Tag: foreign policy
The Lies Continue: Osama Bin Laden was not hiding behind a woman
When will people finally realize that this Government is lying to them?:
The White House backed away Monday evening from key details in its narrative about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, including claims by senior U.S. officials that the Al Qaeda leader had a weapon and may have fired it during a gun battle with U.S. forces.
Officials also retreated from claims that one of bin Laden’s wives was killed in the raid and that bin Laden was using her as a human shield before she was shot by U.S. forces.
At a televised White House briefing Monday afternoon, Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan said bin Laden joined in the fight that several residents of the Abbottabad, Pakistan, compound put up against the Navy SEALs during the 40-minute operation.
“He [bin Laden] was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in. And whether or not he got off any rounds, I quite frankly don’t know,” Brennan said.
At a Pentagon briefing earlier in the day, a senior defense official said bin Laden used a woman as a human shield so he could fire shots. “He was firing behind her,” the official said.
In another background briefing early Monday morning, a senior administration official also said bin Laden put up a fight. “He did resist the assault force. And he was killed in a firefight,” the official said.
However, during a background, off-camera briefing for television reporters later Monday, a senior White House official said bin Laden was not armed when he was killed, apparently by the U.S. raid team.
Another White House official familiar with the TV briefing confirmed the change to POLITICO, adding, “I’m not aware of him having a weapon.”
“The bottom line is the team that entered that room was met with resistance and took appropriate action,” said a third American official.
The White House on Monday night declined to elaborate on the nature of the resistance bin Laden allegedly put up. However, an official confirmed that the Al Qaeda founder was shot twice, once in the head and once in the chest.
via White House modifies Osama bin Laden account – Josh Gerstein – POLITICO.com.
Again, the White House lied about this little detail and quickly backed the bus up and changed their story. Now, they are saying that Osama was not even armed. Possibly. Because they have not decided whether to go with that lie or not. My question, as I have asked before; If the liberal left did not trust this Government under George W. Bush, then why trust it under Barack Obama? I do not trust them and neither should you. This is all a political ruse, to get Obama in the good graces of the American people again.
Others: Michelle Malkin, Mediaite, New York Magazine, Weasel Zippers, ABCNEWS, Reuters, Maggie’s Notebook, The Gateway Pundit and FrumForum
UPDATED: My Official Response to the killing of Osama Bin Laden
As someone who was drawn to the world of Blogging, by the Government’s and by default, the George W. Bush Administration’s handling of “The War on Terror and the war in Iraq —– I am highly suspicious of this whole thing.
They say, Osama is dead. I have my doubts. Until I see a bloody corpse picture; I remain a skeptic.
I just do not trust this Government at all. I did not trust it, when George W. Bush was running it and I really do not trust it, now that Barack Obama is running it.
Of course, the Neo-Cons are over the moon. …and some of the left are either giving the credit to Obama or saying Osama won.
Me? I sit here; suspect of the whole damned thing. I am not easily convinced of anything this Government says or does anymore.
Oh yeah, Obama just won 2012 —– sorry Republicans; four more years of Obama’s socialist stupidity. Enjoy it and get used to it.
If you want to read the rest of the blogging world’s reactions, Start here.
Update: OK. I have seen enough evidence to concede, that the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks is, in fact, dead. For one Al-Qaeda has confirmed this and the Defense Dept has released videos from the compound.
Video: Fox News’s Sean Hannity surprisingly treats Representative Ron Paul with respect
I found this to be very shocking… Sean Hannity was respectful to Representative Ron Paul:
Now here, when I saw the lead in to this segment, I thought “Oh boy, here we go… Hannity is going to cream this guy…” and you know what? Hannity just ribbed him about it and you could tell, it was just a gentle ribbing.
Now, I will say this about Ron Paul, he did stick to his guns on foriegn policy and in this day and age of wishy-washy politicians and flip-floppers; it is a refreshing change to see a guy stick to his guns, even when he knows it will not popular with the person interviewing him. I also commend Sean Hannity for not keeping on and on about it. Hannity made his point and Ron Paul made his and that was good enough, I thought.
Unlike some on the Neo-Con right, I will not treat this announcement dismissively. I think if Ron Paul could overcome some of stuff that the left likes to bring up and maybe hire a damn speech writer! He could very well win the Presidency; and right now, I would vote for Ron Paul over say, Bachmann, Palin, Trump or even Romney. The rest of the crowd, I either do not know, or think is too weak of a person to seriously be considered.
U.S. Military talks with Iraq faltering
I have some very mixed feelings on this story….
Via WSJ:
WASHINGTON—Senior U.S. and Iraqi military officials have been in negotiations about keeping some 10,000 American troops in Iraq beyond the scheduled withdrawal of all U.S. forces at year’s end, according to officials familiar with the talks.
But the discussions face political obstacles in both countries, and have faltered in recent weeks because of Iraqi worries that a continued U.S. military presence could fuel sectarian tension and lead to protests similar to those sweeping other Arab countries, U.S. officials say.
A separate drawdown deadline is looming in Afghanistan, where President Barack Obama wants to see a substantial U.S. troop reduction starting in July. Some U.S. commanders have cautioned against making reductions too quickly.
Underlining Obama administration concerns that U.S. forces have been stretched too thin, the White House has put strict constraints on American military involvement in Libya. On Thursday, the U.S. said it was sending armed drones to support operations in Libya, but the administration has stood firm against sending any ground troops.
In Iraq, top U.S. military officials believe that leaving a sizeable force beyond this year could bolster Iraqi stability and serve as a check on Iran, the major American nemesis in the region, officials said. U.S. allies Saudi Arabia and Israel have echoed the concern that if the U.S. pulls out completely, Iran could extend its influence.
Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Baghdad Thursday, urging Iraqi leaders to step up discussions soon if they want U.S. forces to stay beyond the end of 2011.
The timing is critical because the U.S. is scheduled to start drawing down remaining forces in late summer or early fall, and the military would have to assign new units months in advance to take their place.
While American defense officials have made clear they want to leave troops in Iraq, such a decision would require presidential approval. President Obama has yet to indicate publicly whether he would sign off on such a deal.
Mr. Obama could face a political backlash at home if he doesn’t meet his campaign pledge to bring troops home from Iraq. If the U.S. pulls out of Iraq and violence there surges, the president could face tough questions, particularly from Republicans in Congress, about whether the U.S. misjudged Iraq’s capabilities.
As a Conservative, A Paleo-Conservative, as opposed to a Neo-Conservative — but I digress; I have some very mixed feelings about this. On one hand, I would hate to see the United States withdraw from Iraq, it fall into chaos and Iran or some other surrounding Country invade the Country and mount attacks against Israel or even worse, even the United States. On the other hand, I feel that the invasion of Iraq was based on bad intelligence, largely based upon lies told by a man they called curve-ball.
