Category: Afghanistan
Guest Voice: Jack Hunter on The Conservative Case for WikiLeaks
(Via The American Conservative)
Transcript:
Lovers necessarily keep or share secrets. Being in a healthy relationship means achieving a certain level of intimacy, where shared knowledge of each others’ weaknesses and insecurities is protected by a bond of mutual trust. Sometimes lovers might do devilish things that outsiders wouldn’t understand, or shouldn’t be privy to, and this is fine. But by and large, what they do is simply no one else’s business.
But imagine that the man in the relationship kept it a secret that he had other women on the side, kids, a criminal record, venereal disease, and basically betrayed his lover in every way imaginable, unbeknownst to her?
Now imagine a third party felt it was their moral duty to reveal it?
No one questions that governments must maintain a certain level of secrecy, including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who told Time that “Secrecy is important for many things … [but it] shouldn’t be used to cover up abuses.” The entire premise of Assange’s whistleblower organization is this: To what degree is government secrecy justified? And when particular secrets could be damaging to the other partner in the United States government’s relationship — the American people — should these secrets be revealed in the name of protecting the public?
How often does our government use “national security” simply as an excuse to cover up questionable dealings? Reports Time: “in the past few years, governments have designated so much information secret that you wonder whether they intend the time of day to be classified. The number of new secrets designated as such by the U.S. government has risen 75% … . At the same time, the number of documents and other communications created using those secrets has skyrocketed nearly 10 times…”
To say that government must keep secrets is not to say that all government secrets must be kept.
As admitted even by Pentagon officials and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, none of WikiLeaks’ revelations do anything to compromise national security or endanger American lives — but they have wreaked havoc on political life in Washington, D.C. Americans are not supposed to know, for example, that their government bullied and threatened individuals and other governments that might have undermined the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009. The federal government attempting to squelch anyone who might undermine global-warming dogma? Do WikiLeaks’ conservative critics believe revealing this is a “national security” risk?
Americans are not supposed to know, apparently, that behind the scenes Saudi Arabia has been encouraging the U.S. to take military action against Iran. But if we end up going to war with Iran shouldn’t it be in America’s national interest, and not simply as a subcontractor for another country? Asks Fox News’ Judith Miller: “Why should Americans not know that Arab states, often at the top level, have been urging Washington to take military or other drastic action against Iran, while they publicly oppose such action?”
And when did conservatives become so protective of Hillary Clinton? What happened to the days of the “Stop Hillary Express,” when right-wing talk radio portrayed the former first lady as Satan and theorized about all the devious ways in which, if in power, she might conspire to bring down the country? When WikiLeaks revealed that Secretary of State Clinton tried to obtain DNA, fingerprints, credit-card numbers, and other private information belonging to United Nations officials, we learned that Clinton’s style was every bit as mafia-esque as her conservative critics once warned. Yet conservatives now attack WikiLeaks for revealing what they once feared. It should also be remembered that the same conservatives now calling for Assange’s head either ignored or were sympathetic to Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame allegedly at the Bush administration’s behest — a revelation arguably far riskier to our national security than anything ever released by WikiLeaks.
But the worst hypocrisy throughout this controversy has been in conservatives reflexively defending the government and attacking WikiLeaks. Since when have conservatives believed that Washington should be able to shroud any action it likes in secrecy and that revealing government’s nefarious deeds is tantamount to treason? Isn’t it government officials who might secretly work for corporate, ideological or transnational interests — and against the national interest — who are betraying their country?
Interestingly, Wikileaks’ founder espouses the traditionally conservative, Jeffersonian view that America’s constitutional structure limits and lessens government corruption. Reported Time: “Assange appears to believe that the U.S. has not become ‘a much-worse-behaved superpower’ because its federalism, ‘this strength of the states,’ has been a drag on the combination of the burgeoning power of the central government and a presidency that can expand its influence only by way of foreign affairs.”
Decentralizing government power, limiting it, and challenging it was the Founders’ intent and these have always been core conservative principles. Conservatives should prefer an explosion of whistleblower groups like WikiLeaks to a federal government powerful enough to take them down. Government officials who now attack WikLleaks don’t fear national endangerment, they fear personal embarrassment. And while scores of conservatives have long promised to undermine or challenge the current monstrosity in Washington, D.C., it is now an organization not recognizably conservative that best undermines the political establishment and challenges its very foundations.
—-
The “Southern Avenger” Jack Hunter is a conservative commentator on WTMA 1250 AM talk radio and columnist for the Charleston City Paper in South Carolina.
Remembering Pearl Harbor – 39 Years Ago Today – December 7, 1941
If you would like to check out my remembrances from 2009 and 2010, please click here and here.
Cassy Fiano, who’s husband is in active duty service; remembers and points out some disturbing things happening at the Pearl Harbor Memorial:
Today marks the 69 year anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. The surprise attack shocked the nation and catapulted the United States into World War II. It was, at the time, the worst attack on American soil. 1,178 were wounded. 2,043 were killed. The water itself burned and bodies of the injured and the dead piled up.
As more are more Pearl Harbor survivors and World War II veterans leave this Earth, it becomes more and more of a distant historical event that we no longer honor and no longer remember. Each year, Pearl Harbor gets a little closer to becoming one of those events that we will only know of thanks to a few pages in a history book. The vast majority of survivors are gone now, and when there are none left, who will keep their memory alive? Who will honor the sacrifices of the fallen? Where survivors once fought the Japanese, they’re now fighting time — fighting to keep the memory of their fallen brothers alive, fighting to ensure that we continue to remember and honor Pearl Harbor always.
This summer, my husband and I chose to go to Hawaii for his pre-deployment leave. One of our first stops was at Pearl Harbor and the USS Arizona Memorial. We had the honor and privilege of meeting several survivors before riding out to the watery tomb of the 1177 American heroes killed that day. 33 survivors of the bombing of the Arizona chose to be interred with their shipmates.
[…]
Seeing the names of these heroes was an emotional moment. Far more saddening was the behavior of the people at the memorial. The park ranger on the boat on the way to the remains of the Arizona laughed and joked about partying that weekend. When learning there were service members aboard — my husband, a sailor, and an airman — she said nothing and continued laughing about her weekend party plans. Once we arrived at the memorial, I was appalled at the lack of respect shown. People ran around the memorial, laughing and joking. I couldn’t understand how anyone could treat the tombs of American heroes so callously. It was a warning sign, in my eyes, that too many have stopped seeing the attack on Pearl Harbor as the horrific day that it was, a day that deserves solemn remembrance and honor.
We can still make a choice, though. We can choose to remember the sacrifices of the men who fought valiantly and died with honor in service to their country.
We can remember men like Frank Flaherty. When it became known that the USS Oklahoma was going to capsize and the order was given to abandon ship, Flaherty chose instead to remain at his post with a flashlight, illuminating the way so that the rest of the turret crew could escape. Flaherty perished with the ship and was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.
We can remember men like Doris Miller, Navy Cross recipient. On the bridge of the USS West Virginia, Miller refused to leave his mortally wounded captain, despite enemy bombing and strafing and heavy fire. At great risk to himself, he moved his captain to a safer place and then returned to the bridge where he continued to man and operate a machine gun until ordered to leave the bridge.
We can remember men like William Turner, awarded the Bronze Star. Stationed at the Ewa Marine Corps Air Station, he jumped into the rear cockpit of an airplane with a fellow Marine, Master Sergeant Peters. Both men used the rear machine guns to fire at attacking Japanese planes, and despite being wounded, managed to shoot down one of the enemy planes. Private Turner ultimately died of the wounds he received that day on December 12th.
We can choose to let their memory fade away. Or we can choose to honor their valour, their bravery, their sacrifice.
Remember Pearl Harbor. Remember the men who fought and died 69 years ago today.
Amen and Amen. 😥
Jeff Kuhner takes it to another level: Kill Julian Assange
I figured someone in the Conservative media would say this sooner or later. I thought about it, but I really do not like the idea myself.
