Think Progress

At least 73 U.S. troops are reported to have died in Iraq this past month. The numbers are a decline from the all-time highs of 108, 131, and 117 from the previous three months.

Media reports herald the statistics as encouraging and as demonstrating “steady progress” in Iraq. Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno said that the lower death toll was a “positive sign.”

According to icasualties.org, at least 3,653 U.S. troops have died in the 53 months that the war has been going on — a per monthly rate of nearly 69 U.S. troop casualties. Thus, the current month’s total still exceeds the average monthly casualty rate of the entire war.

Moreover, 73 is also greater than the average monthly casualty rate of each of the first four years of the war. A look at the monthly U.S. casualty rates over each of these years:

YEAR	CASUALITY RATE
2003	48.6 per month
2004	70.8 per month
2005	70.5 per month
2006	68.5 per month
2007	92.9 per month

Statistics compiled from icasualties.org

The AP notes that “the daily average for U.S. troop deaths in July was at least 2.35 — higher than the ...   more »

Think Progress

Reuters reports, “Rupert Murdoch was one step closer to fulfilling a decades-long dream of running the venerable Wall Street Journal on Tuesday after the News Corp board approved his $5 billion bid for Dow Jones & Co Inc.”

URL: Think Progress

   more »

Think Progress

After Brookings analysts Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack published a report in the New York Times yesterday arguing that “we are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms,” National Review convened a symposium of pro-war cheerleaders to praise the op-ed.

Of the eight war backers in the symposium, the most distinguished contributor is Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who — like the Brookings analysts — has previously exploited Baghdad trips to portray a rosy vision of Iraq. McCain used the op-ed to bash war critics:

Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack have uncovered a truth that seems to escape congressional Democrats: General Petraeus’s new strategy has shown remarkable progress. […]

I cannot guarantee success. But I do guarantee that, should Congress fail to sustain the effort, and should it pay no heed to the lessons drawn by Mr. Pollack and Mr. O’Hanlon, then America will face a historic and terrible defeat. Such a defeat, with its enormous human and strategic costs, will unfold unless we do all in our power to prevent it. I, for one, will continue to do just that.

In his interview with Larry King, Vice President Cheney said ...   more »

Think Progress

TV Newser reports CNN has offered conservative radio host Laura Ingraham a one-week guest-host gig for the 8pm ET slot vacated by Paula Zahn. Atrios says contact CNN and “Ask them if someone who told her listeners to jam a voter hotline is really someone appropriate for ‘The most trusted name in news.’”

URL: Think Progress

   more »

Think Progress

The House Oversight Committee reports that in a late breaking development, Donald Rumsfeld will appear tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. for a hearing entitled “The Tillman Fratricide: What the Leadership of the Defense Department Knew.” The following witnesses will testify:

The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld
Former Secretary of Defense

Gen. Richard B. Myers (Retired)
Former Chair, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Gen. John P. Abizaid (Retired)
Former Commander, U.S. Central Command

Gen. Bryan Douglas Brown (Retired)
Former Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command

Lt. Gen. Philip R. Kensinger, Jr. (Retired)*
(supboena issued/not confirmed)
Former Commander, U.S. Army Special Operations Command

A previous witness list had suggested Rumsfeld would not attend.

URL: Think Progress

   more »

FAIR Media Views

In her defense of a Pulitzer-winning Post columnist's shockingly regressive column, the ombud seems to echo Robin Givhan's Talibanesque claim that "to display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d'oeuvres is a provocation":

Did Clinton have a bad-blouse day, or did she want to wear something a bit provocative? Was this a wardrobe malfunction, and, if so, did it merit this much coverage?

A possibility not considered by Howell: The outfit was wearing was a perfectly unremarkable one that would not have seemed out of place at church or a business meeting, and that it's only the Post's strange obsession with the Clintons' sexuality that turns it into a "Cleavage Conversation."

URL: FAIR Media Views

   more »