Tag: Bush

Some advice that Obama should really listen to

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.

The Obama administration really needs to get over itself says The Nation?

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. 🙄

White House is screwing the War in Afghanistan to hell

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

White House asks New York Governor Paterson to drop out of election race

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)

Irving Kristol Dead at age 89

I got the alert via New York Times and I checked over at the Weekly Standard and sure enough Irving Kristol has passed.

Via The New York Times:

Irving Kristol, the political commentator who, as much as anyone, defined modern conservatism and helped revitalize the Republican Party in the late 1960s and early ’70s, setting the stage for the Reagan presidency and years of conservative dominance, died Friday in Arlington, Va. He was 89 and lived in Washington.

His son, William Kristol, the commentator and editor of the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard, said the cause of death was complications of lung cancer.

Mr. Kristol exerted an influence across generations, from William F. Buckley to the columnist David Brooks, through a variety of positions he held over a long career: executive vice president of Basic Books, contributor to The Wall Street Journal, professor of social thought at New York University, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

He was commonly known as the godfather of neoconservatism, even by those who were not entirely sure what the term meant. In probably his most widely quoted comment — his equivalent of Andy Warhol’s 15 minutes of fame — Mr. Kristol defined a neoconservative as a liberal who had been “mugged by reality.”

[….]

By now Mr. Kristol was battling on several fronts. He published columns and essays attacking liberalism and the counterculture from his perches at The Wall Street Journal and The Public Interest, and in 1978 he and William E. Simon, President Nixon’s secretary of the treasury, formed the Institute for Educational Affairs to funnel corporate and foundation money to conservative causes. In 1985 he started The National Interest, a journal devoted to foreign affairs.

But Mr. Kristol wasn’t railing just against the left. He criticized America’s commercial class for upholding greed and selfishness as positive values. He saw “moral anarchy” within the business community, and he urged it to take responsibility for itself and the larger society. He encouraged businessmen to give money to political candidates and help get conservative ideas across to the public. Republicans, he said, had for half a century been “the stupid party,” with not much more on their minds than balanced budgets and opposition to the welfare state. He instructed them to support economic growth by cutting taxes and not to oppose New Deal institutions.

Above all, Mr. Kristol preached a faith in ordinary people. . “It is the self-imposed assignment of neoconservatives,” he wrote, “to explain to the American people why they are right, and to the intellectuals why they are wrong.”

Mr. Kristol saw religion and a belief in the afterlife as the foundation for the middle-class values he championed. He argued that religion provided a necessary constraint to antisocial, anarchical impulses. Without it, he said, “the world falls apart.” Yet Mr. Kristol’s own religious views were so ambiguous that some friends questioned whether he believed in God. In 1996, he told an interviewer: “I’ve always been a believer.” But, he added, “don’t ask me in what.”

“That gets too complicated,” he said. “The word ‘God’ confuses everything.”

In 2002, Mr. Kristol received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, often considered the nation’s highest civilian honor. It was another satisfying moment for a man who appears to have delighted in his life or, as Andrew Sullivan put it, “to have emerged from the womb content.”

He once said that his career had been “one instance of good luck after another.” Some called him a cheerful conservative. He did not dispute it. He had had much, he said, “to be cheerful about.”

I will not lie. I did not agree with Mr. Kristol’s Politics or his version of Conservatism. In fact, I have been known to make a crack at people on other blogs; when they were spewing stupidity, especially the George W. Bush Cheerleaders, I would always say, “Where did you learn that line? From Bill or Irving Kristol?” or something usually to that effect. Some of Irving Kristol’s ideology was very controversial;  like the desire for a full scale invasion of Iran; of which I found to be horrifically stupid. Thankfully, Bush’s people agreed. Much of his ideology can be summed up as Wilsonian; the man believed that war was the answer, always. I disagreed then and I still do.

However, it is not to say that Kristol was a total loss; He did work to take the Conservative movement away from the Anti-Semites within the Republican Party. He also exposed and expelled the blatant racists that had taken root since the days of Abraham Lincoln. Between Kristol and Buckley; Conservatism become a bit more intellectual and not the knuckle-dragging simpleton nonsense that it has become now; Sarah Palin being a perfect example.