Jeff Kuhner at the Washington Times writes:
Julian Assange poses a clear and present danger to American national security. The WikiLeaks founder is more than a reckless provocateur. He is aiding and abetting terrorists in their war against America. The administration must take care of the problem – effectively and permanently.
The recent WikiLeaks document dump is the latest example of Mr. Assange’s dangerous behavior. His release of more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables, many of them containing classified information, is a major blow to our foreign policy. The essence of diplomacy – especially that of a great power – is the ability to conduct negotiations and hold talks in secret. Foreign leaders will not be willing to engage in sensitive discussions with American emissaries if their words are going to be splashed across the front pages of the world’s newspapers. Officials in autocratic and Islamist states often risk their lives to cooperate with Washington, usually by providing vital information or advice. They now face a further disincentive to help us: The U.S. government can no longer guarantee the privacy and secrecy of their discussions.
American diplomacy has been crippled. So has our ability to conduct the war on terrorism. For example, the cables cache reveals that the United States is working closely with Yemen’s dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh, in launching drone strikes against local al Qaeda bases. Al Qaeda has spread to Yemen. Its insurgency is growing. Yemen risks becoming what Afghanistan was before Sept. 11, 2001: a vast sanctuary for jihadists. Mr. Saleh insists that Yemeni public opinion – insular, xenophobic and increasingly Islamic – will not support the U.S. military presence on domestic soil. Hence, he says the pretense must be maintained that Yemen is firing the missiles, not America. This pretense has been shattered – and with it, perhaps, a key ally in the struggle against al Qaeda. Mr. Assange is helping chase the American infidel out of Yemen’s desolate deserts.
[………]
The United States is paying a severe price for Mr. Obama’s negligence. This is the greatest diplomatic crisis since the late 1940s, when communist agents in the U.S. government provided atomic secrets to the Soviet Union. The world is witnessing the absurd, almost surreal spectacle of the American superpower standing helpless in the face of a lone hacker. Her diplomatic secrets are no longer safe; her allies and friends are being betrayed; and her cyber-enemies are free to roam with impunity. America is no longer feared or respected.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. vows that he is looking into possible criminal charges against Mr. Assange. It is too late for tough talk. At this point, we are beyond indictments and courts. The damage has been done; people have died – and will die because of the actions of this puerile, self-absorbed narcissist. News reports say the WikiLeaks founder is hiding out in England. If that’s true, we should treat Mr. Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him
Okay, here is the question that I feel the need to ask. Are we going to kill someone every time some whistle blower decides to speak out and expose some corruption in Government? Because if that is where we are headed, that is a slippery slope we can never recover from. Like anyone else, I am for open Government, I am also for seeing elected officials held accountable. However, if the United States Government and more importantly the United States Military is being put at risk, then by all means, arrest this guy and put him away.
I have no idea what Julian Assange‘s motivation is; whether it is conspiracy theory, politics or if he is just a pompous ass. But the idea of KILLING someone, just because decide to release some confidential information is not something, as a Conservative; who believes in rule of law and not Governmental treachery, that I can support. Because once you unleash that monster onto the American and World Wide Community, it cannot be stopped.
I would think that Jeff Kuhner would be a bit smarter than that. However, when you are working for a paper that basically was a cheerleader for the Bush Administration during the lead up to and during the Iraqi Invasion, one can expect only so much.
Others: Reporters Sans Frontières, Hullabaloo, Harry’s Place, Guardian, New York Times, News: News blog and The New Republic
Anti-Semites at Reddit show their true colors at Reddit
You know how the left likes to say that it is the right who is racist and Anti-Semitic?
Well, I just proved that wrong.
As you know, I wrote a Blog entry here about Helen Thomas and her Anti-Semite comments about “Jews controlling everything.”
Well, I submitted this entry to Reddit and as I expected, it was voted down. What I did not expect is this, click the picture bigger:
Nice. 🙄
I wonder if the owners of Reddit would be willing to stand behind those sort of comments?
I explained as to why I called Helen Thomas what I did. Not because she was an Arab, but because of what she said, and this is the sort of hate that I get in return? I find it appalling that Reddit would allow such hate on their site. Unbelievable. 😯
So, the next time some idiot liberal tells you that the Republican Party is the party of hate — show them this blog entry, please.
Also, please note; this is not the first time this has happened to me. This is just the first time that I have chosen to go public with it. There have been times, when I have writing positive stuff about Conservatives, only to have it voted down. However, I have written stuff critical of Sarah Palin and Republicans and had it voted up. That my friends is bias and it needs to be stopped at Reddit, Period.
Check out my account at Reddit, it will show that I am telling the truth.
Arab Dog Helen Thomas reverses her apology and attacks rich Zionists
(H/T Yid With a Lid)
I put that headline up there intentionally, because Helen Thomas IS a Arab dog in my humble opinion. Anyone that would make an asinine comment like the one that she made, is a damn dog in my opinion.
So, what did this flea bag old biddy say now?
Striking a defiant tone, journalist Helen Thomas, 90, said today she absolutely stands by her controversial comments about Israel made earlier this year that led to her resignation. But she stoked additional controversy with new remarks, claiming that “Zionists” control U.S. foreign policy and other American institutions. The local Jewish community strongly condemned her remarks.
“I can call a president of the United States anything in the book but I can’t touch Israel, which has Jewish-only roads in the West Bank,” Thomas said. “No American would tolerate that — white-only roads.”
Thomas, who grew up in Detroit the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, was in Dearborn today for an Arab Detroit workshop on anti-Arab bias. The Free Press asked her about her comments, which critics have said were anti-Israel.
“I paid the price for that,” said Thomas, a longtime White House correspondent. “But it was worth it, to speak the truth.”
“The Zionists have to understand that’s their country, too. Palestinians were there long before any European Zionists.”
Thomas claimed that “You can not say anything (critical) about Israel in this country.”
In a speech that drew a standing ovation, Thomas talked about “the whole question of money involved in politics.”
“We are owned by propagandists against the Arabs. There’s no question about that. Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question in my opinion. They put their money where there mouth is…We’re being pushed into a wrong direction in every way.”
Using this flea bag old biddy’s logic, Helen Thomas herself is indirectly responsible for 9/11. What am I talking about? Helen Thomas is a Arabic woman, she is Palestinian; so were the men who hijacked those planes on 9/11, so that makes Helen Thomas indirectly responsible for the terrorist attacks on 9/11. After all, if we are going to go the collective route and blame everyone for everything, why not blame Helen Thomas for 9/11?
In case, your one of those slow people; what I just wrote was sarcasm. Because it is, in fact, that stupid. But Helen Thomas has all that covered:
In the interview, Thomas talked about the problems that Palestinians face, saying that “Arabs are not terrorists.“
Which is quite funny, because it is the Arab Muslims that are doing the acts of terrorism —- not Jews, not Hindus, not Buddhists, not Christians; but Arab Terrorists. What Helen Thomas is referring to is the fact that a good majority of Americans believe that ALL Arabs are terrorists. There is a reason for this perception, it is because the majority of peace loving Muslims in America and abroad steadfastly refuse to stand up against those who choose to engage in terrorism, and chose to take a extremist stance on the Koran. Now, there is a defense for that, and I know what it is; it is because if these peace-loving Muslims abroad do speak up, they could be killed by those who are taking the extremist position.
There is a solution to that problem —– numbers. That’s right numbers. There is an old saying, “There is strength in numbers.” Peace-loving Arab Muslims in mass numbers need to rise up and take their Religion back from these cold blooded killers who have hi-jacked a Religion away from those who simply want to practice their religion in peace. Which is why the good majority of Muslims migrate here to American, so that they can do just that.
Now I could go on about what Helen Thomas has said, but I have to honestly ask myself. Is she worth it? The smart answer is no. Helen Thomas is just asking for the attention. I will not give it to her. She went on about the Iraq War, and repeated the liberal talking points about that war. Which is to be expected by her; as she herself, a liberal.
