Forgive me for being partisan here, but I can hear all my liberal friends now: “Look at what Bush did”, “Bush is again abusing his power by disregarding congress and giving his friends a job”, “Bush is evil!!!” Me, I am laughing my butt off. Let’s face it; the liberals in congress are bitter. They’re mad Gore lost, they’re mad Kerry lost, they’re mad they cannot get their way, so they are trying to take their toys and run home crying to their mommies. They complain when the Bush administration fires 8 political appointees for (gasp!) political reasons, despite the Clinton administration firing 93 for similar political reasons. So they run to the media and cry that Bush is making them feel bad. And of course, the media is more than happy to supply the comfort: “There there, we will make sure everyone sees how much of a bully Bush is by blowing every infinitesimal detail out of proportion.”
Let’s get real. Let’s act like adults. Sam Fox donated money to an advertising campaign that made Senator Kerry look bad, and that hurt their feelings. Now they are bitter and wish to make sure Fox/Bush do not get what they want, so they attempt to block his nomination for the position of ambassador to Belgium. Their protest has nothing to do with his qualifications, or how he would even perform at the position, but rather because he donated money that in turn made John Kerry look bad. Not that the junior senator has any trouble making his own self look bad.
Blocking Sam Fox’s nomination has nothing to do with making America better which, I remind both parties, is what we actually elect you to do. By blocking the nomination they are in a sense saying “You made us feel bad, and now we are going to make your life miserable”.
So how does President Bush respond? He waited until congress was in recess and made the appointment anyways. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. I admit it is a very dirty trick. But politics is a messy business, and sometimes you have to get your hands dirty. I would prefer that all my elected officials did things honest and open, but that is asking for a lot. So since the Democrats in congress wish to play petty politics (and yes the Republicans are equally as guilty), I respect the President for playing right back at them. I have a feeling my two readers are not going to agree with me.
So I say to you, relax, take a deep breath, it is only 19 months until the general election.
Until then, here are some data I have found concerning recess appointments:
Carter- 68 (1 term)
Regan- 243 (2 terms)
H.W. Bush- 77 (1 term)
Clinton- 143 (2 terms)
W. Bush- 167 (1.5 terms)
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Monday, April 02, 2007
The war in Iraq gets personal
Those who know me know that I have supported the war in Iraq since the beginning. I support it because I honestly feel Islamic extremism is going to be the greatest challenge my generation will face and that removing evil regimes in that area is one of the many steps we need to take.
However, not much has gone right in conducting this war. Not only did we underestimate the resistance we would encounter, we severely underestimated the amount of casualties and wounded we would incur. This has lead not only to a war lasting over four years, but to inadequate care our veterans received when they returned. Our military is over extended, exhausted, and over taxed. This has led to a virtual loss in confidence and lack of will to continue by the American people. To be honest, I do not fault anyone for feeling this way.
Despite all this I remain, for lack of a better term, cautiously optimistic that something good can come out of this. Exactly what, I do not know.
Throughout this entire ordeal, my viewpoints have come from not having any personal connections to the war. Yeah, people I knew in college are serving, but no one I considered a close friend, and I had no family members until now.
My sister’s future husband is a U.S. Marine and has already been to Iraq, I think twice. He had served four years and has been out for a year or two. He is a great guy, wonderful to my sister and a terrific father figure for her son. Recently he found out that the military is considering reactivating him and send him back to Iraq. He is proud to have served his country and never spoke ill of his previous tours, but since his last tour ended, he purposed to my sister, bought a condo, and is planning their wedding. Needless to say, this news has not been well received. That’s all I will say, as the rest goes too far into the personal realm.
So I am left wondering what to do now. On the one hand, if I continue to support the war, one that I acknowledge is not going well, I do so knowing my future brother-in-law is putting his life on the line. On the other hand, if I suddenly change positions, simply because the war has become personal, I become a hypocrite.
I just do not know what to do anymore. Life is hard and all the only thing I can say is that I wish all our military a safe return, and continue to express my gratitude for all they have sacrificed on my behalf.
However, not much has gone right in conducting this war. Not only did we underestimate the resistance we would encounter, we severely underestimated the amount of casualties and wounded we would incur. This has lead not only to a war lasting over four years, but to inadequate care our veterans received when they returned. Our military is over extended, exhausted, and over taxed. This has led to a virtual loss in confidence and lack of will to continue by the American people. To be honest, I do not fault anyone for feeling this way.
