Oh Lordy. They have let Darth Vader out of his lair again…. 🙄
Two things, he thinks Joe Biden is an idiot, and he supports homos.
Lovely.
That is all.
This blog is no longer active as of October 31, 2011

Oh Lordy. They have let Darth Vader out of his lair again…. 🙄
Two things, he thinks Joe Biden is an idiot, and he supports homos.
Lovely.
That is all.
This video comes via the Neo-Marxist Blog, Think Progress:
Money Quote:
SCHULTZ: I told him he was full of sh*t is what I told him. … And then he gave me the Dick Cheney f-bomb. … I told Robert Gibbs, I said “And I’m sorry you’re swearing at me, but I’m just trying to help you out. I’m telling you you’re losing your base. Do you understand you’re losing your base?”
He goes on to yowl about single payer healthcare, The Jewish Cabal which is also known as Neo-Cons, The Iraq War and much of the same of dead tired Democratic Party talking points. As far as his little talking point about the Republicans getting the war that they wanted; you mean, that SAME WAR that the Democrats in Congress voted to authorize funds for, time and time again? You mean, that war? So, that little talking point just does not fly with this former Democratic Party voter, that’s grand standing and bullshit and I think he knows it.
Anyhow, just a peek into the infighting in the Democratic Party, it is quite funny to watch.
Him again?
A new audio tape allegedly from al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden claims responsibility for an attempt to blow up a plane en route to Michigan on Christmas Day and warns the United States of more attacks.
The tape, which aired on the Arabic-language news Web site Al-Jazeera on Sunday, says “the United States will not dream of enjoying safety until we live it in reality in Palestine.”
The tape continues: “It is not fair to enjoy that kind of life while our brothers in Gaza live in the worst of miseries.”
CNN could not independently confirm the authenticity of the message, but the CIA has in the past confirmed Al-Jazeera reports on tapes from the al Qaeda leader.
President Obama’s senior adviser David Axelrod told CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday that while there was no immediate confirmation that the message was authentic, it “contains the same hollow justification for the slaughter of innocent people.”
In another section of the audio tape that Al-Jazeera broadcast, the voice says: “God willing our attacks will continue as long as you support the Israelis and may peace be on those who follow guidance.”
Bin Laden also claims responsibility for the foiled attack on Delta flight 253 in December.
“The message intended to be sent to you was through the hero fighter Omar Farouq, may God release him, confirming an earlier message that the [September] 11th heroes delivered to you and it was repeated before and after [that event],” he says.
A Nigerian man, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, has been charged with attempting to blow up the Delta Airlines plane as it approached Detroit from Amsterdam, Netherlands.
“Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula was behind the failed attack on Christmas Day. That’s clear,” a U.S. counterterrorism official — who is not authorized to speak publicly — told CNN. “So a message like this — no matter whose voice it may be — should come as no surprise. Al Qaeda has, from time to time, tried to build support for its program of murder by talking about the Palestinian issue. That line’s never gotten them much in the past, and it’s unlikely to now, either.
Here is the audio in question:
Here’s the full audio:
As many of my fellow Conservative Bloggers have asked; I thought all of this was going to, um, change after the election of Barack Hussein Obama? So much for that idea eh? As always, Osama Bin Laden blames the United States of America’s relationship with Israel for the attacks or in this case, botched attacks. Which shows you how bad the Al-Qaeda organization is demoralized since 9/11. Which was, in part, due to the efforts of President George W. Bush. President Obama has basically just continued his policies, which by the way Liberals, WORKED; no thanks to them of course. President Obama, on the other hand, has tried to play footzies with those bastards and look what it has gotten him —- Nowhere!
So, anyhow, the fight goes on and no amount of Hope and Change, Unicorns and rainbows is going to stop that. So, wise up Liberals and realize that the terrorists are not your friends.
Now having said all that; for some oddball reason, I somehow doubt that is actually Osama. I believe it might be someone within the Al-Qaeda group that sounds much like him. But as to that being him, I have my doubts.
I have been trying to piece together something to write about this victory for the Republican Party and more importantly for the people of Massachusetts. This victory means a great deal of things; some that can be articulated well, and some — you would just have to feel. However, being that I am writer, I will try to do my best to bring those thoughts out in writing.
Now to the Republicans, I have some thoughts for you as well:
This victory, while small, is a sweet one. I just hope and pray that for once in their lives that the Republican Party establishment uses this victory to their advantage and does not louse it up — Because at this point, we the American people, have just too much lose, if Republicans screw this comeback up. On the other hand, America has much to gain, if the Party does things right.
So, please, Republicans, for once… Do the Republican Party’s return to its rightful place in American politics the proper way, please?
The idiot story of the day:
Coded references to New Testament Bible passages about Jesus Christ are inscribed on high-powered rifle sights provided to the United States military by a Michigan company, an ABC News investigation has found.
At the end of the serial number on Trijicon’s ACOG gun sight, you can read “JN8:12”, a reference to the New Testament book of John, Chapter 8, Verse 12, which reads: “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” The ACOG is widely used by the U.S. military.
The sights are used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the training of Iraqi and Afghan soldiers. The maker of the sights, Trijicon, has a $660 million multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps, and additional contracts to provide sights to the U.S. Army.
U.S. military rules specifically prohibit the proselytizing of any religion in Iraq or Afghanistan and were drawn up in order to prevent criticism that the U.S. was embarked on a religious “Crusade” in its war against al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents.
One of the citations on the gun sights, 2COR4:6, is an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: “For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”
Other references include citations from the books of Revelation, Matthew and John dealing with Jesus as “the light of the world.” John 8:12, referred to on the gun sights as JN8:12, reads, “Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.
via U.S. Military Weapons Inscribed With Secret ‘Jesus’ Bible Codes – ABC News.
UPDATE: I had some stuff written here, that I wish I had never written. Snark is fun, but only if everyone else is laughing. I blew it and I apologize. Please, go read this….NOW.
Others: Winds of Change.NET, Townhall.com, The Jawa Report
The short answer is, well, No.
Was Obama briefed on a possibly attack? Yes.
From Newsweek:
President Barack Obama received a high-level briefing only three days before Christmas about possible holiday-period terrorist threats against the US, Newsweek has learned. The briefing was centered on a written report, produced by US intelligence agencies, entitled “Key Homeland Threats”, a senior US official said.
The senior Administration official, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, said that nowhere in this document was there any mention of Yemen, whose Al-Qaeda affiliate is now believed to have been behind the unsuccessful Christmas Day attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to bring down a transatlantic airliner with a bomb hidden in his underpants. However, the official declined to disclose any other information about the substance of the briefing, including what kind of specific warnings, if any, the President was given about possibly holiday attacks and whether Yemen came up during oral discussions.
According to the senior official, the holiday threat briefing, one in a series of regularly-scheduled sessions with top counter-terrorism officials, was held in the White House Situation Room on December 22. Present were representatives of agencies involved in counter-terrorism policy and operations, including Attorney General Eric Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and FBI Director Robert Mueller. The CIA and National Intelligence Directors Office were represented by deputy agency heads: CIA deputy director Steven Kappes, and David Gompert, the principal deputy to National Intelligence Czar Dennis Blair. Also present was Michael Leiter, director of the National Counter-terrorism Center, a unit of the Intelligence Czar’s office which was created after 9/11 to ensure that intelligence reporting about possible terrorist plots was shared quickly among all US agencies who might have some capability to do something about it.
The senior official said that beginning in early December, based on reports coming in from intelligence agencies, policy-makers had begun tracking a stream of information which alluded to a possible holiday-period plot against the US orchestrated from somewhere in Pakistan. However, the official said, this reporting later turned out to be “garbled” and it was determined that the threat probably was a washout. The official denied that the White House received any report, representing the concensus of US intelligence agencies, warning that a Holiday-period plot originating in Yemen and targeting the US homeland could be in the works.
