About Us

Name: Patrick Baldwin
Email: pab@tanasarah.com
Name:
Email: tanabaldwin@att.net
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Is this the Bizarro United States?

Okay, so as I scan the news, I am confronted with these bits of reality:
 
It is now protocol for our President to bow and show subservience to nearly every world leader, with the exception of our allies in Great Britian and Israel.
 
We are entering into a nuclear arms reduction treaty with Putin, the same guy the next day inks a deal to supply arms to Chavez, and supports Achmanutjob.
 
The Chinese are going to support sanctions against Iran.....except for right after Obama announced that, the Chinese said that they were not supporting sanctions.
 
Our President shakes hands with Chavez, gets praised by Castro and has Hillary talk nice to Kim Jong Il, but forces the Dalai Lama to use the back door, trash strewn entrance to the White House, and disrespects the Israeli Prime Minister.
 
Seizing control of the car industry, banking industry, health care industry, putting government in control of all student loans and exploding the deficit.....all being sold as ways to improve the economy.
 
Democrats ignoring 70% of the American people and forcing Obamacare on us through back room deals and payoffs, and claiming that they have won a huge victory for the people.
 
If you support our Constitution and believe in lower taxes, smaller government and personal liberty, you are a racist and a terrorist.
 
Joe Biden is the Vice President of the United States....still.
 
I have to be living in Bizarro World.......whatever happened to the "Shining city on a hill"?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Stupak needs to go!

Okay, the vote is over and liberals have won this round, though their win sends our country down a dark and perilous path. President Obama is basking in the glow of victory, but I would humbly suggest that the spotlight should instead be focused on the man who is truly responsible for this assault on our liberty, Bart Stupak.
 
Bart Stupak, who represents my district here in Michigan, has long claimed to be a "moderate", and for some reason the voters here, though for the most part leaning conservative, have repeatedly bought this false claim and returned Stupak to Washington again and again. Though abortion is not way up on my list of issues that we should be concerning ourselves with, I do believe that if you put yourself up there to be the champion of a position, then walk the walk that goes with your talk. Last November, Stupak made a lot of noise about how he would stop the healthcare bill in the House due to its lack of restriction on abortion, and due to the financial burdens that the bill would impose. Yet, when the moment came to stand firm and actually follow the will of his constituents, he sold out and he and his fellow "moderates" sent the bill on to the Senate.
 
Now we have the recent vote, and though again his constituents and a majority of Americans had spoken loud and clear that we did not want this bill, Bart Stupak sold out again. This time he didn't even bother to bluster about any concerns about the cost, but he did speak out clearly that he would vote no if the bill did not contain clear restrictions on federal funding of abortion. He stated this repeatedly, on just about every news program and to any reporter that would listen. He whined about all the pressure being put on him, and he bragged about how he was holding his group of 8-12 fellow "moderate" Democrats with him. Then, when the moment again came, he caved. He did not get what he had promised to hold out for, he did not stand on his principles, he sold out for an unenforceable and irrelevent executive order. He delivered the 7 votes that were necessary to impose the worst, most financially burdensome and socialist program ever foisted on the American people.
 
Bart Stupak has demonstrated, with these votes, that he does not represent the people of his district. He does not support and defend the Constitution, or he would have stood firm and not allowed the trampling of our rights. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for the Federal government to mandate we purchase something just because we are citizens. It is unacceptable that Americans should be forced to use their tax dollars to subsidize elective abortion. It is a travesty that in order for the liberals to acheive control over such a personal freedom as our healthcare, they are financially dooming our children and grandchildren.
 
President Obama may have started us down this patch, but it was Bart Stupak who stepped to the forefront and delivered what was needed to strip us of another of our liberties. Stupak needs to go, and I hope that voters will no longer be snowed by his claims of being a "moderate", and cast a vote this year to replace him with someone who will represent them with honesty and integrity.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

After a year, a fair look back at GW

It has been a year now since President George W. Bush left office, and yet he remains a focus of the political debate as liberals continue to demonize him.
 
