Nearly two feet of snow fell in Washington, DC, last weekend, setting a record for a December snowfall and guaranteeing a white Christmas. Senate Democrats couldn't wait, however, and they braved the blizzard, exchanged Christmas presents early, and got the 60 votes they needed to invoke cloture and ensure final passage of their unpopular healthcare-reform bill in January. Democrats should enjoy their new toy when it arrives. All they are likely to find under their Christmas tree next year is a notice that their House and Senate have been repossessed.

Read the full column at http://ewross.com/Christmas_Presents_for_Democrats.htm

Like the recent case of US Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, are the pending courts-martial of three US Navy SEALs for allegedly punching captured terrorist Ahmed Hashim Abed, the purported planner of the 2004 Fallujah killings of four Blackwater security guards, another case of political correctness displacing common sense?

In Hasan’s case, fear of accusing a Muslim officer of highly questionable behavior allowed him to escape the scrutiny common sense dictates he should have gotten before it was too late. Now, many suspect that fear of detainee-abuse allegations may have led to charges against the SEALs that are not warranted.

The first unit of the 30,000 troops President Obama has ordered into Afghanistan, 1500 Marines from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, will arrive before Christmas. Many of them have spent Christmas away from home before in Afghanistan or Iraq. They'll join thousands of others who have done the same. It goes with the territory. It's no big deal, unless it's your first time.

For me that first time was Christmas 1966. A brand new 2nd LT assigned to the reactivated 9th Infantry Division at Ft. Riley, Kansas, six months earlier, I deployed on 2 December with the 3rd Brigade aboard the USNS General William Weigal out Oakland, California. Twenty-one days later we moved by truck convoy from the port of Vung Tau, South Vietnam, to the 9th's new base camp at Bearcat southeast of Saigon. I spent Christmas eve sitting on a sandbag wall, cleaning my M-16 rifle, looking up at the stars, and thinking about my family 11,000 miles away. I'll never forget that lonely night because it made me aware of what Christmas is really all about--family, friends, and shared beliefs.

A lot has changed in 44 years--the troops today have have email, cellphones, digital pictures, and video. What hasn't changed is that America's young men and women must still go in harms way to defend our freedom. Remember our troops this Christmas. They'll be thinking about us.

Read this week’s and Sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Read Previous EWRoss weekly columns at http://ewross.com/archive.htm

By now, unless the only place you get your news is from ABC, CBS, or NBC, you know what “Climategate” is all about. The hacking and dissemination of more than a thousand emails from the influential Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, revealed wholesale deception and data manipulation to support global-warming trends that don’t exist. Curious minds want to know, what impact will it have?

Considerable impact; more I suspect, than most people believe, not only on the climate-change establishment, but on the scientific community in general, the alternative energy industry, the so called mainstream media (MSM), and Democrats. The emails themselves were explosive enough; however, their full effect will take time to play out.

Read the full column at http://ewross.com/Climategate.htm

As a US Army Captain, I was stationed on Oahu, Hawaii, in the mid-1970s. Our house in Pearl City overlooked Pearl Harbor. In the military and later as a civilian working for the Department of Defense, I visited Hawaii dozens of times until I retired from government service in 2007.

Living there and visiting so often, I had a different perspective, of course, than the tourist who only visits Hawaii once or twice. Still, I couldn't drive by the USS Arizona Memorial or, after 1998, the battleship USS Missouri without remembering the events of December 7, 1941. And I couldn't stand on either and look down at the sunken hulk of the USS Arizona with oil still seeping from it and where bodies of 1102 of the 1177 sailors remain entombed without thinking about what it must have been like that day.

I was only a few hundred yards from  from the Pentagon on September, 11, 2001. I heard the plane crash into the building, saw the column of smoke, and smelled the burning jet fuel. A few months later when I visited Hawaii, I went again to the Arizona Memorial. This time I had an even deeper understanding of the shock and surprise the men of the Arizona must have experienced.

With each passing year, the memory of that "day of infamy" fades further in the American consciousness. For many, it's becomes just another tourist attraction. A nation at war, America would do well to keep the memories of the attacks of December 7, 1941 and September 11, 2001 alive.