May God Bless the man, I am sure will be missed. May he rest in peace.

Cross-Posted at Alexandria

President Obama honors Jared Monti

I realize that this Blog entry is not going to do much for my Conservative Credentials; not that I honestly give two flips about that. But I happened to notice this little entry over at the White House Blog.

<p>President Barack Obama stands with Paul and Janet Monti as he posthumously awards their son, Army Sgt. 1st. Class Jared C. Monti from Raynham, Mass., the Medal of Honor for his service in Afghanistan during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, Sept. 17, 2009.</p>
President Barack Obama stands with Paul and Janet Monti as he posthumously awards their son, Army Sgt. 1st. Class Jared C. Monti from Raynham, Mass., the Medal of Honor for his service in Afghanistan during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, Sept. 17, 2009.

Quote:

Today the President awarded Sergeant First Class Jared C. Monti, U.S. Army, the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty in the East Room of the White House. Sergeant First Class Monti received the Medal of Honor posthumously for his heroic actions in combat in Afghanistan, which the President recounted alongside his parents Paul and Janet Monti.

Here is a portion of the President’s comments, of which you can read the full thing here.

That’s when Jared Monti did what he was trained to do. With the enemy advancing — so close they could hear their voices — he got on his radio and started calling in artillery. When the enemy tried to flank them, he grabbed a gun and drove them back. And when they came back again, he tossed a grenade and drove them back again. And when these American soldiers saw one of their own — wounded, lying in the open, some 20 yards away, exposed to the approaching enemy — Jared Monti did something no amount of training can instill. His patrol leader said he’d go, but Jared said, “No, he is my soldier, I’m going to get him.”

It was written long ago that “the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet, notwithstanding, go out to meet it.” Jared Monti saw the danger before him. And he went out to meet it.

He handed off his radio. He tightened his chin strap. And with his men providing cover, Jared rose and started to run. Into all those incoming bullets. Into all those rockets. Upon seeing Jared, the enemy in the woods unleashed a firestorm. He moved low and fast, yard after yard, then dove behind a stone wall.

A moment later, he rose again. And again they fired everything they had at him, forcing him back. Faced with overwhelming enemy fire, Jared could have stayed where he was, behind that wall. But that was not the kind of soldier Jared Monti was. He embodied that creed all soldiers strive to meet: “I will always place the mission first. I will never accept defeat. I will never quit. I will never leave a fallen comrade.” And so, for a third time, he rose. For a third time, he ran toward his fallen comrade. Said his patrol leader, it “was the bravest thing I had ever seen a soldier do.”

They say it was a rocket-propelled grenade; that Jared made it within a few yards of his wounded soldier. They say that his final words, there on that ridge far from home, were of his faith and his family: “I’ve made peace with God. Tell my family that I love them.”

And then, as the artillery that Jared had called in came down, the enemy fire slowed, then stopped. The patrol had defeated the attack. They had held on — but not without a price. By the end of the night, Jared and three others, including the soldier he died trying to save, had given their lives.

I’m told that Jared was a very humble guy; that he would have been uncomfortable with all this attention; that he’d say he was just doing his job; and that he’d want to share this moment with others who were there that day. And so, as Jared would have wanted, we also pay tribute to those who fell alongside him: Staff Sergeant Patrick Lybert. Private First Class Brian Bradbury. Staff Sergeant Heathe Craig.

And we honor all the soldiers he loved and who loved him back — among them noncommissioned officers who remind us why the Army has designated this “The Year of the NCO” in honor of all those sergeants who are the backbone of America’s Army. They are Jared’s friends and fellow soldiers watching this ceremony today in Afghanistan. They are the soldiers who this morning held their own ceremony on an Afghan mountain at the post that now bears his name — Combat Outpost Monti. And they are his “boys” — surviving members of Jared’s patrol, from the 10th Mountain Division — who are here with us today. And I would ask them all to please stand. (Applause.)

Like Jared, these soldiers know the meaning of duty, and of honor, of country. Like Jared, they remind us all that the price of freedom is great. And by their deeds they challenge every American to ask this question: What we can do to be better citizens? What can we do to be worthy of such service and such sacrifice?