The negative image of President Bush, created by liberals and the mainstream media, is unfair and false in so many ways. The greatest slur is that the man is stupid, and many times this assertion was made in comparison to his opponents like Algore and John Kerry. This "stupid" man is the only President ever to have earned an MBA, he never failed at his academic pursuits, unlike Gore who flunked out of divinity school, and he maintained a higher GPA than John Kerry. His term as Governor of Texas was highly successful and he accomplished lowering taxes while increasing funding to public schools and raising test scores. He was able to do these things because he was able to work with Democrats in his state and bring the parties together to pass meaningful legislation.
 
He has been painted as a right-wing neocon, though this too is far from the truth, as most conservatives agree that he was far too moderate on federal spending and growth of government. Though early on he worked with Ted Kennedy to pass the No Child Left Behind legislation, it was immediately after that when the Dem's turned on him and resisted his every effort in other areas of reform, inlcuding oversight of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which we now can see were so seriously needed. The tax cuts, and contrary to liberal claims, they were targeted to the middle class, helped to rejuvenate the economy and get us back on track, at least until Republicans lost the majority in Congress in 2006. Though it cannot be said that Bush and his Republican majority for the first six years were in any way fiscally responsible, his refusal to use his veto power after the Dem takeover in 2006 allowed them to get us into the terrible economic state that we are in now. Let's not forget though that while he did not veto this spending, the legislation came from a Congress controlled by Democrats and was voted for by those on the left who now seek to blame Bush for everything.
 
After September 11, 2001, stood strong and went after Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. He put measures in place to protect the homeland. Though some of these need revisiting now and should be reviewed regularly to keep the government from overreaching, they were necessary to protect against an enemy ready to attack our friends and families on our own soil. When Bush decided to hold Saddam accountable to the conditions he agreed to in the cease fire at the end of the Gulf War, he was doing something that should have been done under President Clinton. Yes, he stated that danger from Saddam's suspected WMD threat, but so did President Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry and a long list of Democrat and Republican politicians, as well as other leaders around the world. He did not lie to us about this threat, he used the same intelligence that all of these others cited, and yet they don't get called liars. My only regret is that President Bush did not simply make the most relevent case....Saddam was in violation, and as soon as he was out of compliance the cease fire no longer applied and a state of hostility existed again, all he did was enforce the cease fire conditions. Regardless of whether he had WMD at the time, ridding the world of Saddam and preventing him from ever developing them and placing them in the hands of those who are against us was a victory for the US.
 
President Bush is accused of stupidly and callously sending our troops into battle. This is patently false, if anything his desire to limit the scope of troop deployment early on led to our diffuculty in initially dealing with the insurgency. The media image of Bush as indifferent or unaffected by the death of service members, that he took war decisions lightly and was only concerned with his policy objectives, is perhaps the most vulgar charge leveled against him. Those close to the President all relate how deeply he was affected he was by the deaths of service members, and how heavily his responsibilities as Commander in Chief weighed on him. The media was excluded from his many visits to wounded veterans at Walter Reed and Bethesda, which he insisted were to be private and not photo-ops. Many Gold Star military families tell of meetings with the President, where his warmth and genuine emotion touched and consoled them. Even take the case of the tragedy at Fort Hood, long after he had left office, where on the same day that President Obama was there for the memorial services, President Bush quietly came and met with the families, spending hours with them quietly out of the view of the media.
 
President George W. Bush, it can be fairly said, did not do everything right. He made mistakes, as every President does, but he does deserve credit for the things he got right. He may have done things that, whichever side of the aisle you are on, were not in alignment with your political, fiscal or social philosophy, but he was not the caricature that he was made out to be. The truth is that this is a decent and honest man who took his responsibilities to heart and followed his moral compass. He did not lead by checking the daily opinion polls, he did what he thought was right and if his approval ratings suffered, so be it. He is not stupid, but neither is he an academic elitist. He may have bungled a word here and there, but not out of a lack of intelligence, rather it is because he spoke plainly, talking to us, not above us. He left office with his approval numbers in the 20's, a year later nearly as many people say they wish he was back as give approval to the job that President Obama is doing. Perhaps hindsight is more fair than the media spotlight.
 