In a background briefing for reporters on December 29, also attributed in an official White House transcript to a “senior administration official”, that official asserted that in the wake of the attempted underpants attack, it had become clear to the President and top advisers that before Christmas, the US government was in posession of “bits and pieces” of information, which, if they had been properly knitted together, “could have…allowed us to disrupt the attack or certainly to know much more about the alleged attacker in such a way as to ensure that he was on, as the President suggested in his statement, a no-fly list.” In the briefing, the official identified three rough categories of information that the government had which could have been relevant to foiling the attack: information about Abdulmutallab and his plans, info about Al-Qaeda and their plans, and info “about potential attacks during the holiday period.”
Asked about what kind of intelligence reporting was circulated to senior officials about possibly holiday period attacks before the failed underpants attack, a US intelligence official, who also asked for anonymity, explained: “As everybody knows, terrorists often speak in coded language, especially when they think their communications might be intercepted. There was no clear discussion of an attack, on Christmas or any other time, in the Middle East or anywhere else. But as veiled as the message was, it was spotted, processed, analyzed, and presented to senior policymakers as a warning sign-however vague-of a holiday attack. While this was handled properly, there were, to put it mildly, virtually no details at all. That happens.” When Newsweek asked a senior Administration official about this characterization of a warning which was passed to White House policymakers, and whether it tracked what was presented at the December 22 Presidential briefing, the official would not comment.
I quoted a good lot of that; because I think that it is important to note, that United States Government, in particular, the President; cannot look into a crystal ball and tell the American people where we are going to be hit next. Also too; there seems to be a bit of rumbling amongst the Conservative Bloggers about how Obama handled the attacks. Yes, I know, it looked horrible. In fact, it kind of pissed me off as well. But, Bush did the same stuff, prior to 9/11.
Remember this? From Salon.com:
We’ve known for years now that George W. Bush received a presidential daily briefing on Aug. 6, 2001, in which he was warned: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” We’ve known for almost as long that Bush went fishing afterward.
What we didn’t know is what happened in between the briefing and the fishing, and now Suskind is here to tell us. Bush listened to the briefing, Suskind says, then told the CIA briefer: “All right. You’ve covered your ass, now.”
The point that I am trying to make here guys, is that while it might be fun to try and tag this President and blame him directly for the attempted terrorist attack; I am afraid that I just cannot play along here. President Obama just cannot sit and predict when something like this is going to happen. Blaming Obama for this sort of a thing is just plain stupid. Was the ball dropped? Yes. Did someone screw up? Yes. Can Obama be blamed for any of that. Sorry, I’m afraid that is just plain wrong. President Obama cannot predict when one of the Governmental agencies is going to make a mistake, much less when a terrorist attack is going to happen.
Now, if you are one of those people that believes that Obama is somehow trying to undermine the Nation’s intelligence; because he is some sort of pseudo-Muslim. Then, you are just a plain idiot that believes every damned e-mail that you read, then you have issues that is beyond the scope of this blog, much less this blog entry.
So, in short, while this might not look good. I am afraid this finger pointing by the right — is just plain silly.
Others in the Conservative, “Obama is a terrorist” Meme Machine: Gateway Pundit, Erick’s blog, The Strata-Sphere, Outside The Beltway, YID With LID, Riehl World View, Laura Rozen’s Blog and THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS
Update: Since I originally wrote this earlier today; there has been some new information come to light. I have funny feeling, that after the Holiday and the weekend are past. You are going to see some resignations of some posts within Obama’s cabinet. I could be wrong though. We will have to wait and see. But, from the looks of this; someone’s head is going to roll, when Obama gets back from his Holiday vacation.
Egad, when an American Conservative like me, and a warmongering Wilsonian Conservative, like Bill Kristol are actually agreeing. You know stuff is fudged up in the Country:
Unable to defend themselves on the merits, the administration and Democratic leaders are trying to change the topic to blaming Bush and Republicans. This is pathetic.
First of all, Obama is president. He has been for almost a year. Whatever mistakes Bush did or didn’t make, Obama is in charge — and the issue isn’t partisan score-settling, it’s whether the system he is in charge of is working. It isn’t.
One reason the system isn’t is some of the people he put in charge — Janet Napolitano and Dennis Blair come to mind. Another reason is certain concrete policy choices they’ve made — e.g., embracing a law enforcement approach and, without even weighing the choice, immediately choosing to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal suspect, not an enemy combatant.
via The Weekly Standard.
Go read the rest. It is very good….and yes, I agree with it all.
Obama promised change, and change he might be able to deliver, like mending the long standing rift between the Paleo-Conservatives and the notorious Neo-Conservatives. Yeah, I know, not everyone would go along with it. But it would be some, dare I say it? Progress!??! (In the Republican Party? GASP!) 😉
I present two videos; the first by reason magazine, which is a very funny take on the past 10 years. Which comes via HotAir.com, who has a poll up with this decade versus a few other notable decades:
The second video comes via Jack Hunter, who video blogs over at the American Conservative. Here Jack lays out a very compelling case for the fact that starting with George H.W. Bush, continuing with Bill Clinton and finally with George W. Bush; the entire big government, got even bigger:
As Jack says, and yet, conservatives are now griping about Barack Obama’s big government agenda. However, it is to be said, that Jack Hunter does point out the hypocrisy of the Democrats, when it comes to the wars. They were, in fact, loudly condemning of Bush’s Wars, but now, they’re all but silent. (Except for a few… and I mean very few…)
One point that I will offer a rebuttal to, is Jack’s point that Bush touted a more peaceful Foreign Policy, when he ran back in 2000. Jack points out that this suddenly changed after 9/11. What he fails to realize is this; on September 11, 2001, the game changed. Terrorists slammed two planes into the World Trade Centers, one plane into the Pentagon, and one plane that was headed to the White House; ended up in a field in Pennsylvania. As someone who had a terrorist almost blow up a plane near my house. I can fully understand why this game changed. However, because I am not a overly partisan blogger, I will say this; I do fully realize that Iraq, in hindsight was, in fact, a mistake. I have yet for anyone at all, to convince me otherwise, that Iraq was a direct threat to our Republic. I personally believe it was because of this massive screw up of the Bush Administration, that Afghanistan is now possibly a lost cause, and why Al-Qaeda is now attacking us once again. If I were Jack and those who agree with him; I would be watching the Yemen situation very closely. Because I tend to believe that Yemen is going to become Obama’s war, especially if he does not root out that Al-Qaeda group there.
As a fiscal Conservative; I must say that I wholeheartedly agree with Jack’s assessment of the G.O.P. and Republican establishment’s hypocrisy on spending; the same very people that are bitching to high heaven about Obama’s spending, were all but silent during the eight years of George W. Bush and his reckless drunken sailor like spending, which was primarily on a war in a country that really, when you get down to it, had zero to do with 9/11. But, yet, you have Bloggers, who are pro-war, bitching about Obama’s socialist agenda and take over of health care, plus his screwing of the economy into the ground. My question is, where were these people back in Bush’s day? Oh, that’s right, partisanship —- Which is such a horrible disease.
In fact, just here the other day; I was ripped by a “so-called” Conservative blogger, because I went to his blog and left a rather nasty message about Obama, because I was quite pissed off about his handling of the attempted terrorist act here at the airport, which is less than 10 miles from my house. (I also e-mailed him and apologized for it too..) This man goes out of his way to rat me out, and offers to give my damned IP address to anyone that wants it. But yet, on that same blog, he does the rather unfunny Osama/Obama joke on his blog. He removed it, presumably after one his readers bitched at him about it, but just the same, this idiot is going to bitch at me for being a ‘so-called’ racist and he does the same thing? That is hypocrisy and I think he knows that, because it was changed, I wish I had screen capped it and posted it here. But, I didn’t. Also, one of his commenters proceeded to give out my real name and drudge up crap that happened years ago. She also went out of her way to say that I, according to her, criticized the right more than the left. Which is, of course, stupid. I have pointed out stupid stuff on the far right and I will continue to do so; as much as I criticize the left. My point that I am trying to make is this here. Just as much as I am not drinking the idiotic socialist Kool-Aid of the Democrats; I am also not drinking the idiotic Kool-Aid of the far right either, I consider myself to me a critical, or dare I say it? A free-thinker.
