And the Award for Best Stupidity goes to.....

The envelope please.....Chris Rock and Hollywood!

Well, we made it through a whopping twelve minutes of the Oscars before turning off the TV! I knew I was in trouble during the opening medley, when the voice-over spoke about heroes in film and they flashed a brief shot from Michael Moore's film "Roger & Me". "Hero?" I sputtered. "How can you possibly call Michael Moore a hero? Are these people TOTALLY clueless?"

Then Chris Rock began his Bush-bashing monologue, praising "Fahrenheit 911" and expressing amazement that Bush could be re-elected, given how much he "sucked" at being President. This from the genius who brought us "Pooty Tang"! (So does the fact that Chris Rock "sucks" at what he does give him special credibility?)

Apparently, Hollywood just can't help itself.

This is why televisions come with 'off' buttons....

UPDATE: Two additional thoughts this morning. I don't suppose there was any tribute to the troops last night, or mention of the successful election in Iraq. First of all, don't these people realize that, if nothing else, the spread of freedom gives them more potential AUDIENCES (customers)?

Secondly, I wonder if they realize that the Muslim world is disgusted by what they perceive to be the decadence of our culture....largely exported to the world by....you guessed it, Hollywood. So, who bears the responsibility for the fact that the U.S. is disliked by other parts of the world? Oh, of course---it's because of our President---who merely happens to believe that all human beings on the planet deserve to live in a free and open society.

Do they hate him because of his convictions, or just because he HAS convictions?

MORE UPDATES:

From Powerline today:

La Shawn Barber on Chris Rock and his "triumph of ignorance and vulgarity" at the Oscars. I didn't watch. The last time I watched, Bob Hope was presiding, I think. Heck, with rare exceptions, I don't even watch new Hollywood movies these days.

To me the Oscars represent another example of the left's march through our institutions. The left has captured nearly all of the organizations and phenomena that meant something to me when I was growing up -- the New York Times, CBS News, the NAACP, the ACLU, the professoriate, Hollywood, etc. etc. But it's a meaningless triumph because these institutions have lost their authority precisely by virtue of their leftward tilt. To illustrate, a Zogby poll shows that 39 percent of Democrats, but only 13 percent of Republicans, watch the Oscars. (Hat tip: PoliPundit).

HINDROCKET adds: Those numbers are stunning; wouldn't you think that if the film industry were motivated by economic self-interest, it would try to find a way to avoid alienating the members of America's most popular political party? Plus, I can hardly be the only viewer who turned off the telecast almost as soon as it began because of the host's anti-Bush rant. On what theory does it make sense to put on a show that will drive away large numbers of viewers--and gratuitously, too, since Rock's Bush-bashing had nothing whatever to do with the subject at hand? It's more evidence that, as Michael Medved has often argued, for Hollywood it's not about profit, it's about ideology.

UPDATE by HINDROCKET: Deacon and I are probably pretty hard-core--the last comedian I really liked was Jack Benny--but USA Today, hardly a hotbed of conservatism, shared my reaction:

Unfortunately, what many viewers are most likely to remember — particularly those who feel Hollywood is out of touch with many of its customers — is Rock's lengthy attack on George Bush.
It went over big with the crowd, and if you voted for John Kerry, you probably found it amusing. But that routine had nothing to do with the Oscars, either, and it very likely sent half the audience fleeing from what was otherwise a politics-free evening.

Bush in Brussels

Jay Nordinger had a great column yesterday on NRO. Here it is...

Can I grin over the president, just a little — even though the topic is quite serious (a nuclear Iran)? In Brussels, he said, "This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table."


I can't tell you how much I love that — it's better than "Now watch this drive." President Bush has almost zero patience for boilerplate, even though he repeats it (as he must). And he just can't help showing his impatience.

Also, I tend to like it when Bush is snippy. Remember when Gore said to him, over the phone on Election Night 2000, "You don't have to get snippy with me"? I'd bet a million dollars that Bush was, in fact, snippy.

In Brussels, he said, essentially, "We don't think we have to take out your nukes right this second. But, you know? We may."

I wanted to take note of a couple of things in Bush's big Feb. 21 speech. Did you catch that opening joke? I thought it was enormously shrewd.