 
Tags: Politics   bush  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Congratulations Senator Scott Brown!

I want to wish congratulations to Scott Brown on his election victory, and thank the people of Massachusetts for doing the right thing! This was a referendum on the policy agenda set by President Obama and his Democratic majority in the Senate and House. Perhaps now the Dem's will pay more attention to what the American people are expressing so vocally. All the major polls reflect Americans, by a 2-1 margin, are against the proposed health care reform, are against cap and trade and are against the further expansion of government. The Dem's have failed to get the message. It is not that most of the people, and I include conservatives in this, don't want health care problems addressed. Health care needs attention, but not by mandates and having the government run everything. The reform needs to take on tort reform, allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines and allowing individuals to band together and purchase as a group.
 
Cap and Trade is a loser across the board. It increases taxes and places burdens on our economy that we cannot afford, and is based on science that, recently more than ever, has become suspect. Expanding government involvement into the banking and automobile industries has to be stopped and we must return to free market principles. Hopefully, the election of Senator Brown will help to start us back on the right path, and we can build on this with the mid-term elections this fall.
 
Thank you citizens of Massachusetts!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Acting Stupidly

During this press conference last night, President Obama commented on a situation in Cambridge, Massachusetts involving the police and an african american professor. While first saying that he did not know all the facts, he went on to state that the police had acted stupidly. Okay, someone acted stupidly but it wasn't the police officer, it was our brilliant President, who inserted himself in something where he had a lack of information and a bias due to his personal friendship with the professor.
 
Having read the police report on the incident, and watched the video of the incident, I feel the President was way off base in his comments. I will admit that as a former police officer, I have my own bias. However, looking at this as objectively as possible, it seems clear, considering the facts, the President's comments reflect ignorance and arrogance.
 
This police officer, Sergeant Crowley, was dispatched to a possible crime in progress involving a home being broken into. Upon his arrival he speaks with the complainant, then approaches the home. When he makes contact with Mr. Gates, he requests identification so that he can verify that Mr. Gates does belong there. This has to be done, whether Mr. Gates was black, white, asian, etc.. Mr. Gates, rather than being appreciative that someone was keeping an eye on his home, and that the police responded promptly to a possible problem, reacts in the manner of the activist that he is. Mr. Gates berates Sergeant Crowley and accuses him of racism. Mr. Gates was uncooperative and verbally abusive, and continued to escalate his offensive behavior. Sergeant Crowley responded with professionalism, and even after placing Mr. Gates under arrest, continued to treat him with far more courtesy than Mr. Gates was showing the police. If this was your home, wouldn't you want the police to make sure that the person in the house belonged there? This wasn't about race, this was about a home with the front door broken in, people in the house and needing to know if they belonged there.
 
Sergeant Crowley is a veteran police officer, with a distinguished record and no history of racial behavior. On the contrary, he was selected to teach a course at the police academy that dealt with racial profiling and how officers should avoid that type of practice. Years ago, it was James Crowley who responed to fallen Boston Celtics star Reggie Lewis and attempted to revive him by performing CPR. People who know Sergeant Crowley relate that to this day, he still comments on how he wishes he had been able to save Lewis's life. A plethora of people, of differing races, have come forward to defend Sergeant Lewis and paint a picture of a professional and caring officer. This officer is not a racist and did nothing wrong, and yet, with the comments made in support of Mr. Gates, President Obama has damaged Sergeant Crowley's reputation and good name.
 