I will admit, that I am a supporter of the United States Military; but I will the first to admit, that I beginning to be very skeptical of the war in Afghanistan; and I will go out of my way to say that this is NOT the fault of the United States military. It never was, it is the fault of the jackasses in Washington D.C. who could not define a damned military mission, if their lives depended on it. This is nothing new, it was the same way during the Bush Administration, much worse in fact. The problem is, our lives do depend on it. Al-Qaeda is still a damned threat and what does Obama do? Gives a half-assed speech as to the fact, that the government is on it. Yeah, uh-huh, sure. You mean, like the Government has been on the hunt of Osama Bin Laden for the last damned eight years? I call B.S. people, big time.
So, to those who come here and think this is a far right, rabid Conservative Blog. Be forewarned; my criticism and skepticism of Government and politics; and those who engage in that profession, is NOT on a partisan basis. I am quite bi-partisan on my criticisms. This blog has always been that way, and always will be.
Now this is interesting:
Karl Rove, former senior adviser to President George W. Bush, has been granted a divorce in Texas after 24 years of marriage, family spokeswoman Dana Perino said.
“Karl Rove and his wife, Darby, were granted a divorce last week,” said Perino. “The couple came to the decision mutually and amicably, and they maintain a close relationship and a strong friendship. There will be no further comment, and the family requests that its privacy be respected.”
The Roves were married in January 1986.
A family friend told POLITICO: “After 24 years of marriage, many of which were spent under incredible stress and strain during the White House years, the Roves came to a mutual decision that they would end the marriage. They did spend Christmas together with their son, and they plan to spend time together in the future. They maintain a strong friendship, and they both feel that that friendship is a source of comfort and inspiration for their friends and family.”
This proves what I have believed all along. That social Conservatism is nothing more, than a well-planned and executed joke. I will not do the pile-on about Rove’s stances on Gay Marriage. However, I will present this video, done by Jack Hunter, who now Video Blogs over at the American Conservative. In this video, Jack makes some very valid points about the establishment Republicans in Washington D.C. at the 3:13 mark is where Jack really makes the point that I am making here.
I will be the first to admit; I do not always agree with Jack on foreign policy and war. However, I am in total agreement with him on the subject of social Conservatism. I being a child of the 1980’s, I remember very clearly all the talk that Reagan was going to get prayer back into schools, was going to see to it that Abortion was outlawed. Now did any of that stuff ever happen? Um, No. That is because the Republicans of that era, were exploiting the Conservative Christian community for their vote. Sort of like what Barack Obama’s campaign did to the far left during the election of 2008.
Enjoy the video:
Seems that Think Progress has a great deal of Chutzpah this morning. Accusing Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) of politicizing the attempted terrorist attack here in Detroit. One only need to look at the archives of Think Progress to see how they and the rest of the Democratic Party politicized the Hurricanes Katrina and Rita during the Presidency of George W. Bush.
Now, you say, “Well, that was different!” and to that I ask you, “How so?” Is liberal Democratic organization like the Center of American Progress politicizing a natural disaster any better, than a Republican Representative supposedly politicizing a terrorist attack? The answer is, no. They are both wrong. But, yet, the liberals believe that they are right, because they’re defending the current socialist President.
Think Progress has much Chutzpah, after how they accused President Bush of some of the most outlandish crap back after the hurricane; including the Hollywood crowd and the Music people saying that Bush hated black people and so forth. The truth of the matter is that the CITY and STATE Government failed, not the Federal Government. It was after the droning of the Liberal WHINE, that the federal Government had to step in and take over.
I mean, does anyone remember THIS picture?

Those were buses, buses that could have been used by the city to get people out of the area. But did Ray Nagin do that; no, he sat on his ass and did not use them and then blamed Bush and Co. in Washington D.C. for not coming to the rescue.
So, much Chutzpah on the part of the liberals to even dare to complain about politizing of anything at all. As they have done the same very thing themselves.
I must admit that for the first time, since my journey began into political blogging has began, much less, Conservative political blogging; I am divided on an issue. While I believe that what the Democrats are doing with the healthcare bill, with the protecting parts of the bill from being overturned is wrong. I also believe that the Republicans have zero right to complain.
Let us not kid ourselves folks; The Bush Administration sold America using some very deceptive means, into a war in Iraq. The intelligence was bad; the Bush Administration knew this and did not care. They were determined to strike Saddam Hussein. So, while I am sympathetic towards the Republicans on this issue, I feel they have zero right to complain about this one, as it was the Republicans who backed the imperialistic actions of President Bush.
Others on this: The Politico, Confederate Yankee, Moonbattery, QandO, Washington Post, Hot Air, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, Sister Toldjah, Fausta’s Blog, Riehl World View, Atlas Shrugs, Megan McArdle, National Review, No More Mister Nice Blog, The Jawa Report, Betsy’s Page, Pundit & Pundette and And So it Goes in Shreveport
I write this piece to answer the libertarian leftist Laurence Vance’s smear piece against me. An article for what it is worth has only brought 143 visitors to my blog, as of this writing. For a man, who is supposedly an authority on all things libertarian; not to mention all things Austrian economics —That my friend is quite amusing, I guess Lew Rockwell and company are legends in their own minds — at best.
I will not sit here and pick apart this entire ridiculous article, which is filled with in inaccuracies about me, who I listen to in talk radio, and all the other silly assumptions that those of the idiotic leftist mentality believe about us, who happen to respect and support our Military. Nevertheless, I will correct this leftist imbecile on some issues.
First off, whom or what I listen to on television: I guess Mr. Vance assumes that Fox News Network in my Television when I am awake. This is a gross fallacy; I only watch Fox News during the daytime; that is, if and when, I decide to turn the blasted thing on. I think I may watch an hour of Television at most, as for during the opinion hour at night, the only person I can stomach on Fox News is, in fact, is Bill O’Reilly. I find Sean Hannity most annoying. Why is that? Because Sean Hannity is a water carrier, a talk points repeater. Quite bluntly, Sean Hannity is an idiotic gasbag — Not to mention he looks and dresses like a closeted gay twink. Sean Hannity is, in fact, a Republican. He spouts Republican talking points — all the while claiming to be a Libertarian. One thing I can tell you, Sean Hannity is not a libertarian, he is not even close. Even I, the most hawkish man in the blogosphere can tell you that. Sean Hannity, to me, represents the Bush-era Fox News. Which has since changed, they stopped with the stupid Bush-era talking points and moved on. Sean Hannity, well, not so much. As for Limbaugh, I respect the man for building such a large business around his, well, ego. However, I do not listen to him on a regular basis, and I will tell you why. Rush Limbaugh strikes me as someone who is love with his own voice — something that I find most highly annoying. Therefore, I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh for that reason. Like anyone else, I catch the clips online when he says or does something remarkably stupid. As for Glenn Beck, Beck peddles paranoia; I am not much into that sort of a thing really. Glenn Back believes that communism is still a real threat. I disagree; I believe that radical socialism is a real threat. However, staunch communism is not and has not been for many years — McCarthy saw to that little feat — and yes there is a big difference between socialism and communism, it even says this on the communist party USA’s website. I ought to know, I did look it up. I do not make a habit of yowling about things that I have no clue about, unlike some in this idiotic political blogosphere.