I called Helen Thomas an Arab dog, because that is what she is acting like — a Dog. This is not to say that I actually believe that ALL persons of Arabic decent are Dogs, as I do not. I believe that there are respectable persons of Arabic decent; I also believe that there are racist Anti-Semite Arabs as well. Helen Thomas is quite obviously one of those. Thus the reason why I called her an Arab Dog.
That is all….
Others: Weasel Zippers, NewsBusters.org blogs, Pajamas Media, Elder of Ziyon, Solomonia, The Daily Caller and FrumForum
Living proof that John McCain is a typical warmongering Neo-Conservative
This also explains why I did not vote for him and that moronic bimbo Sarah Palin:
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed concern Monday that some new Republican legislators would be defined by their “protectionism and isolationism,” two views that the Vietnam war veteran feared would result in a butting of heads within the party on Afghanistan and defense spending.
“I think there are going to be some tensions within our party,” McCain said during a conference put on by Foreign Policy Initiative, a DC-based think tank. “I worry a lot about the rise of protectionism and isolationism in the Republican Party.”
A prime example, McCain continued, was Rand Paul, Kentucky’s next U.S. Senator.
“I admire his victory, but … already he has talked about withdrawals [and] cuts in defense,” McCain said.
Indeed, Paul appears to have taken after the more libertarian side of foreign policy issues, much like his father, Texas Rep. Rand Paul (R).
via John McCain Attacks Rand Paul’s ‘Isolationism’ In Willingness To Cut Defense Spending.
They mean Ron Paul. I’ve cracked up watching the media calling Rand, Ron and Ron, Rand. It is quite funny. To review! Ron Paul is from Texas, and Rand Paul is from Kentucky.
The serious point to be made here is that John McCain is trying to follow the foreign policy path that was started by President George W. Bush. That foreign policy, which was Wilsonian in nature, proved to be disastrous for the Republican Party and caused them to lose the 2008 election. The Republican Party, under chairman Steele, has been trying to remake the image of the Republican Party being the party of warmongers. As a Conservative, I believe that protecting and defending the Republic of the United States of America is paramount. However, I believe that forcing our style of Democracy on nations that do not necessarily want it; at the cost of our treasure, that being our Military; is a tragic mistake. This is what happened in Iraq and that will always be a black mark on our record throughout the World.
Someone needs to get the memo to John McCain that the Republican Party has moved on from the Bush era and that the Conservative grassroots has pretty moved on from the Bush era.
Let me also say this; I will avoid taking a swipe at Israel, as I believe that they do have right to exist. However, We Paleo-Conservatives understand why McCain feels like he does. McCain comes from that old Wilsonian school of thought — Protect Israel at any cost. We can see what that idiotic stance has gotten us in the past eight years, can we not? Again, someone needs to get that Memo to McCain; that the Conservative grassroots, being challenged by the Tea Party movement, has moved on from that stance and has totally rethought that whole idea. The idea of going to war now, to appease that Country is not popular any longer, among anyone — and that my friends, is a good thing.
Others: Hit & Run, Raw Story, Outside the Beltway, DoD Buzz and Talk Radio News Service
Bill O’Reilly interviews President George W. Bush
I have to give the man credit where it is due. Bill O’Reilly really gave Bush a good grilling here. Although, to his credit also, President Bush did stick to his guns.
Here part one and part two of the interview: (H/T Bill O’Reilly online)
Get the book:
Disclosure: I do make a little bit of money, if you order one of these books. You won’t pay any extra for it. It is capitalism, and I like capitalism, don’t you? 😉
Happy Veterans Day!
To all Military, active and otherwise! Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your service.
I never served a day in my life in the armed forces. They will not take me, I do not have a high school diploma. I have learning disabilities and I never did finish high school. Therefore I was ineligible. However, I am eternally grateful for anyone who served in the Military in any capacity.
Here are some videos from a pretty cool new site:
and this:
Also, I want to give credit, where credit is due…
You did well Google, thank you for honoring our Nation's best.
Again, let me be clear — I never served a day in my live, ever. However, I know from whence our freedoms doth come. They do not come from the Government; they come from the Lord God above and they are bought and paid for, by the blood of brave soldiers, who have fought and died in battlefields in our own Country of old and in battlefields abroad….. and for that, they have my deepest respect.
My feelings on the Iraq War Wikileaks dump
I have one thing to say about the dump by Wikileaks of documents related to the War in Iraq.
War —— is pure hell.
I did not agree with the decision to go into Iraq and I always knew —- always — that this stuff would eventually come out.
It does hurt our guys over there now; which is the goal of the rat bastard that is running the site. I loathe him with every fiber of my being.
However, I believe that this should a be lesson to those who are in places of influential power—- that they should think long and hard, the next time they try to persuade a President to go to war with a Country to further your own political agenda or foreign policy vision that you support. Going to war to support a Country with zero standing with the United Nations and who was illegally recognized by a sitting President —- always has disastrous results. You would have thought that these idiots would have learned that lesson during the Vietnam era — but, as they say, old dogs never learn new tricks. 🙄
It is a sad thing, but it was bound to happen — sooner or later.
President George W. Bush talks about his book Decision Points
(H/T HotAir.com)
You can buy President George W. Bush’s Book here:
Disclosure: A percentage of the purchase cost of this book goes to me, at not additional cost to the customer.
Also, please note; I did not always agree with the decisions that George W. Bush made while he was in office. However, considering what we have now for a President — I have to respect this man. He was, for all of his faults, a leader. Again, I did not agree with everything he did — especially his decision to go to war in Iraq — I also disagree with his idea of exporting democracy to other countries; which is a hallmark of Wilsonian foreign policy. However, I will give the man the respect and honor he does the deserve. That is what separates me from the left — they steadfastly refuse to respect the man and the office. I respect the man and the office; I just do not agree on the policies. I can separate the two, liberals cannot.
WOW: VFW dissolves PAC Board over endorsements
This is pretty wild here!
This comes via Blackfive, it’s a letter from the head honcho of the VFW:
I have reviewed the Political Action Committee (PAC) Board of Directors’ response
to our request to rescind this year’ s Congressional endorsements. I disagree with their
assessment.It is now evident to most of the VFW leadership, both National and especially the
departments, that the VFW has been subjected to extreme negative publicity throughout
the nation, and the recent endorsement decisions have, in fact, harmed the VFW’ s
reputation and future ability to fulfill our mission.I cannot let this erosion of public support for our great organization continue. The
apparent lack of the committee to address these concerns will lead to a proposal by me,
as Commander-in-Chief, to amend the by-laws at the 112th National Convention for
the purpose of dissolving the PAC. Meanwhile, under the authority granted to me as
Commander-in-Chief in section 619 of the VFW National By-Laws and under section
620 of the Manual of Procedure, I am withdrawing all PAC appointments effective
October 15, 2010.Accordingly, I’ m asking the council for a vote of “ no confidence” in the VFW PAC as
indicated on the enclosed ballot.To: National Council of Administration
From: Richard L. Eubank, Commander-in-Chief
Date: October 14, 2010
You can read the PDF Here.
Wild… 😯
Blackfive has the scoop on this, go read it.
(H/T Gateway Pundit)
Here is a perfect reason why I will never vote Democrat again, ever
Some video clips, but first a little housekeeping —- sorry for the lack of posts. I passed out asleep and didn’t wake up till 12:00 midnight.
Anyhow, here are three video clips, all of which I saw over at HotAir.com:
The first one is where Bill O. is on the view and he makes the fetal mistake of ID’ing who actually attacked us on 9/11:
My friends, after 10 years, if we cannot say Muslim’s attacked us on 9/11 without having to add the radical part, then something is seriously wrong. We usually do not say, radical Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor, nor do we say that Germany under Hitler was radical Germany —- we just call them Germans. I ask you people, why the hell do we have to give the god damned Muslims in this Country some sort of god damned special treatment!?!?!?! Now the argument here is, that if you do not use the term “Radical Muslims”, that you imply that ALL Muslims are terrorists; to which I say, ever read their Koran? I am just saying….