Police officers have a difficult job, even on the best of days. There is no normal, no routine. People complain that there is never a cop around when you need one, and then complain when a patrol car is in their rear view mirror. Police officers risk their lives every day and believe me, its not for the money, which is not nearly enough, it is because, for the most part, they want to make a difference, make our lives safer and maybe even save a life. Yes, there are bad apples out there, as you find in any occupation, but they are not the majority. We can all "monday morning quarterback", and many of us cops and ex-cops probably have more than most, and see ways in which we might have dealt with this differently. But, we weren't there, we didn't have to make the decision at that moment, Sergeant Crowley did, and I, for one, will give him the benefit of the doubt.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Go Sarah!

The talking heads have been going nuts all weekend about Sarah Palin announcing her resignation as Governor of Alaska, and I love it! Those who are speculating that Sarah is done as far as politics, and that this was a foolish move are so incredibly stupid that it is beyond belief.
 
Everyone who says they are confused by what Sarah is doing or who state that she is a quitter, did not listen to what she said, and cannot recognize someone who actually does what they believe is the right thing. After deciding that she was not going to run for re-election, which she would have had to announce within a few months anyway, she knew that as a lame duck her effectiveness would be limited, and that if she was going to pursue higher office, she would be short-changing the citizens of Alaska. By doing what she is doing, she allows her Lt. Governor to step up, give the people their monies worth, as well as position himself well for his own election, and she frees herself for what needs to be done on a national level. I respect and applaud this decision. How many others in state level elected office(Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and yes even George Bush and John McCain) have we seen neglect their responsibilities so they can run nationally, many times after promising to serve out their terms. I don't see Sarah "quitting", as much as I see her showing respect to her citizens, not neglecting their needs, and demonstrating responsibility.
 
People need to take a good look at Sarah Palin, see her for who she is, not what she has been painted to be. When the liberals are so afraid of her that they have remained on constant attack against her, and when many in the old guard of the Republican Party jump on the band wagon to slam her, it should be clear that she is a force to reckon with. While the GOP sends out endless surveys and lauches "listening tours" populated by the likes of Romney, Jeb Bush and others who tell we should forget about Ronald Reagan; Sarah Palin reminds us of the principles Reagan stood for. Sarah Palin stands for smaller government, fiscal conservatism and individual liberty. When Sarah Palin looks into the future of our country she sees Reagan's "shining city on a hill", where others see only the same old thing we have right now.
 
I, for one, hope that Sarah takes the national stage and that true conservatives rally around her. We need her and those who would stand with her, we don't need a repeat of 1996, and that is what will happen if the GOP gets its way and puts Mitt Romney at the top of the ticket, another example of the party saying, "its your turn". The Democrats are driving our country into the ground, destroying our children's future, we need someone who is ready to fight, who will push conservative ideals that Ronald Reagan stood for, and who will once again make us proud to be Americans.
 
Go Sarah!!!   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The right way, the wrong way, the Obama way!

Is our current foreign policy confusing anyone else, or is it just me? I am trying to figure this out and I must be missing something. The Administration will not strongly speak out and support the protestors in Iran, who, nearly everyone agrees, are correct in asserting that the Iranian presidential election was stolen by Ahmanutjob and the mullah theocrazies. But, spokesmen for Obama were tripping all over themselves to get out there and condemn the government of Honduras for tossing out their dictator wanna-be Zelaya.
 
I guess there is some common ground, being as our government seems to want to support the anti-American factions in both cases. Perhaps we would be better off if the same approach was taken in both cases, try to say little or nothing at all. It appears that this was an easy way to go in the case of Iran, where the government there is clearly in the wrong. The rule must be that we can only shoot our mouths off when the government is right, as in the case of Honduras. Is it really possible that no one in the Administration took the time to do their homework on this? The military only stepped in at the request and with the unanimous backing of the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress. Zelaya, following in the footsteps on Obama friend, Hugo Chavez, tried to go around the Congress, the Honduran Constitution and the Court and push an illegal election meant to put him on the path of a Chavez like presidency for life.
 
So, if I get this right, the US foreign policy now supports the establishment of leftist dictatorships, of fascist theocracies and of oppressing those who call for democracy and freedom. This must be the case, since we are now standing shoulder to shoulder with Castro and Chavez!
 