Read this week’s and Sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Read Previous EWRoss weekly columns at http://ewross.com/archive.htm

On December 1, President Obama will announce his decision on troop levels and the way forward in Afghanistan in a speech to the nation from the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. Media reports indicate that he will approve something less than, but close to, the optimal 40,000 troops that General Stanley McChrystal requested more than three months ago. He also likely will announce “benchmarks” for measuring success and an “exit strategy” for getting US forces out of Afghanistan. But if this is all he does, even if he gives McChrystal most of what he asked for, our prospects for winning the war in Afghanistan aren’t good.

The hacking and dissemination of thousands of emails from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England that reveal deception and data manipulation may be a game-changer. They don’t prove that long-term global warming isn't happening or that humans aren't responsible for some of it. What they reveal is that the paleoclimatology branch of climate science has become politicized to the point of engaging in “unethical and probably illegal behavior.” They should serve as a warning to countries around the world on the eve of the Copenhagen Climate Conference that it is premature to plunge headlong into binding international treaties that limit CO2 emissions and permanently impinge on individual freedom.

The real “inconvenient truth” is that former Vice President Al Gore and many of those who preach from the pulpit of the “church of climatology,” have been serving up tainted cool aide. They've been using junk science as a tool to bring about a fundamental change in the world order--massive redistribution of wealth and global governance.

I’m not a climate change believer, nor am I a climate change denier; and I believe that pumping too much “stuff” into the atmosphere that we weren’t pumping into it 150 years ago isn't a good idea. Before we take drastic steps based on unsettled science, however, we should demand more compelling evidence.

Honest, ethical, and objective scientists have discovered much about our world and our universe. They’ve made us aware of how complex it is and, when it comes to the odd six-mile-wide asteroid, how quickly life on earth can change. They’ve also shown us what true scientific research is all about--withstanding the most critical debate and skepticism without resorting to deception and the demonization of people with contrary views.

Read this week’s and Sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Sarah Palin’s memoir, Going Rogue, An American Life, is flying off bookstore shelves, and thousands are lining up wherever Palin appears on her book-signing tour. Her interviews with Oprah Winfrey, Barbara Walters, and conservative radio and cable TV talk-show hosts have drawn huge audiences. Will Palin’s book and public appearances improve her political prospects? What do they suggest about her intentions?

The Obama administration's actions on Nidal Malik Hasan and Khalid Shiekh Mohammed confuse our men and women in uniform.

At a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing chaired by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I. RI.), Mr. Walid Phares, an expert on Islamic jihad at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, regarding whether Hasan was a terrorist or not, testified; "It will be 'terrorism' per Obama's team only if it is proven that there was a terror organization or a regime involved." Apparently, Hisan's emails to al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki are not sufficient to demonstrate Hasan's desire to become a member of al-Qaeda.

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Attorney General Eric Holder, “Can you give me a case in United States history where an enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court?” Holder responded, “I don't know. I'd have to look at that. I think that, you know, the determination I've made . . .” Before Holder could finish his sentence Graham interjected, “We're making history here, Mr. Attorney General. I'll answer it for you. The answer is no.”

Graham went on to tell Holder that his policy was confusing our soldiers on the ground. What were they supposed to do when they captured another terrorist on the battlefield, question him for intelligence information or read him his Miranda rights.

Has the Obama administration really thought through their policies with regard to the Fort Hood shootings and punishing the people behind the 9/11 attacks? You'd have thought that Eric Holder should have known the answer to Sen. Graham's question; and you'd think they'd understand that Hasan is a terrorist. Their actions in both cases only confuse our men and women in uniform who fight terrorism and embolden our terrorist enemies.

Read this week’s and Sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Read Previous EWRoss weekly columns at http://ewross.com/archive.htm

Attorney General Eric Holder’s controversial decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo detainees accused of the 9/11 terror attacks in Federal Court in the Southern District of New York will take America down a path it will likely regret. America, not just Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his cohorts, is going on trial, allowing misperceptions of world opinion and US national interest to put America at risk.

Read my column at http://ewross.com/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed_Goes_to_Court.htm

Many argue that fighting al-Qaeda and the Taliban on the battlefield is one thing, but we should use the criminal justice system to bring foreign terrorists who attack us in the US to justice. They find the idea of "a war on terror" to deal with them objectionable. They believe it puts us at odds with the Muslim world and gets in the way of winning hearts and minds with outreach to them. We should prevent terror attacks with good police work.

