In a post today over at Slate, Christopher Hitchens argues that the $79 billion surplus currently enjoyed by the Iraqi government is not only a sign of progress but also necessitates an apology from the American people to Paul Wolfowitz:

“But, just before we all join hands on this obvious proposition, may we take a moment to apologize to Paul Wolfowitz? Of all the many slanders hurled at this advocate for Iraq’s liberation, probably none was more gleefully bandied about than his congressional testimony that Iraq’s recovery from decades of war and fascism could be self-financing. Now the opponents of the intervention are yelling that Iraq ought to be opening its bulging wallet right away.”

Mr.  Hitchens, in his heroic effort to turn lemons into lemonade on behalf of Mr. Wolfowitz, seems to have conveniently forgotten the entire statement made on March 27, 2003 by the then Deputy Secretary of Defense:

“There’s a lot of money to pay for this. It doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money. We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”      
Congressional Testimony, March 27, 2003

It seems to me that those last three words are somewhat vital.  Mr. Wolfowitz was not talking about more than four years when he made that statement.  

While we’re taking this trip down memory lane with Mr. Wolfowitz, let’s remember some of his other greatest hits:

“There has been a good deal of comment—some of it quite outlandish—about what our postwar requirements might be in Iraq. Some of the higher end predictions we have been hearing recently, such as the notion that it will take several hundred thousand U.S. troops to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq, are wildly off the mark. It is hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army—hard to imagine.”   
(House Budget Committee testimony on Iraq, February 27, 2003)

“I can’t imagine anyone here wanting to spend another $30 billion to be there for another 12 years.”   
(House subcommittee on Iraq testimony, February 28, 2003)

It seems an apology is owed – but I believe Mr. Hitchens has the apologizer and the recipient confused.

Back on June 24, 2008, Marathon Oil issued a press release that included the following announcement:

HOUSTON, June 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Marathon Oil Corporation (NYSE: MRO) announced today that it has exercised a two-year option extension on its contract for the Noble Jim Day drilling rig, expected to commence drilling operations in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico in the first quarter of 2010.

The original commitment was announced in March 2007 and the contract was signed in August 2007 with an initial two-year term. The option will extend the contract to 2014.

 “We’re encouraged by the acreage and quality of prospects that Marathon captured in the two recent Gulf of Mexico lease sales. This contract extension with Noble will provide ongoing rig availability to satisfy and fully execute our long-term deepwater Gulf exploration program, as well as additional appraisal and development activity that might be considered in the future,” said David E. Roberts, Marathon executive vice president, Upstream.

“Additionally, we believe it is a prudent step to lock-in competitive, long-term rates in a rapidly evolving deepwater rig market.”

It seems at least one company feels that their current leases give them enough work to carry them another seven years.  They are so confident that they signed this extension which cost the company $750 million.

So someone please explain:  why the rush to lease more off-shore territory?

Today’s Washington Post carries this article:

The Department of Homeland Security swept aside evaluations by government experts and named Mississippi — home to powerful U.S. lawmakers with sway over the agency — as a potential location for a $451 million national laboratory to study some of the world’s most virulent biological threats, according to internal documents obtained by the Associated Press.

Among the sites passed over for the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility was Beltsville, Md., even though it scored better on Homeland Security’s evaluation system than the Mississippi site. The department said there were too many skilled researchers near Beltsville, and the agency worried about competing to hire them.

So, according to DHS thinking, don’t try to hire the professionals with the most relevant skills where they are…instead move hundreds of miles away to where they aren’t.  Then pay large bonuses, relocation costs and travel back to Maryland on a frequent basis to interact with experts and other colleagues.

In their view, this is a far superior plan.  In addition to Mississippi, they are considering Kansas, Georgia, Texas and North Carolina.

And the current lab this facility will replace is on Plum island in Long Island Sound.  So include the costs of relocating the staff there, along with records and equipment.  And then factor in the cost of cleaning up Plum Island.

The Plum Island facility has been a cause for concern in terms of security and issues with aging facilities. But why move it so far?

Perhaps the answer lies in the makeup of the Senate delegations from the states under consideration.  All are represented by two Republicans.  And Mississippi might have made the cut because of the close relationship its governor, Haley Barbour, has with the current administration.  

Is this DHS project turning in to a pork project to direct money to solidly Republican states as the Bush administration winds down?  

Of course the article mentions a Democrat (Rep. Bennie Thompson) – but the proposed location is not in his district.

Amidst all the hoopla about opening new areas off our coasts for oil drilling, a salient fact has been ignored:  there are no drill rigs or ships available…and there will not be for the next few years.

The first point was made by the oil industry’s top representative in Washington: Red Cavaney, the president of the American Petroleum Institute.  He made this statement on This Week with George Stephanopoulos on June 22, 2008:  redcavaney.wav

The New York Times business section featured an article on the dearth of drill ships back on June 19th.

So, while securing more domestic supplies of oil and gas is a policy we should pursue, why the rush to lease new areas when there is no equipment available to drill in the areas already open?

Over at The Huffington Post today, Bob Cesca has a great piece on Republican electoral strategy and how it depends on a lack of curiosity about actual fact on the part of the media and the electorate.

His observations are part and parcel of why I started The Fact Track.  But we need to remember that Democrats are culpable as well – just not as good at it.

There is a technique used by politicians in which they mention two ideas in the same sentence.  Their purpose is to make us believe that one of the ideas has some relation to the other.

John McCain is trying to take us down that path when he talks of building new nuclear power plants and achieving energy independence.  While he never directly says the words, his aim is to create the implication that increased use of nuclear power to generate electricity in the United States would help this country attain independence from Middle Eastern sources of oil.

There may be other and better arguments for the pursuit of nuclear power generation, but this particular one is not supported by the facts.

FACT: A brief examination of the U.S. Government’s own electricity generation statistics shows that very little electrical power is generated by liquid petroleum products.

FACT:  Of the 4,159,514 thousand megawatt hours generated in all of 2007, just 1.2% were generated by petroleum liquids, which include distillate fuel oil, residual fuel oil, jet fuel, kerosene, and waste oil.  Another 0.378% of the total is generated with petroleum coke.

FACT:  In contrast, during that same period, renewable energy sources (other than hydroelectric) produced 2.475% of all electricity generated, or more than double that produced by petroleum liquids.

It will be far easier and faster to replace all petroleum-based electrical generation with renewable energy sources.  In fact, the Department of Energy has set a goal of producing 6% of all electricity by wind power alone by 2020, which will more than surpass the generation capacity needed to supplant all petroleum.

Welcome to the first day of The Fact Track.

I started this enterprise at the insistence of my wife.  She has grown tired of listening to me bellowing about politicians, pundits and reporters whose arguments and opinions hold no basis in fact.  While the bellowing was never directed at her (well, almost never…) it was occasionally cast in her direction.

So she suggested that I channel my irritation into The Fact Track.

She believes this will make for quieter evenings at home.

However, that opinion has no basis in fact…