You know what they say Mr. President, most times, you are judged by the company you keep!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Few House Republicans Let Us Down!

Now that the Cap and Trade legislation has passed the House, I want to take a moment let my sarcastic side run rampant and thank the turncoat Republicans who made the difference! This ridiculous, garbage laden bill, which if it was to somehow make it through the Senate would bring about the largest tax increase in American History, isn't a victory won by the Democrats, it is a gift handed them by a handful of Republican traitors.
 
Perhaps the GOP Chairman, Mr. Steele, should spend less time sending out nonsensical surveys, and spend more time attending to the lunatic behavior being exhibited by members of his party in Washington. Those in the Senate and House who are Republican in name only, and certainly not conservative at all, need to be clearly identified by the party and targeted for primary challenges in the next election. We need to stop fooling around with these traitors, and send them packing, they do not act in the interest of conservatives in this country, which I might add are in the majority according to recent polls.
 
So let me sum up by again saying thank you to those turncoats in the House, your votes would have made the difference, and by the way, I would like to consider this a parting gift from you, and I will accept it as that....so don't hesitate to leave now!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Cast Your Vote Against Earth Hour

The World Wildlife Foundation, supported by a call from the UN Secretary General, has asked everyone to "cast their vote" against global warming on March 28, 2009 at 8:30pm local time, by turning all their power off for an hour.
 
These Global Warming Scam (GWS) proponents state that they will present their vote tally at the Global Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen later in the year and are shooting for a goal of 1 billion votes. Since there is absolutely no way for them to accurately obtain any "voting" results, we can be assured that they will pull their tally out of thin air and assuredly meet their goal!
 
Those of us who live in the universe of rationality should make sure that we "vote", by turning everything on that we possibly can! Light up your house, turn on the yard lights, let your car sit and idle, if its cold outside - turn up the furnace, if its hot outside - crank up the air conditioning!
 
Al Gore and those who are devotees of his global warming, oh I'm sorry, climate change, lunacy are in the words of Weather Channel founder John Coleman, "pushing the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind". Thousands of eminent scientists have spoken out against this nonsense, but their voices are largely silenced by major media outlets. This is about the money, with billions of dollars being spent on "green" initiatives. Al Gore himself is a major recipient, having increased his own net worth 9 times over since embarking on this path.
 
Unlike those who support the GWS, who rely totally on projections based on speculation, scientists in opposition present actual historical data which clearly shows that climate changes are cyclical. Already the GWS nuts have had to change their terminology to climate change in order to address temperatures growing colder instead of warmer. They are simply trying to keep this hoax going for as long as they can so they can continue to collect the dollars.
 
Let's not follow the lemmings over the cliff! Besides just the cooling we have seen, they have also had to backtrack on Arctic sea ice, which is not diminishing, but has grown at a greater rate than anytime in the last 15 years. They have had to back off of their claim that the number of hurricanes and their intensity would get worse, when that didn't materialize. They had to recant their assertion that severe weather was caused by increased global temperatures, when studies proved that this was totally false, and completely cyclical in nature. The claim that the Antarctic ice pack is in danger of disappearing was shown totally false when scientists had to admit that their is more ice than previously thought, so much so that it conceals a mountain range equal in height to the Alps, and the breaking away of ice shelves is a natural occurence.
 
Let's kick this GWS fallacy to the curb, tell the WWF and the UN to take a flying leap. In the 70's these fools told us a new ice age was coming and money was made on that, then we had the whole Y2K thing was foisted on us and that was a money making windfall for those pushing it, and now we have the GWS, where money is being made, and politicians are using it for major power grabs. It's time to take a stand for the truth!
 
So, turn it on, turn it up and vote against Earth Hour!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Involuntary Servitude For Our Children

The House of Representatives (HR 1388) and the Senate (S 277) have passed an alarming bill, opening the door to involuntary servitude for our children, which will now be on its way to the President's desk.
 
