could find $11.3 million (FY10-FY12 savings) necessary to keep the lights on at the courthouse?

Cross-posted to VV

Obamacare “Down 17″

Jeffrey Anderson does a quick-and-dirty analysis of The Hill‘s current tally, and determines the current tally looks to be No-224, Yes-207 (Dennis the Menace included) – meaning Pelosi et al need to switch eight more votes.

Anderson wraps up his post perfectly (emphasis added):

However, this is not the time to let up, but rather to push even harder. It should be encouraging to note that, contrary to President Obama’s fondest hopes, public opinion is indeed affecting Democratic representatives. Now let’s turn up the pressure all the more and put this game away.

Exactly.

Cross-posted to VV

So much for that

I thought I’d take a quick break from health care and budgets to revisit the Australian political scene – and found out that the Australian Liberal Party is now backing a massive tax hike on businesses (a very unhappy Andrew Bolt).

Off go the Aussie Libs from the right-hand column.

Obama-Reid-Pelosi-care gaining momentum, or is it losing momentum?

Confusion on the Hill.

AP says Obama is “making headway” and picked up another vote – James Oberstar.  Oberstar was a yes who supposedly would flip without the Stupak language on abortion.  Apparently he won’t.

But, David Drier tells the Corner that the Dems are still 10 votes shy – and the “shy” number is growing.

We shall see.

Cross-posted to VV

Cathy Crabill on “these wars”

Courtesy of Facebook, this is what Cathy Crabill thinks about the WBK War.

Where to begin.

For starters, Crabill seems to forget why we liberated Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place: to remove Wahhabist and Ba’athist regimes (respectively) that were providing aid and comfort to al Qaeda.  That the Taliban did so is well-known; sadly, there is far more confusion than there should be regarding Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.

Of course, I doubt the facts matter much to Crabill, who in the Rappahanock Record (April 3, 2008, my attempts to convert the PDF into linkable form have been fruitless) referred to the liberation of Iraq as “this horrific war made worse by the fact that the decision to engage this battle was based on lies by the Bush administration.”

Thanks a bunch, Cathy!

At this point, sadly, many conservatives would ignore or even grudgingly agree with the rest of her Facebook comments.  It is, in fact, an inherently respectable conservative position – and the one argument more than any other that leads me to call myself a right-wing liberal.

Crabill suffers from a common malady among the right: the notion that “Islam” is somehow so foreign to a republican form of government (to use the venerated term from 1787, translated loosely in modern terms to “representative democracy”) that our political efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are a waste of time.

This runs into my second problem with Crabill’s comments: opposing “these wars” means more than just criticizing “building a democracy.”  It means you oppose any effort to defeat the Wahhabists, Ba’athists, and Khomeinists.  Of course, it would help if this Administration, its predecessor, or just about anyone else was as willing as I am to name the enemy, but refusing to name the enemy doesn’t make the enemy go away, however much Cathy Crabill would try to wish them away.

This lack of specifics about the enemy leads to my next point: this war isn’t about Islam.  It’s about Wahhabism, Ba’athism, and Khomeinism.  Most Sunni Muslims look at Wahhabism as a hideous perversion of their faith.  We just don’t notice that hear because the overwhelming majority of American mosques are funded by the Saudis – the founders of Wahhabism, while the European nation to which we pay the most attention (the UK) is heavily populated with immigrants from the only other major nation afflicted with Wahhabism – Pakistan.  Meanwhile, within Shia Islam, Khomeinism gets the same reaction.  Shia Islam is strong in Iraq, Iran, and Albania; the first is finally seeing its way through turmoil to embrace anti-Iranian politics; the mullahcracy is facing popular revulsion at home; and the European nation is a strong ally of the U.S. – and a functioning democracy practically since the Communists were overthrown in the early 1990s.  Sadly, much of Sunni Islam (save Lebanon) is under the thumb of one dictator or another, except for Indonesia: the largest Muslim nation on Earth, a representative democracy for 10 years, and one of the most anti-Wahhabist nations on the planet (al Qaeda has felt the need to hit them several times).