Now this next clip is beyond belief, to add insult to injury, Joy Behar invites Jesse Ventura; Yes, Jesse “I think Bush and Cheney caused 9/11” Ventura:
Finally, here is the clip of Bill O. talking with Laura Ingraham ripping on Behar and Whoopie on the walkout and basically saying what I said; Now I know that I have ripped on Ingraham on here in the past, calling her a shrieking Harpy, when I thought it was due, I have also made fun of her, when she has done silly stuff, case and point, see here — But this time, Bill O’Reilly and yes, Laura Ingraham are both right, the damned liberals, as usual, are straight up wrong and are trying to play some sort of political correctness game with 9/11, which I happen to know is straight up BULLSHIT. Anyhow, here’s the clip of Bill O and Ingraham:
Again, let me say, I agree with both of these people 100 percent; it was Muslims that attacked us on 9/11, it was not Christians, it was not Jews, it was not Hindus; it was Muslims. To say anything other than this, excuses the group that attacked us. What about so-called peace loving Muslims? Well, to that I say this, when the Muslim Community decides to confront, head on, the radical element within their own religion abroad and here in America —- then I might start making that distinction, until that starts happening, all bets are off.
Further more, let me get into something else here. This whole idea, by some, on the liberal left, that Bush did 9/11. Now to normal sane Americans; this idea that President George W. Bush caused or ordered the attacks on 9/11 is pure insanity. But to some of the left, it is a true fact. Honestly, only about 1% actually believe that Bush caused 9/11. The rest of the left, use that little line, out of anger — over losing the 2000 and 2004 elections. I ought to know, I used to vote Democrat, up until 2007, when I decided that the Democratic Party had went too far to the left for even my liking.
This whole idea that Bush caused 9/11 and Democrats calling for a formal investigation into events surrounding 9/11, and also the lead up to the Iraq War is nothing more than political retribution towards the Republican Party and towards George W. Bush —- because the Democrats lost 2000 and 2004. As you all know, in 2000, the Democrats ran an unelectable buffoon named Al Gore. In 2004, Same deal, different person. Losing both of those elections have burned Democrats for years. Hence the continued inferring that Bush caused 9/11. Plus, on top of that, there was the Iraq War; which was the liberal “cause” here, up until someone within the liberal establishment decided that the Iraq War was no longer worth making the entire liberal movement look stupid and they dropped it as a whole. Then there is the afghan war; which the opposition to it, has been rather muted. Because the liberal establishment knows that if they turn on that War that the Democratic Party to the rest of America, will look like the biggest bunch of hypocrites ever. Which they are, but I digress. Either way, these videos just show you; one, the hypocrisy of the liberals and two, how bad that the liberal movement has become, when it comes to freedom of speech.
Come November 2, I will either be voting for Libertarians or Republicans. I have no really decided which; at this point, I am most likely pulling the lever for the Republicans. Because we need to right the ship and the libertarians have never won anything at all, and I want to vote for a winner this time; especially here in Michigan. We have had enough of Democratic failure, me especially, being out of work since 2005, it does really suck. Instead of doing the normal blaming of the Republicans, like some people I know around here do, I am facing reality and saying that Granholm and her polices failed and am voting different.
…and I hope you will do the same….
How the left really feels about our Military
Here is another video from the leftist shindig up on the National Mall in Washington D.C.
This is a video of the World War II memorial in Washington D.C. after the leftist jackboots got done with it.
This makes me sick to my god-damned stomach. 😡
The Video: (H/T to HotAirPundit and it comes with a special thanks to Michelle Malkin)
Dear God…………………………… What is happening to my Country? 🙁 😥
Mrs. Malkin, I do not know if you will actually ever read this; but if you do. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for linking to that Video, and thanks to HotAirPundit for posting. This is an outrage. Something has to be done, these people do not love America; they hate it.
Update: Some of you might be wondering why this one bothers me so badly; Because it is personal, extremely personal. My Grandfather’s two brothers, both from Georgia, served in the United States Military during World War II. Both served in Germany, both made it back alive, both lost friends in the War. My Dad’s Father’s brother also served in the Military during War II. They were a part of the greatest generation ever; and these bastard communists treat that memorial like it is some park!?!?!? That is an outrage! Many people gave their lives for this Country, so that those idiot communists could have the right to march and believe in their idiotic dream of a socialist utopia and they treat their memorial like it is a place to leave their garbage. There are no words to describe what I am feeling right now —- rage, anger, hatred, resentment, sadness, fear of what the Country is becoming —- all of that in one big ball of fury.
My friends, I apologize if my writing at the moment sounds damned disjointed. But god-damn it, I am angry. We must vote for a new slate come November 2, 2010. This is gone on long enough. There is just some lines that you do not cross; and the Democrats, the socialists, the left; what the hell ever you want to call them —- they crossed it yesterday. We must, must, must, let them know that the silent majority of us will not sit idly by and allow these jack-booted thugs destroy our nation any longer. It has to stop, before it is too late.
Again, sorry for rambling. But this one really bothered me.
Not that it is a big surprise, but Fox News is murdering MSNBC in ratings
I happen to know why too… but first:
Via Politico:
More people are getting their news about the upcoming election from cable television than any other source, and from Fox News more than any other cable channel, according to a POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll released Monday.
The poll found that 81 percent of those polled get their news about the midterm elections from cable channels, like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, or their websites, compared with 71 percent from national network news channels, such as ABC, NBC or CBS, and their websites.
Among cable news channels, Fox was the clear winner, with 42 percent of respondents saying it is their main source, compared with 30 percent who cited CNN and 12 percent who rely on MSNBC.
The results show the growing influence that 24-hour cable news has on shaping the political consciousness, despite the fact that network newscasts still draw many multiples of the number of viewers of even the highest-rated cable news shows.
“Because people can tune into cable at any time of day, I think the cumulative audience is probably larger than the cumulative audience for the three network news shows,” said Chris Arterton, dean of the George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.
The real funny part about this, is the following:
Fox’s opinionated personalities were also rated as having the greatest positive impact on the political debate in the country. Bill O’Reilly was rated as having, by far, the greatest positive impact, with 49 percent of respondents rating him positively, and 32 percent negatively.
Glenn Beck was the second most-positively rated personality, with 38 percent of respondents saying he had a positive impact, and 32 percent saying he had a negative impact.
Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was the third-most-positively ranked, with 36 percent saying he has a positive impact on the discourse, but his negatives far outweighed his positives, with 52 percent saying he has a negative impact.
“To some extent, Limbaugh has become almost a caricature in a way, so I don’t know how much influence he has beyond entertainment value,” Arteron said. “Whereas, in some way, the other people on Fox are seen as more legitimate news operations.”
MSNBC’s personalities were largely ranked as unknown by respondents: 70 percent said they had never heard of Ed Schultz, 55 percent said they had never heard of Rachel Maddow and 42 percent said they had never heard of Keith Olbermann.
The reason?
So True....
(Borrowed from Weasel Zippers)
There is a personal angle to this story and I am going to share it with you. During the 1990’s, I was a watcher of CNN, mainly because that was about the only cable news outlet out there at the time. Please keep in mind that back on those days, I was very unaware or unconcerned about media bias. I always knew that the media, which I referred to, at the time, as the “secular media”; always had a bias against Christianity, Christians and the Church World as a whole.
However, I really do not know when it started really, most likely, after the election of George W. Bush; but it seemed like the bias and antagonistic mentality towards Christians, Christianity, and the Church World began to come to a feverish pitch around 2006 or so. At least, that is when I began to notice it with any somewhat real cognizant effort. The straw that broke the camel’s back, so to speak, is when CNN did a special called “What is a Christian?” Which I felt was a purposeful attack on Christianity in general. However, when they did a special on Muslims, it was titled “God’s Warriors.” That is when I decided that CNN had “Crossed the Rubicon” in my book. So, I switched to MSNBC. I knew that MSNBC would be a bit like CNN, but they had tucker Carlson on there. Therefore, that would balance it out. I remembered tucker from the CNN days —- I also remember him being a bit of an asshole as well. I knew about his background, which admittedly made me cringe a bit. However, when I began watch his show, I found that I actually began agreeing with what he was saying. I should also point out, that this was around the time, that I began blogging. I was inspired, mainly by Lou Dobbs and with an utter frustration with what the Bush Administration was doing in Iraq.