Despite all this I remain, for lack of a better term, cautiously optimistic that something good can come out of this. Exactly what, I do not know.
Throughout this entire ordeal, my viewpoints have come from not having any personal connections to the war. Yeah, people I knew in college are serving, but no one I considered a close friend, and I had no family members until now.
My sister’s future husband is a U.S. Marine and has already been to Iraq, I think twice. He had served four years and has been out for a year or two. He is a great guy, wonderful to my sister and a terrific father figure for her son. Recently he found out that the military is considering reactivating him and send him back to Iraq. He is proud to have served his country and never spoke ill of his previous tours, but since his last tour ended, he purposed to my sister, bought a condo, and is planning their wedding. Needless to say, this news has not been well received. That’s all I will say, as the rest goes too far into the personal realm.
So I am left wondering what to do now. On the one hand, if I continue to support the war, one that I acknowledge is not going well, I do so knowing my future brother-in-law is putting his life on the line. On the other hand, if I suddenly change positions, simply because the war has become personal, I become a hypocrite.
I just do not know what to do anymore. Life is hard and all the only thing I can say is that I wish all our military a safe return, and continue to express my gratitude for all they have sacrificed on my behalf.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
How do you start a world war?
Recently Iran has detained 15 British sailors and is accusing them of spying. They claim the sailors were in Iranian waters, while England claims there were in Iraqi waters. A witness, an Iraqi fishermen, supports England’s claim. Now Iran is using this situation as leverage to force England to release 50 Iranians captured by British forces in Iraq.
What does this mean? If it is in fact true that Iran entered Iraqi territory in order to capture British solders, well then that is a significant act of war. England surely is not going to allow these sailors to be part of an Iranian show trial against the west, which is what I think Iran really wants. I think that if this situation does not resolve itself in the next few days, then England will have to launch some sort of attack on Iran, which no doubt will get us involved. It was a real stupid move on Iran’s part capturing these sailors.
If the sailors were actually in Iranian waters, then that is a whole another issue and we will have a huge diplomatic mess on our hands. Iran could legitimately use this as support for their case against western imperialism.
This to me is a potentially scary string of events. Sometime I think Iran is looking for a fight with the west. It would no doubt incite more Islamic fascism, give Iran a legitimate (in their minds) use for a nuclear program, and would (again in their minds) prove the west is against the Muslim faith. Other times I think Iran is just trying to put on a diplomatic show, trying desperately to look like a powerful force in world politics.
Either way we ought to take this incident very seriously. In 1979 a group of radical Islamic students took the American embassy hostage in Iran with the intention of showing the world “The great Satan”. What started as a planned 3-day “peaceful protest” turned into a 444 day hostage crisis. Almost 30 years later, little has changed within Iran. If anything, Iran has become more defiant and more violent.
Let us hope this situation resolves itself peacefully, if not, expect to be at war with Iran by years end. My prediction: Iran will release the hostages after a few more days of grumbling and baseless demands.
What does this mean? If it is in fact true that Iran entered Iraqi territory in order to capture British solders, well then that is a significant act of war. England surely is not going to allow these sailors to be part of an Iranian show trial against the west, which is what I think Iran really wants. I think that if this situation does not resolve itself in the next few days, then England will have to launch some sort of attack on Iran, which no doubt will get us involved. It was a real stupid move on Iran’s part capturing these sailors.
If the sailors were actually in Iranian waters, then that is a whole another issue and we will have a huge diplomatic mess on our hands. Iran could legitimately use this as support for their case against western imperialism.
This to me is a potentially scary string of events. Sometime I think Iran is looking for a fight with the west. It would no doubt incite more Islamic fascism, give Iran a legitimate (in their minds) use for a nuclear program, and would (again in their minds) prove the west is against the Muslim faith. Other times I think Iran is just trying to put on a diplomatic show, trying desperately to look like a powerful force in world politics.
Either way we ought to take this incident very seriously. In 1979 a group of radical Islamic students took the American embassy hostage in Iran with the intention of showing the world “The great Satan”. What started as a planned 3-day “peaceful protest” turned into a 444 day hostage crisis. Almost 30 years later, little has changed within Iran. If anything, Iran has become more defiant and more violent.
Let us hope this situation resolves itself peacefully, if not, expect to be at war with Iran by years end. My prediction: Iran will release the hostages after a few more days of grumbling and baseless demands.