You know, on this journey to Europe, I follow in some large footsteps. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin arrived on this continent to great acclaim. An observer wrote, 'His reputation was more universal than Liebniz or Newton, Frederick or Voltaire, and his character more beloved and esteemed than any or all of them.' The observer went on to say, 'There was scarcely a peasant or citizen who did not consider him as a friend to humankind.'

I've been hoping for a similar reception. But Secretary Rice told me I should be a realist.

Bush also said, ". . . our strong friendship [that between Europe and the United States] is essential to peace and prosperity across the globe, and no temporary debate, no passing disagreement of governments, no power on earth will ever divide us."

That seems to me false, but maybe a necessary falsity. There is much that can divide us, for a very long time. If "peace and prosperity across the globe" depends on European-American friendship — well, too bad for peace and prosperity across the globe. I'm fond of quoting the adage, "We don't have permanent alliances, we have permanent interests." And it's just possible that U.S. interests and those of, say, France have seriously diverged. Alliances aren't forever. The record of mankind makes that much clear.

Said Bush, "After many false starts and dashed hopes and stolen lives, a settlement of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is now within reach." I was taken with that phrase, "stolen lives."

I interpreted what follows as a rebuke — a polite, semi-disguised rebuke — to certain Euros. See if you agree:

Together, we must make clear to the Iraqi people that the world is . . . with them, because they have certainly shown their character to the world.
An Iraqi man who lost a leg in a car bombing last year made sure he was there to vote on January the 30th. He said, "I would have crawled here if I had to. I don't want terrorists to kill other Iraqis like they tried to kill me. Today, I'm voting for peace."

Every vote cast in Iraq was an act of defiance against terror. And the Iraqi people have earned our respect.

Some Europeans joined the fight to liberate Iraq, while others did not. Yet all of us recognize courage when we see it. And we saw it in the Iraqi people.

Nice, no?

Well done, cowboy.

The Bold Truth Tour

Josh McDowell gave an awesome presentation last week at Elmbrook Church. He spoke about the the challenges of our culture to our young people, 91% of whom do not believe that there is any such thing as absolute truth.

He spoke about the need for young people to develop conviction. He defined conviction as:
-knowing what you believe
-knowing why you believe it
-experiencing it in your life

Our biggest challenge is convincing kids that God's truth is "real, relevant and true....whether they believe it or not." (Debunking the myth of relative truth).

He gave seven simple principles that parents can apply to develop closer, supportive relationships with their children.

1. Affirmation: gives kids a sense of authenticity
Romans 12:15
2. Acceptance: gives kids a sense of security
Romans 15:7
3. Appreciation: gives kids a sense of significance
Matthew 3:17
4. Availability: gives kids a sense of importance
Matthew 19:13-14
5. Affection: gives kids a sense of lovability
John 15:12
6. Approach their world: gives kids a sense that you are interested in what they care about
I Corinthians 13:5
7. Accountability: gives kids a sense of self-control and responsibilty

Josh and his team will be returning to Milwaukee on Wednesday, April 27th to present "The Bold Truth Tour". Tickets sold out the first night, so the venue has been moved to the U.S. Cellular Arena downtown. Tickets are available at the Garden of Readin' bookstore. Highly recommended for kids from ages 12-17 and their parents.

We'll be there, so I will blog about the event.

Not a Native American, but I play one on TV....

So, now the truth is out. Ward Churchill finally admits that he is not a Native American--but issues no apology for lying about it all these years. **Please see correction at bottom of this post.**

Read the article from The Honolulu Star Bulletin on his speech at the University of Hawaii.

Churchill did address the issue of his ethnicity, admitting that he is not Native American.
"Is he an Indian? Do we really care?" he said, quoting those he called his "white Republican" critics.
"Let's cut to the chase; I am not," he said.
His pedigree is "not important," Churchill said: "The issue is the substance of what is said."

According to The Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel on February 11th...

On Thursday, UW-Whitewater Chancellor Jack Miller decided that Churchill would be allowed to speak on March 1, as part of a four-part speaker series sponsored by the Native American Cultural Awareness Association. Churchill will speak on racism against American Indians.