Because of this, I believe we should really get out of there. Because, quite frankly, we have done our jobs. We got rid of Saddam, who was, admittedly hurting his own people and was corrupt as hell. We have trained the Iraqi army to protect themselves from attack or foreign invasion and uprising from within its own Country. Which it appears they are using to hurt dissidents. So, I really do not understand why we are still there. It appears that the Iraqi Government is most likely worried about our interests there — such as oil.
Either way, this is a very sticky situation; no matter what we do, we are going to be the bad guys. If we stay, we will be blamed for any and all uprisings in the Country. If we leave and that Country falls into chaos; we will be blamed for that too and some idiot with a grudge will try to attack us for allowing his Country to invaded. So, either way, it is going to be a mess for us for a long time to come.
This is why, that as a Paleo-Conservative, who rejects the foreign policy stance of the Neo-Conservative right; that we as Conservatives and Republicans should rethink our entire foreign policy status. The very idea of exporting freedom to other Nations is foolish on its face. Even David Horowitz, much to his credit, said this:
The Obama Administration, in my view, is the most dangerous administration in American history, and conservatives need to be very clear about the limits and objectives of American power so that they can lead the battle to restore our government to health. To accomplish this, neo-conservatives need to admit they were wrong, and return to the drawing board. They should give up the “neo” and become conservatives again.
Let me go on the record as saying, I wholeheartedly agree. Not so much about the Obama administration; I have yet to see anything that they have done that is overly dangerous to the Country. I do not agree with Obama’s whole, “Spread the Wealth around” nonsense; but Bush was not exactly my idea of a “perfect” President either. So, that whole argument is basically mute with me. However, I will say that Conservatives do need to get back to their pre-George W. Bush Neo-Conservative lead foreign policy stance. Because quite frankly, our Nation cannot continue on this idiotic path and survive. I mean, tomorrow China could cut us off and we as a Nation would be done. They basically own us and could decide to collect on their debt — Militarily. If you think about it, that would be quite scary; because what would we fight them with? They own our money and if they decided to defund us, where would we get the money to fight them with? Again, something to think about.
As for the “other” war in Afghanistan; we need to define that mission and if we cannot do, what we set out to do there — which was to capture or kill Osama Bin Ladin, then we need to get out of that Country. Period. End of Story. Nation Building does not work. It was tried there by the Russians and it failed horribly and almost bankrupted the Russian Government. Establishing Governments and Nations should not be the responsibility of the United States armed forces; it should be the job of NATO and the U.N. — let them deal with that idiotic backward Nation — not us.
Sadly though, the United States Government will not listen to the voice of people like me or you. Who feel that this road to ruin that we are on, is not sustainable. That my friends, is the true crime of this Country.
Guest Voice Chuck Baldwin Asks Have The Tea Parties Been Neoconned?
(Lifted from Chuck Baldwin’s website)
Back in February of 2010, I appeared on Neil Cavuto’s FOXBusiness TV show to talk about the emergence and effectiveness of America’s Tea Party movement. I warned FOX biz host Charles Payne that I was very concerned about the Tea Parties being infiltrated and taken over by big-government neocons.
See my interview on Neil Cavuto’s show (hosted by Charles Payne):
With more than a year having gone by since that interview, I believe the concerns I expressed on FOX were more than warranted. I am seeing more and more Tea Parties fall into the same trap, as did their predecessors back in the “Conservative Revolution” of 1994 and ‘95.
Right here in my home State of Montana, voters overwhelmingly threw the liberal Democrats out of both State houses and replaced them with Republicans who campaigned on strong conservative rhetoric. But what has happened since? Neocon Republicans in leadership positions squashed the best legislation and bullied compromised, big-government legislation through both chambers. The result: big-government neocons, once again, stymied and squashed the efforts of constitutionalist GOP legislators.
A press release at the half-way point of the Montana legislative session stated, “According to Montana Conservatives’ just-released mid session scorecard, the new wave of Republican legislators elected in November’s landslide are actually voting less conservative than their party’s incumbents.
“This is not good news for Tea Party organizers and other conservative activists, who were hopeful the strong conservative mood of the fall elections would sweep into office a new breed of bolder conservative voices. Instead, the organization’s Taxpayer Advisory Bulletin (TAB) reveals that returning GOP legislators (including those who switched houses) voted 46% conservative through the transmittal break, while newcomers graded a slightly lower 43%. Democratic legislators had an average conservative score of 7%.
“Commenting, MC spokesman Roger Koopman said, ‘This poor performance of Republican freshmen perpetuates what is functionally a three-party system in Helena, consisting of small government Republicans, big government Republicans and big government Democrats. The pattern has existed for years. Consequently, even with large Republican majorities in both houses, conservative ideas remain in the minority and the overall thrust of the legislature is toward bigger, more intrusive government, with greater state control and less individual freedom.’”
See the TAB press release and report at:
What the report does not make a point to say is that the poor performance of many of these freshman GOP legislators is primarily due to the political pressure brought upon them by big-government neocons in leadership positions within the GOP State caucus. This is the same thing that has been going on in State legislatures all over America, and even more so in Washington, D.C. When the courageous freshman class of 1994 was elected to the US House of Representatives, everyone was talking about the great “Conservative Revolution” that had just taken place. Conservative freshman House members such as Helen Chenowith, Bob Barr, Steve Largent, J.C. Watts, J.D. Hayworth, Joe Scarborough, Sonny Bono, etc., marched into the US Capitol with broad support from the American electorate and a sense of commitment to reign in an out-of-control federal leviathan in Washington, D.C. So, what happened? Were any federal departments dismantled? No. Was the size and scope of the federal government reduced? No. Was federal spending reduced? No. Within a year from that historic election in 1994, the “Conservative Revolution” was dead, and it was “business as usual” in Washington, D.C.
Why did this happen? Two reasons: big-government neocon GOP Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich and big-government neocon GOP Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. These two big-government establishment phony conservatives used their leadership positions to stymie, steamroll, and squash the conservative agenda of the 1994 conservative freshman Republicans.
And the same way that Gingrich and Lott killed the “Conservative Revolution” of 1994 in Washington, D.C., big-government neocons in the State legislatures (including here in Montana) have killed and are killing the limited-government revolutions of the various Tea Parties in 2010 and ’11. Beyond that, many Tea Party leaders and activists are currently touting the Presidential candidacy of the same man who helped kill the “Conservative Revolution” of 1994: former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.
In my interview on FOX, I said that I was angrier with the Republican Party than I was the Democrat Party. If you listened to the interview referenced above, you heard my reason why: with Democrats there is no pretense. One knows exactly what the Donkeys stand for: Big Government, more taxes, more spending, more welfare, etc. Republicans, however, constantly campaign for less government, less taxes, less spending, less welfare, etc., but after they are elected, they continue the big-spending ways of their colleagues on the other side of the aisle (then throw in their own propensities to expand a burgeoning Police State and Warfare State). Say what you want, at least Democrats are honest about their affinity for Big Government.