Monday, March 12, 2007
What’s up with Chuck?
Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) recently announced that he will later announce his intentions to run or not to run for president. Why the vagueness? I think it has a lot to do with his position on the Iraq war and how the surge fairs. Senator Hagel has taken an interesting position by distancing himself from the Republican base. As far as I know, he is the only Republican to do so and the reason for this, in my opinion, has everything to do with the 2008 presidential election.
Here is why: The war is very unpopular. Let’s face it, no one likes where this thing is going. Sure some people, like me, see the importance of a successful outcome. However, I think most of America just wants out. So any person seeking the presidency, must, and I mean absolutely must want out of Iraq, have a way out of Iraq, or simply think this was a foolish idea in the first place.
This is where it gets tricky for a candidate. I believe who wins the white house depends mainly on how Iraq turns out. PREDICTION 1: Should the surge actually bring some much needed success, I think the Republicans take the office as well as take back the house and senate. PREDICTION 2: If Iraq completely spirals into chaos, I think it is pretty much a slam dunk the Democrats win.
However, this is where it gets interesting. Should Iraq fail, senator Hagel can tout himself as the only Republican to stand against the surge and thus make himself a viable alternative to the anti-war Democrats. By taking the position he has, senator Hagel and to some degree all the Democrat candidates have a vested interest in the United Stats losing Iraq. This is a very dangerous position to take and one that I believe influences their decisions. People seeking office should put their country ahead of their personal goals. Yet sadly, this is not so, for either party.
This leads back to Senator Hagel’s decision to announce his intention to announce later his intentions to run or not to run for the office of the President of the United States. PREDICTION 3: If Iraq has some signs of success, the senator will not run for office. If Iraq fails, he will seek, but lose, the office of the presidency. Either way, I do not see him even getting the Republican nomination.
Let us see in six-nine months how I did.
Here is why: The war is very unpopular. Let’s face it, no one likes where this thing is going. Sure some people, like me, see the importance of a successful outcome. However, I think most of America just wants out. So any person seeking the presidency, must, and I mean absolutely must want out of Iraq, have a way out of Iraq, or simply think this was a foolish idea in the first place.
This is where it gets tricky for a candidate. I believe who wins the white house depends mainly on how Iraq turns out. PREDICTION 1: Should the surge actually bring some much needed success, I think the Republicans take the office as well as take back the house and senate. PREDICTION 2: If Iraq completely spirals into chaos, I think it is pretty much a slam dunk the Democrats win.
However, this is where it gets interesting. Should Iraq fail, senator Hagel can tout himself as the only Republican to stand against the surge and thus make himself a viable alternative to the anti-war Democrats. By taking the position he has, senator Hagel and to some degree all the Democrat candidates have a vested interest in the United Stats losing Iraq. This is a very dangerous position to take and one that I believe influences their decisions. People seeking office should put their country ahead of their personal goals. Yet sadly, this is not so, for either party.
This leads back to Senator Hagel’s decision to announce his intention to announce later his intentions to run or not to run for the office of the President of the United States. PREDICTION 3: If Iraq has some signs of success, the senator will not run for office. If Iraq fails, he will seek, but lose, the office of the presidency. Either way, I do not see him even getting the Republican nomination.
Let us see in six-nine months how I did.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Will the real Ann Coulter please stand up?
Now this is the Ann Coulter I like. The Ann Coulter I admire. The Ann Coulter the general public seldom sees. She is bright, articulate (Can I say that about a woman?), and absolutely masterful at crafting an argument. However, she has a propensity for taking pleasure in the “shock factor” and that is where I disagree with her approach and do not excuse what she has recently said.
Before you completely demonize her, it is critical to remember what she is and isn’t. First and foremost, she is NOT a public servant, journalist, or even a political analyst. Her words should not and do not dictate political decision making. What she is is an author and political satirist. Ms. Coulter makes a living making fun of political figures and selling books. Is this wrong? No. Comedians throughout time have made a living poking fun at political figures, often using words far worse than the word Ms. Coulter used. So why was she raked through the coals (sorry I cannot come up with a more eco-friendly analogy)?