OK...does anyone see the irony in his speaking on "racism against American Indians"? Isn't it rather racist to claim to be a minority when you're not? Churchill bleats about the attempts by "white Republicans" to suppress his freedom. (I hate to break it to him, but if he isn't Native American, isn't he...well....er...."white" himself?)

Liberals love to position this as a 'freedom of speech' issue. It is not a 'freedom of speech' issue. We are not debating the rights of Ward Churchill to stand at 3rd and Wisconsin with a bullhorn. We are not debating the rights of Ward Churchill to speak at a privately-funded venue.

We are debating whether a publicly-funded institution should promote lies and hate speech. Is this an appropriate speaker for a state university to sponsor--a known liar and promoter of murder and terrorism?

In a logically indefensible editorial, the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel opposed the right of Marquette University students to have a table on campus to raise money for the "Adopt a Sniper" program, even though they were not receiving any funding or support from the university. (BTW, this IS a freedom of speech issue). But they support Whitewater inviting Ward here to spread lies and hatred.

At least the Marquette students were genuine students.....

P.S. Ann Coulter has a great editorial on Churchill here.

The whole idea behind free speech is that in a marketplace of ideas, the truth will prevail. But liberals believe there is no such thing as truth and no idea can ever be false (unless it makes feminists cry, such as the idea that there are innate differences between men and women). Liberals are so enamored with the process of free speech that they have forgotten about the goal.

CORRECTION???:

Well, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin just issued this correction about Ward Churchill's remarks. Before you start questioning the credibility of the "internet", remember that the original quote came directly from the MSM. Makes one wonder how a trained reporter and eyewitness to the original speech could have gotten it so wrong???

Churchill misquoted in article on UH speech

The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, incorrectly quoted University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill as admitting that he was not American Indian.
The story about Churchill's Tuesday night speech at the University of Hawaii-Manoa said the professor noted that his "white Republican" critics were asking, "Is he an Indian? Do we really care?"

"Let's cut to the chase, I'm not," the quote in yesterday's paper continued.

But a review of video and audio tapes of the speech shows that Churchill actually said: "Is he an Indian? We really care. We're trying to protect the rights of Indians to divine for themselves, say this circle of flies in the form of white reporters circling a manure pile like it's of all consequential importance. Cut to the chase on that."

Churchill went on to say that he is an associate member of the Keetoowah tribe and that associates are enrolled in the band after their genealogy has been vetted by the enrollment office. He said that he is less than one-quarter Indian, so he does not qualify to be a full member.

The issue of whether Churchill has Indian blood is part of the national debate over the controversial professor who gained notoriety for comparing some Sept. 11, 2001, victims to Nazis.

Howard Dean Strikes Again

Howard Dean....the gift that keeps giving.

Incoming Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean spent yesterday in a series of meetings with valued Democratic constituencies at the Hilton Washington. He did the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus at 12:15 p.m., the Seniors Coordination Council at 12:45 p.m., the Women's Caucus at 3:40 p.m., the Native Americans at 4:35 p.m., the African Americans at 5 p.m., the Asian Pacific Islanders at 5:20 p.m. and the Hispanics at 5:40 p.m.

Here's what he REALLY thinks of the minorities so cherished by the Democratic Party...

"You think the RNC could get this many people of color into a single room?" he marvels. "Maybe if they got the hotel staff in there."

Hmmm...good enough to vote for you....and make your bed, too!

From The Washington Post.

Spoken Like a True Neo-Con

Ok. So I'm tired of hearing Americans talk about the U.S. 'forcing' OUR brand of democracy on Iraq. (Can you "force democracy"? Isn't that an oxymoron, or something?)

Here's what Walid Jumblatt, the leader of the Progressive Socialist Party in Lebanon, had to say about the recent events in Iraq, in an interview with the Washington Post:

"It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq," explains Jumblatt. "I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world." Jumblatt says this spark of democratic revolt is spreading. "The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it."

You can read the whole article here at washingtonpost.com.

The reason that these remarks are strange coming from Jumblatt is that he has been an outspoken critic of the U.S. Here are some excerpts from an article at FrontPageMagazine.com by Steven Stalinsky.

