It worked in Iraq. I think.

Five years ago, President Bush sent U.S. soldiers to the Middle East to play soccer with Iraqi school children. When it became increasingly evident that Americans suck at soccer, a plan was developed to bolster our offensive. So, some 20,000 extra fullbacks, halfbacks, forwards, and goalkeepers were sent overseas to help. This increase in footballers is commonly referred to as "the surge."

So basically, the government realized the current plan of action wasn't working, and decided the solution was to do more of the same. And look where that got us: only 1,100 American troops have died since the surge was announced!

On Wall Street, investors and lenders have been digging themselves into a hole for a lot longer than five years. So what does the government do? Give them $700 billion in relief, amounting to millions of dollars in payout salaries for the CEOs of the companies that got us into this mess.

But if the surge worked in Iraq, it must work on Wall Street, right?

More (and Simpler) Math Lessons, Since No One Learned from Last Week's

Our previous lesson taught us about the inverse relationship between President Bush's job performance and the 'threat' of terrorism in the U.S. Today we'll learn about Positive Correlation with respect to the War of on Terror:
Congressional Democratic efforts to stop the War in Iraq
are positively correlated to
'Successes' in the War in Iraq
Last night, Senate Democrats, in true college fashion, pulled an all-nighter discussing the war. Cots were rolled out and set up and everything. Yay slumber parties!

But wait! Just as the American public began to think Congress was actually doing its job by ending this war... on the other side of the Potomac, the Pentagon today announced the capture of 'the most senior Iraqi in al Qaeda in Iraq'! A MAJOR VICTORY IN THE WAR ON TERROR! What are these Democrats talking about?? We must be winning the war if we were able to capture the head of al Qaeda in Iraq, right? Hmm.. that story conveniently pushes the 24 hour debate off the front page of CNN. Turns out we captured the guy two weeks ago, but I guess the White House was just waiting for the right time to tell us.

Here's the kicker:

The declassified portion of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) warns of "a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years" from Islamic terrorist groups, namely al Qaeda.

Math Lesson #4
This Year (2007) + 3 years = 2010

What else (besides another terror attack, of course) will happen 'over the next three years'? Step aside, Nostradamus. I predict BIG threats to the nation on the following days:

November 4, 2008 & November 2, 2010.

Math for Terrorists

It's summer, and since many children are out of school, I thought a couple of math exercises today might help stimulate the neurons.

The first lesson is from our 8th grade Algebra books:

President Bush's approval rating
is inversely proportional to
the current threat of a terrorist attack on the United States

'Breaking News' right now on the CNN homepage reads (beneath a picture of our good friend Osama bin Laden):

Al Qaeda is stepping up its efforts to sneak terror operatives into the United States and has acquired most of the capabilities it needs to strike here, according to a new U.S. intelligence assessment, The Associated Press has learned.

'Stepping up its efforts.' I guess al-Qaida was just kickin' it old school in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan ("ASSHOLES!") since their last strike, drinkin' fawties and rollin' fatties.

There's nothing like an overblown threat of terror to get people to forget about the shortcomings of the Bush administration. In case you were still asleep this morning during the announcement, at 7:15 PST President Bush unveiled the results of a broad (yet 'initial') assessment of the current situation in Iraq, with regard to U.S. troop involvement, extremist violence, and the Iraqi government's ability to handle its own, among other things.

Congress outlined 18 benchmarks on which the President was to give his thumbs-up or thumbs-down to (whether progress in each area was 'Satisfactory' or not) by the deadline of this Sunday, July 15, 2007. In a shocking move by the Executive Branch, the President actually obeyed Congress this time, and even beat the deadline by three days!

Out of 18 benchmarks, only 8 were deemed 'Satisfactory.' In the President's words, this is a 'cause for optimism.'

Ready for Math lesson #2 for today? We'll go simpler than algebra, back to 2nd grade arithmetic:

8 ÷ 18 = 44.44% = FAIL

8 out of 18 is definitely not a cause for optimism. Unless you're optimisitic about failing.

Read the entire 'Initial Benchmark Assessment Report' on Iraq (.pdf)