Our New House!

We bought a house! We closed escrow on Friday and it will take about 2 weeks for the initial work to be finished. We're basically restoring the original floor plan by getting rid of all the terrible decisions the previous owners made that destroyed the integrity of this beautiful historic home (random walls, raised floors, etc.). Once the work is done, then we can move in!

Here's a picture of the outside...

Here's the view down the street...

The absolute best thing about the house is the location. It's about 2 blocks from the Capitol, 1 block from my office, 2 blocks from the Metro, and has views of the Washington Monument out the front window. I am so excited!! I took tons of "before" pictures so that we can see the difference when it's completely finished, so I'll be sure to keep you all posted!

The Truth about Fresno

Regarding Jim Boren's recent article (a definite must-read)... I have to congratulate The Bee on publishing what is probably the most honest assessment of Fresno I have ever read. I'm usually not a big Bee cheerleader, but kudos to them for having the guts to speak the truth to power - especially in a city that seems to be allergic to the truth at the expense of the city and its citizens.

I was born and raised in Fresno, graduated from Fresno Pacific, and moved to Washington DC after graduation where I lived and worked for 2 years. I then naively thought that I could come back to my hometown and be able to be taken seriously -- maybe even make a positive difference -- as a young woman with an excellent education and management-level experience in something other than data entry. Wow, was I wrong.

The Good Old Boys are alive and well in Fresno, and unfortunately, their quest for self-preservation has driven away or silenced some of the most intelligent, creative young minds that Fresno has produced (and when I say "creative." I don't mean all the artsy-types; I mean people who actually work for a living, and not as teachers). This "leadership" has clearly demonstrated that they are incapable of effecting any kind of real, positive change, but they are so invested in the status quo that they won't let anyone else even try. The irony is that once these changes happen, it will affect everyone's bottom line (not to mention quality of life) in a positive way. But then, it would take long-term vision for someone to realize that -- something obviously lacking in the current group of "All the Same People" now running the city.

Unless these folks either go away or wake up, Fresno will eventually die economically because people like me get so fed up with the ineptitude of the city establishment that we see no reason to stay, especially when we can easily find and move to other cities that welcome us and allow us to grow and thrive, both professionally and personally.

Unfortunately, the dirty little secret is that I would have liked to stay in Fresno and be closer to my family and friends, if only Fresno had given me a reason to stay (a good economy, decent jobs, things to do after 8pm, a fun downtown, less corruption). But it didn't, so I didn't. I hope that someday the leadership of the city will realize that preserving the status quo will eventually mean not having a city to run. I would love to see Fresno adopt some of the proven strategies that have made cities like Arlington, VA, Washington, DC, Portland, OR, Denver, CO, and San Diego, CA such great places to live. But again, I'm probably being naive.

Let's hope people keep speaking the truth.

Quick Update

Hi everyone! Just wanted to post a quick update on non-news-related life events...

Brian's parents came into town on Friday and will be here until Wednesday night. It's the first time they've ever been to Washington, and the first time they've come to visit us since we moved here 3 years ago.

One of my absolute favorite things is seeing the city with people who have never seen it before. There's just something about seeing the Capitol, the monuments, the Supreme Court, and all the other beautiful and awe-inspiring symbols of our nation with someone who is seeing them for the first time. It reminds me to take time to appreciate getting to live in such a beautiful city that people come from all over the world to visit, and walking past landmarks on my way to work that people dream their whole lives of seeing.

On Friday night we did my favorite thing to do with "new people" - take a driving tour of the city at night, when all the monuments and buildings are lit up. The city takes on a completely different feeling at night... almost magical, and very dramatic. I love it.

Saturday we all went over our soon-to-be new house (!) and spent about 3 hours with our contractor, our realtor (both of which are fantastic), and Brian's parents going over all the renovations we're going to be starting as soon as we close escrow on Friday. The prior owners basically destroyed the integrity of the house, so we're going to be getting rid of all their awful choices and try to restore it back to its original 1875-era beauty (with some modern conveniences, of course). Oh, and we get to live there! I'm pretty excited about that, too. Not only is it about a 3 minute walk to my office and 2 blocks from the Metro, it's 2 blocks from the Capitol and has views of the Washington Monument. Not that I'm bragging. Well, okay, maybe just a little.

Saturday night we went to dinner at our favorite Irish Pub in Old Town Alexandria (Pat Troy's), then had dessert at La Madeleine (one of my all-time favorites).

Yesterday we drove down GW Parkway and went to Mount Vernon. It could not have been a more perfect, beautiful day for it. After that we had dinner at La Tasca and went through two pitchers of Sangria between the four of us, so we were all feeling pretty good afterward. Today they're doing the Tourmobile and we're going to get together for dinner at Ruth's Chris tonight after Brian and I get off work.

So that's the latest. I'm starting to get pretty excited, but also pretty stressed out about the house stuff, and balancing all of that with stresses and demands of work and making sure I see my husband every now and then. But I can see the light at the end of the tunnel, and I know how beautiful it will be when it's all finished, which is comforting. I'll be sure to post some before and after pictures and keep you all posted!

Bush on Iraq

Here is the full transcript of President Bush's address last night regarding Iraq.

Kudos to our troops and commanders who have worked so hard to turn the tide in Iraq and are now seeing success. We owe you more than we can ever repay.

News Digest

The House Republican Conference (www.gop.gov) sends out news clips every morning for all of us aspiring wonks on the Hill. Today's were especially interesting, so I thought I'd pass them along for all of you to enjoy...


House Republican Conference Morning Clips – Friday, 9/14

Iraq
LA Times
Bush redefines 'victory'
Troop cut could be less than reported
Big N.Y. Times discount for MoveOn.org Betray Us ad
Bandow and Hewitt: Rethinking the war on terrorism
Opinion: Debating Iraq? Pop a pill first

NY Times
Success Allows Gradual Troop Cuts, Bush Says
Multiple Messages and Audiences
Why Officers Differ on Troop Reduction
Number of Soldiers to Be Left in Iraq Remains Unclear
Editorial: No Exit, No Strategy

Wall Street Journal
President Sees 'Enduring' Role For U.S. in Iraq
Brothers in Arms: Sheik Backs U.S., Sibling Is Suspect
Opinion: 'Media Is Half the Battle'
Strassel: Political Surge

USA Today
Analysis: Bush Buys More Time on Iraq
Dems Vow to Fight Bush “endless” Strategy in Iraq
Bush: Continue US Presence in Iraq
Editorial: In for the long term? Maybe, but not with a blank check

CQ Today
Bush Attempts to Shore Up Support

The Hill
Bush: Surge allows some troops to come home

Investor’s Business Daily
Editorial: The Democrats’ Moral BankruptcyEditorial: Subsidizing Sedition

The Washington Times
Op-Ed: Political tug of war
Op-Ed: Digesting the dual reportsBush to start pullout
War policy change gives GOP momentum for ‘08

The Washington Post
Editorial: The Least Bad Plan
Krauthammer: A ‘Realistic Chance’ for Success
Robinson: Patchwork in Progress?
GOP Moderates React with Concern
Fact Checking the President
Bush Tells Nation He Will Begin to Roll Back ‘Surge’
Bomb Kills a Key Sunni Ally of U.S.

Associated Press
Attack kills U.S. ally in Iraq al Qaeda fight

New York Post
Rep. Putnam: The Risks of Running Away

Economy/Finance
Investor’s Business Daily
Editorial: Recession Antidote

Christian Science Monitor
Credit crunch likely to spur GOP reforms

International Relations
Investor’s Business Daily
Editorial: Bombs, Babies, and Bolsheviks

Christian Science Monitor
Editorial: Unpredictable Putin

Agenda
LA Times
Editorial: Democracy for D.C.

NY Times
Editorial: More Help Needed for Tougher Times

CQ Today
House, Senate Ponder Different Timelines for Temporary Spending Measures
The Week Ahead

The Washington Times
Rep. Tancredo: Protect America’s children

Administration
Wall Street Journal
Editorial: Borking Mr. Olson

The Washington Times
Blowing a chance for a smackdown

The Washington Post
Gonzales Ready to Leave the Stage
Tree in AG Contender’s Past Could Needle Democrats

2008
LA Times
Brownstein: Republicans run right

NY Times
Angered by an Antiwar Ad, Giuliani Seeks Equal Space

The Washington Post
Editorial: The Presumed Favorite (M. Warner)
Dionne: Painting the Suburbs Blue

Items of Interest
LA Times
Opinion: Petraeus on Britney

NY Times
Sideline Spying: N.F.L. Punishes Patriots’ Taping

People
Alyssa Milano Scores MLB Reporting Gig

Observations

Very interesting analysis of the events of the past week...

Political Surge (Wall Street Journal)
Look who won Petraeus week.
BY KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Friday, September 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Had anyone suggested six weeks ago that the GOP would emerge from the Petraeus hearings on the political front-foot, they'd have been laughed at all the way to Anbar. There's a lesson here for Republicans, in particular those most worried about how Iraq will play in next year's elections: Good military policy is good politics.

That wisdom was a hard sell this spring, when the news out of Iraq was glum, the war supplemental debate raged, and dozens of Republicans were threatening to call it quits. The White House instead made an impassioned plea that the party hold tight through the summer and let Gen. David Petraeus do what they'd sent him to Iraq to do. Sen. Mitch McConnell and Rep. John Boehner were subject to endless moaning and fretting and even a few senatorial mini-defections, but for the most part succeeded in keeping their political troops in formation. In July, when House Democrats forced yet one more vote on Iraq withdrawal, only four Republicans joined the other side.

And slowly, slowly began a trickle of good news: fewer car and suicide bombings here; fewer violent civilian deaths there; Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar and elsewhere who had joined with the U.S. against al Qaeda. These good tidings, and many more, were confirmed this week, as Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker assured the U.S. public that Iraq really is making strides both militarily and politically, and that the U.S. still very much has the opportunity to deliver victory.

The military commander also went out of his way to explain that it was entirely because of the U.S.'s growing strength on the military front, that we might now begin to talk about limited force withdrawals. This is what the vast number of Americans have been aching to hear--not talk of a dishonorable cut-and-run--and polls show they are increasingly willing to grant Gen. Petraeus, and by extension the Bush administration, more time to build on this success.

In short, the war is in a better place, and by extension those politicians who have supported the war are in a better place. The most obvious winners are congressional Republicans. The pressure they had faced to join with Democrats on withdrawal deadlines has now ebbed, primarily because Gen. Petraeus is himself advocating bringing troops back home--and from a position of strength. Those members who have fought the hardest for a principled stand in Iraq, say Sen. Joe Lieberman, are looking smarter, and will be able to tackle upcoming legislative battles--over the defense budget and a later war supplemental--with renewed firepower. One senior House staffer reports that some amazed Republicans are even allowing themselves to hope--should the upcoming months deliver as much positive news as the preceding few--that Iraq might be a "second tier" issue come the election.

The White House, for its part, has cracked itself a small opening to recoup some credibility on the war, and potentially revitalize what's left of its tenure. Few things are more dangerous than a weak presidency, in particular when it comes to foreign policy. A stronger President Bush in Iraq will hopefully mean a stronger President Bush on the growing regional threats of Iran and Syria. Continued good news also wouldn't hurt the administration's case on domestic security battles, say wiretapping or Guantanamo.

Then there are those Republicans who'd like to have Mr. Bush's job. Sen. John McCain stands to get the biggest bump, and his team is already noting that it was the Arizonan who for "four years" "consistently advocated for a new strategy in Iraq"--meaning, of the sort today yielding success. But in general, Gen. Petraeus's testimony has given other GOP candidates, in particular Rudy Giuliani, a chance to remind voters that he's stood for success in Iraq all along and that his Democratic opponents haven't.

Speaking of Democrats, they've conversely had a bitter taste of the perils of investing their political fortunes in military failure. Their decision to throw in with the antiwar left has left them with nowhere to go now that the better news is rolling in. That much has been obvious by the speed with which they've been blowing through new political strategies--each one less convincing than the one before.

The grand plan this summer was to claim the surge was a failure, no matter what Gen. Petraeus said. But then even some in their own party started returning from congressional trips to Iraq to report progress. Next up was to say that military success mattered little, given the lack of political progress. That became harder as reports surfaced of some political reconciliation. A final, desperate ploy in the past week was to besmirch the honor of a respected general, suggest he had "cherry picked" data and was a puppet of the Bush administration. That went over like an IED with the public.

Don't think it hasn't occurred to Democratic presidential contenders that their political terrain is also shifting, and uncomfortably. The likely effect of the Petraeus report is to buy the Bush administration another six or nine months in Iraq. Even if the general feels confident enough to follow through on his initial withdrawal proposals, an estimated 130,000 U.S. troops will remain on Iraqi soil come next summer or fall. Should the Democrats win the White House, those troops will be their responsibility. And they'll also take the blame if they cave to a politically motivated withdrawal that results in an Iraq that descends back into chaos. This unpalatable thought helps explain the bombs Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were lobbing at Gen. Petraeus this week.

Republicans would do well to absorb the military-success lesson, and quickly, because big challenges remain. The John Warners and Chuck Hagels of the world aren't yet ready to relinquish their self-proclaimed roles as "brave" GOP war dissenters; expect them to team up with Democrats on creative legislative language that might yet tie the military's hands. An even bigger challenge for Republicans will be to find the courage to follow President Bush's lead and make clear to the American public that true success in Iraq may involve a troop presence for many years.

That sort of public acceptance will be crucial if Republicans hope to weather Iraq next year. Yet that acceptance will only come if Americans continue to see success. That means giving the generals all the freedom they need to keep doing their job. Good policy, good politics.

Ms. Strassel is a member of The Wall Street Journal's editorial board, based in Washington. Her column appears Fridays.

Side Note

Just to brag about my wonderful boss a little bit...
Forbes would make a terrific senator (Tidewater News)

Also, this is just for fun. Is anyone really surprised by this? Yet another black eye on the face of "unbiased" American journalism...

Fresno's Folly

Quick shout-out to my hometown on how the mayor's race is shaping up.

Ashley Swearengin would make a phenomenal Mayor, but unfortunately the Good Ol' Boys Club back home would be more likely to collectively jump off a bridge rather than allow an intelligent, articulate, competent, authoritative, attractive woman under 40 to be elected Mayor. At least that's my prediction after dealing with the mind-blowing backwardness that pervades most local politics there for the last year. I hope I'm wrong, for Fresno's sake.

It's too bad, too. She might actually change things for the better.

Move On, MoveOn

Below is an excellent op-ed from today's Wall Street Journal about the unfortunate and dangerous takeover of the Democratic Party by MoveOn.org. A definite must-read for anyone who cares about the future of political discourse in the United States.

Update: Another interesting analysis, this one from Politico.

Trashing Petraeus
The Wall Street Journal
September 11, 2007; Page A18; Editorial

Important as was yesterday's appearance before Congress by General David Petraeus, the events leading up to his testimony may have been more significant. Members of the Democratic leadership and their supporters have now normalized the practice of accusing their opponents of lying. If other members of the Democratic Party don't move quickly to repudiate this turn, the ability of the U.S. political system to function will be impaired in a way no one would wish for.

Well, with one exception. MoveOn.org1, the Democratic activist group, bought space in the New York Times yesterday to accuse General Petraeus of "cooking the books for the White House." The ad transmutes the general's name into "General Betray Us."

"Betrayal," as every military officer knows, is a word that through the history of their profession bears the stain of acts that are both dishonorable and unforgivable. That is to say, MoveOn.org didn't stumble upon this word; it was chosen with specific intent, to convey the most serious accusation possible against General Petraeus, that his word is false, that he is a liar and that he is willing to betray his country. The next and obvious word to which this equation with betrayal leads is treason. That it is merely insinuated makes it worse.

MoveOn.org calls itself a "progressive" political group, but it is in fact drawn from the hard left of American politics and a pedigree that sees politics as not so much an ongoing struggle but a final competition. Their Web-based group is new to the political scene, but its politics are not so new. More surprising and troubling are the formerly liberal institutions and politicians who now share this political ethos.

In an editorial on Sunday, the New York Times, after saying that President Bush "isn't looking for the truth, only for ways to confound the public," asserted that "General Petraeus has his own credibility problems." We read this as an elision from George Bush, the oft-accused liar on WMD and all the rest, to David Petraeus, also a liar merely for serving in the chain of command. With this editorial, the Times establishes that the party line is no longer just "Bush lied," but anyone who says anything good about Iraq or our effort there is also lying. As such, the Times enables and ratifies MoveOn.org's rhetoric as common usage for Democrats.

Late last week, for instance, we heard it said of General Petraeus that, "He's made a number of statements over the years that have not proven to be factual." This was from Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate.

The Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Tom Lantos, said Thursday that General Petraeus would not be the author of his report; it would be written "by Administration political operatives." He opened yesterday's hearing, moments before General Petraeus was to speak, by saying, "We cannot take anything this Administration says on Iraq at face value."

So far, only two Democrats that we are aware of have repudiated this political turn. Joe Lieberman, already ostracized from the party for dissent, called the MoveOn ad an "act of slander that every member of the Congress -- Democrat and Republican -- has a solemn responsibility to condemn." And Joe Biden, after the MoveOn ad was read to him on "Meet the Press" Sunday, replied: "I don't buy into that. This is an honorable guy. He's telling the truth."

These are the exceptions. Another of the party's activist groups, Democracy for America, released a statement about the time General Petraeus began to speak: "It is offensive that our commander-in-chief has ordered a four-star general to mislead Congress."

As General Petraeus finished his statement yesterday, Senator Chris Dodd's Presidential campaign spammed an email about "the accuracy" of the report: "The fact that there are questions about General Petraeus's report is not surprising given that it was brought to you by this White House." Thus in Mr. Dodd's view, General Petraeus, returned from the Iraq battlefield, is a complicit ventriloquist's dummy.

Can this really be the new standard of political rhetoric across the Democratic Party? There was a time when the party's institutional elites, such as the Times, would have pulled it back from reducing politics to all or nothing. They would have blown the whistle on such accusations. Now they are leading the charge.

Under these new terms, public policy is no longer subject to debate, discussion and disagreement over competing views and interpretations. Instead, the opposition is reduced to the status of liar. Now the opposition is not merely wrong, but lacks legitimacy and political standing. The goal here is not to debate, but to destroy.

Today General Petraeus testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Its Democratic Members include Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer and Jim Webb. This would be the appropriate setting to apologize to General Petraeus for the MoveOn.org ad. Or let it stand.

Petraeus Continued

In the way of a quick update (and as part of my futile but passionate quest to encourage Americans to make decisions based on facts rather than after-the-fact synopsis and spin) here is the link to the full text of Gen. Petraeus' report to the House Armed Services Committee.

I would encourage you to read it (all of it). Also, pass it along to your friends and family in order to educate people that there is more to what's going on over there and in the broader War on Terror than what you hear about on the evening news.

Petraeus Report

Well, the Petraeus Report hearing is happening less than 100 feet down the hall from my office in about an hour. One of the fun perks of working on the Hill: you get to wait for elevators with media types and capitol police with bomb-sniffing dogs. Fun times.

Wanted to pass this along, too. This is our good friend Pete on Fox News today. He's an Iraq vet and a really great guy. He's talking here about MoveOn.org's disgusting political ad in the New York Times today. I was livid when I heard about it. Regardless of your feelings on Iraq, calling a United States General a traitor, especially when your country is at war, is absolutely despicable, if not treasonous. I just (probably naïvely) wish that all the politics of this war would just go away, and people would instead spend their energy trying to help our country and our troops win.

Click here to watch the clip.

MoveOn Ad: "Absolutely Despicable"
Iraq Veteran: Democrats "Invested in the Fact that Things Must Get Worse in Iraq"

Anyway, that's about all the excitement for today. I think that's about all the excitement I can handle. :)