This is significant because Jumblatt is known for his vehement anti-American statements and antagonistic stance toward the U.S. On November, 19, 2003, it was reported that the State Department cancelled Jumblatt’s diplomatic visa following revelations that he expressed regret that Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz was not killed in a missile attack during a visit to Baghdad.

More recently, Jumblatt gave an interview to the Arabic London-based Saudi daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat on February 12, 2004, in which he said: “We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory.” The Progressive Socialist Party leader has also said he felt “great joy” at the destruction of the U.S. Space Shuttle Columbia in 2002, because it carried an Israeli astronaut.

The Lebanese MP is also known for espousing conspiracy theories against the U.S. On April 28, 2004, he gave an interview to United Arab Emirate-based Al Arabiyya TV, in which he detailed how the U.S. was really behind September 11: “Who invented Osama bin Laden?! The Americans, the CIA invented him so they could fight the Soviets in Afghanistan together with some of the Arab regimes. Osama bin Laden is like a ghost, popping up when needed. This is my opinion.”

Jumblatt was asked “Even 9/11?” and answered: “Even 9/11…Why didn’t the sirens go off when the four hijacked planes took off?…The U.S. always needs an enemy…According to this plan or ideology of the born-again Christians who formed an alliance with Zionism – Islam is the monster, Islam is the target.”

Hmmmm....if there's hope for him, maybe there's hope for Teddy Kennedy.

For a good FAQ site on the Syria/Lebanon situation, go to The Council on Foreign Relations website.

The Blogs Must Be Crazy

If you're still trying to figure out the allure of the blogosphere and its role in challenging the mainstream media, read this excellent piece by Peggy Noonan,
The Blogs Must Be Crazy.

I think her predictions are spot-on!

My Head is Spinning

"Much is required from those to whom much has been given"
(Luke 12:48)

In a domestic policy discussion with a liberal colleague, she quoted the Bible verse above to make her point. The point? That the wealthy and powerful have an obligation to help the poor and weak. Her opinion? We're a selfish nation, because people no longer care about helping out the people who need help.

Her fallacy? Ten minutes later, in a discussion about Iraq, she stated that Iraq is not OUR problem and that we should help our OWN people first. Let the Iraqis solve their own problems.

I have heard this same argument in different flavors over the last few years. So tell me again, what is required of those to whom much has been given? What is the role and responsibility for the U.S. in world affairs, given that we are the wealthiest and most powerful nation on the planet? Do we or do we not have an obligation to use our power, influence (and yes, sometimes, military force) to change behaviors and promote the cause of freedom?

The same people who deride us for not stepping in during the Rwandan genocide are the ones who think we should stay out of Iraq. The same people who think we should passed John Kerry's 'global test' before invading Iraq think we should meet alone and unilaterally with North Korea. (Does this mean that China and Japan have no 'say' in the North Korean situation?)

The United States has been blessed with vast resources, incredible wealth and the power to help those who need it. Should we sit on our hands, or act? What are our guiding principals? How do we fulfill this obligation? What happens when diplomacy fails?

President Bush has put actions behind the words, "Much is required from those to whom much has been given". His opponents just wait to see what he does and then take the opposite view.

Guaranteed to Make You Smile

This just popped into my in-box from the pastor of our church. You have to watch the whole thing. I guarantee it will make you smile (it made me laugh out loud).

Okay, so there is no huge spiritual lesson here, but ask yourself, is there anything I will do today that will be as joyful as this computer video made by a 19-year-old New Jersey kid in which he lip-syncs a Romanian love song? Click on or go to....

http://wordway.c.topica.com/maadccIabejF4b64ATxbaehobk/

Watch for the eyebrows--it's the best part!!!

The U.N. Strikes Again

Mark Steyn has a great piece on the unimaginable corruption of the U.N. and the puzzling lack of interest on the part of the world press corps.

It's a good basic axiom that if you take a quart of ice-cream and a quart of dog faeces and mix 'em together the result will taste more like the latter than the former. That's the problem with the UN. If you make the free nations and the thug states members of the same club, the danger isn't that they'll meet each other half-way but that the free world winds up going three-quarters, seven-eighths of the way. Thus the Oil-for-Fraud scandal: in the end, Saddam Hussein had a much shrewder understanding of the way the UN works than Bush and Blair did.