Sergeant First Class Jared C. Monti. In his proud hometown of Raynham, his name graces streets and scholarships. Across a grateful nation, it graces parks and military posts. From this day forward, it will grace the memorials to our Medal of Honor heroes. And this week, when Jared Monti would have celebrated his 34th birthday, we know that his name and legacy will live forever, and shine brightest, in the hearts of his family and friends who will love him always.

May God bless Jared Monti, and may He comfort the entire Monti family. And may God bless the United States of America.

For all of the criticisms that I level at President Obama; this is not one of them. I truly believe that President Obama “Gets it”; when it comes to loss of life in the Military. More so, than even President Bush. I believe sometimes, that Bush used the Military as a photo prop or even to boost his ratings. To me, as a writer who was and still is, far way from the beltway, it always seemed like Bush was posing, when appearing with Military personnel. I could be wrong on this, but I highly doubt it. Obama does genuinely care. I can tell this. He respects the men and woman who risk and ultimately give their lives for the Military and more broadly for their Country. To me, that strikes me as Obama being a “Truman Democrat”. I truly believe that Obama dislikes the notion of war. But he also understands that War is necessary for the preservation of the Republic.  I also notice that Obama has stepped up to the plate in the Afghanistan war. The President knows that the situation in that country is extremely complex; even more so now, that it was when Bush ordered the invasion.

It has also been observed that President Obama has shrugged off the far left’s insistence that President should pull our ground troops out of Afghanistan and solve the Afghanistan war though diplomacy. Something that this writer highly disagrees with. There is only one way to deal with terrorists and Al-Qeada and that is with the end of gun or a missile. President Obama knows this and has; so far, stepped up the plate and made it quite clear that he intends to carry that fight on.  As a Conservative and someone who believes that the war on terror is a reality, this is a welcome quality as a President and I personally commend him for that.

This is not to say that I do not have issues with his domestic polices. I do. I disagree with a good portion of it. But his policy when it comes to the war on terror and his respect for our Nation’s Military is not something you will find me criticizing at all.

So, on the behalf of this Conservative writer and supporter of our Nation’s Military; Thank you Mr. President and please, Keep it up.

U.S Changes direction on Eastern European Nuclear-Missile Shield

Oh Wonderful….. 🙄 You will see why I say this in a minute here.

First, the video:

The Story via the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON — The White House is scrapping a Bush-era plan for an Eastern European missile-defense shield, saying a redesigned defensive system would be cheaper, quicker and more effective against the threat from Iranian missiles.

“After an extensive process, I have approved the unanimous recommendations of my secretary of defense and my joint chiefs of staff to strengthen America’s defenses against ballistic-missile attack,” President Barack Obama said in an announcement Thursday morning.

The previous administration’s plans will be changed, moving away from the installation of a missile-defense shield in the Czech Republic and Poland in the near future. A second phase to begin in 2015 could result in missiles being placed on land in Eastern Europe.

“Our new missile defense architecture in Europe will provide stronger, smarter and swifter defenses of American forces and America’s allies,” Mr. Obama said. “It is more comprehensive than the previous program, it deploys capabilities that are proven and cost effective, and it sustains and builds upon our commitment to protect the U.S. homeland.”

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the decision to abandon the Bush administration’s plans came about because of a change in the U.S. perception of the threat posed by Iran.

Mr. Gates said intelligence experts concluded the short- and medium-range missiles were “developing more rapidly than previously projected” in Iran. The findings are a major reversal from the Bush administration, which pushed aggressively to begin construction of the Eastern European system before leaving office in January.

The Bush administration proposed the European-based system to counter the perceived threat of Iran’s developing a nuclear weapon that could be placed atop its increasingly sophisticated missiles. There is widespread disagreement over the progress of Iran’s nuclear program toward developing such a weapon, but miniaturizing nuclear weapons for use on long-range missiles is one of the most difficult technological hurdles for an aspiring nuclear nation.

The White house confirmed that it will ditch Bush plans to erect a missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, a move likely to mean greater cooperation with Russia. WSJ’s National Security Correspondent Peter Spiegel reports.

The Bush plan infuriated the Kremlin, which argued the system was a potential threat to its own intercontinental ballistic missiles. U.S. officials repeatedly insisted the location and limited scale of the system — a radar site in the Czech Republic and 10 interceptor missiles in Poland — posed no threat to Russian strategic arms.