The Give (HR 1388) and Serve (S 277) Acts deal with the re-authorization and amendment of National Service Bill. While supporters, in the Senate these include Ted Kennedy and John McCain, say that this is merely an extension and strengthening of the Americorps program, this is far from all this legislation covers.
 
Within this bill there is a requirement for the establishment of a commission to determine ways to expand national service programs, including:
 
         "The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."
 
         " Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."
 
Yes, you read that right, our government is now moving in the direction of ordering mandatory service for, according to the bill, our children between the ages of 17 and 25. There is also provision in the bill for the possibility of mandatory service for retirement age citizens as well. While the language of the bill does not speak to mandatory military service, there is the open door to include type of domestic defense forces which Obama spoke of in Colorado Springs on July 2, 2008.
 
         "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
 
There is a scary comparison that could be made here, when you consider pressing our youth into service to act as a massive national police force.
 
Also, tucked away inside this bill is this little gem:
 
         "Amendment to prohibit organizations from attempting to influence legislation; organize or engage in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes; and assist, promote, or deter union organizing."
 
The last time I checked, we had this thing called the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides not only for the abolition of slavery, but also for the outlawing of involuntary servitude.
 
         (Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.)

I would submit that if our children are pressed into mandatory service, this would be an illegal and unconstitutional act. I, for one, would not surrender my children to the government to be sent to their proposed training campuses (originally called camps), for indoctrination prior to assignment. I have served my country, and have also served my community in various volunteer organizations, and did so by my choice, not because I was forced by the government. I never want to see my daughters become the victims of their own government's oppression. Government encouraging its citizens to service is laudable, to mandate this service is unacceptable. The hypocrisy of liberals, who have so long railed against the draft for military service, to now push this plan is beyond belief.

A government that nationalizes banks, champions wage and price controls, seeks the power to seize private businesses that it deems a danger to the ecomony, and proposes mandatory government service for our children, is a goverment that walking the path toward tyranny. We must all be watchful, alert and involved. We must utilize our First Amendment right to free speech to defend against these things that could mortally wound our cherished republic.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

So Now We Are Deadbeats!

The United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, on Wednesday called the United States a "deadbeat", while speaking with members of Congress. Ban stated that while the US is a major contributor, it is also a "deadbeat", being the largest debtor and owing nearly 1 billion dollars.
 
Let's remember that the United States is not a major contributor, it is the largest contributor, paying 22 percent of the organizations 5 billion dollar budget. That 22 percent does not include aid contributions that we volunteer during disasters, and the costs we incur for our part of peacekeeping operations. It also does not address the millions of dollars in associated costs to house the UN in New York, including being stiffed for thousands of unpaid parking tickets!
 
We should also make note of the fact that the primary reason that the US is in arrears is that our government's fiscal year runs differently than that of the UN, so payment has not yet been made. Another reason that arrears exist is for the commendable reason that previous administrations, and Congress, have at times withheld payment in order to pressure the UN to take action on reforms and for policy disagreements. You know, reforms like the investigation and overhaul of programs like the Oil for Food program, in which 10 billion dollars, yeah, ten times the amount of our arrears was siphoned off fraudulently by corrupt UN officials. Most of these officials walked away with not even a slap on the writst. We have also tried to pressure the UN to deal with serious problems concerning abuses by UN personnel, including repeated reports of sexual assaults and other criminal conduct.
 
Did this insult receive an outraged response from our elected leaders? No, the White House issued a "rebuke", saying that the, "word choice was unfortunate". Democrat Congressman Bill Delahunt and Senator John Kerry, made comments not attacking this slur, but supporting Ban's position, even going so far as to say that, "his argument was well stated". Republicans weren't much more vocal, with the strongest response coming from Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, saying she, "took great umbrage", with his statement.
 
Wouldn't it have been nice to have someone stand up and ask the question that many of us have on our minds, "We are paying all this money, what are we getting for it?"
 