This leads me to my final point: building representative democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq may not be easy, but what’s the alternative?  If anything, the experience of Saddam himself should remind us that backing “pro-American” dictators is counterproductive and damaging.  Such a policy in Pakistan enabled General Zia to Wahhabize his country, which almost directly led to the Taliban’s formation and rise to power next door, and indirectly fueled the effort by Pakistani radicals to Wahhabize Britain.  Egypt and Saudi Arabia are powder kegs waiting to explode.

By contrast, the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon stopped the Khomeinists cold in Israel’s neighbor.  Bahrain’s rising anti-Americanism vanished when the local emir responded by allowing an elected legislature.  Pakistan’s weak elected government may or may not be very helpful to us, but neither was the Musharraf regime for the most part.  The partial returns from Iraq show a humiliating defeat for Iran-tainted parties.  Meanwhile, people literally gave their lives in Tehran and elsewhere for a vote that meant something.  Again, there is the example of Indonesia.

Churchill once said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”  When it comes to allies, democratic (or republican) ones are just as “bad.”

Cathy Crabill clearly doesn’t understand this, and admittedly, she’s not alone there.  However, she takes that and uses it to come to one of the most dovish points of view in America.  I sincerely doubt most Americans, let alone Republicans in VA-1, are with here on that.

Cross-posted to VV

Tax hike on manufacturers survives (albeit shrunken)

Virginia has a new budget, and while the usual suspects are squawking about budget cuts, Norm @ TQ has been banging on about a tax increase that should be getting more attention:

On his Facebook page, Sen. Mark Obenshain has a few notes about the budget, including this:

There appears to be a significant tax increase on manufacturers that has been embedded into the budget the elimination of a deduction for manufacturers on domestic production (I hope the Governor will revisit this in his review and that he might offer an amendment.

I don’t believe the deduction was eliminated, just made much smaller than it would have been had Virginia fully-conformed its rate to federal tax law.

Still, shaving the deduction does tend to put a crimp in the jobs mantra the Assembly and the Governor have been chanting throughout the winter.

I’m with Norm; the tax appears to be smaller, but it’s still there.

Obenshain, BTW, was one of only 6 Senators (all Republicans) who voted against the budget.  The House vote isn’t on line yet, but among the 23 noes was local Delegate Mark Cole (FLS).

Cross-posted to VV

Crabill backed candidate who played footsie with 9/11 Truthers for Texas Governor

The picture below is taken right from Ms. Crabill’s Facebook page: a clear endorsement of Debra Medina:

Take a closer look at the date – February 28 – i.e., more than two weeks after Glenn Beck watched Medina play footsie with the 9/11 Truthers.

Be afraid; be very afraid.

Cross-posted to VV

Memo to House Democrats: if you vote to declare the Senate bill passed, you vote for the Senate bill

As we approach the apparent day of reckoning (next Thursday or Friday), it is possible that the House Democrats may try to pull a “self-execution” maneuver.  Much like the “Slaughter rule,” it would basically say that if the House passes the reconciliation bill, the Senate health care bill is deemed “passed.”  Haans Kuttner explains the effect on NRO – Critical Condition:

A self-executing rule could provide that (1) the House passes the Senate health-care-reform bill and (2) the House passes a reconciliation bill. All in one vote. The Senate health-reform bill would then be sent to the president for his approval. The reconciliation bill would be sent to the Senate for further action.

The idea is this: Pelosi et al know Obama-Reidcare can’t win on its own, so they hide it in this House Rule under a bill that does most of the opposite and hesto presto, the bill passes!  The President signs it; the Senate can do whatever it wants (even House Democrats know that’s a minefield); and House Democrats can claim they never really voted for the odious pieces.

Wrong.

It is at this time that I humbly recommend those of us in the rightosphere make certain things abundantly clear to the House Democrats: no matter what parliamentary tricks or buried votes you want to pull . . .

• If you vote to deem Obama-Reidcare “passed,” you vote for Obama-Reidcare
• If you vote to deem The Cornhusker Kickback “passed,” you vote for The Cornhusker Kickback
• If you vote to deem The Louisiana Purchase “passed,” you vote for The Louisiana Purchase
• If you vote to deem abortion funding “passed,” you vote for abortion funding

No if, ands, or buts.  We will not allow you to hide your vote in parliamentary jelly roll.

Are we clear?

Cross-posted to VV