If Tea Party activists really believe they are going to change the size and direction of government (at any level) by promoting and electing people such as Newt Gingrich, they are living in fantasyland. (Or, if they live in Montana, they are smoking too much of the weed that they seem hell-bent to deny everyone else!)
Furthermore, this whole Republican vs. Democrat, or “conservative” vs. liberal, paradigm is a joke, anyway! Voters have been replacing Democrats with Republicans, liberals with “conservatives” (and vice versa) for decades; and what has it gotten us? Nothing but bigger and bigger government; more and more government spending; more and more welfare programs; more and more taxes; more and more Police-State legislation; more and more political correctness; more and more environmental wackoism; more and more foreign wars; less and less freedom; and less and less State autonomy.
Koopman’s “three party” description is well taken, except I might refine it a little by maintaining that we still have only two parties: socialist Democrats and neocon Republicans in one party, and limited-government, freedom-oriented constitutionalists in the other party. It’s time that people start identifying big-government neocons in the GOP as being nothing more than a clandestine fifth column unit of the Democrat Party!
If Tea Parties have a death wish, they will promote and support big government neocons such as Newt Gingrich. If they want to truly change the course of their states and country, they will promote and support only those men and women who understand what constitutionalism, limited-government, and liberty really mean–and who have the courage and fortitude to actually defend those principles after being elected. Anything less is just more of the same.
Video: Another reason why I will not vote Democratic Party again
You know what is worse than old racist dinosaurs in the Republican Party?
This, which comes via my facebook page:
Key phrase here is:
I wipe my ass with the American flag!
I am sorry, but there is no justification for this of Anti-American bile. If you are a minority in this Country and you feel this way; I got one thing to say to you:
GET THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY!
It just so damned happens that these same minorities, who say that they wipe their ass with the American flag, are here making a good living in this Country. Want to know why? Because they know good and damned well, that they would never be able to do that in their Country. Which is, if the truth be known, Mexico, who treats their own people like crap; and pays them like crap too. Which is why Mexicans are sneaking across that boarder, so they can make a decent wage here.
Unlike this here; this is not about racism. This is about being angry about watching people, who come from another Country, trashing the values and the flag of the United States of America —- all the while making a decent living here in the United States of America. It is straight up hypocrisy of the highest order. You come to my Country, and you make a living for your family; you show some damned respect for its flag, culture and values or you get the fuck out and go back home. Just that damned plain and simple.
Anyone says or believes anything different than that; is either one of three things:
1. An Anti-American
2. A Communist
3. An Asshole
But then again, I might just be repeating myself.
That is all.
Video: What the Neo-Conservatives created in Iraq
First some very disturbing video from Fox News:
Now the story via Fox News Channel:
On April 8th, the same day Defense Secretary Robert Gates was visiting leaders in Baghdad, a 2,500-man Iraqi Army unit raided a compound occupied by Iranian dissidents in Iraq, killing 34 people and injuring 325 others. Eight of those killed were women, according to the United Nations.
The attack occurred just hours after members of the same group in Washington revealed what they said was a previously undisclosed Iranian centrifuge production facility near Tehran — part of Iran’s secret nuclear weapons program.
Camp Ashraf has long served as a sanctuary for members of the anti-Iranian government group known as the People’s Mujahideen Organization of Iran (MEK) — a place the U.S. military vowed to protect shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
But with only 47,000 U.S. troops still in the country, and a new Shiite-led government in Iraq looking to bolster relations with Iran, the camp is threatened.
A 12-minute video released by the MEK documents the nighttime attack, beginning with images of Iraqi soldiers driving through crowds of civilians and running men over with trucks and armored Humvees. It shows soldiers firing on and killing groups of unarmed men and women. Gaping wounds suffered by survivors are displayed in detail along with images of the dead laid side by side and covered to the neck by white sheets.
The Iraqi general who led the raid claims the shootings came in response to residents pelting his troops with rocks and throwing themselves in front of his military vehicles.
MEK say those same soldiers are still preventing the wounded from getting proper medical treatment.
MEK was designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. after it carried out an assassination campaign targeting American military leaders in Tehran in the 70’s, as well as later attacking Iranian government targets. Since then the group has become better known for revealing secret production facilities related to the Iranian nuclear program, as it did with uranium enrichment facility in Natanz in 2002.
Sen. John Kerry, head of the Foreign Relations Committee, wants the Iraqis to conduct a full investigation and the called the raid “deeply disturbing” and “simply unacceptable.”
Gates commented on the incident while he was in Iraq, saying he was “concerned” with the reports of deaths and injuries.
And State Department spokesman Mark Toner later condemned the attack, but called it a “sovereign” matter for the Iraqis. By law, the U.S. security agreement with Iraq prohibits the U.S. military from intervening.
A number of former U.S. government officials spoke out about the raid during a conference at the Mayflower hotel in Washington Thursday, many of them calling on the State Department to remove the MEK from its list of terrorist groups.
Michael Mukasey, an attorney general under George W. Bush, called the Iraqi’s guarantee in 2003 to protect the group, “worthless.” He said that unless the U.S. removes the MEK from its terror list the killings will continue.
“What has enabled the Iraqi government — acting in the behest of the Iranian regime — and what enables the Iranian regime itself is this continued designation,”
Mukasey said.
Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, linked the incident at Camp Ashraf to current Arab uprisings in the region.
“How can we hope to help those inside Iran who are seeking a more open and liberated government if we can’t help those in Camp Ashraf who are simply asking for protection and an opportunity to live their lives in peace,?” he asked.
Critics say Iran is seizing on distractions in Libya by backing a Shia uprising in Bahrain and helping Syrian President Bashar Assad crack down on government protesters.
Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for the MEK and the National Council of Resistance Iran, says the Iranians encouraged the Iraqis to attack Camp Ashraf.
“This is a pure crime committed intentionally by the Iraqi government against the Iranian dissidents to do the bidding for Tehran,” Jafarzadeh said.
The last portion of the video provided by MEK shows a 29 year-old Iranian woman, named Isiyeh Rakhshani, delivering a video message to Congress in 2010. Flash to April 8th where she’s shooting cell phone video of the attack on Ashraf. In the final frame Rakhshani’s mother is seen mourning over her dead body.
I really hated to quote that all; but friends, I wanted you all to see it for yourselves; just what Bush and the Neo-Conservative warmongers in the G.O.P. created. My friends, if that does not sicken you to your core, you do not have a damned soul. In 2003, after the euphoria and outrage over 9/11, the United States of America went into a sovereign nation and invaded it; based on the lies of a man, who they call “Curveball.”