Therefore, yes, I do watch Bill O’Reilly; why, you ask — Because Bill O’Reilly is fair and yes, balanced. Anyone who actually watches his show knows that Bill does not carry water for the President, ever. Bill also is fair to the President; he does not just hate President Obama, because he is a socialist, much to the chagrin of those on the far right. Bill O’Reilly, like me, has a strong disliking of the socialist far left. This is because we both happen to know that socialism is a threat to the free capitalistic system in this country — this is why I respect the man. Another thing that made me begin to watch him at Bill O’Reilly was the fact that he stopped the policy of shutting people’s microphones off, that disagreed with him. I noticed that he was doing that, and because of this, I refused to watch O’Reilly. As much as I disagree with much of what the left has to say; I do believe that anyone in this Country, as long as they are not planning to overthrow or cause harm to anyone in this Nation, have the right to freedom of speech. This is what got Senator Joseph McCarthy into a great deal of trouble, this is why people like William Buckley Jr. and L. Brent Bozell Jr. (not to be confused with his son, Brent Bozell III) abandoned McCarthy. Because McCarthy wanted to exert thought police on the American people, that which is, sadly, a tactic of the far left. Because O’Reilly abandoned this practice of shutting microphones off, I began to watch him. I also starting watching Fox News and frankly stopped watching CNN and MSNBC because of the blatant partisanship of MSNBC and to a lesser extent CNN. I am all for a diversity of opinion, but when you actually stoop to the level of insulting your viewers, that is when I decided that the bus stopped here and I got off. (So to speak)
Getting back to the subject at hand here, Laurence Vance also accuses me of not being able to separate the Military from the Government. Which is most amusing, because his posting at Lew Rockwell’s Blog; he accuses the Military of occupying Iraq, which was done on the orders of the George W. Bush Administration — Which is something I pointed out in one of my previous postings. Therefore, to Mr. Vance I say — Project much, friend? But then again, when talking to a leftist, one can only expect so much — because to them, up is down and left is right, and the world is a very bizarre place; which is why I tend to avoid reasoning with them. After all, the Bible says; “If any man be ignorant, let them be ignorant” and I do try to follow the Bible as much as I possibly can.
While I am on the subject of Iraq, I feel the need to clear something up. If Mr. Vance or anyone else happens to believe that I am some sort of a Bush-supporting Republican, please be advised that this about as far from the truth that one can get. I did not vote for President George. W. Bush, at all, either time. During that time, I was firmly in the Democratic Party column. This pre-dated my blogging days. I was a left of center — albeit quite the “half-assed left of center,” but I digress. Further, I did support the Iraq war, until the reports came out and the White House admitted that they were wrong about Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, it was that little incident, that triggered me to start blogging in February of 2006 as a “left of center” blogger. I will explain the reasons why I switched sides for another posting, as this one is getting very long.
Finally, to answer Mr. Vance’s charge of being a “Red State Fascist” — If loving America and in loving America; knowing that in order to maintain the peace requires strength. If knowing that the United States Military is a valued treasure in this Country and should be highly respected — If wanting to see the United States of America protected from terrorists; both foreign and domestic, makes me a Red State Fascist — I plead the only thing I that I will ever plead to a charge as this — guilty as charged.
May God Bless the United States of America and May God Bless the United States Armed Forces. Further more, Thank God for our Military and Thank God for the privilege of being able to debate those who I disagree with, without the fear of being criminally persecuted for it. We live in a wonderful Nation and I will always defend her from those who would want to slander her. I feel that it is the most that I can do.
Lew Rockwell’s little weasel friend by the name of Laurence Vance is still at it slandering our Nation’s finest and best Military. Mr. Vance writes over at Lew’s Blog the following smear against the United States Military:
Obviously, this picture and story are supposed to counter the negative things I have said about the U.S. military. While I applaud the actions of Lt. Hickman and his fellow soldiers, I’m afraid it doesn’t counter anything. The U.S. military unjustly invaded and still occupies Iraq. This has directly and indirectly resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. It doesn’t matter how many Iraqi children are helped by the U.S. military. There is nothing these benevolent soldiers can do to make up for what the U.S. military has done to Iraq.
Mr. Vance’s inability to write a sentence with proper grammar structure aside, this is nothing more than a leftist slander against our United States Armed Forces. It is in fact true that our Armed Forces did invade the Country of Iraq. They did so BY ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, GEORGE W. BUSH. In other words, these fine brave young men and women were just doing their jobs and following orders; as one is supposed to do when in the Armed Forces. Not that Laurence Vance would know anything about serving our Country, he is too busy peddling his stupid religious books, and books that slander other Presidents —like FDR. Silly books that float the conspiracy theory that FDR purposefully allowed the ships to be attacked at Pearl Harbor and other such stupidity — Which is quite typical of the idiotic libertarian left and their idiotic twins the Paleo-Conservatives.
Some of you might wonder why I am going after Lew Rockwell and Vance. I will explain this; my family served in the United States Armed Forces, my uncle pulled a tour of duty in Vietnam. Luckily, he got out there alive. My grandfather’s two brothers pulled a tour duty in Germany during World War II. When Lew Rockwell and Laurence Vance insult the United States Armed Forces, they are insulting my family, and that my friends, I take very seriously. My family who spilled blood on foreign soil, just so these two jackasses can run a blog, which is for the sole purpose of insulting our United States Military. I am for the idea of freedom of speech and I would not dare try to stop these two thugs from speaking their mind. Nevertheless, I will counter their idiotic accusations and general stupid slanders against our Armed Forces, no matter the cost and no matter how many people e-mail me and try to intimidate me into stopping. I will not stop, ever.
I am, in essence drawing the line in the sand here and saying, “This will NOT stand!” I will not allow two leftist thugs to slander our United States Armed Forces and get away with it unanswered. The American Military is treasure to America and I will not let it be slandered. Call me a “Chickenhawk,” call me whatever you want, but I will NOT allow this to happen unchallenged. Because those brave and woman out of the front lines deserve better than this and if I have to do it alone, I will.
To my readers, I ask you this, where do you stand? Are you with the United States Military or are you against it? The decision is yours.
The following picture and caption that I am about to show you, comes from the libertarian leftist blogger Lew Rockwell. I present this personal exhibit as to why I left the Paleo-Conservative/libertarian ranks in favor of the Conservative, Pro-military ranks:
Hey Marines, how about some toys for this tot in Afghanistan:
I present this as “Exhibit A”, to the fact that the libertarian movement has been infiltrated by Anti-War leftists who hate America, our Military and why they should be stripped of their citizenship and deported out of our fine Country and into another country; like say, North Korea, Venezuela or maybe even Communist China. Not to be rude about this, but it just so happens, that if that dumb kids fellow Countrymen had not giving refuge and comfort to those who would seek to destroy America — Namely Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda; the damned kid would still possibly have his damned leg. Not to mention the fact that on September 11, 2001, our Country was attacked by Islamic terrorists who did more than just destroy a leg. It killed 2,996 of our people.
However, of course, you cannot tell this to the likes of Lew Rockwell and his bastard gang of leftists who hate this damn Country; they still believe that George W. Bush ordered those planes into the trade center towers. What really troubles me, is that the author of this posting is none other than Dr. Lawrence Vance, who is supposedly a Born-Again Christian. How anyone can harbor such hatred for this Country and our Nation’s Military and still claim to be ANY kind of a Christian is beyond me.
When I still was on the left; as little as that was, in terms of what I believed the Democratic Party to be about, I was always under the impression that Iraq was the war that was very unjustified and that Afghanistan was in fact, the good war that we were fighting to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden. I heard that from the left and I believed that myself. As it turns out, that was nothing more than a damned lie and the far-left knows it. The good majority of the far left either believes that George W. Bush ordered the attacks, to win his popularity or to justify going into Iraq. The rest believe that we had it coming or deserved the attacks because of our evil capitalistic society. This picture and caption are living proof of this; which is why, I left the liberal left and stopped voting for the Democratic Party.
Just to let everyone know, I said my piece on this and I am not interested in debating it. Therefore, I am shutting the comments off; because I want this posting to stand on its own.
Update: After reading this entry again, I realize that I did leave out one important thing. My apologies for that, I do sometimes forget to include stuff pertinent to the entry at times; A.D.H.D. does that to a fellow. Yes, I am serious about having that little disability. Anyhow, the thing I forgot to include in this little shoving of the hatred of the libertarian leftists, into their faces, is the following:
There is one unifying cause that the libertarian leftists and the socialist liberal left is their inbred hatred of war and of anything military. Further more, the libertarians and liberals hate the current state of the Government, albeit for very different reasons. The libertarians hate the size of the Government and the fact that it has become too large, and too regulatory — Which is something I can identify with myself. The socialist left, however, is angry because they cannot control that large Government. The Socialist left does not mind big Government, as long as they can control it. A perfect example of this can be found here.