However, things over at MSNBC began to change; first off, Tucker’s show was cancelled, that just flat out angered me. I thought Tucker’s show balanced out the other opinions, like Olbermann. Then the jockeying of talent around, all of whom had one thing in common — They were all liberal. That bothered me a bit. Therefore, I did what any sane, reasoned person would do. I began to watch Fox News — in a very limited fashion at first. I would watch Keith Obermann’s show at eight o’clock and then I would catch the repeat of Bill O’Reilly’s show at Eleven o’clock.
I should also mention that around this time, is when I began to see the writing on wall, so to speak, in the Democratic Party. The Party that once stood for middle class people and people like me, who were held back, due to personal circumstances, was becoming the party of identity politics. I also began to see that the Democratic Party was much biased and geared against middle class and above white people —- like me. Yes, I am aware, that identity politics and gender entitlement always was a faction within the Democratic Party. However, until the 2007 Primary, I do not believe that it was the “mainstay” of that party. In 2007, that all changed, with the battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama; it was the blacks against the feminists and that was when I decided that enough was enough. Also around this time, my blog was hacked and I had to start over from scratch and I decided that cheering for the left; even though I was a left-of-center and not really ever a fully-fledged Democrat — was an exercise in abject folly. Therefore, I began blogging from an Independent standpoint and as time went on, I found myself agreeing more and more with the right on most, if not all issues.
Now there are some issues that I am in disagreement with, however, they are nothing worth totally separating me from the right. Most of them are on the framing of arguments against the left. Example: Socialism and Unions —- I believe it to be a credible argument to say that socialism has contributed to the downfall of Michigan and the Detroit area. Further, I believe it to be a legitimate argument to say that the Unions have added to the cost of vehicles offered by the auto companies. The problem is that the right needs to work on the polish and verbiage of those legitimate arguments. Casting unions in the light of some covert Communist operation does nothing but make the right look like total buffoons.
Finally, my viewing of MSNBC finally stopped, after a woman by the name of Janeane Garofalo took to the airwaves on MSNBC and declared on Keith Olbermann’s show that the Tea Party movement was nothing more than a bunch of racist white people and racist rednecks. It was at that point, when I decided, that Keith Olbermann and his show were not something that I felt that I needed to watch any longer. I am sorry, but when you use your show and one of your guests as a proxy to insult a particular ethnic group of people — especially one that I happen to be involved in — you are practicing the politics of exclusion; and that is, I am afraid, not something that I can and will ever support. The Bush Administration tried this back in 2003, during the run up to and after the start of the Iraq War. Those that were opposed to the war in Iraq were labeled by the Bush Administration and its supporters as Anti-American. Conversely, it is believed by some, that certain persons within the Bush Administration purposely derailed the career of a covert C.I.A. agent of whom husband did criticize the decision to go to war.
This all again, is the practice of derisive politics, something I thought that the left detested; however, it seems that the left engaged in the same sorts of folly themselves — Not only in just the general politics itself, but also in the media coverage — but also in the actually reporting of news as well. I remember well how Keith Olbermann and many of his fellow liberals liked and still do like to blast Fox News for allow opinion to seep into the normal news programs in the morning. However, I have watched MSNBC, and have seen liberal bias in the morning news reporting there as well. Therefore, to this writer, that nullifies any argument that the left has against Fox News or any other sort of Conservative outlet. I mean, it only makes sense that you cannot criticize someone for doing something that you do yourself. Then again, common sense does not seem to be in great abundance in liberal Democrat circles these days. Just look at whom the Democratic Party installed as President — that ought to speak volumes as to the condition of liberalism, and the Democratic Party in general in this modern day and age. I mean a perfect example of the elite liberal establishment can be seen, when Bill Maher calls those who do not want the nationalized heathcare, as stupid. This is the attitude of the liberal populace and establishment as a whole; that most Americans are uneducated stupid people, who must have the enlightened ones makes the decisions, because most Americans are too stupid to know what it good for them — that is essentially liberalism distilled to its basic parts. This is why I sided against them. They do not trust people like me, to be able to make our own decisions. Further, they wish to quell my free will, which is given to me, by God himself, to accept or reject what it is that they wish to foist upon me.
In closing of this rather long article — I am quite the windbag, when I want to be — the reason for these dismal ratings for MSNBC is that that network has and is continuing to engage in intellectual dishonesty. This began right after the election of President Barack Obama. This should be proof that you just cannot propagandize the American people — not for very long anyhow. Americans are just smarter than the liberal elite and some elite among the Conservative establishment, give them credit for being. Americans just have that uncanny ability to know when they are being sold a line of tripe.
This friends, is what makes us a great Nation and for this, I am eternally grateful.
A very awesome story
Posted at Blackfive and Q & O.
Ladies, if there are any that actually read this blog, have your hankies ready.
Men, and I know damned well, that there are ton of them that read here; have your eye leak management prepared.
Quote:
I arrived at Ft. Stewart’s Cottrell Field a few hours early – it was a long drive from Atlanta and I wanted to make sure I got there with plenty of time to spare. I was the only one in the parking lot as I pulled in, grateful for the opportunity to rest a bit before the ceremony. My son’s unit was coming home from Afghanistan and in a few short hours I’d actually get to see him, put my hands on him and rest assured that he was home and well.
As I sat there thinking about the upcoming event, my eyes wandered to two rows of small trees lining Cottrell Field at either end and what appeared to be markers at their base. Curious, and needing to stretch after the long ride, I walked toward them. It was a beautiful hot August Georgia day with a slight breeze, enough to keep the heat from being oppressive and the gnats at bay.
Walking toward the trees I noticed a walkway with two brick pillars. On the pillars were brass plaques, one announcing this was “Warrior’s Walk” and the other explaining it was a memorial to the soldiers lost in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. My heart caught in my throat as I looked down the long double row of trees and I thought, “there but by the grace of God …” —– Read the rest Here
May the Lord Jesus Christ Bless and Keep our Military Men and Woman, who are serving abroad and their families.
Quote of the Day
We won’t win the war on terror simply by killing, capturing, and imprisoning al-Qaeda terrorists and Taliban fighters; but neither can we afford to let up on them. If we pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan before those countries have governments that are stable enough to keep a tight lid on our enemies, we’ll soon be right back where we started. We can use missile and drone attacks and covert forces to kill our enemies in Yemen and Pakistan; but what do you think will happen when the next Umar Abdulmutallab or Faisal Shahzad succeeds in killing hundreds or thousands of Americans? Will we not again retaliate?
The negative effects of permanent war on the U.S. armed forces, on the American people, and on America’s diminishing financial resources are obvious. When compared to the effects of a chemical, biological, or nuclear terrorist weapon going off in an American city, however, those effects become secondary considerations.
No matter how much President Obama or his successor may want to end the permanent war, there is no exit strategy in a war with an enemy that relentlessly attacks the U.S. homeland. We can’t negotiate our way out, like we did in Korea; nor can we simply decide it’s costing too much in lives and treasure and walk away from it, as we did from Vietnam. This time the enemy will come after us.
Whatever your views on America’s ongoing multi-front war, it is not going to end anytime soon. We’ll be fighting this war “for the rest of our lives and probably our kids’ lives.” The Pentagon, the White House, and the American people must come together on a strategy for sustaining that fight until we ultimately defeat our enemy.
The G.O.P’s “Pledge to America” is nothing more retread Neo-Conservative, Theocracy nonsense
This is pretty rich; The Republican Party is trotting out the same old George W. Bush style of Governence, with some new promises. Promises that the Republican Party actually expect the American people to believe that they will actually keep.
Let us go through this thing, shall we?
This comes Via CBS NEWS:
CBS News has obtained a final draft of House Republicans’ legislative agenda for the next Congress, a 21-page "Pledge to America" that they will formally unveil Thursday morning at a Virginia hardware store.