America then proceeded to take a Nation, who’s army had, at best, soviet-era tanks and equipment; and proceeded to give them our very best equipment; and now, they are using it on their own damned people. Anyone who believes that Iraq is a free nation; is either lying to themselves or worse. The United States of America basically ousted one dictator and installed a new one in Iraq. Even now the most pro-war Conservative admits that.
It was indeed “Mission Accomplished.” But this mission that we accomplished, was not what Bush and his Neo-Conservative friends had in mind. Now, there are people in Iraq this day, who have lost family; all because a group of Jacobin Democrats decided to invade a Country and further their warped foriegn policy fantasies.
For every action, there is a reaction. For every action taken by the United States Government and its military there is “blowback.” It is an CIA term, and it is very real. Welcome to the middle east 2011; brought you by internationalist Democrats and Neo-Conservatives. We have no one to blame, but ourselves.
Democrats have no love for Obama, Part Two
Continuing with this theme…
Coming from The Nation:
President Obama cut a budget deal with congressional Republican leaders that outlined draconian cuts to needed programs while doing little if anything to address a supposed fiscal crisis. As such, it was a classic austerity agreement that served the special interests that dominate the upper ranks of both parties while ill-serving the great mass of Americans.
Congress has approved the deal that Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders says “moves America in exactly the wrong direction. It cuts programs for struggling working families, the elderly, children and the poor while preserving tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.” But Sanders and a majority of House Democrats opposed it.
That represents a significant break with Obama and his attempt to get congressional Democrats to buy into the austerity agenda — and the false premise that America has the resources for wars and bank bailouts but not for health care, education and meaningful investments in community renewal and job creation.
The House vote was especially telling.
Poor man can’t do nothing right. Continuing:
Sanders captured the sentiment of progressives in Congress and across the country when he said, “There is no question that we must reduce soaring deficits, but it must be done in a way that is fair, which protects the most vulnerable people in our country, and which requires shared sacrifice.”
Roughly translated: “But it must be done in a way that is fair, that protects my special interests; like those old fools who voted me into office.” It must be kept in mind, that Sanders is a socialist. I mean, this guy left the Democratic Party, because it was not liberal enough.
However, I will say this; like I told Karl Rove on twitter, all of this talk about cuts; without making any Military Cuts and ending the wars, especially Iraq and also end the war and more importantly, end the nation building in Afghanistan — is nothing more than a well-planned ruse on the American people. Heck, even Lew Rockwell agrees that making cuts on the back of the poor is just damned immoral. I have to agree, my parents are in their sixties; why should they have to suffer, because a bunch of idiots want to defend an empire?
Further more, why should my parents suffer, because a group of beltway thugs, of both parties, got drunk on spending? It makes no sense to me at all. End these wars, The Afghanistan War has outlived it’s mission, we’re simply nation building there, to make Bush happy. Iraq is done, let’s get the heck out of there! Libya is another mess. We should have never gotten involved with that, at all.
So, as I said, when Democrats and Republicans both want to get real on spending, then I will commend them and vote for a Republican President; until then, it is just all Hot Air.
On the budget deal and the liberal left’s reaction
So about this so-called budget deal, which many a blogger on the right has reminded us, is not a real deal at all. Conservatives are not too keen on it; but the liberals —- my God! — they are in sackcloth and ashes!
Consider some of the reactions…..
Melissa McEwan over at shakesville is not a happy camper:
We’ve sure come a long way (no we haven’t) from Barack the Feminist (LULZ). I guess he’s just one of those “pragmatic feminists” who understands that sometimes women’s reproductive rights need to get thrown under the bus in order to make way for Important Democratic Politics, like empowering the most rightwing elements in the Republican Party.
To understand how thoroughly the Dems caved to the GOP on this deal, it was struck with “historic” cuts about which that nincompoop Reid is actually bragging, as if misogyny, Social Darwinism, and allowing infrastructure to fester until people die on collapsing bridges are radically brave progressive ideas.
Obama’s a fucking disaster. We needed FDR; instead we got FML.
Richard (RJ) Eskow at HuffPo says a whole bunch, a snippet:
Say what you will about Rep. Ryan’s budget proposal, it’s a vision. By proposing to dismantle Medicare for people retiring in 2021 and afterwards, he’s laid out a radical alternative to today’s policies. By slashing taxes for the wealthy and proposing deregulation for all industries, the Ryan plan envisions a future America: one where the environment is despoiled, the poor go unfed, and the middle class faces a lifetime of financial insecurity following by an old age of sickness and penury.
It may not be a good vision, but it’s a vision.
Where’s the progressive vision for 2021? Where’s the dream people can seize upon and make their own? Where’s the ideal that can energize activists? Where’s the extreme position from which the Democrats can be “bargained down” so that they, too, can only get 20% more than they asked for when the negotiations began? If they’re not going to do it, we have to do it for them.
Here’s a start: First increase Social Security retirement benefits by 15%, across the board, by lifting the payroll tax cap and imposing a financial transactions tax. Second, increase income taxes on a sliding scale that goes up to 60% for the highest earners in the country. (It’s been as high as 90% during periods of our greatest prosperity.) Third, add $500 billion to our stimulus spending over the next two years, and keep adding it until unemployment is down to 4%. Fourth, immediately add a public option, “Medicare For All” plan that’s voluntarily available to Americans of all age brackets.
Have fun. Add your own visions. Dream. Then demand your dream. It’s working for the Tea Party, and it can work for you.
One thing’s for sure: The old definition of insanity, “doing the same thing and expecting different results,” still holds. Whatever the progressive movement’s doing right now, it’s not working as well as it should. It’s frustrating, but it’s no reason to give up. Like a guy with a guitar said a century ago: Don’t mourn, organize.
Benintn over at DailyKos, is surprisingly reasonable:
There’s understandable frustration about President Obama’s deal with the devil Speaker Boehner and House Republicans to pass the 2011 budget and fund government for the rest of this fiscal year. After all, with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in the Senate, why couldn’t Democrats protect the budget from these job-killing, growth-slowing, economy-damaging budget cuts?
But as President Obama said to the Republicans in 2009: “I won.” And now, in 2011, the tables are turned. Republicans eager to show off their newly discovered fiscal sobriety are trying to roll back not only the stimulative impact of the Recovery Act, but also the legislative and political progress of the last two years.
In 2008, we won. In 2010, we lost. (Badly.) This is what happens when you lose elections.
[…]
But if Progressives are really interested in redrawing the map in 2012, the way to do it is outside of electoral politics. Let’s face it: redistricting in 2012 will reduce the number of safe progressive districts in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Arizona. And with 23 seats to defend in the US Senate, we’ll have to play defense more than offense in 2012. And if elected officials are forced by Citizens United to run to the middle, then the real solution is something that will happen outside of the push-pull of Republican v. Democrat. The real issue comes down to a massive voter education campaign that will take place in coffee shops, libraries, churches, schools, and neighborhoods all over the country.