So, again, the reason why I lump the libertarian leftists in with the socialist is this, not because they are one in the same, they are not, even I know this. However, it is because the libertarian leftists are totally “In bed” with the anti-war socialist leftists who resent any sort of American values or capitalism or defense of the Republic. This has been proven many times with the vile acts at the Military recruiting office in Berkley California and such matters. Same goes for the Paleo-Conservatives, They too are “in bed” with the socialist left, when it comes to foreign policy. It has been that way for years and will continue to be that way. The difference between a Paleo-Conservative and a libertarian is one thing —protectionism. This is what the Democratic Party believed in, before globalists like Bill Clinton came on the scene and passed NAFTA. It should be noted, however, that the NAFTA agreement did not pass until the Republicans took back the Congress, and Clinton became an instant moderate.
Nevertheless, my feelings toward these libertarian leftists, their Paleo-Conservative counterparts, and their cousins the Anti-War socialist left remain unabated.
Ouch. The demeaning gets worse and worse and from both sides.
Quotable Quote: (H/T Gateway Pundit)
Sean Hannity: You said about Barack Obama that he is projecting weakness to America’s enemies. Expand on that.
Dick Cheney: Well, I think most of us believe and most presidents believe and talk about the truly exceptional nature of America. Our history, where we come from, our belief in our Constitutional values and principles. Our advocacy for freedom and democracy and the fact that we’ve provided it for millions of people all over the globe and so unselfishly. There’s never been a nation like the United States of America in world history. And, yet when you have a president that goes around and bows to his host and proceeds to apologize profusely for the United States, I find that deeply disturbing. That says to me there’s a guy who doesn’t fully understand or share that view of American exceptionalism that I think most of us believe in.
Now there are those that would say, “Who cares what Dick Cheney thinks?” It would be help to point out, that the only people that would say this, would be the Liberal Left or the Anti-Semite and Racist Paleo-Conservatives, who are in bed with the left. Having said all that; It does say quite a bit, when a former V.P. or President say something like that about a President. Now I fully expect for one of the African-American Congressmen, who are essentially President Obama’s attack dogs, to go after Dick Cheney and call him a racist. Which is about normal for those types.
Others: Pajamas Media, Fox News, Riehl World View and Israel Matzav
Yikes!
A new group wants former Vice President Dick Cheney back in the White House.
The organization – “Draft Dick Cheney 2012” – launched on Friday, and unveiled their new Web site. Their aim: To convince the former vice president to seek the Republican presidential nomination in the next race for the White House. But there may be a major roadblock to the group's pitch – Cheney himself.
“The 2012 race for the Republican nomination for President will be about much more then who will be the party's standard bearer against Barack Obama, the race is about the heart and soul of the GOP,” said Christopher Barron, one of the organizers of the Draft Cheney movement. “There is only one person in our party with the experience, political courage and unwavering commitment to the values that made our party strong – and that person is Dick Cheney.”
The former vice president has been a frequent outspoken critic of the Obama administration's security policy. He recently suggested that Obama was “dithering” over deciding on adding more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. National polls suggest that the former vice president remains popular among conservatives and Republicans.
via CNN Political Ticker – New group tries to convince Cheney to run in 2012
What does Cheney think of this?
Does Cheney want to run for the White House? He was quite blunt earlier this month about whether he had any desire make a bid for the presidency in the next election. At an event in Houston for Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who’s running for Texas governor, Hutchison was joined by Cheney, who endorsed her bid against fellow Republican incumbent Rick Perry. During the rally, Hutchison yelled out to the crowd “Cheney 2012!” and some one in the audience quickly responded “We need you, Dick!”
Cheney’s response: “Not a chance.”
Thank You God! Eight Years of the United States of America being ran indirectly by Jewish Warmongers was quite enough, thank you very much.
Others: Another Black Conservative
I think I have seen it all now…:
We know absolutely no one in Bush family circles and have never met former President George W. Bush or his wife Laura.
If you have been reading us for any length of time, you know that we used to make fun of “Dubya” nearly every day…parroting the same comedic bits we heard in our Democrat circles, where Bush is still, to this day, lampooned as a chimp, a bumbling idiot, and a poor, clumsy public speaker.
Oh, how we RAILED against Bush in 2000…and how we RAILED against the surge in support Bush received post-9/11 when he went to Ground Zero and stood there with his bullhorn in the ruins on that hideous day.
We were convinced that ANYONE who was president would have done what Bush did, and would have set that right tone of leadership in the wake of that disaster. President Gore, President Perot, President Nader, you name it. ANYONE, we assumed, would have filled that role perfectly.
Well, we told you before how much the current president, Dr. Utopia, made us realize just how wrong we were about Bush. We shudder to think what Dr. Utopia would have done post-9/11. He would have not gone there with a bullhorn and struck that right tone. More likely than not, he would have been his usual fey, apologetic self and waxed professorially about how evil America is and how justified Muslims are for attacking us, with a sidebar on how good the attacks were because they would humble us.
Honestly, we don’t think President Gore would have been much better that day. The world needed George W. Bush, his bullhorn, and his indominable spirit that day…and we will forever be grateful to this man for that.
via Thank you former President George W. Bush and former First Lady Laura Bush « HillBuzz.
It is a very interesting read; It all sounds nice and pretty — that is until you hear the reality of it. If you think for one minute that the people that wrote the above and what is over at that link are really sincere about that; I have land to sell you for extremely cheap in Texas —- in a swamp. The only motivation for this idiotic bunch of Bovine Tripe that was written here is the following; their allegiance to Hillary Clinton. HillBuzz is simply a group of Homosexual Hillary Supporters; that are a still bitter because Barack Obama kicked Shillary’s fat ass in the 2008 Primary.
So, while it may sound nice, pretty and — dare I even say it? Patriotic. (Uh, Gag, Puke) It is simply a piece written to kick dirt in the face of Barack Obama for daring to defeat Hillary Clinton. So, please, do not buy the hype on this entry. Because if it would have been Hillary that won. These guys would be still trashing Bush. In other words; Nice try guys, but not all of us in the political blogging world are that dumb to believe that you actually now love Bush. 🙄
Just wanted to be nice about it.
Welcome to my World!
Via The Old Grey Lady:
The United States economy shed 190,000 jobs in October, and the unemployment rate reached a 26-year high of 10.2 percent, up from 9.8 percent in September, the Department of Labor said Friday in its monthly economic appraisal.
While the pace of job losses has slowed significantly since the peak of the recession last winter, the unemployment rate, which measures the number of people actively seeking work, continues to climb, and economists do not foresee relief until well into next year.
“There’s no doubt that the slashing and burning of jobs has abated quite a lot,” said Allen L. Sinai, the founder of Decision Economics, a research firm. “The economy is recovering, but it is a very soft recovery.”
The biggest losses came in the construction, manufacturing and retailing sectors. Health care companies added 29,000 jobs to their payrolls, and the number of temporary workers increased by 34,000 — a significant gain that could indicate employers are beginning to expand their businesses again.
The Labor Department also revised September’s losses to 219,000 from 263,000.
Dean Baker, a director for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said he did not expect declining unemployment rates until next spring. “We may be looking at very high levels,” Mr. Baker said, “barring a policy response, for several years into the future.”
Um, Why should there be any policy response? I believe that we are already tapping our resources to the limit now.
On Thursday, in anticipation of the unemployment report, Congress overwhelmingly voted to extend benefits for jobless workers for up to 20 weeks. That will soothe the short-term financial pain of many families, but demands for a new wave of government relief may intensify if companies continue to cut back.
Yes, let’s encourage people NOT to look for a job and continue to spend ourselves into a hole; by being a nanny state.
So far, the federal stimulus package has injected billions into local economies, giving states money, for instance, to finance construction projects or retain teachers. The housing and auto sectors have been propped up with government credits meant to encourage spending. But weak consumer demand and hefty labor costs are still forcing many employers to cut positions and reduce hours to survive.
So much for Hope and change!
The article goes on trying to defend President Obama, which is so typical for the New York Times, but it is quite obvious, this President has failed on all fronts, the stimulus, the bailouts —- everything. He is, in fact, a black Jimmy Carter.
Ed Morrissey says:
This is now Obama’s economy. He owns the double-digit unemployment level, having bought it with the $787 billion stimulus plan that he promised would keep unemployment no higher than 8%.
I agree with that. Obama simply continued the bailouts that President Bush started, which was a huge mistake.
The AP Reports:
But the loss of jobs last month exceeded economists’ estimates. It’s the 22nd straight month the U.S. economy has shed jobs, the longest on records dating back 70 years.
Counting those who have settled for part-time jobs or stopped looking for work, the unemployment rate would be 17.5 percent, the highest on records dating from 1994.
Now, if I were a partisan Blogger, I would simply sit here and blame Obama for it all. However, I am a bit more smarter than this. This all goes to Carter and then to Clinton. This video from the Wayne County Republicans will explain:
These unemployment numbers are just a ripple effect of all of this. Bush had a hand in it, as well as Obama. This is what happens when you elect faux Conservatives as Republicans and it is what happens when you elect Socialists.
Just a reminder, these guys need your help.
This comes via From My Position….On the Way!
I have not really promoted it that heavily; mainly because I have not really thought about it.
But your help is requested…
Here’s the e-mail that I received:
Subject: An Affront to All that is Good and Pure in the World
I’m talking about the marines.
Team Marines is leading Team Army by a lousy few thousand dollars. This simply must not stand.
First, let me thank all of you who have posted on behalf of Team Army. Second, I apologize for the lack of commo and cooordination (blame my scout background) as I just received the email list yesterday and am recovering from the flu.
So, here are some assets to use in posting about Valour-IT for Team Army:
Team Army donation page: Click Here
Ballad of Captain Z video: Click Here(you can get the embed codes on that page).
Cox & Forkum Carton: attached to this email (we have permission to use but it would also be nice to link to them – Click here ).
If you have any assets you want to share, email me and I’ll send them to the group.Thanks!Go ARMY!Matt
—
Matthew Burden
“BlackFive”
Yeah, what he said! 😀
Seriously folks, it is going for a very good cause… So, if you would, Click here and give what you can.
I do not always agree with Jack Hunter; however I do on this video here. Especially on his views of the Main Stream Media in the lead up to the Iraq War. Whether it is his anti-Military bias or an honest disgust with the Bush Administration; that Jack can only answer. But he is right, and very sadly so. The media was laying down on the job during that time period.
Having said all that, let me be absolutely clear; while I am quite happy that Bush’s surge worked and that Iraq, outside of the occasional car bomb, is much more stable than it was in 2006. But that does not take away from the fact that Bush’s invasion of Iraq and occupation of it was not justified. I believe that this will be a black mark on America for a long time to come.
Enjoy the Video:
Seeing that the running meme in the political Blogosphere is the fact that Obama White House is trying to marginalize its critics. I thought I would post a very well done speech: (H/T to HotAir for Video and Transcript)
Transcript:
In 1969 and during the first half of 1970, I was a wet-behind-the-ears, 29-year-old staff aide in the West Wing of the Nixon White House. I was working for the wisest man in that White House, Bryce Harlow, who was a friend of President Johnson, as well as the favorite staff member of President Eisenhower, and President Nixon’s first appointee.
Based upon that experience and my forty years since then in and out of public life, I want to make what I hope will be taken as a friendly suggestion to President Obama and his White House: don’t create an enemies list.
As I was leaving the White House in 1970, Mr. Harlow was heading out on the campaign plane with Vice President Spiro Agnew whose job was to vilify Democrats and to help elect Republicans. The Vice President had the help of talented young speechwriters, the late Bill Safire and Pat Buchanan. In Memphis, he called Albert Gore, Sr., the “southern regional chairman of the eastern liberal establishment.” He labeled the increasingly critical news media, “nattering nabobs of negativism.”
Those phrases have become part of our political lore. They began playfully enough, in the back and forth of political election combat. After I had come home to Tennessee, they escalated into something more. They eventually emerged into the Nixon enemies list.
In 1971 Chuck Colson, who was then a member of President Nixon’s staff and today is admired for his decades of selfless work in prison reform, presented a list of what he called “persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration.” He said he thought the administration should “maximize our incumbency . . . [or] to put it more bluntly, . . . use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.” On that list of 20 people were people like CBS correspondent Daniel Schorr, Washington Star columnist Mary McGrory, Leonard Woodcock, the head of the United Auto Workers, John Conyers, the Democratic Congressman from Michigan, Edwin Guthman, managing editor of the Los Angeles Times, and several prominent businessmen such as Howard Stein, of the Dreyfus Corporation and Arnold Picker, vice president of United Artists. The New York Times and the Washington Post were made out to be enemies of the Republic.
Now make no mistake, politics was not such a gentlemanly affair in those days either. After Barry Goldwater had won the Presidential nomination in 1964, Daniel Schorr had told CBS viewers that Goldwater had – quote – “travel[led] to Germany to join-up with the right wing there” and – quote “visit[ed] Hitler’s old stomping ground.” — unquote. Schorr later corrected that on the air.
What was different about Colson’s effort, though, was the open declaration of war upon anyone who seemed to disagree with administration policies. Colson later expanded his list to include hundreds of people, including Joe Namath, John Lennon, Carol Channing, Gregory Peck, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Congressional Black Caucus, Alabama Governor George Wallace. All this came out during the Watergate hearings. You could see an administration spiraling downwards. And, of course, we all know where that led.
Now the only reason I mention this is because I have an uneasy feeling, only ten months into this new administration, that we’re beginning to see symptoms of this same kind of animus developing in the Obama administration.
According to Politico, the White House plans to “neuter the United States Chamber of Commerce,” an organization with members in almost every major community in America. The Chamber had supported the President’s stimulus package and some of his early appointments, but has problems with his health care and climate change proposals.
The Department of Health and Human Services imposed a gag order on a large health care company, Humana, who had warned its Medicare Advantage customers that their benefits might be reduced in Democratic health care reform proposals—a piece of information that is perfectly true. This gag order was lifted only after the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said he would block any future nominees to the Department until the matter was righted.
The White House Communications director recently announced that the administration would treat a major television network, Fox News, as “part of the Opposition.” On Sunday White House officials were all over talk shows urging other news organizations to “boycott” Fox and not pick up any of its stories. Those stories, for example, would include the video that two amateur filmmakers made of ACORN representatives explaining how to open a brothel. That’s a story other media managed to ignore until almost a week later when Congress decided to cut ACORN’s funding.
The President has not stopped blaming banks and investment houses for the financial meltdown even as it has become clear that Congress played a huge role, too, by encouraging Americans to borrow money for houses they couldn’t afford.
He was “taking names” of bondholders who resisted the GM and Chrysler bailouts.
Insurance companies, once the allies of the Obama health care proposal, have suddenly become the source of all our health care problems—because they pointed out, again correctly, that if Congress taxes insurance premiums and restricts coverage to those who are sicker and older, the cost of premiums for millions of Americans is likely to go up instead of down.
Because of that insubordination, the President and his allies have threatened to take away the insurance companies antitrust exemption.
Even those of us in Congress have found ourselves in the crosshairs:
The assistant Republican leader, Sen. John Kyl of Arizona, said to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that the stimulus plan wasn’t working. The White House wrote the governor of Arizona and said, “If you don’t want the money, we won’t send it.” Sen. McCain said that this could be perceived as a threat to the people of Arizona.
Sen. Bennett of Utah and Sen. Collins and I as well as Democratic Senators Byrd and Feingold all have questioned the number and power of the 18 new White House czars who are not confirmed by the Senate and have suggested that is a threat to constitutional checks and balances. The White House refused to send anyone to testify at congressional hearings. Sen. Bennet and I found ourselves “called out” on the White House blog by the President’s communications director, Anita Dunn.