Read the whole article at opinion.telegraph. Then ask yourself...why isn't anyone screaming for Kofi's head on a platter?

Iraqi Elections Map

Great work by Patrick Ruffini on a visual representation of the results of the Iraqi election.

Check it out here:

http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/2005/02/the_iraqi_elect.php

Great analysis, too.

Hotel Rwanda: "Must-See" Cinema

We just saw the movie "Hotel Rwanda" last night. It is absolutely must-see viewing for anyone who thinks that the U.N. is the solution to all of the world's problems.

The movie depicts the amazing courage of one man, Paul Rusesabagina, a manager of the Milles Collines Hotel in Kigali, who saved 1268 souls from certain death by sheltering them in the hotel and bargaining for their lives. Don Cheadle played Rusesabagina and gave an amazing performance. He definitely deserves an Oscar for Best Actor. It probably helped that Rusesabagina was a consultant on the film and spent time with Cheadle.

My husband thought that casting Nick Nolte as the lead U.N. peacekeeper was also brilliant. Nick personifies the 'has-been' impotence of the U.N. in the face of crisis. His character provides a striking counterpoint to Rusesabagina. The U.N., with all its appearance of power, was totally ineffective in protecting the Tutsis from Hutu slaughter, while Rusesabagina, despite his lack of traditional power, used his wits to stave off the attackers.

The actual Rwandan situation was even more horrifying than depicted in the movie (hard to believe for those of you who've seen it). The U.N. refugee camp, presented as a safe haven (I won't spoil the ending), was, in reality, a death sentence to many who managed to find their way there. Thousands of Tutsis were slaughtered within the refugee camps, under the noses of the U.N. 'peacekeepers'.

This is not a criticism of the movie. However, people need to know that there is more to the story.

What's more, the French (that nation whose approval is so ardently sought by John Kerry and his ilk), were supplying arms to the Hutu rebels, who slaughtered more than a million of their fellow countrymen. Jacques Mitterand's son, Jean-Christophe, (reminiscent of Kojo Annan) was an arms dealer at the time, and was rumored to be involved in illegal drug trafficking with the Rwandan military.

This is addressed briefly in the film when the Belgium hotel owner is able to call off the Hutu assassins by placing a phone call to someone in the French government. Though not explained any further, the point is made.

How many times do we need evidence of the French profiting from human misery and defending their behavior with high-handed malarkey? Why would we care one iota about what these people think of us? The more they disapprove of us, the more I believe that we are doing the right thing.

Their totally secularized approach to morality has failed. If this is the next step in the social evolution of man, I think I'll pass.

And what about the U.N.? Story after story of corruption, ineffectiveness and worse yet, abuse of the very people they are chartered to help. Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse (Oil for Food), we now discover that U.N. peacekeepers sexually abused Congolese women, boys and girls.

I would strongly recommend the book, We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed with our Families by Philip Gourevitch for anyone who would like to know more about this subject. Philip is a staff writer at The New Yorker magazine and spent time in Rwanda a year after the genocide. It may totally change the way you think about the U.N., so read it at your own risk!

Importance of Iraq War

GREAT editorial by Thomas Friedman on the strategic importance of the Iraq war in today's Journal/Sentinel. Since they don't seem to provide it online, I'll provide a link from the International Herald Tribune.

In Tom's open letter to Democrats, he brings up four points that should get Democrats 'jazzed up' about the potential results of the war. A summary of his points:

*A successful democracy in Iraq proves that democracy is a possibility in the Arab world.
*A free Iraq is our best weapon against Iran's nuclear program.
*Democracy creates a culture and environment that provides an alternative to terrorism.
*Iraqi freedom and self-rule provides encouragement for those in Egypt and Syria who want to see more open government there.

Here's the link:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/10/opinion/edfried.html

The question is--can a Howard Dean-led Democratic party get over their unrelenting anti-war 'Iraq-is-the-quagmire-of-the-century' attitude to embrace the unbelievable world-altering good that can result? Can they find room in their hatred of President Bush to stop rooting for disaster in Iraq and start embracing success? Can they become a forward-thinking positive force, or just continue to Monday-morning-armchair-quarterback every decision this administration makes?