So, you can blame Obama, blame me, shake your fist, write a blog, or…
What if we started doing what we do best on Daily Kos? What if we got back to the kind of high-quality opposition research, candidate profiles, policy papers, and community-building diaries that make this community the most interesting online political forum out there? What if we let go of the need to change Obama and got refocused on effective netroots organizing strategies? What if we acknowledged the harsh reality that we got our asses handed to us in 2010, and took that lesson as an opportunity to stop doing things that don’t work?
Or we could just have more pie fights.
It’s up to you.
These budget negotiations were a giant win for the Republican Party. President Obama initially cut $40 billion from his own budget proposal — and he got absolutely no credit for that. It was a very typical preemptive concession by the president. It was so typical, you wonder if he recognizes what an indisputably terrible strategy it is or if he has a different agenda.
So, after getting no credit for his original $40 billion concession, then the negotiations began at square one. The Republicans claimed in February that they wanted $32 billion in cuts from that point on. About a week ago, the president came out an announced that they had given the Republicans another $33 billion in cuts — a billion more than they originally asked for. And still the Republicans wanted more.
Why not? They’re dealing with the world’s worst negotiator, why not ask for more? After February they came up with a brilliant good cop-bad cop strategy with the Tea Party, where they had the Tea Party force them to go to $61 billion in demands. Which pushed the spectrum out further to the right. They know President Obama will go to the middle of any spectrum, no matter how radical. And then once they had baited Obama out to the $33 billion number, which was past their original goal, they baited him out even further. Finally, they got him to $38.5 billion in cuts an hour before the deadline.
[…]
I didn’t write this to rub it in the face of the feckless Democrats who always wind up playing the role of the Washington Generals to the Republican Globetrotters (remember the Democrats have the White House and the Senate — but they let the GOP run the place like they are totally in charge). I wrote it to tell you how incredibly important it is that you put real pressure on the president from the left. He will move to the middle of any spectrum!
If you don’t help push the spectrum to the left, the Republicans will move it massively to the right — and the president will fall for it.
The whole point of the insane, draconian, ridiculous Paul Ryan budget proposal for next year was to move the spectrum all the way to the radical right, so that they can lure Democrats to a false middle, that is in reality the far right.
It’s time to stop playing nice with Democrats. Good cop-good cop doesn’t work. We need a bad cop. We need a strong progressive wing to keep shouting “no deal!” every time the White House wants to concede (which will be every time).
You can ignore this, blame me and go hug the president one more time, but you won’t be doing your side any favors. If you actually care about policy and progressive priorities, you must get tough with the president right now. There is no next time.
Which did not go over too well with joelgp over at DailyKos at all:
Cenk, I’m just about sick of you bashing the president with your unrealistic, bombastic crap. You my friend, have become Sean Hannity by day and Bill O’reilly by night. You don’t want or need a president, you need a servant who will do exactly what’s in your head.
After all, Obama is the president of 300 million, not just you.
I rejected your stuff way before today after I watched the most despicable segment you ever produce on Obama in some time. You know what, the Republicans loved you for it.
[..]
Do you simply ignore the fact that conservatives and independents make up nearly 60% of the electorate and Obama should completely reject them?
Of course I’m not happy with everything Obama does but I feel the same way about my wife and kids.
I support him because there has never been another man in U.S. history who inherited a great depression, two wars, a jacked-up banking system, earthquakes in Haiti and Japan, a totally transforming Middle East and a bunch of freakin’ tea party nuts who believe he’s from Mars.
What Obama need’s most is our help–our voices, our support. The last thing he needs is another cable-news loud-mouth whose eating ice cream and candy on his fat Comcast salary while the president is battling for middle America.
Cenk, today you need to decide, either join us in helping the president or apply for the chalkboard vacancy on Fox at five.
I thought you should know.
Finally, there is this here, by DailyKos Diarist teacherken:
Here I am doing my civic duty, working on my taxes. I am paying my fair share.
My wife and I gave you money when you ran for President. We supported you.
But now? Blow, after blow, after blow.
The ‘deal’ about which you bragged is perhaps the final straw for this camel, whose back is breaking at the same time as his heart is shattered.
Dear readers, I apologize for what I am now writing. It will not be coherent, because I am responding to the policy and actions of an administration that are not coherent.
It is an expression of … what? Disappointment to be sure, anger, almost despair.
Mr. President, with what you have just done, on top of all else your administration has done – and failed to do – you have destroyed the hopes of millions, and shifted power and wealth in the direction of those who are fueled by hatred and anger.
And you expect us to continue to support you?
Perhaps you had better ignore this. Because you will not be happy with what I have to offer.
[…]
This is a screed, I admit. I am sitting here just letting it hang out.
I claim no wisdom. I claim no original insight. None of my arguments are original.
That is something that should concern you. I am borrowing from what I hear and 4ead from others. That includes members of your own party who hold federal elective office. It includes party officials in states and local organizations. It includes key voices in the progressive wing of the Democratic party. You know, those nasty types who remember that it was unions and progressives who have helped create the social safety net that built the American middle class, the social safety net the that Republicans are now dismantling a piece at a time, as they simultaneously impose a vision of this nation that should horrify you.
So go ahead Mr. President. Ignore me. Ignore all the voices that have been trying to explain to you, trying to help you help this country.
You might as well.
It seems as if you have been ignoring us all along.
But just one question, Mr. President. One that perhaps you need to consider.
What happens if we decide we have had enough? What if we return the favor?
What if we decide we will ignore you?
Sorry, that was a good deal of quoting; but I wanted to give you a feel for what is happening within liberal progressive Democrat circles. The truth is folks, that progressives put way too much stock in Barack Obama. They projected themselves on him; their dreams, their hopes and yes, even their wishes for progressive policy change in Washington D.C. and ultimately, President Barack Obama gave them some good old-fashioned lip service and laughed all the way to the White House. Now, this is not anything new to politics; President Ronald Reagan did the same very thing to the Religious Christian Conservative right back in the 1981 election. He had them believing that he was going to outlaw Abortion and put prayer back in schools; none of which he did at all. Instead he ran up deficits, shipped arms to Iran, and basically played much of the Republican Party and the far right for a fool.
So, while all of this sadness and naval grazing might be humorous to watch; it is a little silly. Did the liberals actually expect Obama to cater to their every whim?
Now, as for the Republicans, I think all of this belly aching is a bit silly; we all wanted cuts. We should be glad we got anything at all. Sure, we all want more. But anything is better than nothing.
Charles Johnson is right and here is why
First, go read — I will wait.
Are you finished? Good.
