#1
Why kill any brain cells over this? it is obvious that the majority of those voting didn't care if BO is even a natural born citizen, much less whether he legally registered for the draft.
put the effort instead into working toward 2012 and returning this community activist back to Chicago.
God help us that we can survive these next four years.
Hillary's being floated now for Secretary of State. And as entertaining as the idea of sticking that in career backbench ditherer John Kerry's face is, here's another idea. Make her Oberreichskriegssturmfuhrer. Or -- to put it somewhat more Kumbayahishly -- War Czar.
This is the position that was created and defacto occupied by the widely despised and feared Dick Cheney under the hated Chimpy McHitlerburton regime. Here's the deal.
We all know Clintons in positions of executive power historically view war as something that should be fought with a missile here, a missile there, or in limited, extreme circumstances by the United States Air Force, and that in the event of blood actually being shed, all operations should be immediately terminated and forces extricated in the most humiliating way possible. However, that was the 1990s, and we also know that in the post-9/11 era, Clinton briefly grew a set and strongly favored invading the heck out of belligerents who had made her husband look like an ineffective skirt-chaser. It was only the prospect of being president herself that made Hillary turn into a peacenik, but we know from the Democratic primary that Hillary does not give up. She will gouge the eyeballs out of anyone who stands in her way.
News reports indicate we are being increasingly quagmirized by a bunch of 19th-century dishcloth-wearing savages in the rocky passes of the Hindu Kush, with al-Qaeda thumbing its aquiline nose from across the border in Waziristan, and the mullahs of Iran insisting on becoming a world-class nuisance, not to mention the Putinistas getting all Cold War, buzzing our remote Pacific islands, forcing our NATO allies to scramble their jets, and stomping jackbooted over two-bit ex-SSRs, while the ChiCom are building up their fleet -- and here we are stuck here with an administration that wants all those snarling Klingons to like us better.
Is there any reason to think President Obama, strongly jut-jawed though he is and given to steady gazes, is really up to facing off any of these adversaries, when he started whining "no fair" the minute anyone questioned his policies or his statements or his decades of hanging around with America-bashing wackjobs?
I don't think so. It's not a pretty picture, but we've got four long years of this ahead, and we need to make the best of it. Because Hillary hates Obama for depriving her of that which was rightfully hers, she can be relied on to subvert all of his limp-handshake peace overtures. And because preliminary indications are the Obama administration may be waking up to the reality that its World Peace Now agenda doesn't stand a chance, having Hillary snarling at the end of a long leash would allow Obama to continue speaking softly, and just shrug sheepishly, "Hey, that's Hillary, what can I say?" whenever she rips anything to shreds.
This is why I am imploring the Obama administration to unbolt Hillary from whatever Democratic dungeon she's been strapped down in for the last three months, and inform that hard, pipe-hitting politician that her job is to get medieval on the asses of America's enemies. And give her the leather girdle, the zipper mask, the whip, the pliers and the blowtorch to do it with.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/14/2008 10:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If Hillary is the Sec of State, how much money can Bill make in bribes in 4 years?
"Are they all good little Democrats?" the candidate asks.
"Well," the farmer says, "five of 'em are. But my oldest boy, he got to readin' . . . "
licking our wounds, now just hoping that zero doesn't pour salt in them.
just another thought, Newt was talking tonight about how can we as a country be competitive in the world when we give to those who don't do anything. I can't stand this mindset.
Posted by: Jan ||
11/14/2008 2:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
An after-action report is good, time to start thinking the next election; only 30% or so voted so there are plenty of people out there to reach.
PolySci friend of mine and I were talking the other night and we agreed McCain's message was weak - the good points he made were not emphasised. What he talked about in the debate for the most part only really made sense to those who were able to check the internet often and the openings he had McCain did not take advantage of. Populist messages though correct but was his opponents game; the campaign was like watching the Raiders and Chiefs play.
Time to start thinking about the next elections - House in 2 and then the Presidency. Gotta have a distinctive message not a retooling of this last one.