That is the question.

Welcome Home, Lance Corporal Travis Wichlacz

Touching down tonight at Mitchell Int'l Airport on a flight from Minneapolis, we heard the flight attendant make an unusual announcement. "When we come to a full stop, please remain in your seats. We have a Marine accompanying a soldier wounded in the Iraq war on this flight." When the plane stopped, those of us in coach craned our necks to see the first class section. We saw a Marine in uniform exit the plane.

Several people stood and began to retrieve their bags from the overhead bins. Something made me stay in my seat.

An elderly gentleman seated across the aisle leaned over to me and spoke in a quiet voice, "There's a hearse parked outside. He must have been bringing the body home. It must be that young man from West Bend."

"That must be the hardest job in the world," I replied.

Suddenly, it didn't seem important to be the first person off the plane.

I stepped across the aisle and sat at the window. An Honor Guard made up of six Marines, in full dress uniform, stood at attention and began a slow march in formation towards the plane. They lifted a flag-draped wooden box and slowly loaded it into the hearse. Standing in the cold, in the dark, on the snowy tarmac, they saluted their lost brother.

Those of us still on the plane sat quietly for a moment and then left.

Josh McDowell at Elmbrook Church

Josh McDowell, the noted Christian apologist, will be speaking to parents and other adults on "Why Belief Matters" on Thursday, February 17th from 7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. at Elmbrook Church in Brookfield, Wisconsin.

His talk is aimed at parents, grandparents, youth workers, teachers and other adults involved in education of pre-teen and teenage children.

From the Elmbrook Church website:

Josh will be sharing vital truths based on his popular book, Beyond Belief to Convictions. His research shows that church youth are adopting distorted beliefs about God and His Word. Josh's sessions will empower you to instill convictions in the young people in your lifethat will lead them to make right moral choices.

Josh will be returning to speak to the junior and senior high school students on Wednesday, April 27th.

More details here:

http://www.elmbrook.org/josh.shtml

The Continuing Saga of Ward Churchill...

The Ward Churchill story is becoming more and more bizarre. Paul Campos, a law professor at the University of Colorado, writes a great article here...read the whole thing.

Rocky Mountain News

Not only has Churchill apparently lied about being of Native American heritage, but he has also fabricated a story, accusing the U.S. Army of intentional genocide-by-smallpox of the Mandan tribe in 1837.

Campos saves the best for last:

The saddest aspect of Churchill's case is that, in regard to his identity, he might not be guilty of fraud in the narrowest legal sense. According to the News, Churchill has been claiming to be a Native American since his high school days in Illinois. It may well be that by this point he has genuinely convinced himself that he actually is an Indian.

Of course some people believe they're Napoleon. But that's not a good reason for giving them professorships in French history. (emphasis mine)

Now, the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater seems to be re-thinking their decision to have him speak on campus. See http://www.theamericanmind.com/ and http://view.web-nuts.com/

Update: Tonight, Friday 2/11, Bill O'Reilly questioned why Governor Jim Doyle has been silent on the Ward Churchill/UW-Whitewater affair. He encouraged viewers to let Doyle and the UW-Whitewater Chancellor Jack Miller know how they feel about the University sponsoring this hate speech. Let them know.

Send e-mail to UW-W at churchillresponse@uww.edu or to Governor Doyle at http://www.wisgov.state.wi.us/contact.asp?locid=19.

BTW, my brother in Minneapolis had this to say tonight:

"Interesting note: The St. Paul Pioneer Press prints an AP article in the 02/11 edition and entitles the article "Embattled Professor to speak on campus". The article never mentions any of the false claims Churchill has made."

Bush Popularity Surges In Polls

In a recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup organization poll, Bush's approval rating has surged to 57% from 51% a few weeks ago. Check it out at www.gallup.com.

A new CNN/USA Today/Gallup survey shows that President George W. Bush's approval rating has increased to 57%, up from 51% three weeks ago. The increase appears to be related to the Iraqi elections, which the poll shows went better than most Americans expected. In general, the public is more positive now than it was before the elections about the way Bush has handled the situation in Iraq, as well as how the war is faring for the United States.

Bet you won't see this in the Associated Press any time soon.