What is my point? This:
This right here above, is why I have my comments section on lock down. Not only do I require people to register, but I also moderate all comments — meaning, I personally read every comment; because of stuff like this right here. Uncontrolled discussion on blogs leads to things being said, like what Charles Johnson quoted.
However, I do wholeheartedly reject the accusation or at least the inferring that all Conservative blogs have become a swamp of hate against Muslims and or Arabs. Furthermore, I reject the inferring that all Conservatives/Classic Liberals/Republicans and Christians hate all Muslims and Arabs. That is collectivism, and it is crap; and I think Johnson is smart enough to know this, I think he is backhanding the blogs mentioned due to his dispute with the persons mentioned.
Having said of that, I do truly believe that there is a minority of persons in the Republican/Conservative/Classic Liberal crowd — who are frankly, bigoted towards Muslims and ultimately Arabs. Unlike some of the empty-headed idiots on the left, I am not going to make the asinine inferring that they are this way by design. What I will do is tell you the truth; what has caused this small but very vocal minority to become this way, is because of the attacks on American soil on September 11, 2001.
President George W. Bush, much to his credit did make the much vital distinction between the war on Terrorism and the war on Islam or Muslims or even Arabs. Not everyone within the conservative circles agreed with him and still does not agree with that mindset to this day; and now that President George W. Bush is out of the picture that vocal minority is becoming louder and much more accepted. I do not like myself; because it just makes the rest of us look bad.
This of course, is what the C.I.A. calls “Blowback.” It is the unintended consequences of actions taken by the United States Government. Most people think of “Blowback” as the angering of the Arab people to cause them to take up arms and commit terrorism against the United States of America – and in fact, it is just that. However, that is just the one side of “Blowback.” The other, more tragic and sinister side of “blowback” is the incitement of racial hatred towards Arabs and the religious hatred towards Muslims in General — including those here in the United States of America.
This reason, along with the laundry list of reasons; is why people like myself, Jack Hunter, Ron Paul, Rand Paul and an ever-growing list of Conservatives and Republicans are beginning to question the role of the United States Government involvement on foreign entanglements in foreign lands.
Of course, anyone with a good knowledge of the history of the United States of America and of American politics can tell you, that this is nothing new at all. In the 1940’s President Franklin Roosevelt, badly wanting to enter into the conflict against the Empire of Japan and against Germany, ordered a blockade of oil from South America that was headed to Japan. This act by the President plunged Japan into desperation caused Japan to fly across the Atlantic and attack America’s interests in the Republic of Hawaii. At the time however, Americans were not made aware of the fact that President Roosevelt had done this, as it was kept quiet by the Government. However, there were people who did know about it. Winston Churchill was one of those people, and in fact, Churchill warned FDR that doing such things would cause some sort of backlash from the Japanese and, as history shows, he was correct. The sick and sad part is; to this very day, there are people who still believe that the Empire of Japan attacked the United States for no reason at all.
How this ties into the modern-day events is this; back in 1941, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States Government set up internment camps throughout the United States for the Japanese people. It is very widely believed that the decision to do this, by the United States Government was brought on by or at the very least fueled Anti-Japanese sentiment in this Country for years, even after the war. Sadly, there are Conservatives, of whom I will not name; that actually advocated the interment of Muslims and Arab Americans — after the attacks on 9/11. Thankfully, the Bush Administration did not listen to the foolish ranting of the people who wrote those books.
My point is the following: Conservatives who believe that foreign policy interventionism is wrong, need to take a stand against the internationalist Democrats and the Neo-Conservative foreign policy interventionists and take control of the Republican Party and possibly the Democratic Party away from these warmongers. Because as long as the United States continues to wage war against Nations that have never really attacked it, this sort of hatred and bigotry will continue. It is simply the doctrine of “Cause and Effect.” Nothing ever happens for any reason at all. It is tragically sad, that the United States and its political parties and their legions of sheep followers, have not figured that simple kernel of truth out.
You say, “What about protecting the Republic?” I do not have a problem with that. However, there is a Grand Canyon difference in protecting the Republic and protecting the empire of America; and wise is the person who knows the difference between the two. Declaring unconstitutional wars and military actions against Nations who have not attacked us; is not defending or protecting the Republic; but rather defending the empire of America and playing useful idiot to foreign lands. I hope that someday, the grassroots of both of these parties will wrestle control away from these people. However, if one is to base his hopes on the Republican Party — their recent actions — make that hope, nothing more than a pipe-dream.
Video:Guest Voice Jack Hunter on Stereotyping the Old South, Plus Tea-O-Cons
More Great Commentary from Jack Hunter:
And as a Bonus:
When I am wrong, I am wrong and I was
Here I go, eating crow again! I wrote this on back on November 15, 2008:
Okay, here’s what is wrong with that up there. To infer that George W. Bush’s Administration and the Administration of President-Elect Barack Obama will be exactly the same, as much as I hate to say this about Mr. Rockwell; is just beyond crazy. Because we are talking about two totally different people; politically, ideologically and personally. I regret to say this, but for all of George W. Bush’s faults; the war, the scandals, everything — I have a real hard time sitting here and believing that he was an Imperialist, yes, he did have a very flawed vision of what he wished to accomplish in the middle east. Yes, he did take some advice from the likes of John and Neil Podhoretz. Yes, it was advice that ended up doing the President more harm that it did good in the end, politically. But to infer that he was a blind imperialist, is borderline Alex Jones sounding.
Believe me when I say this, I am about as a non-Bush fan as it comes, but I just cannot buy into the whole idea that Bush is some sort of Imperialist, being driven by some evil machine. Nor can I, with my normal functioning brain, sit here and believe that Barack Obama will do the exact same things as Bush. I just cannot do that. Because Barack Obama and the Democrats follow a totally different Political ideology than the Republicans. Now before anyone screams about the bailouts, I am fully aware of how Bush basically tossed fiscal Conservatism under the bus. I was not very happy about that. I also noticed that the bailout plan that he signed unto, has failed. But the truth is, he was forced into that, because he was told by the “so-called” experts, that it would work. Now it seems that the “experts” were wrong.
What I am basically trying to get at here is this. If the old school Conservatives or Paleo-Conservatives, and the Libertarians want to be taken serious by the rest of the Conservative movement and the Republican Party as a whole, they need to seriously look into stopping with the Alex Jones material and stick with policy and reality. Because not everyone buys into some of the sillier nonsense that I have seen within them circles. Not only this, but they need to really get away from the abject racism that I have, in fact, seen posted on some of their Blogs.
via Political Byline » Blog Archive » Lew Rockwell jumps the shark.
I do not believe that I was totally wrong about President Bush. But it is very clear now that I and a good number of other people; were wrong about President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. It made sense to me at the time. I really did not think President Obama to be a “warmonger” President. However, it does sadden me; that President Obama has basically done what Bush did, listening to the Neo-Conservatives and followed their advice.