The Obama administration’s assessment concludes that U.S. allies in Europe, including NATO members, face a more immediate threat from Iran’s short- and medium-range missiles and is ordering a shift toward the development of regional missile defenses for the Continent, according to people familiar with the matter. Such systems would be far less controversial.

Russia on Thursday welcomed the news but said it saw no reason to offer concessions in return. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called the plan a “responsible move.” He threatened last year to station tactical Iskander missiles on Poland’s border if the U.S. system was deployed.

“We appreciate this responsible move by the U.S. president toward realizing our agreement,” Mr. Medvedev said Thursday. “I am prepared to continue the dialogue.”

Okay now, here’s why I say, “Oh Wonderful….” 🙄

Via The A.P.:

VIENNA (AP) – Experts at the world’s top atomic watchdog are in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report seen by The Associated Press.

The document drafted by senior officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency is the clearest indication yet that the agency’s leaders share Washington’s views on Iran’s weapon-making capabilities.

It appears to be the so-called “secret annex” on Iran’s nuclear program that Washington says is being withheld by the IAEA’s chief.

The document says Iran has “sufficient information” to build a bomb. It says Iran is likely to “overcome problems” on developing a delivery system.

Nothing like yanking your shields down —– Just in time to find out that Iran has the ability to make a Nuke and is hiding it from the rest of the World.

If I were President Obama, I would be in the fetal position crying my eyes out right about now. I mean, This guy just has a horrible sense of timing or something.

I hate to be the guy to say it; but this President has royally screwed up and screwed us, the American people…..again.

Good Job Barry! 🙄

Others:  Pajamas Media, Jules Crittenden, Don Surber, Power Line, Moonbattery, Fausta’s Blog, , The Foundry,  Below The Beltway, Moderate in the Middle, Neptunus Lex, A Blog For All, Dr. Sanity, , Michelle Malkin, 

Liberals now accuse us of being terrorists

That is correct, we are now the terrorists; that is according to the far left African-American wing of the Democratic Party.

I am, of course, referring to this absolutely asinine rant here.  I would quote that bunch of nonsensical prattle on this blog and respond to it directly; but I am afraid that my emotions would get the best of me and I would say something that I might regret later. Leave it to the idiotic Socialist Liberal Democrats, to turn a fact finding mission, about an admitted Communist, who said everything and I do mean everything; under the damn sun about white people into a “White vs Black” witch hunt; starring of course; Glenn Beck.

The truth is folks, this had nothing to do with “White vs Black” and everything to do with Right vs Wrong. In fact, here is Glenn Back’s Statement about Van Jones’s ouster:

The American people stood up and demanded answers. Instead of providing them, the Administration had Jones resign under cover of darkness. I continue to be amazed by the power of everyday Americans to initiate change in our government through honest questioning, and judging by the other radicals in the administration, I expect that questioning to continue for the foreseeable future.

That is the truth about what really happened people. The Socialist Liberals seem to forget something; and that is that not every person under the Sun voted for Barack Obama. Some that voted for radical extremists like Bob Barr, some that wrote in the name of the crazy extremist Texas Representative Ron Paul, some that actually held their noses and voted for Moderate Republican John McCain and his V.P. Pick Caribou Barbie; er, um, I mean, Sarah Palin.

That my friends is 42% of this Country of ours. Yes, President Obama won fair and square; there is no disputing that.  But he won the election for President of the United States of America and NOT President of the Democratic Party; NOT President of extreme socialist wing of the Democratic Party, not President of the Socialist States of America, not the President of the African-American wing of the Democratic Party —- But the United States of America. President Barack Obama is the American people’s President and we, as Americans, have a obligation as United States citizens to hold this President accountable for every last damn decision that he and congress make.  The same was true with George W. Bush and the Republican Congress and the same is and will be true with THIS President and this Congress.