The problem with this is that the criminal justice system is ill-suited for that task, especially protecting Americans from international terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda. The focus of the criminal justice system is collecting evidence, preserving it for trial, and protecting the Constitutional rights of the accused. Captured foreign terrorists (enemy combatants) do not have the same Constitutional rights as US citizens, and granting them such rights inhibits our ability to deter, prevent, and defend against terrorist attacks. Collecting and preserving evidence inhibits intelligence collection and intelligence sharing.

When we catch a Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed after the fact on foreign soil, it's far more important that we use every lawful technique to learn everything he knows rather than reading him his rights and giving him a lawyer so as not to prejudice the case against him in court. In an age when terrorists may soon possess nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons, we can not afford to do otherwise.

What motivated US Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan to open fire on his fellow soldiers at Fort Hood’s Soldier Readiness Center on November 5, 2009? Is he a “terrorist”--mounting evidence suggests Hasan’s actions were premeditated and ideologically motivated--or is he just an Army medical officer who snapped under pressure? That’s the central issue investigators and military courts must ultimately determine.

Read my column at http://ewross.com/Nidal_Malik_Hasan.htm

This Veterans Day, the victims and heroes of the shooting at Fort Hood, Texas on November 5 will be much on the minds of those who take time to think about and honor American veterans. We understand and appreciate the risks they take in combat zones, but we don't expect them to come under attack on a secure military base in the United States. We certainly don't expect the attack to come from one of their own.

If there is anything positive to reflect on in this tragedy, its the way our military personnel and their civilian counterparts reacted to it. Despite the large number of casualties at Fort Hood, it appears that the number could have been much higher. Major Nidal Malik Hasan is reported to have fired more than 100 rounds from his semi automatic pistol into a crowd of 500 soldiers. The quick reactions of Department of the Army police officer Kim Munley and her partner Sgt. Mark Todd and their close-range gun battle with Hasan prevented him for killing and wounding more than he did. Speaking of Munley, LTG Robert Cone, the senior commanding general at Fort Hood, said "It was an amazing and an aggressive performance by this police officer."

Munley and Todd weren't the only heroes. LTG Cone cited numerous other acts of heroism by soldiers who used their combat life-saving skills on wounded soldiers until the first ambulances arrived. Other soldiers responded instinctively, leading their buddies out of the danger zone.

We've come to expect this kind of behavior from our brave men and women in uniform, but we should never take it for granted. Since 9/11 we seen all too often the great sacrifices our military veterans and civilian first responders so often are called upon to make. As they in the past and will in the future, at Fort Hood the worked side by side to stop the killing and save lives.

Read my weekly columns and my current sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Read Previous EWRoss weekly columns at http://ewross.com/archive.htm

Do you ever get the feeling, watching the news out of Washington, DC, that you’ve been transported to the Twilight Zone?

For an off-year election the races of 2009 have stirred up a hornet's nest. Of special interest are the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey and the special election in the 23rd District of New York. I addressed all three in last week’s column.

As usual, the winners, most likely the Republicans in at least two out of the three, will interpret the results in broad national terms. The losers will remind us that all politics is local. Both are correct. The trick for both parties is interpreting their relative significance and applying lessons learned to the races to come in 2010.

More immediately, what message will Tuesday's election results send to senators and representatives in Congress who will vote on healthcare-reform legislation? Republicans hope that victories in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York will send a powerful message to "vulnerable" House Democrats who all must face reelection in 2010. Why else were Democrats in such a hurry to pass reform legislation?

Tuesday's election results may sway some votes in the House, but it would be folly for Republicans and Americans opposed to current healthcare-reform legislation to invest too much hope here. Nancy Pelosi's leverage with House Democrats is considerable. I suspect the current bill before the house will pass. When that happens, the ball will be in the Senate's court where the dreaded "public option" has less support but likely will make to a floor vote.

Odds are that an amendment will remove the public option from the Senate bill. What emerges from the conference committee won't be everything Democrats wanted, but it may still be sweeping, radical reform. Herein is the key to 2010 and 2012. If Democrats force through healthcare-reform legislation that the majority of Americans abhor, they may have signed their own pink slips.

Read my weekly columns and my current sidebar at http://ewross.com

Read Previous EWRoss at http://ewross.com/Sidebar.htm

Read Previous EWRoss weekly columns at http://ewross.com/archive.htm