"The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated," the introduction says.
It continues: "With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America."
Let look at this thing shall we? I mean, I need a good laugh! I will spare you the hum drum, "Patriot" sounding nonsense and puffery, and I will get to the meat and point out the crap.
We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.
We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and honest in its dealings.
We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of mankind.
We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America.
Hmmm, Sounds like they want to turn America into a theocracy.
Continuing:
Permanently Stop All Job-Killing Tax Hikes: We will help the economy by permanently stopping all tax increases, currently scheduled to take effect January 1, 2011. That means protecting middle-class families, seniors worried about their retirement, and the entrepreneurs and family-owned small businesses on which we depend to create jobs in America.
• Give Small Businesses a Tax Deduction: We will allow small business owners to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their business income. This will provide entrepreneurs with a much-needed infusion of capital for investment and new hiring.
• Rein In the Red Tape Factory in Washington, DC: Excessive federal regulation is a de facto tax on employers and consumers that stifles job creation, hampers innovation and postpones investment in the economy. When the game is always changing, small businesses cannot properly plan for the future. To provide stability, we will require congressional approval of any new federal regulation that has an annual cost to our economy of $100 million or more. This is the threshold at which the government deems a regulation “economically significant.” If a regulation is so “significant” and costly that it may harm job creation, Congress should vote on it first.
• Repeal Job-Killing Small Business Mandates: One of the most controversial mandates of the Democrats’ government takeover of health care requires small businesses to report to the Internal Revenue Service any purchases that run more than $600. This 1099 reporting mandate is so overbearing that the IRS ombudsman has determined that the agency is ill-equipped to handle all the resulting paperwork.. We will repeal this job-killing small business mandate.
This was all promised before and never was enacted.
Act Immediately to Reduce Spending: There is no reason to wait to reduce wasteful and unnecessary spending. Congress should move immediately to cancel unspent “stimulus” funds, and block any attempts to extend the timeline for spending “stimulus” funds. Throwing more money at a stimulus plan that is not working only wastes taxpayer money and puts us further in debt.
• Cut Government Spending to Pre-Stimulus, Pre-Bailout Levels: With common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops, we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to begin paying down the debt, balancing the budget, and ending the spending spree in Washington that threatens our children’s future.
• Establish a Hard Cap on New Discretionary Spending: We must put common-sense limits on the growth of government and stop the endless increases. Only in Washington is there an expectation that whatever your budget was last year, it will be more this year and even more the next. We will set strict budget caps to limit federal spending on an annual basis. Budget caps were used in the 1990s, when a Republican Congress was able to bring the budget into balance and eventual surplus. By cutting discretionary spending from current levels and imposing a hard cap on future growth, we will save taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.
• Cut Congress’ Budget: This year, Congress increased its own budget by 5.8 percent at a time when families and small businesses across the country are cutting back. We will make Congress do more with less by significantly reducing its budget.
• Hold Weekly Votes on Spending Cuts: Earlier this year, House Republicans launched the YouCut initiative to combat the permissive culture of runaway spending in Congress. Over the course of nine weeks, YouCut produced proposals to save taxpayers more than $120 billion. We will continue to hold weekly votes on spending cuts.
• End TARP Once And For All: Americans are rightly outraged at the bailouts of businesses and entities that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior. We will cancel the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a move that would save taxpayers roughly $16 billion.
• End Government Control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Since taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage companies that triggered the financial meltdown by giving too many high risk loans to people who couldn’t afford them, taxpayers were billed more than $145 billion to save the two companies. We will reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by ending their government takeover, shrinking their portfolios, and establishing minimum capital standards. This will save taxpayers as much as $30 billion.
• Impose a Net Federal Hiring Freeze of Non-Security Employees: Small businesses and entrepreneurs are the engine of our economy and should not be crowded out by unchecked government growth. We will impose a net hiring freeze on non-security federal employees and ensure that the public sector no longer grows at the expense of the private sector.
• Root Out Government Waste and Duplication: Once created, federal programs almost never go away, even if the problem they were created to address is no longer relevant. More than 20 states have addressed this problem by requiring that programs end – or “sunset” – by a date certain. We will adopt this requirement at the federal level to force Congress to determine if a program is worthy of continued taxpayer support.
• Reform the Budget Process to Focus on Long-Term Challenges: We will make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs for today’s seniors and future generations. That means requiring a full accounting of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, setting benchmarks for these programs and reviewing them regularly, and preventing the expansion of unfunded liabilities.
Again, this was all promised before in the past; and was never done. In fact, spending increased under the previous President.
My favorite so far…:
There is literally no aspect of our economy or our society that the federal government doesn’t tax, regulate or subsidize, and often it does all three at the same time. The most recent edition of the Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance listed 2,050 different assistance programs available to states, local governments, for-profit and non-profit organizations, groups, and individuals. Taxpayers are literally funding programs from cradle to grave…
Yes, let’s defund programs for the actual needy, and the Handicapped — like my aunt. Let’s allow them starve. What idiots. 🙄
Here’s the REAL knee slapper!
• Read The Bill: We will ensure that bills are debated and discussed in the public square by publishing the text online for at least three days before coming up for a vote in the House of Representatives. No more hiding legislative language from the minority party, opponents, and the public. Legislation should be understood by all interested parties before it is voted on.
• Adhere To The Constitution: For too long, Congress has ignored the proper limits imposed by the Constitution on the federal government. Further, it has too often drafted unclear and muddled laws, leaving to an unelected judiciary the power to interpret what the law means and by what authority the law stands. This lack of respect for the clear Constitutional limits and authorities has allowed Congress to create ineffective and costly programs that add to the massive deficit year after year. We will require each bill moving through Congress to include a clause citing the specific constitutional authority upon which the bill is justified.
• Make It Easier to Cut Spending: By forbidding amendments on spending bills, Democrats have denied lawmakers the opportunity to tighten Washington’s belt and slash wasteful and duplicative programs. Structure dictates behavior, so we will let any lawmaker — Democrat or Republican — offer amendments to reduce spending.
• Advance Legislative Issues One at a Time: We will end the practice of packaging unpopular bills with “must-pass” legislation to circumvent the will of the American people. Instead, we will advance major legislation one issue at a time.
However, they wish to do this too:
* Pass Clean Troop Funding Bills: When asked to provide our troops with the resources they need, we will do so without delay. That means no more troop funding bills held up by unrelated policy changes, or extraneous domestic spending and pork-barrel projects.
• Keep Terrorists Out of America: We will prevent the government from importing terrorists onto American soil. We will hold President Obama and his administration responsible for any Guantanamo Bay detainees they release who return to fight against our troops or who have become involved in any terrorist plots or activities.
• Demand an Overarching Detention Policy: Foreign terrorists do not have the same rights as American citizens, nor do they have more rights than U.S. military personnel. We will work to ensure foreign terrorists, such as the 9/11 conspirators, are tried in military, not civilian, court. We will oppose all efforts to force our military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel operating overseas to extend “Miranda Rights” to foreign terrorists.
• Fully Fund Missile Defense: There is real concern that while the threat from Iranian intercontinental ballistic missiles could materialize as early as 2015, the government’s missile defense policy is not projected to cover the U.S. homeland until 2020. We will work to ensure critical funding is restored to protect the U.S. homeland and our allies from missile threats from rogue states such as Iran and North Korea.
• Require Tough Enforcement of Sanctions Against Iran: The Iranian regime is a state-sponsor of terrorism, has actively worked to harm our deployed troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and violates the rights and will of its own people. It has declared its determination to acquire a nuclear capability, which threatens its neighbors and the security of the United States. We will work to ensure the government aggressively and effectively implements the sanctions tools Congress has provided.
• Establish Operational Control of the Border: We must take action to secure our borders, and that action starts with enforcing our laws. We will ensure that the Border Patrol has the tools and authorities to establish operational control at the border and prohibit the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from interfering with Border Patrol enforcement activities on federal lands.