I cannot come up a good answer for that one, unless you believe it is okay for us to pay to be opposed constantly, and to have insults and slurs thrown at us and our closest allies. Or maybe the bang our buck is getting is in the vein of UN proposals in the areas of gun control and global warming, where drastic actions are being targeted directly at the United States.
 
I was told a long time ago that the skunk smells himself first, and I humbly suggest that this might better explain Ban Ki-moon's nonsensical slam.   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

With Friends Like US...........

As the foreign policy direction of the new administration begins to evolve, it begs the question; with friends like US, who needs enemies?
 
The first foreign press interview granted by our new president was not to the British, French, German, Canadian or Israeli press, but to Al-Arabiya. Okay, so maybe he was sincere in just wanting to open a new dialog.
 
The British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, comes to Washington for his first official meeting with Obama. This representative, of a country which is arguably one of our two closest allies, receives a blatant snub. Unlike previous White House meetings, he is ushered in and out rather quickly, with only a brief Q&A session, instead of the joint press conference normally held. There are no normal State functions held, and even Mr. Brown's wife get the casual brush off from our First Lady. When this very apparent snub is addressed by a British reporter to the State Dept., the response is that British are out of line in feeling snubbed, that they aren't special, they are no different that any of the other 190 countries that the government is dealing with.
 
Then, onto our second steadfast friend, Israel. Our esteemed Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, travels to the Middle East. Does she trumpet our support for our Israeli allies, no, the hallmark of her visit is Obama's pledge of $900 million to assist the terrorist Palestinian group, Hamas, with rebuilding Gaza.
 
So, as I am left to understand, the new US foreign policy is to kiss up to hostile Muslim regimes, disrespect the British, and stick a thumb in the eye of Israel. What's next, pull our troops out of South Korea and apologize to Kim Jong Il for standing in his way all these years? Or maybe we can send a nice greeting card and basket of processed uranium to Achmadinejad?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Deja Vu, All Over Again!

As I read the newswires this morning, Yogi Berra's old saying, "It's like deja vu all over again", sprang to mind.
 
President Obama, under a veil of secrecy, sent a letter to Vladimir Putin's puppet, Medvedev, offering to drop our missile defense system plans if the Russians would assist us in preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. This naive quid pro quo offer is absurd on so many levels it is hard to know where to start.
 
This Carteresque bumble at diplomacy makes me think that Obama drank the same Kool-Aid that President Bush did when he ridiculously said he had looked into Putin's eyes and saw a good man. So, we drop the missile shield and trust in the former KGB agent to flip 180 degrees and turn on his long-time pal Achmadinejad? Yeah that's going to happen. The Russians have been working overtime, and making huge money, helping the Iranians along with their nuclear program, which everyone can rest easy and believe is only meant for peaceful energy production. Sure, they are just suddenly going to turn on a dime and walk away from those paydays, especially when they perceive that the United States is willing to negotiate from a position of weakness. We have been here before, facing down thugs who were threatening us and our allies, I know I was there. Didn't we learn anything?
 
Nearly a quarter century ago, while in the Army, I was in Germany and participated in providing security as we deployed Pershing II missiles all over the country. President Reagan took this action, even as he negotiated for a reduction in nuclear arms, because he understood that we could only be successful in dealing with the hard-line Russians when speaking from a position of strength. Obama should take a lesson from this.
 
Not only would we be weakening ourselves, but we would also be throwing Poland, the Czech Republic and our other eastern European allies under the bus. Sending the signal to Putin that we won't take a strong stance, also telegraphs that we may well be willing to allow him to act on his aggressive urges towards all the former Soviet satellite nations. Since suffering no serious repercussions from his incursion into Georgia, he is already emboldened. It is not wise to encourage him further by getting mealy mouthed with a non-starter like Obama's offer. He has bullied Ukraine and Europe this winter with his cutting off of natural gas, and he stuck a thumb in our eye with his pressuring the government of Kyrgyzstan to close our military base there. The Obama-Hillary Clinton foreign policy direction appears to view Putin's intentions as something far different that what it is. Perhaps they should consider what Mikhail Gorbachev has to say, that Putin and his ilk are like the old-school communists of the Soviet era and Putin has designs on recreating what once was. I think we can trust Gorbachev's evaluation on this, he should know better than anyone, he was one of these guys.
 