Unlike the Jacobin Democrats who have invaded the Republican Party and that flatly refuse to be held responsible for their actions in the Arab World. I do accept mine and I apologize for even doubting for a minute that a Neo-Liberal would be any different from the previous Neo-Conservative President. So, yeah, I screw the pooch here; in a very big way.
Again, I do not claim to be an absolute authority on anything at all; least of all politics. In fact, I never really claimed to be an authority. Just an opinion guy.
Video: Obama’s Libyan War
Seeing that things are changing with Libya; I thought this to be a be very appropriate video: (Via Reason Hit and Run, and Reason TV)
Video: Guest Voice: Jack Hunter on Mark Levin’s Constitution
Once again, Jack Hunter outs a slime ball Neo-Conservative for what he really is; a warmongering pig. Notice in this video, that Jack Hunter points out the differences between Neo-Conservatives —– and Paleo-Conservatives or American Conservatives who are against interventionist foriegn policy. Something that the Republican Party was for prior to the mass exodus from the Democratic Party in 1964. Then these Jacobin Democrats brought their foreign policy with them. That, my friends, is the problem and what brought us George W. Bush.
Video:
U.K.’s PCC investigates Melanie Phillips blog posting
This is what happens when you coddle minorities, and yes that does include Arabs — and yes, Jews too:
A Melanie Phillips blogpost on the Spectator website which referred to the “moral depravity” of Arab “savages” is being investigated by the Press Complaints Commission.The online comment piece, headlined “Armchair barbarism”, focused on media coverage of the murder of five members of a Jewish family in the West Bank settlement of Itamar by Palestinian militants earlier this month.”The moral depravity of the Arabs is finding a grotesque echo in the moral bankruptcy and worse of the British and American ‘liberal’ media,” wrote Phillips.”Overwhelmingly, the media have either ignored or downplayed the atrocity – or worse, effectively blamed the victims for bringing it on themselves, describing them as ‘hard-line settlers’ or extremists.”To the New York Times, it’s not the Arab massacre of a Jewish family which has jeopardised ‘peace prospects’ – because the Israelis will quite rightly never trust any agreement with such savages – but instead Israeli policy on building more homes, on land to which it is legally and morally entitled, which is responsible instead for making peace elusive. Twisted, and sick.”
via PCC investigates Melanie Phillips’ Spectator blog | Media | guardian.co.uk.
I guess the dolt that brought this investigation on thinks that slaughtering a Jewish family; including a baby is just fine, right? What really makes it sickening, is that those who killed these poor people, were trained by the US.
Yeah, perhaps her wording was a bit harsh? So what? The Arab community should be glad that Israel has not bombed Palestine to powder for these crimes. For that matter; what if she is right? Then what?
When ethnic and religious minorities control freedom of speech; something is seriously wrong. America and the U.K. both need to tell both sides of that little dispute to take their damned Religious wars back to their homelands and stop involving Government’s like the U.K. and the United States. This is why 9/11 happened and why terrorism exists; because we, that being the United States; keep involving ourselves in a dispute between to religious factions in the middle east.
Having said that, Melanie Phillips, has the damned right to say what she wishes. So what if some turban wearing fool does not like it? Who cares, what the Arab people think in the U.K.?
Others: The Gateway Pundit, Weasel Zippers, National Review, Jihad Watch, Israel Matzav and American Power
Stupid: Federal Court rules that Colorado Man Can Sue Secret Service
My God, how stupid can the leftist fools be?
DENVER — A Colorado man can sue two Secret Service agents who arrested him after he touched former Vice President Dick Cheney on the arm in 2006 and told him his Iraq War policies were “disgusting,” a federal appeals court ruled Monday.The ruling means Steven Howards can try to subpoena Cheney to testify about the incident, said David Lane, Howards’ attorney.”I fully intend on deposing the former vice president,” Lane told The Associated Press.Lane has been trying for years to subpoena Cheney, but his motion has been delayed as judges weighed the question of whether the Secret Service agents were immune in the case. He has said he wants to subpoena the former vice president because he’s “the best eyewitness to the case.”
via Federal Court: Colorado Man Can Sue Secret Service – FoxNews.com.
This is why this strikes me as incredibly stupid; for one, this man made a choice to break the law and try to grab the former Vice President — to make a political statement. For two; now he is trying to capitalize on this incident and sue the Secret Service and the Government by proxy. In short; the man is nothing more than some leech, who wants to make a quick buck on the backs of the American people. Not to mention make a stupid political point.
Either way, I hope like hell that the courts toss this idiot’s case out. Because he does not deserve anything at all. Except maybe a swift kick in the butt. 😡
So, the next time some idiot liberal Democrat tries to tell you how horrible we Capitalist Conservative Christians are; show ’em this, please. I mean, I would rather be some money grubbing capitalist, than to be trying to make a quick buck on the back of the American people; and for what? To make a rather idiotic political point? How stupid. 🙄
….and I say this, as someone who was not too keen on Bush and Co’s polices either…..
Where the Itamar killers trained by the US?
That is the story according to this report: (H/T to Tim Graham on Facebook)
JERUSALEM – Two members of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ official security forces were arrested in conjunction with this past weekend’s bloody massacre in which five family members were brutally stabbed to death inside their home in the Jewish village of Itamar, WND has learned.The names of the apprehended suspects will be released to the Israeli media within hours but were revealed to WND by security officials working on the murder.Two cousins are now in Israeli custody and are suspected in the slayings. Ahmed Awad is an officer in Abbas’ Preventative Security Services in the northern West Bank city of Nablis. Iyad Awad is an officer in Abbas’ General Intelligence services in Ramallah.Both the Preventative and General Intelligence services of Fatah are armed, trained and funded by the U.S.The duo did not personally carry out the murders, but rather they assisting in the planning and logistics, informed security sources told WND.Since the late 1990s, the U.S. has run training bases for PA militias. The U.S. also has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in financial aid and weapons to build up the PA militias. Since 2007, the U.S. has stepped up its efforts at training the PA, including a new, advanced program for Palestinian police to train 500 to 600 cadets at a time at the American bases. The U.S. currently operates training bases for the PA police and other militias, such as Force 17 and the Preventative Security Services in the West Bank city of Jericho and the Jordanian village of Giftlik.
via WorldNetDaily: U.S.-trained forces arrested in bloody slaying of kids.
Like I wrote yesterday; this murder is the continuation of a very long war, that dates back to Biblical times. However, the very idea that our Armed Forces trained these people; changes the ballgame. I wonder what President Obama would think about such things? Of course, based upon what I have been reading; he really does not care about Israel (or anything else for that matter, including America) at all.