• Work with State and Local Officials to Enforce Our Immigration Laws: The problem of illegal immigration and Mexican drug cartels engaged in an increasingly violent conflict means we need all hands on deck to address this challenge. We will reaffirm the authority of state and local law enforcement to assist in the enforcement of all federal immigration laws.
• Strengthen Visa Security: To stop terrorists like Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Christmas Day bomber, we will require the Department of Homeland Security to review all visa applications at high-risk consular posts and prevent aliens from attempting to avoid deportation after having their visas revoked.
As for immigration; how about we try this novel idea? END ALL IMMIGRATION FOR AT LEAST 10 YEARS! Then, using the Government’s already vast resources, we round up, and DEPORT ALL Illegal immigrants in this damn country and BAR THEM from returned to the United States, FOREVER!
Yes, we want to stick to the constitution; but we also want to keep funding the Military industrial complex! This one was really one that makes me ill:
Require Tough Enforcement of Sanctions Against Iran: The Iranian regime is a state-sponsor of terrorism, has actively worked to harm our deployed troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and violates the rights and will of its own people. It has declared its determination to acquire a nuclear capability, which threatens its neighbors and the security of the United States. We will work to ensure the government aggressively and effectively implements the sanctions tools Congress has provided.
Oh yes, let’s antagonize the hell out of Iran, until they strike one of our interests overseas; like Iraq and we end up having to go into that Country or some other one, with our interests in it. Which would lead to more War…….again!
Here is a novel idea. How about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now? Because Iraq is done; let them people deal with their own Country. Afghanistan is basically lost. The Russians tried rebuilding that god-forsaken wilderness and failed. Why do we think that we can do it any better? Al-Qaeda is basically in Pakistan and so damned well protected; that we will never get them, unless we keep hitting civilian targets. Which only inspires more terrorists. Why not just use CIA Drones and bring out troops home? That or just admit that the United States purposefully let down it’s guard; and end the lie, in the first damned place! That way, we can usually save some money for defending America from Terrorism here; seeing that we have created this situation of possible blow back from those wanting to hurt America, because of our stupid invasion of Iraq, which had zero to do with 9/11. How is that for a novel idea?
However, no, we would rather continue with the same old Neo-Conservative, Israel-appeasing, polices that caused 9/11 in the first damned place. In the process, we want to bankrupt the Country, by continuing to fund crap like that. Plus, we continue to fund other Countries, like Israel and their healthcare plan, which includes a public option; which America does not even have. Until this stops. America will continue to be in debt for a long time to come.
For what it is worth, I am not the only person that thinks this is crap. Even the folks at RedState hate it.
UPDATED: On the Bob Woodward Book
I am poking my head back in again — to comment on the big Bob Woodward story, that is the top story on Memeorandum.
I am referring to this:
President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.
Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page “terms sheet” that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in “Obama’s Wars,” to be released on Monday.
According to Woodward’s meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.
“This needs to be a plan about how we’re going to hand it off and get out of Afghanistan,” Obama is quoted as telling White House aides as he laid out his reasons for adding 30,000 troops in a short-term escalation. “Everything we’re doing has to be focused on how we’re going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It’s in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room.”
Obama rejected the military’s request for 40,000 troops as part of an expansive mission that had no foreseeable end. “I’m not doing 10 years,” he told Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a meeting on Oct. 26, 2009. “I’m not doing long-term nation-building. I am not spending a trillion dollars.”
Woodward’s book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, “We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”
But most of the book centers on the strategy review, and the dissension, distrust and infighting that consumed Obama’s national security team as it was locked in a fierce and emotional struggle over the direction, goals, timetable, troop levels and the chances of success for a war that is almost certain to be one of the defining events of this presidency.
Obama is shown at odds with his uniformed military commanders, particularly Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command during the 2009 strategy review and now the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan.
Woodward reveals their conflicts through detailed accounts of two dozen closed-door secret strategy sessions and nearly 40 private conversations between Obama and Cabinet officers, key aides and intelligence officials.
Tensions often turned personal. National security adviser James L. Jones privately referred to Obama’s political aides as “the water bugs,” the “Politburo,” the “Mafia,” or the “campaign set.” Petraeus, who felt shut out by the new administration, told an aide that he considered the president’s senior adviser David Axelrod to be “a complete spin doctor.”
During a flight in May, after a glass of wine, Petraeus told his own staffers that the administration was “[expletive] with the wrong guy.” Gates was tempted to walk out of an Oval Office meeting after being offended by comments made by deputy national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon about a general not named in the book.
Suspicion lingered among some from the 2008 presidential campaign as well. When Obama floated the idea of naming Clinton to a high-profile post, Axelrod asked him, “How could you trust Hillary?”
Okay, first off, has everyone forgotten that 90% of what Bob Woodward writes is just straight up, sensationalized Bullshit? The Neo-Cons sure did say that, when Bob Woodward wrote his book about Bush. However, now the Neo-Cons are treating this book like the Gospel truth; because it is about a Democratic Party President. Of course, the warmongering Neo-Cons are eating the whole bit about the terrorist attack up and basically saying that President Obama wants another attack on America. Which is, of course, straight up bullshit.
Some of the other highlights are:
— Obama told Woodward in the July interview that he didn’t think about the Afghan war in the “classic” terms of the United States winning or losing. “I think about it more in terms of: Do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end?” he said.
— The CIA created, controls and pays for a clandestine 3,000-man paramilitary army of local Afghans, known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams. Woodward describes these teams as elite, well-trained units that conduct highly sensitive covert operations into Pakistan as part of a stepped-up campaign against al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens there.
— Obama has kept in place or expanded 14 intelligence orders, known as findings, issued by his predecessor, George W. Bush. The orders provide the legal basis for the CIA’s worldwide covert operations.
— A new capability developed by the National Security Agency has dramatically increased the speed at which intercepted communications can be turned around into useful information for intelligence analysts and covert operators. “They talk, we listen. They move, we observe. Given the opportunity, we react operationally,” then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell explained to Obama at a briefing two days after he was elected president.
— A classified exercise in May showed that the government was woefully unprepared to deal with a nuclear terrorist attack in the United States. The scenario involved the detonation of a small, crude nuclear weapon in Indianapolis and the simultaneous threat of a second blast in Los Angeles. Obama, in the interview with Woodward, called a nuclear attack here “a potential game changer.” He said: “When I go down the list of things I have to worry about all the time, that is at the top, because that’s one where you can’t afford any mistakes.”
— Afghan President Hamid Karzai was diagnosed as manic depressive, according to U.S. intelligence reports. “He’s on his meds, he’s off his meds,” Woodward quotes U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry as saying.
Again, I have to ask; how much of this is actual truth and how much of it is sensationalized bullshit?
Liberal Blogger No more Mister Nice Blog puts it correctly:
“It’s in our national security interest” “I am not spending a trillion dollars.” At least he understand that endless war is bad for America.
And the reason that’s important is that, if we’re still deeply mired in Afghanistan as of January 20, 2013, we’ll still be just as deeply mired four years later, because President Palin/Pence/Daniels/Thune/Huckabee/Barbour/Christie sure as hell ain’t gonna withdraw. But this semi-rationality on Obama’s part is going to be lost, and the bullet-point version of this entire book is going to be “Obama plans to surrender in Afghanistan to appease the evil traitorous voters in his party.”
I hate to say it; but he is absolutely correct. Because you all know that the Neo-Conservatives are all about perpetual war. But they call me a Neo-Nazi for pointing that out; and because I refuse to do the “Identity politics” for that particular warmongering class of people. I despise identity politics on the left and the right. That, according to the protected class, is being a Neo-Nazi. Which, like most of Bob Woodward’s writings, is just straight up bullshit.
Update: But of course. That is the same idiot that said that Iraq was an imminent danger to America and the rest of the free world back in 2003. Which of course, like Bob Woodward’s books; was straight up bullshit. 🙄
One of the sad side effects of 9/11 and War, Military Crimes
This is one of the saddest things that you would ever want to read.