Even the president, in his address to Congress on health care, threatened to “call out” members of congress who disagreed with him.
This behavior is typical of street brawls and political campaign consultants. It is a mistake for the President of the United States and the White House staff.
If the President and his top aides treat people with different views as enemies instead of listening to what they have to say, they’re likely to end up with a narrow view and a feeling that the whole world is out to get them. And as those of use who served in the Nixon administration know, that can get you into a lot of trouble.
This administration is only ten months old. It’s not too late to take a different approach – both at the White House and here in the Congress.
Here is one opportunity. At the beginning of this year, shortly after the President’s inauguration, the Republican leader, Sen. McConnell, addressed the National Press Club. He proposed that he and the President work together to make social security solvent. He said that he would make sure the President got more support in that effort from Republicans than President George W. Bush got from Democrats when he tried to solve the same problem. President Obama held a summit on the dangers of the runaway costs of entitlements which I attended. Every expert there said making social security solvent was essential to our country’s fiscal stability. There is still time to get that done.
On clean energy, Republicans have put forward four ideas: build 100 nuclear plants in 20 years, electrify half our cars and trucks in 20 years, explore offshore for low-carbon natural gas and for oil, and double energy research and development for alternative fuels. The administration agrees with this on electric cars and research and development. We may not be far apart on offshore exploration. And, at his town meeting in New Orleans last week, the President said the United States would be “stupid” not to use nuclear power. He is right, since nuclear reactors produce 70% of our carbon free electricity. So why don’t we work together on this lower-cost way to address clean energy and climate change instead of enacting a national energy tax?
On health care, the White House idea of bipartisanship has been akin to that of a marksman at the state fair shooting gallery: hit one target and you win the prize. With such big Democratic congressional majorities, the White House figures all it needs to do is unify the Democrats and pick off one or two Republicans.
That strategy may win the prize but lose the country. Usually, on complex issues, the President needs bipartisan support in Congress to reassure and achieve broad and lasting support in the country. In 1968 I can remember when President Johnson, with bigger majorities in Congress than President Obama has today, arranged for the Civil Rights Bill to be written in open sessions over several weeks in the office of the Republican leader, Everett Dirksen. Dirksen got some of the credit; Johnson got the legislation he wanted; the country went along with it. Instead of comprehensive health care that raises premiums and increases the debt, why should the White House not work with Republicans step by step to reduce health care costs, and then, as we can afford it, reduce the number of Americans who don’t have access to health care?
The President and his Education Secretary Arne Duncan have been courageous— there is no better word for it— in advocating paying teachers more for teaching well and expanding the number of charter schools. These ideas are the Holy Grail for school reform. They are also ideas that are anathema to the labor unions who support the President. President Obama’s advocacy of master teachers and charter schools could be the domestic of equivalent of President Nixon going to China. I, among others, admire his advocacy and have been doing all I can help him.
Having once been there, I can understand how those in the White House feel oppressed by those with whom they disagree, how they feel besieged by some of the media. I hope the current White House occupants will understand that this is nothing new in American politics—all the way back to the days when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson exchanged insults. The only thing new is that there are today multiple media outlets reporting and encouraging the insults 24 hours a day.
As any veteran of the Nixon White House can attest, we’ve been down this road before and it won’t end well. An “enemies list” only denigrates the Presidency and the Republic itself.
Forty years ago, Bryce Harlow would say to me, “Now Lamar, remember that our job here is to push all the merely important issues out of the white house so the president can deal with the handful of issues that are truly presidential.” Then he would slip off for a private meeting in the Capitol with Democratic leaders who controlled the congress and usually find a way to enact the president proposals.
Most successful leaders have eventually seen the wisdom of Lord Palmerston, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom who said, “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies.
The British writer Edward Dicey was once introduced to President Lincoln as “one of his enemies”. “I did not know I had any enemies,” was the Lincoln’s answer; And Dicey later wrote, “I can still feel, as I write, the grip of that great boney hand held out to me in token of friendship.”So here’s my point. These are unusually difficult times, with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list. Let’s push the street-brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues: creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.
Now, do I believe that Obama was listen to this advice? Most likely not, as his White House is doing that same thing that Bush’s did; except for Obama has a bigger share of the media on his side, Bush did not. It is quite obvious that Obama is in full campaign mode, which will be to his own downfall. You watch and see.
Oh-My….. 😮 😯
I figured I would see this out of maybe, The National Review or possibly, maybe, The New Republic and definitely The Weekly Standard ——– But, the Nation? I mean that magazine is about a leftist as it gets and they are criticizing “The One” that they were all waiting for? The One who they basically turned into the Democratic Party’s personal savior and lord? I mean, this is amazing.
I do believe the Honeymoon is over and over horribly it is.
John Nichols writes over at The Nation the Following:
The Obama administration really needs to get over itself.
First, the president and his aides go to war with Fox News because the network maintains a generally anti-Obama slant.
Then, an anonymous administration aide attacks bloggers for failing to maintain a sufficiently pro-Obama slant.
These are not disconnected developments.
An administration that won the White House with an almost always on-message campaign and generally friendly coverage from old and new media is now frustrated by its inability to control the debate and get the coverage it wants.
Nichols goes on to deliver a blistering smack down of the Obama Administration’s idea that they can try and control the media. Which is pretty shocking, considering which magazine that this is actually coming from. I guess that this should not be that great of a surprise, seeing that Barack Obama’s White House yesterday kicked the entire gay community and the Liberal Blogging community square in the jewels. Despite the best efforts to quell down the backlash, I do believe that the proverbial Genie is out of the bottle here. I do believe that President Obama is about to find out just how intolerant and hateful that the Progressive/liberal community is towards those who try and stiff them. Bill Clinton went through this; and now Obama is about to get the same treatment.
This should serve as a wake up call to anyone in the Democratic Party that is thinking of running in 2012 or in 2010 for that matter. Do not pander, do not overreach; or you will pay dearly. You would think that the Democratic Party would have learned all of this, as a whole, from the Clinton years. Sadly it seems that the Democratic Party is hellbent on making the same stupid mistakes that it made in the Clinton years. Clinton did that and the Democrats paid for it, for eight long years. George W. Bush did that to the Republican Party— and to America; and now the Republican Party is paying for that now, as we speak. Now the Obama White House is doing the same thing —— again. When will people ever learn, that you just do not make lofty promises that you do not intend to keep, that you just no not pander or overreach, because it will come back haunt you.
It is such a vicious cycle, that is repeated over and over and over… by both Political Parties. 🙄
Not a big surprise, considering the President’s middle name; I mean after all, The President does not even want the words “War on Terror” used anymore.
This comes via the AP:
President Barack Obama is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan‘s political future and appears inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops as needed to keep al-Qaida at bay, a senior administration official said Thursday.
The sharpened focus by Obama’s team on fighting al-Qaida above all other goals, while downgrading the emphasis on the Taliban, comes in the midst of an intensely debated administration review of the increasingly unpopular eight-year-old war.
Though aides stress that the president’s final decision on any changes is still at least two weeks away, the emerging thinking suggests that he would be very unlikely to favor a large military increase of the kind being advocated by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal.
McChrystal’s troop request is said to include a range of options, from adding as few as 10,000 combat troops to — the general’s strong preference — as many as 40,000.
Obama’s developing strategy on the Taliban will “not tolerate their return to power,” the senior official said in an interview with The Associated Press. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan’s central government — something it is now far from being capable of — and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to al-Qaida, the official said.
[….]
There now are no more than 100 al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Instead, the U.S. fight in Afghanistan is against the Taliban, now increasingly being defined by the Obama team as distinct from al-Qaida. While still dangerous, the Taliban is seen as an indigenous movement with almost entirely local and territorial aims, less of a threat to the U.S. than the terrorist network.
Obama’s team believes some elements in the Taliban are aligned with al-Qaida, with its transnational reach and aims of attacking the West, but probably not the majority and mostly for tactical rather than ideological reasons, the official said.
“They’re not the same type of group,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. “It’s certainly not backed up by any of the intelligence.”
That leaves the primary aim in Afghanistan to deny al-Qaida any ability to regroup there as it did when the Taliban was in power before the 2001 invasion that ousted them. And this points to a smaller military increase in Afghanistan and a bigger focus on surgical strikes against terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere — essentially the approach being advocated by Biden as an alternative to the McChrystal recommendation for a fuller counterinsurgency effort inside Afghanistan.
Biden has argued for keeping the American force there around the 68,000 already authorized, including the 21,000 extra troops Obama ordered earlier this year, but significantly increasing the use of unmanned Predator drones and special forces that have been successful in Pakistan, Somalia and elsewhere.
[….]
Clinton has not tipped her hand as to how she is leaning in the sessions, according to aides. While she is broadly supportive of building up troop levels — although not necessarily in the numbers favored by McChrystal — she also believes the military cannot be the only focus, said the aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to detail her views.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, long wary of a large troop presence in Afghanistan, appears to have grown more comfortable with the prospect of a moderate, middle-path increase.
Many lawmakers from Obama’s own Democratic Party do not want to see additional U.S. troops sent to Afghanistan. According to a new Associated Press-GfK poll, public support for the war has dropped to 40 percent from 44 percent in July.
Republicans, meanwhile, are urging Obama to heed the military commanders’ calls soon or risk failure. “Unnecessary delay could undermine our opportunity for success,” House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said Thursday.
So, while President Obama and Hillary Clinton are playing political chess and trying not to offend one another; our troops are dying on the battlefield. Terrific.
AllahPundit over at HotAir.com, who was in New York during the 9/11 attacks; is quite livid:
They’re looking for any way they can to avoid giving McChrystal the troops he says he needs to secure the country, so they’ve come up with a way out. If the people we’ve been fighting for eight years aren’t the enemy, then the country no longer needs to be secured from them, does it?
[…]
In other words, rather than eat crap by forthrightly admitting he’s prepared to abandon huge swaths of the country to Islamist fascists rather than invest another 40,000 troops, he’s going to create an artificial distinction between the Taliban and Al Qaeda to let him save face by claiming he’s focused on “the real enemy.” Much like how he was focused during the campaign on “the good war” in Afghanistan rather than “the bad war” in Iraq. I wonder how long it’ll be before he decides that not everyone who’s in Al Qaeda is an enemy either — or, better yet, that AQ’s been “substantially defeated” or something, which has been the unstated thrust of all those WH-leaked pieces in the press lately about how weak Bin Laden’s gang has become. Why, I’ll bet in a year or so we’ll be told that they’re so weak that we can start pulling out of Afghanistan altogether. Things sure have improved over there since Bush was president, huh?
I would not want to be in the United States Military right now for no amount of money in the world. Not with that idiot buffoon running the Military. The man has zero, and I do mean ZERO clue how to fight a war. I feel for our boys over there right now; because, quite frankly, they are trapped. Just like in Vietnam.
The real sick and sad part is; that the Republican and the Democrats both are taking this whole, “Whatever you decide to do boss! We’ll support you, all the way!” attitude; because none of them have the damn guts to stand up and tell this jack assed idiot to either damn lead or resign and let someone else lead for him. That is what makes me so damned angry.
Update: Video: (H/T to reader Stephanie)
As Stephanie said, this is going to be tough one. But he does need to stand up and lead and quit putting it off.
Others: Atlas Shrugs, The Long War Journal, Flopping Aces, Stop The ACLU, theblogprof, War in Context and Pajamas Media
There has been quite a bit of discussion about this story in the Blogosphere already. Most of it has focused on the way that the White House handled the situation; which I will admit was less than professional. But the thing that I want to focus on, is why this is even happening.
First off, let us look at the New York Times Story:
Gov. David A. Paterson defiantly vowed to run for election next year despite the White House‘s urging that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race.
Appearing tired and agitated at a parade in Harlem on Sunday, the governor told a crowd of reporters that he would not abandon his campaign to seek a full term.
“I have said time and time again that I am running for governor next year,” he said at the 40th annual African-American Day Parade.
Mr. Paterson would not characterize what he was told by the White House, saying that he would not “discuss confidential conversations.”
“I’m not talking about any specific conversations,” he said. “As I said, I am running for office.”
President Obama had sent a request to Mr. Paterson that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race, fearing that Mr. Paterson cannot recover from his dismal political standing, according to two senior administration officials and a New York Democratic operative with direct knowledge of the situation.
The decision to ask Mr. Paterson to step aside was proposed by political advisers to Mr. Obama, but approved by the president himself, one of the administration officials said.
“Is there concern about the situation in New York? Absolutely,” the second administration official said Saturday evening. “Has that concern been conveyed to the governor? Yes.”
The administration officials and the Democratic operative spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions with the governor were intended to be confidential.
First off the confidentiality part got blown out of the water, and the President’s communication went public. I believe that part was totally intentional. It basically was done to send a message to Governor; one of “Hey, you idiot! Get out of the race, because you are going to lose!” That is pretty much a given.
My question is this; why all of the sudden are Democrats or more specifically the President of the United States asking the Governor of New York to drop out of an election race? I have an idea, and part of my explaining that reason is in this video, please watch it: (H/T HotAir)
Is it clear to you now? Well, in case it is not. I will explain. We Conservatives have taken control of the conversation. When I say “we”, I mean, the Conservative media, like Glenn Beck, who’s really an Independent; Bill O’Reilly, Who is a traditionalist and the rest of the talk radio world. Plus, you have the Conservative Blogosphere who were the forerunners in this fight. We were criticizing the President and polices from day one! The old media finally caught to us, oh, around three months later! This is why I had the screaming fit at Jim Hoft for linking to that site! We have seized the ship and taken the wheel away from the socialist media; we cannot afford to screw it up!
We have the Democrats running scared; and when I say “We”, I mean everyone that is involved in this operation, the Conservative media, like Fox News and all of the little media guys, The Conservative Blogosphere; who have been on this President’s butt since the day he botched up the oath of office. The rest of America; after watching the stimulus basically flop and the economy not recover, after watching the Government bailout the big two (and not the big three; Ford did not take any money…) and assume control of these companies, and after those employees, like my Father, watched their Dental and Optical benefits disappear, after working 31 hard years for that Company. —– Those people are starting to pay attention to the situation and are wondering, “Hey, what on earth is going on here??” and let’s not even get into that whole Healthcare debacle! —- They were promised change, and so far, they have gotten nothing. Nothing but trillions of dollars of debt, that their grandchildren and great-grand children will paying for, for the rest of their lives.
The sad part about all this is that the Democrats have about used every trick in the book to stop this movement; and have failed horribly. First, it was the tactic of the Bush Administration; of calling everyone that is opposed to Obama’s polices as being Anti-American. Then they trotted out the fear card, saying that we who were against Obama were stirring up violent tendencies among the people. Now they have trotted out their last refuge and that is the race card. In fact, the Democrats have used that race card, so much in fact that now even the Associated Press is basically saying, “Um, Guys? You are overplaying that defense.” Even African-Americans are even starting cringe. The sad part is, that is all they have, and now as you can see, they are on the run.
So, what happens now? Do we quit? Oh, heaven’s no. We keep fighting; Bloggers keep writing, Fox News and the media guys keep reporting, keep being critical of the President. It never ends, until the battle is over in 2012, and even then; whomever is elected, we criticize them too. That is what a Constitutional Republic with a free press does, and we Blogging folk, we are the independent, non-corporate media. The sixth estate, if you will. We keep the Murdoch, the G.E. and the turner empires honest. If they fall down on the job, we call them on it. That goes for Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, or whomever else is not doing their jobs properly.
We are in the battle of our lives, for our Country, for our freedoms. We must not quit, we must not grow faint. We must carry on.
“Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:” (Ephesians 6:10-17 King James Version of the Bible)