As anyone who traverses the blogoshpere knows, few if any political blogs attempt to be bipartisan by inviting contributing authors without regard to political pursuasion. Frankly, OneUtah is the only one of which I am aware.

Our vision for OneUtah is to replicate the town square. Contributing authors are qualified exclusivily by their demonstrated, responsible commitment to civil society, in other words people who have earned the right to be heard. In the year OneUtah has exisited, I have invited many far to the right of me to contribute freely as authors. None have risen to the challenge until recently.
Our newest author Frank Staheli has served as a council person somewhere in Utah (I forget where at the moment, and he is too modest to put it in his profile) and has also served his country in Iraq. Frank is a model Utahn; earnest, honest, fair, and unusually articulate.
But sometimes, Frank pisses me off beyond belief with some of the things he says over on his blog Serving In Iraq, but nonetheless a valued author on OneUtah with free reign to top post here at will. interestingly, his posts here on OneUtah have been moderate by comparison to his ‘MilBlog. This fact causes me no small amount of curiosity.

Without trying to be provocative, I’m going to suggest that Frank knows that some of the posts he flies over on ServingInIraq would be met with loud dissent on OneUtah for their attack-the-messenger canard-heavy, fear-pedaling kind of tactics that so predictably stimulate the tribal antennae of the warmongers and far-right and now common in the right-wing blogosphere. But I’ll let the reader be the judge of that.

One post in particular ServingInIraq inspired this thought – actually several…Ok, most. But I will address just one for now. 655,000–Why Didn’t I Think of That?

(btw: 655,000 is the estimated number of Iraqis killed since we invaded based upon the most comprehensive unbiased scientific study done to date.)

Lets look at Franks first clearly cynical paragraph.

The journal Lancet, that paragon of truthfulness and impartiality, recently ‘reported’ that at least 655,000 Iraqis have been killed since the American invasion in 2003. I never put a pencil to the numbers, but Common Sense Political Thought has.

Lets look at the statement. Here’s what Wikipedia says about The Lancet Journal

The Lancet is one of the oldest peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, published weekly by Elsevier, part of Reed Elsevier. It was founded in 1823 by Thomas Wakley, who named it after the surgical instrument called a lancet, as well as an arched window (”to let in light”).

The present editor-in-chief is Richard Horton. The Lancet takes a stand on several important medical issues – recent examples include criticism of the WHO, rejecting the efficacy of homoeopathy as a therapeutic option and its disapproval of Reed Elsevier’s links with the arms industry.

Here’s what Common Sense Political Thought says ‘about’ themselves.

This is the political website of Ken Vermillion and Dana Pico, mostly conservative, sometimes not, usually Republican, but not always. We believe in the Bill of Rights, we believe in capitalism, and we believe in an aggressive foreign policy. Political correctness will not be found here.

I can’t even begin to figure out how to explain to Frank how utterly irresponsible it is to impugn the veracity of long-standing responsible scientific journal long guided by people, like Frank, who have a strong sense of civic duty and hold themselves to the highest standards of rigorous scientific peer review in favor of Ken and Dana’s uninformed homegrown dribble.

Would Frank prefer to defend our country using technology tested by Ken and Dana instead technology developed by the kind of scientist who pass muster with Lancet? Would Frank prefer our soldiers serving in Iraq be treated in hospitals run by people chosen by Ken and Dana or doctors and researchers whose training is guided by a scientific community tripping over themselves to achieve peer review from Lancet?

Nuf Said?

Lastly, I’d like to review the reasoning at over at Common Sense Political Thought for why the 655,000 is obviously ‘exaggerated’.

Even if you take the number of deaths at face value given by the United Nations for the month of October 2006, and multiply it by the number of months that Coalition Forces have been in Iraq, it doesn’t even come close to 655,000.

I simply won’t attempt to characterize that logic for fear of insulting my good friend Frank, because I do appreciate him and he can take it. Frank IS a thoughtful man with a good heart. And he gives me clues.