Update: Thanks to the people at Rotter.net for linking in! (Hebrew to English Machine translation here.) If anyone happens to have an account there and can speak Hebrew; please let them know that I cannot Independently verify the claims made by WND in that story above, thanks!
Ruh Roh! Fit to hit the shan tommorow in Saudi Arabia
Gulp. 😯
I’d do a posting on this; but I just recommend, quite highly, for you to read AllahPundit’s story on this.
I tend to believe that everyone at The White House and the State Department are worried about this; and for good reason too.
I”ll leave you these quotes:
Enjoy the Wisconsin and NPR posts tonight because this news cycle may shift very quickly. The Saudis have been preparing for this for weeks: First they tried to shore up public support with a new package of economic reforms, then they drafted 10,000 troops and deployed them to the Shiite provinces in the east. All protests have been banned, naturally, and for good measure they got the country’s top clerics to issue a fatwa declaring demonstrations un-Islamic.
(***)
That’s why the White House is worried, and that’s why we’ve quietly moved from a policy of regime change in the region to “regime alteration.” It’s all geared towards protecting our “friends” in Riyadh and preventing the oil apocalypse that would crush America’s economic recovery (not to mention Obama’s reelection chances). In fact, as I said once before, I’m convinced that this is a factor in why The One has been quiet-ish about Libya. He knows the Saudi protests are coming and he doesn’t want to do anything that will commit too boldly to helping scrappy rebels against an oppressive regime. Obama will vote present on revolution in the Kingdom, and a lot of other people will vote with him. Tomorrow — big day. Exit quotation from a Wall Street analyst on today’s Saudi demonstrations and the temporary oil sell-off they inspired: “The stakes just went up in a big way. Even if this was a minor incident, it was a jarring reminder of what could happen there.”
As I was saying; Gulp.
Remember what I was saying about prayer and Obama? More of that….now.
The Reality Report: Toll Booth Tyranny
Disclaimer: The posting of this video should not be considered an endorsement of the views and editorial position of the makers of this video. Further more, The posting of this video, should not be considered an endorsement of the advertisers in this video presentation. It is being posted for informational purposes only.
Signed,
Patrick
Owner
politicalbyline.com
———————-
Synopsis:
http://RTR.org | http://RealityReport.TV | This is one report you do not want to miss. Americans are being detained for using cash! Gary Franchi presents the investigation into the Florida Department of Transportation. Filmmaker and radio host Jason Bermas joins the cast for his new segment called Punk Rock Politics. Also this week we present the special report on Project Gunrunner, how the BATF facilitated ‘straw purchase’ firearm sales that resulted in the death of one of our own. We’ll also present a viral video explains Goldman Sachs is getting double dip profits off the Tax Payer’s backs. Nina returns to present the top stories of the week and as always, we dip into the mailbag, present last week’s poll results and brand another enemy of the state.
Video:
Join the discussion at our RTR Group:
http://rtr.org/group/745
Become a Fan at our Facebook Page:
http://facebook.com/realityreport
Share the Reality Report on Facebook:
http://on.fb.me/realityreport
Subscribe to our youtube channel:
http://bit.ly/sub-2-rr
Support our work with a donation:
http://bit.ly/rtr-q1
MONEY BOMB! March 12th
http://MadAsHellMoneyBomb.com
Are Conservatives finally waking up to the realities of war?
This all comes via Little Miss Whatsherface.
Kenneth Anderson writing over at The Volokh Conspiracy says:
It’s heartbreaking, if you’ve spent a lot of time and energy over years of your life, figuring out how to deal with the local village elders and try and start development projects and improve governance and send Afghan girls to school, to realize that the institutions that one believes one has started and got off the ground are far more likely to blow away like a Potemkin village. You have these hard-won skills and these small, on the ground achievements, and it looks like maybe you’ve started something that might someday bear fruit. You’ve actually done remarkable things, by any ordinary measure. But then it doesn’t bear fruit, because it isn’t rooted, not culturally or institutionally, and the belief that it will have a life after your funding is gone is illusion.
But it’s not an unusual story, if one looks beyond Afghanistan and indeed beyond war. It’s actually the oldest story in the world in development work. In development, we believe we need to develop institutional governance capacities so that the efforts that shelter and take root under those institutions will not be in vain. No doubt that’s true. But unfortunately we don’t have a clue how to do that — and even less of a clue how to do that in war.
I highly recommend that you go read that whole quote. Because if this is broadening feeling among Conservatives; we could be looking at a total change in attitude among the right.
Mark Steyn over at National Review puts it in more plain terms:
Before I got into the Derb/Andy discussion, I was reading an obituary in The Daily Telegraph of Anthony Brooke, former Rajah Muda of Sarawak, whose family reigned over much of the Borneo jungle for over a century until 1946, when the kingdom lost its independence and was formally incorporated into the British Empire. As often with flotsam and jetsam (Flintstone and Jetson?) from the imperial byways, you’re struck by how much London accomplished with so little. By contrast, we’ve spent a fortune in Afghanistan and have nothing to show for it.
I think the difference is this: When America goes into Afghanistan, it doesn’t think it’s prosecuting American interests. Quite the opposite: Regardless of whether it’s officially UN- or Nato-sanctioned, America goes in as the expeditionary force of “world opinion” or “the global commons”. It doesn’t believe it has a national interest in Afghanistan, and indeed assumes that it would be a kind of transnational faux pas to be seen to have one, so it’s hardly surprising that the “nation” it winds up “building” doesn’t look much like anywhere any American would want to have anything to do with. Even nation-building requires the builder to build it in what he perceives as his national interest – as the British did in India and the Americans in post-war Japan. If you have disinterested, transnational nation-building, you wind up as we have in Kabul.
To go back to Sarawak, it was ceded to His Britannic Majesty in 1946 and became independent in 1963, when it joined the new Federation of Malaysia: Seventeen years from colony to statehood – versus a decade spent presiding over Take Your Catamite To Work Day in Kandahar. And, as a New Jersey reader wrote to me the other day, “Does anybody really think we’re leaving anytime soon?” In Afghanistan and elsewhere, transnational nation-building is like a mangled Hotel California: We never seriously check in, and yet we never leave.
Now, if I were a rabid Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan type; I would say something to the effect of, “See? Now that the Neo-Conservatives are not controlling the war, they want to stop it!” Well, rest assured I am not a rabid anything at all. I think that it is encouraging to see that the Conservative Blogosphere is finally starting to figure out, what the rest of the America already knows; that we went into Afghanistan to hunt down, and capture or kill Osama Bin Laden and destroy Al-Qaeda. Now that has become like the secondary mission and defeating the Taliban and setting up Government there is now this goal, which is essentially “Nation Building.” Something that never works, ever. Especially in the middle east, where some, if not all, of the Governments are inherently corrupt.
Either way, it is good to now see writers question the very thing, that back in 2003, they were mindlessly cheerleading.