As Ms. Coulter correctly points out in her vulgarity free column, shooting elephants in a barrel, it is a crime to be a Republican. If there is one undeniable aspect of politics, it is that liberals and conservatives are treated very different both in the media and in the court room. Unfortunately for conservatives, we usually draw the short stick. I could go on and on and whine that this is unfair, but it won’t do any good. All we can do is do our best to point out the facts. Time after time, column after column, speech after speech Ann Coulter does a brilliant job at doing just this. However, as long as she focuses more on shocking and offending people into buying her books than on building a rock solid argument, her genius will be lost.
Before you completely demonize her, it is critical to remember what she is and isn’t. First and foremost, she is NOT a public servant, journalist, or even a political analyst. Her words should not and do not dictate political decision making. What she is is an author and political satirist. Ms. Coulter makes a living making fun of political figures and selling books. Is this wrong? No. Comedians throughout time have made a living poking fun at political figures, often using words far worse than the word Ms. Coulter used. So why was she raked through the coals (sorry I cannot come up with a more eco-friendly analogy)?
As Ms. Coulter correctly points out in her vulgarity free column, shooting elephants in a barrel, it is a crime to be a Republican. If there is one undeniable aspect of politics, it is that liberals and conservatives are treated very different both in the media and in the court room. Unfortunately for conservatives, we usually draw the short stick. I could go on and on and whine that this is unfair, but it won’t do any good. All we can do is do our best to point out the facts. Time after time, column after column, speech after speech Ann Coulter does a brilliant job at doing just this. However, as long as she focuses more on shocking and offending people into buying her books than on building a rock solid argument, her genius will be lost.
Monday, March 05, 2007
Recommended Reading
I have been meaning for some time to share with you some of the great books I have read over the last few months. Reading has become something I try to do more and more and have become so interested in learning about what ever I can. Since this the theme of this blog is current events and social issues, I will post books pertaining to those subjects. If you would like I have been also reading a lot about poker, dog psychology, and non-verbal communication. Like I said, I love to read.
The first book, by Larry Elder, has to do with many of the social issues we face today including: black racism, white condescension, the glass ceiling, gun control, and welfare. This book is written from, in my opinion, a libertarian point of view. For someone who is anti-conservative, this is still a great book to read as Larry Elder is by no means, a right-wing nut. In all honesty, this book has had the greatest impact on my personal beliefs of any book I have read. I highly recommend it.
“America Alone” tackles the issues we face in dealing with radical Islam. Mark Steyn does a great job in using demographics to hypothesize as to why we really are alone in this fight. I will admit, this is more “right-wing” that the first, but again, is by no means “out there”. It is a really well written book full of factual and easily verifiable information. If you take the time to look up what he talks about, you will be scared, or at least concerned.
“Who really cares” examines America’s charitable practices and used a wealth (no pun intended) of surveys to determine who gives and who does not. The results, I guarantee will surprise you. Again, this is a really great book, which includes many of the surveys in the appendix of the book. The results and conclusions are based on facts easily verifiable and not on speculation and rhetoric.
I already have generated a very long list of books I intend on reading in the near future, so look for more recommendations to come.
Happy Reading!
The first book, by Larry Elder, has to do with many of the social issues we face today including: black racism, white condescension, the glass ceiling, gun control, and welfare. This book is written from, in my opinion, a libertarian point of view. For someone who is anti-conservative, this is still a great book to read as Larry Elder is by no means, a right-wing nut. In all honesty, this book has had the greatest impact on my personal beliefs of any book I have read. I highly recommend it.
“America Alone” tackles the issues we face in dealing with radical Islam. Mark Steyn does a great job in using demographics to hypothesize as to why we really are alone in this fight. I will admit, this is more “right-wing” that the first, but again, is by no means “out there”. It is a really well written book full of factual and easily verifiable information. If you take the time to look up what he talks about, you will be scared, or at least concerned.
“Who really cares” examines America’s charitable practices and used a wealth (no pun intended) of surveys to determine who gives and who does not. The results, I guarantee will surprise you. Again, this is a really great book, which includes many of the surveys in the appendix of the book. The results and conclusions are based on facts easily verifiable and not on speculation and rhetoric.
I already have generated a very long list of books I intend on reading in the near future, so look for more recommendations to come.
Happy Reading!
Friday, February 16, 2007
A liberal nightmare
Caution: Do not watch this video if you are a liberal with a heart condition
FOXNEWS new satire show promo
And for the record, even I think this half-hour news satire show is probably going to tank. But this promo is just too awesome.
FOXNEWS new satire show promo
And for the record, even I think this half-hour news satire show is probably going to tank. But this promo is just too awesome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)