At a time when we are already economically vulnerable, especially to China, it is lunacy to unilaterally disarm and put ourselves at the mercy of those who have, time and again, proven that they cannot be trusted. This is a pivotal moment in history, Iran and Russia are serious and growing threats. We cannot come to the table softly quoting Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" We must enter the room with Teddy Roosevelt's big stick and we need to make everyone understand that if necessary the stick will be used.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Our Own Worst Enemies

Let's see, Democrats are spending like our children's tomorrow's don't matter, Putin is trying to turn Russia back into the USSR, Iran is getting ready to unveil its first nuclear weapon, and the prime focus for conservatives today is...Michael Steele vs. Rush Limbaugh!
 
Unbelievable! While liberals are working like a well oiled machine to transform our country into their ideal socialist utopia, conservatives seize the moment to attack each other. Both Steele and Limbaugh should be ashamed of themselves. Michael Steele should never have allowed himself to be baited into making the statement that he did, especially when he was drawn into it by CNN's powerhouse political commentator D.L. Hughley (wasn't he a washed-up comedian?). Then, Limbaugh can't resist the urge to fire back, and of course Steele then apologizes. The entire day was spent on this nonsense, taking attention away from the real issues we should be focusing on.
 
This is just another example of how deeply in trouble the Republican party is right now. I mean, good grief, since the election we have seen Sarah Palin attacked, the Republican attempt to stop the Porkulus plan foiled, and Bobby Jindal savaged for his response to Obama's speech, and these things have been done by other conservatives, not by the liberals. Is it any wonder that the socialist agenda marches along? Conservatives have got to stop floundering around, taking cheap shots at each other, and remember the principles and unity of the Reagan Revolution.
 
Those in leading roles in the conservative movement, whether party leaders, commentators, politicians or pundits, need to get it together and stop behaving like they are ridiculous puppets in Rahm Emmanuel's lunatic play.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It's A Matter Of Respect

Today, the Defense Department announced that they were changing the policy regarding media access to the return of our fallen military members. Since 1991, following an order issued by President George H.W. Bush, it has been the policy of the Defense Dept. not to allow the press access to the arrival of our fallen heroes. The charge has been made that this was done for political reasons, to "hide the true cost of war". These claims have been made members of the media, anti-war groups and by politicians, including Senator John Kerry. President Bush stated in an interview several years ago, that this decision was made out of respect to the families of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, so that they may be allowed privacy in their grief. He further stated that consideration was given to the fact that it may be difficult for some families to travel and be present for the arrival of their loved one, and to allow press access might put pressure on those families to be in attendance.
 
President Bush, a WWII veteran, understood the feelings of military families, and I find no credible reason to doubt his motives for issuing this order. I also give credit to President's Clinton and George W. Bush for having continued this policy, quite obviously they understood its purpose. On the other side, those in the media and the anti-war movement have repeatedly shown their disregard and contempt for our military. They don't oppose the war out of concern for our uniformed services, but due to their political philosophy. Senator Kerry's motives are easily questioned, as he has stated that those who serve do so only because they couldn't do anything else, and let's not forget his shameful comments before Congress after his return from Vietnam. For President Bush this was a matter of respect, for Senator Kerry and his ilk, this is a matter of propaganda.
 
While the new policy will allow family members the choice of whether to allow the press or not, is this really a question that they should be confronted with in their hour of grief? Is the need of the press to broadcast pictures of flag draped coffins so great that it should intrude upon the heartbreak and tears of this moment? I think not, and as a veteran, and a supporter of our outstanding military, I am outraged by this politically motivated act. Until this time, I have felt that Secretary Gates was doing a fine job, but now I have to question if he would have taken this same decision had John McCain become President. I suspect that he would not have, and in that case, his leadership must be questioned.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »