The article starts with a false premise -- that coverage of the surge is dropping because the Left doesn't like the results. That canard frankly shows abysmal ignorance of how the media works. Journalists rely on conflict to drive stories. Where there is no conflict there are no stories. You won't see an article headlined "no one was killed in Des Moines today" because that isn't news. And that is true in Baghdad as well. There will be occasional situationers, stories which explain the situation. And those are still around. But they don't appear as often as some would like. That doesn't mean there is some grand conspiracy against the Right, which seems to be popular theory of some in this time period. The author of this article ... More »

A ridiculous, waste-of-time article which substitutes neocon-logic for facts and reality. Invading Iraq for control of its oil isn’t exactly “liberation”. France’s President Sarkozy’s 51% approval is no barn burner--indeed, my friends in France regard him as the Gallic Bush. The article goes on and on in this vein, eventually landing in a never-never land of wishful thinking, without ever providing a shred of evidence for his what-are-you-talking-about? contentions—typical necon thinking. One thing is sure: if conservatives can win America in 2008, cows can fly.

This is a strange, unsuccessful piece. It didn't seem to effective argue its point (that there is a conservative tide in Europe) very well. While it presents data about parliamentary proportions, it never explains with evidence why the Governments of Sarkozy and Merkel are actually good for American conservatives.

I am not familar with this pubilcation. But after reading the article and looking a little at the publication, my opinion becomes more negative.

An incredibly vacant neoconservative fantasy, not worth the space it has wasted or the time to read it. Given the results of the 2006 election and the glaringly evident prospects for advances of Democratic Party pols in 2008, it's a little late in the game for writers of neocon screeds to try to convince anyone of anything, particularly with this mindless kind of message so fully packed with false interpretations, unconvincing speculations, and a nonsensical premise. One doubts that even the dedicated neocons who read this journal believe, out of desperation, what passes for logical argument, what they see and hear on Fox News, and the ravings of fundamentalist evangelists on TV.