We just cannot allow, nor can we afford, to become complacent in our attitude towards politics and Washington D.C. and most importantly about the Obama Administration.  That is what the Obama Administration wants; everyone just to tune out and let them handle everything. Let me be the first to say this; as a Independent Conservative writer, and not as a Republican —– that complacency is what got this Country in this mess in the first place. What am I talking about? I am referring to the last nine years in the Country. Back in 2000. There was an election, we elected George W. Bush, then the day after the election, the America said, “Okay, that is over with!” and they proceeded to tune out politics and went back to their normal lives.  Then 9/11 happened and everybody paid attention again, and that lasted about a month or so, maybe two or three; but by the time December of 2001 had rolled around the majority of America had moved on or lost interest.  Then 2003 rolled around, George W. Bush sort of declared war against a Country that had zero to do with the 9/11 attacks. All because upon intelligence that we now know was horribly bad. Again, everyone paid attention, for a while, maybe for about a month or so. But then, the story got to be old hat and the majority of Americans lost interest. Then came 2006, the Iraq War turned ugly — troops started dying in mass; and the American people got angry and started demanding answers. Changes were made, idiots were fired, and a magical surge happened and everything was fine again, and again the people tuned Washington D.C. and the President out, again.

Then came the 2008 elections, which really started way back in 2007. I know, I blogged about them; daily. The American people started, ever so slowly to pay attention again, weary from the Bush Years, people wanted change. Then in the middle of the horse race in 2008, the economic bubble burst and burst bad it did. This is when everyone and I do mean everyone began to pay attention.  What would President Bush do? What would become of our Nation? The American people actually said, “What will become…of me?” Bush did what any beltway Conservative does in time of crisis; he became a Democrat and started trying to prime the pump. He threw money at the Bankers and very quickly left the scene. By this time, the damned world was watching and some, were scratching their heads and wondering; “What on earth are these people doing to our Nation?”

Then the day of reckoning arrived; November 4, 2008. The Nation was in dire need of change and a new President; and the American people did what our Constitution guarantees us —- A right to vote.  During the election, Conservatives like myself, raised our objections to the Democratic forerunner and his policies.  But, the majority of the American people either were not listening or just simply did not care. They wanted a change in direction and boy did they ever get one!

Six months have passed now and Obama’s mantra of Hope and Change is now soured and the very people that voted for him are not shaking their fists in disgust at this President. His policies are failing, tax cheats have bailed, a Communist has resigned over furor of statements made by him. His own very base is now turning on him.

Where am I going with this? What is my point?

My point is this. The American people are actually paying attention to what you do, Mr. President. Do not deceive yourself into believing that you can just do what you damned well please. Your backroom deals with big pharma will come back to haunt you in 2012. Your feeble attempt to fix this economy has essentially failed.  You hired a racist-baiting, bigoted, Communist for a “Green Jobs Czar.” The American people, with the assistance of the Conservative Blogosphere; you know those 42% of Americans that did not vote for you. —- have become well informed of you actions sir. We will continue to fight for what we believe in, Mr President.

We are the loyal opposition. We have nothing to apologize for….. and we’re not going any damned where. Mr. President we elected you and we will make sure, that you are doing your job. We cannot ever afford to tune out, nor will we ever do so again.

Others:  American Power, Pajamas Media, Hot Air, Riehl World View,  AmSpecBlog, Power Line

Jack Hunter makes a good point

At one point, I had written that I was not going to publish this man’s videos anymore; and I do not make a habit of it. His comment about our Military over on The American Conservative‘s Blog called “Post Right” was the end for me.

However, this video does make a good point and so, I will post it; with a comment at the end.

(Source)

I posted this, because I happen to agree with Jack’s stance on progressive policy on economics. But because I am “Fair and Balanced”, I will tell you, what others will not about the “Paleo-Conservative” or the “Taft” wing of the Republican Party as it is called by some. If it were left to these guys; such as Jack Hunter and his two hero-like personalities like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul —- America would have never went to war with Germany, at all. Hitler would have allowed to exterminate the Jews. Something that I am told Pat Buchanan has said that he wished happened, when he was around some friends once; which goes back to the old school catholic hatred of the Jews and their religion. Further more, most people of the Paleo-Conservative strand believe that Abraham Lincoln was a traitor. Not only to the White Man; but also to the South for the way he conducted the Civil War. Which Jack claims was not about race. (Wink Wink) But rather about Centralized Government.

So, while Jack might be correct about his thesis on the economic policy; his association with the bigoted “Old Right” is to be noted and for this, I feel, his credentials are marred.