#6
Jan, read the excerpt below and rethink that mindset issue you have, 'kay?
The problem with lefty liberals is that they think, probably because they don't DO anything themselves, that all the goodies in life grow on trees.
Men have been taught that the highest virtue is not to achieve, but to give. Yet one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution- or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement.
Americas abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for Americas industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.
#7
Is there a moral dimension to foreign policy in our political philosophy? Or do we just exist to help the world's rich people make and keep their money?
Interesting question. After the financial glut that has taken place over the last 15 years, how can we be broke after 2 bad quarters? Where did the money go?
#8
just to clarify, (whoa "'kay?" really?) but hey, it's okay because I was misunderstood.
I agree with Newt, I don't like the mindset of the zero, sorry if I was unclear in my earlier comment.
I'm working damn hard and don't like the idea of giving to those that sit on their butts expecting something for nothing. To help those in need is one thing, but to promote the masses of folks that want something for nothing is the wrong thing to do. Seeing these expectations by these lazyass folks, and that the laws promote it is what drives me nuts. Hell we have commercials telling folks how to work the system, there was one on just last night about how to get an electric scooter, all free for example. This explains how we often see many " fluffy" folks on them when in reality they would be better off walking having the exercise. I know there are folks that really need them, but have them get it through their health care provider, not by an advertisement telling them how to get it for free when it's questionable if they even really need it.
I work in a place that gives free stuff out to people whether they need it or not, most or all in the form of emergency medicaid. Housing, food, resources, to mostly illegal aliens that did the anchor baby deal. We can't afford this America needs to open it's eyes, and wake up from this dreamworld.
Also during this election year most my co-workers were for the zero, also very frustrating, mostly because of the pro-life issue. I've always been pro-birth control.
It's painful watching our country be taken over by this kind of Robin Hood "mindset".
We need to get pride back into people's hearts, promote a job well done, and to do the right thing. Not expect government to provide everything. I think it funny back when comparisons were being made of the zero to President Kennedy; remembering the "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". Man what a concept huh imagine that.
Regarding Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement.
People forget that gift's aren't just material, to give your time, and not somebody else's hard earned money. People can work in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless, and helping those really in need is one thing. Teaching them to provide for themselves, what's that saying, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime... Many of these lefty liberals wouldn't consider giving their time, they are too busy going after the big money and have someone else give. That they are making it happen is their gift.
Instead it seems we've taught not just the homeless, but even the middle class how to work the system and get free stuff and that it's expected.
We need to get our integrity, honor and duty back in the minds of Americans. I only hope it's not too late.
(end rant, until the next article lol. It's going to be a long winter sigh)
Posted by: Jan ||
11/14/2008 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Jan,
Your original "I can't stand this mindset." seems to refer to the previous sentence where you paraphrase Newt. If you meant that you can't stand the mindset of those demanding something for nothing then we just have a "failure to communicate".
The only problem with your second post is
"People forget that gift's aren't just material, to give your time, ...".
Time may not be material but it also ain't free.
If you have to work two jobs to make ends meet it is very tough to find time with which to be charitable. It is even worse when someone else demands that you spend your most precious commodity to suit their purposes.
Note, I'm not saying the being charitable with money or time is bad. However, for the enunciated reasons it is second on the value list to actually producing stuff.
#10
AlanC,
Thanks, and I agree that time isn't free. I'm currently working alot more than 40 hr's/wk, doing so will get me in a better place financially, but that's my choice to do so. My free time is very valuable to me, I definitely agree with you here.
For those that want to give using others money, they are the ones I was thinking could give of their time instead, but probably wouldn't consider it. It is even worse when someone else demands that you spend your most precious commodity to suit their purposes.
I think the bottom line here is pointing out the difference from giving because you want to and to your choice of charity, VS being told to give to who and how.
I do like seeing community service projects, say by the Boy Scouts as an example. Teaching our youth to give back to the community is a good thing. It's the "expected" part that has me so angry.
Posted by: Jan ||
11/14/2008 13:45 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Jan,
Expected? Hell these folks want to do it at the point of a gun.