Via the Washington Post:
AT JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD, WASH. The U.S. soldiers hatched a plan as simple as it was savage: to randomly target and kill an Afghan civilian, and to get away with it.
For weeks, according to Army charging documents, rogue members of a platoon from the 5th Stryker Combat Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, floated the idea. Then, one day last winter, a solitary Afghan man approached them in the village of La Mohammed Kalay. The “kill team” activated the plan.
One soldier created a ruse that they were under attack, tossing a fragmentary grenade on the ground. Then others opened fire.
According to charging documents, the unprovoked, fatal attack on Jan. 15 was the start of a months-long shooting spree against Afghan civilians that resulted in some of the grisliest allegations against American soldiers since the U.S. invasion in 2001. Members of the platoon have been charged with dismembering and photographing corpses, as well as hoarding a skull and other human bones.
The subsequent investigation has raised accusations about whether the military ignored warnings that the out-of-control soldiers were committing atrocities. The father of one soldier said he repeatedly tried to alert the Army after his son told him about the first killing, only to be rebuffed.
Two more slayings would follow. Military documents allege that five members of the unit staged a total of three murders in Kandahar province between January and May. Seven other soldiers have been charged with crimes related to the case, including hashish use, attempts to impede the investigation and a retaliatory gang assault on a private who blew the whistle.
Army officials have not disclosed a motive for the killings and macabre behavior. Nor have they explained how the attacks could have persisted without attracting scrutiny. They declined to comment on the case beyond the charges that have been filed, citing the ongoing investigation.
But a review of military court documents and interviews with people familiar with the investigation suggest the killings were committed essentially for sport by soldiers who had a fondness for hashish and alcohol.
The accused soldiers, through attorneys and family members, deny wrongdoing. But the case has already been marked by a cycle of accusations and counter-accusations among the defendants as they seek to pin the blame on each other, according to documents and interviews.
The Army has scheduled pre-trial hearings in the case this fall at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, home of the Stryker brigade. (The unit was renamed the 2nd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, when it returned from Afghanistan in July.) Military officials say privately that they worry the hearings will draw further attention to the case, with photos and other evidence prompting anger among the Afghan civilians whose support is critical to the fight against the Taliban.
This article is a seriously interesting read; so I will ask you, please head on over at read the rest of it.
Now, if I were a committed Neo-Conservative; like many of the Bloggers on the right, I would say something to the effect of, “Oh, this is just liberal, anti-war propaganda!” If I were a committed Paleo-Conservative, I would say something to the effect of, “See? This is what happens when you go to war! See? See? See?”
Fortunately, I am not committed to either of those positions really.
One of the worst assumptions, that a person can make about the Military, is that every person that volunteers for service; is going to be an honest, upstanding person. There are people out there, which are just hell bent on breaking rules. Only difference is, these people were wearing our Military uniforms when doing so. Could this crime cause problems for us down the road? Maybe. There could be blowback later on. I hope that not — but it does happen.
I do not claim to know the motives for this crime; all I can really do is speculate. One could blame the euphoria after 9/11; one could blame the kids for their desire to kill people. All of that really does not matter; all that matters now is, that there are dead afghans, who really had nothing to do with 9/11, and officers from our Military killed them, for sport. That is a real problem, when it comes to trying to get Afghans to trust us, so that we can make gains with Taliban and ultimately kill or capture the members of Al-Qaeda.
War is a game, a game of strategy; like chess. The problem is the pieces of that game are real human lives on the line. The bad part is this, these idiots, in their moronic desire to kill —- just kicked the damn chess game over. Now, the Military leaders have to upright the game, and hopefully no pieces — or lives — get lost in the process. It is a job and a responsibility that can make even the most steel-nerved person into a bumbling, pill-popping wreck. Another thing is this is not 24 hours news cycle, news sound bite, work. It is long, tedious work, and it can wear the strongest of them down quick.
My thoughts and prayers go out to those who are involved in this situation, at all levels. My Prayers go out to the Soldiers who are in the Afghan Theater fighting what the liberals used to call, “The good war.” God be with them.
Video: The man who received the medal of honor – Salvatore Giunta
I have said in the past that I have nothing but the highest respect for the United States Military. Here is why:
You can read more about this young man and why he received the Nation’s highest honor by going here, here and here.
Kudos and mad respect for this man; I wish him all the best to him and his family. Salvatore Giunta is a perfect representation of our finest and best in our Military. They deserve only the best.
Video: REALITY REPORT #60 – Obama’s Iraq Bushism
In this edition of the Reality Report:
Gary Franchi points out Obama’s latest Iraq War Bushism and welcomes We Are Change Founder Luke Rudkowski to the show.
Nina breaks down the headlines including Homeowners Associations restricting Gadsden Flags, the Blogger Shakedown of Righthaven LLC, the recent Emergency Declaration in North Carolina that suspended the 2nd Amendment and how Blackwater Security used shell corporations to acquire tax payer money.
The viewers answer whether or not the World Trade Center was a Controlled demolition in the mailbag and keep watching to see the viewer pick for this week’s Enemy of the State.
Two Sites to check out: http://RealityReport.TV | http://RestoreTheRepublic.com |
…and now the video:
UPDATED: I hate to say it: Nicholas Kristof makes a very good point
Rarely do I ever concede a point to a liberal. However, in this case; it is fair to do so.
This morning Nicholas Kristof writes in the New York Times, about the Mosque Controversy:
For a glimpse of how venomous and debased the discourse about Islam has become, consider a blog post in The New Republic this month. Written by Martin Peretz, the magazine’s editor in chief, it asserted: “Frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims.”
Mr. Peretz added: “I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment, which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse.”
Thus a prominent American commentator, in a magazine long associated with tolerance, ponders whether Muslims should be afforded constitutional freedoms. Is it possible to imagine the same kind of casual slur tossed off about blacks or Jews? How do America’s nearly seven million American Muslims feel when their faith is denounced as barbaric?
This is one of those times that test our values, a bit like the shameful interning of Japanese-Americans during World War II, or the disgraceful refusal to accept Jewish refugees from Nazi Europe.
It would have been natural for this test to have come right after 9/11, but it was forestalled because President George W. Bush pushed back at his conservative ranks and repeatedly warned Americans not to confuse Al Qaeda with Islam.
As much as I hate to say it; Mr. Kristof is absolutely right. It should noted that Martin Peretz is, in fact Jewish and is, in fact, a rabid Zionist. In fact, Martin Peretz is known for the following comments:
Frankly, I couldn’t quite imagine any venture like [the Iraq War] in the Arab World turning out especially well. This is, you will say, my prejudice. But some prejudices are built on real facts, and history generally proves me right. Go ahead, prove me wrong. — Source
and:
But, frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims. And among those Muslims led by the Imam Rauf there is hardly one who has raised a fuss about the routine and random bloodshed that defines their brotherhood. So, yes, I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges [sic] of the First Amendment which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse. — Source
Like Kristof said; could you imagine if the above were uttered about the Jews or about the black race? There would a media frenzy about it. Believe me, I know; I have been attacked by those who are of the protected class and all for speaking my mind about them and how they attack those of whom they disagree.
The fact is, that this whole Mosque situation boils down to this; Islam versus Christian Nativists and Jews, Arabs versus Americans, whites versus non-whites. Am I calling those who oppose this mosque racists? Well, my question for you is this; do you feel that burning pages of the Koran normal acceptable practice? Would you feel the same way, if some Muslim took a page out of the Christian Bible and began burning it? How about the Tanakh, the Torah, or The ?umash, the Siddur, the Piyutim or even the Zohar?
The point I am trying to make here is this; I realize that radicalized Muslims attacked the World Trade Center, The Pentagon and Flight 93. However, when you punish an entire religion for the actions of a few, you are practicing a forum of collectivism. That is not anything remotely Conservative, nor is it anything remotely American. Being vigilant against terrorism is one thing; but being idiotic is another, this situation with this Mosque is well beyond that — on both sides.
Update: On the Other hand… these are videos from 9/11:
There are two sides to every argument; one would suppose. There is also this here.