Individual rights, responsibilities, rewards and consequences are what this country was founded on; and what made this country great. The fascism / groupism of the socialist left is the antithesis of individual liberty and the presence of tyrrany.
An interesting piece from TNR, of all places, that tries to educate the Left (without success, I'll wager) on what we at the Burg already know. Why does Syria harbor terrorists? Because it's in their interests as they see it. Assad is not irrational, he's a thug, and this is what modern thugs do. Read on:
Why does Syria insist on harboring terrorists?
by Lee Smith
The Bush administration has quietly authorized U.S. forces to attack Al-Qaeda bases around the Middle East—an escalation in the war on terror that Eli Lake first revealed two weeks ago in The New Republic and that The New York Times reported on this week. One of the administration's most recent targets was Syria, where it struck Al-Qaeda leader Badran Turki Hishan al Mazidih last month.
Though Syrian officials feigned ignorance at Al-Qaeda's encampment within its borders, the reality is that the country not only tolerates the presence of terrorists, but encourages them to use the country as a safe-haven, headquarters, and transit point. Why does Syria continue to harbor terrorists, knowing that it places the country squarely in the crosshairs of the Bush administration? Particularly in light of Syria's historical problems with its own Islamist groups, why would it welcome radicals from across the region? Finding the answer to these questions is crucial in trying to defeat one of the Middle East's most prolific boosters of terrorism.
To better understand Syria's motivations, I visited Abdel Halim Khaddam, Syria's former vice president, in Brussels, where he was leading a meeting of the National Salvation Front (NSF), a Syrian opposition group. Having served under both Hafez al-Assad and his son Bashar, Khaddam is well-acquainted with the strategic and political exigencies driving the regime's support for terror. "Fighting the Americans in Iraq is very dangerous," he tells me. "But it also makes Bashar popular. Under the banner of resistance, anything is popular."
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/14/2008 11:33 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lee Smith has apparently moved on from Slate. But it sounds like he's talking to that fascist retread of an ex-Syrian-vice-president as if the guy is anything other than an out-of-favor Baathist pining for his lost industrial paper-shredder.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
11/14/2008 15:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This article ignores the high likelyhood that the Syrians fingered the Al Qaeda operatives for the US and just went through the motions of protesting the raid.
It is entirely possible the Syrians wouldn't have even mentioned it if not for the film clip that made it on the internet.
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
11/14/2008 16:27 Comments ||
Top||
#4
VARIOUS MSM-NET OPEDS > the next IRAQ-STYLE INSURGENCY "QUAGMIRE" FOR THE US-ALLIES MAY BE INDIA [e.g. ASSAM/Hindu-Christian anti-Foreigner Violence]???
Spook86 at In from the Cold walks us through the new Iranian missile test and what it means for our security. Must-read.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/14/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Today's event also underscores the importance of the recent deployment of a U.S. X-band radar to Israel. Capable of detecting missile launches at long range, the radar will give Israeli officials an additional 60-70 seconds of warning time, critical in any "surprise attack scenario.
The strategic assumption here is the incoming missiles will be identified as coming from Iran and assumed to be nuclear, which essentially means the IDF has 70 seconds to launch their own. Should indeed be quite a "Storm."
#4
"The strategic assumption here is the incoming missiles will be identified as coming from Iran and assumed to be nuclear, which essentially means the IDF has 70 seconds to launch their own. Should indeed be quite a "Storm."
Not quite. Israel's second strike capacity relies on submarines so I doubt they would launch their own nuclear missiles before the first Iranian one hit ground.
The "Samson Option" would still work.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
11/14/2008 20:16 Comments ||
Top||
Not so long ago, corporate giants with names like PanAm, ITT and Montgomery Ward roamed the earth. They faded and were replaced by new companies with names like Microsoft, Southwest Airlines and Target. The U.S. became famous for this pattern of decay and new growth. Over time, American government built a bigger safety net so workers could survive the vicissitudes of this creative destruction -- with unemployment insurance and soon, one hopes, health care security. But the government has generally not interfered in the dynamic process itself, which is the source of the country's prosperity.
But this, apparently, is about to change. Democrats from Barack Obama to Nancy Pelosi want to grant immortality to General Motors, Chrysler and Ford. They have decided to follow an earlier $25 billion loan with a $50 billion bailout, which would inevitably be followed by more billions later, because if these companies are not permitted to go bankrupt now, they never will be.
This is a different sort of endeavor than the $750 billion bailout of Wall Street. That money was used to save the financial system itself. It was used to save the capital markets on which the process of creative destruction depends.
Continued on Page 49
#1
The Big 3's problem is the same it has always been, an unholy alliance between the UAW and feckless management. No amount of federal money is going to fix the problem as long as the UAW is involved.
#3
One thing Dr. Doom doesn't predict is runaway inflation, a key element of which is increasing wages/salaries, which ain't gonna happen. Prices can go as high as they like, e.g., gasoline, but too few buyers means the prices will fall or the sellers will go out of business.
It's a good time to stock up on guns, ammo and Soylent Green.
#5
E.g. CHINESE MIL FORUM > CHINA PLA DEPLOYING 150,000 TROOPS ALONG UNSTABLE NORTH KOREAN BORDERS/NORTH KOREA MAY END LAND ACCESS TO CHINA AFTER DECEMBER 10th [SOKOR already being closed off]. POSTERS - one argues that Kimmie's renowned playboy older son will rule, NOT his youngest son, + Kimmies health must be dangerously critical in the light of China's + NK's actions???
Also from CMF > TIBET MOVEMENT CONFRONT CALLS FOR CHANGE - INDEPENDENCE IS NEXT!? 500-plus Tibetan Exiles to meet in India as per Dalai Lama-suppor "ALL-ASPECTS" REVIEW OF CURRENT POLICIES REGARDING CHINA [includ but not limited to posible review + suppor for formal Tibet independence from China]; + [WORLD TRIBUNE] US NEEDS BASES THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST, CENTRAL ASIA TO PROTECT THE GULF FROM IRAN [effec mil reaction time].
JUST A FEW FOR PREZ OBAMA.
Methinks CHINA, RUSSIA + INDIA are well aware that the HISTORICAL AND GEOPOL MAP OF ASIA = PAN-ASIAN ORDER MAY BE DIFFERENT 2015-2020, VEE ISLAMIST-INDUCED MULTI-STATE DESTABILIZATION + BREAKUP???
#6
OOPSIES, forgot PRAVDA > EARTH TO CARRY THE BURDEN OF 9.0BILYUHN PEOPLE BY 2050 [estimated 9,191,300,000 Persons]. China's popul may increase by under-100Milyuhn in 42 years to approxi 1.048Bilyuhn [1.3B today in 2008]; India's to grow to 1.658Bilyuhn from 1.186Bilyuhn in 2008; Russia's to decline to 107.8Milyuhn, whilst the USA's may rise to 402Milyuhn in 2050 from 308Milyuhn today in 2008. OTHER COUNTRIES.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Jules Crittenden
I don't think so. It's not a pretty picture, but we've got four long years of this ahead, and we need to make the best of it. Because Hillary hates Obama for depriving her of that which was rightfully hers, she can be relied on to subvert all of his limp-handshake peace overtures. And because preliminary indications are the Obama administration may be waking up to the reality that its World Peace Now agenda doesn't stand a chance, having Hillary snarling at the end of a long leash would allow Obama to continue speaking softly, and just shrug sheepishly, "Hey, that's Hillary, what can I say?" whenever she rips anything to shreds.
Not so long ago, corporate giants with names like PanAm, ITT and Montgomery Ward roamed the earth. They faded and were replaced by new companies with names like Microsoft, Southwest Airlines and Target. The U.S. became famous for this pattern of decay and new growth. Over time, American government built a bigger safety net so workers could survive the vicissitudes of this creative destruction -- with unemployment insurance and soon, one hopes, health care security. But the government has generally not interfered in the dynamic process itself, which is the source of the country's prosperity.
