Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Democratic Leadership – Enabling Hamas Victory

The first tangible results of the soaring U.S. popularity triggered by the leadership of the Democratic Party’s “surrender-to-anyone” policy and George W. Bush’s “placate-the-idiots-in-Congress” policy are in. Iran and Hamas have been emboldened, and now they control the Gaza strip. For the first time since 9/11, the terrorists are winning. Way to turn the tide of the war, Senator Reid, Speaker Pelosi, and President Bush. Was this the change America voted for in 2006? Happy Flag Day.

When Israel pulled out of Gaza 3 years ago, it was in its own interest, declaring that the area was indefensible. Israel was right, apparently. The result will be a clarification of Palestine’s actual position, a single voice with a single objective – the destruction of Israel.

This will, in turn, lead to an escalation of Palestinian attacks on Israel. Israel will defend itself, be condemned by the both the world and the Democrats in Congress for trying to stay alive, and the world will be sucked in. The bad guys will be gleeful as they send their pawns to inglorious death, and the good guys will be kicking, screaming, wringing their hands, and wasting valuable time searching their souls and consciences.

Israel’s decision was based on a number of assumptions, the most important of which was continued and unwavering U.S. support. Since we are in the process of figuring out how to renege on our commitment to the citizens of Iraq, can our commitment to Israel be far behind. Not to renege would violate the Congressional surrender policy. Since they have now made war inevitable, they had better start formulating their surrender strategy now unless they want to look something other than stupid for a change.

Enter Joe Lieberman, the only person in the federal government talking sense and speaking his conscience. Take out Iranian nukes, he suggests, before they exist. For most Democrats in Congress and virtually all liberals, this ought to make perfect sense. It is nothing more than political abortion – kill the nukes in the womb, so to speak. It is a second chance to relive 1938 all over again. President Bush had better re-grow some cojones (At least he had some at one time, unlike Congress.), and the world had better start listening to the only member of Congress making sense, working for America, and speaking his conscience.

Side note on Lieberman: I hereby officially forgive Joe Lieberman for his “not guilty” vote on Clinton’s impeachment, even though I still disagree with it.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Pelosi?

You should be – whoever you are. If you’re not you should be seriously questioning what is wrong with you. If you can’t do that by yourself, then get help. Once you have completed this first step, you have a duty to ask yourself what is wrong with those who do not yet fear this woman as you do. So in the interest of providing you that help, assuming you need it, and of getting this country back to having a reasonable line of succession and having a reasonable Congress, let me help you with a few observations.

Nancy Pelosi is two heartbeats away from the Presidency of the United States. And one of those heartbeats, despite its strength of mind and character, grows increasingly fragile as time passes. You should now have a sense of constitutional urgency about the situation.

Nancy Pelosi recently visited Syria – a terrorist state and enemy of the U.S. – for what? She says she was bringing the Presidents message. Well, the President is a big boy and is capable of delivering his own message. Better yet, he has Condoleezza Rice, whose job it is to deliver the Presidents message and does it better than anyone else. Here is the message “We don’t talk to terrorists.” By going at all, she acted to rescind the message – not deliver it. We, here at the bottom, understand this message. Some at the top – like the Speaker of the House – apparently don’t. If she does, she is lying about it. Either way, she doesn’t belong in a position of power in our government. You should now have a picture of a confused, back-stabbing liar. Convinced yet?

OK, I’ll continue. She is now talking about visiting the terrorist government of Iran. Does she have a list of terrorists that she needs to contact? It would have helped if she had published that list during the campaign – more honest too. I am a little surprised that she hasn’t visited Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro yet, but we have time and Fidel hasn’t been all that well lately. You should now have a picture of a dishonest politician who did not reveal her real agenda during her campaign. Convinced yet?

No? OK. All this exists against the backdrop of refusing to pass a war-funding bill capable of being signed into law before her Middle-Eastern vacation to aid and comfort America’s enemies, which, of course could not be postponed for the purpose of passing decent legislation. Passing legislation? Yes, her job - the one that she doesn’t much care to be bothered with. You should now have a picture of a woman unable and/or unwilling to do her own job, but who is hell-bent on making sure she keeps others from doing theirs, thinking that will make her look good.

So why am I not as critical of Harry Reed in the Senate? I am; he is her partner in incompetence and publicly has supported her undermining of foreign policy at the expense of our troops and their mission. He has also pushed a similarly nonsensical bill through the Senate. But he’s not the one who is two heartbeats away from the Presidency.

Anyone who does not condemn her vacation activities is complacent in aiding and comforting the enemy, and is not worthy of any position of authority in the U.S. government. This especially applies to anyone of any party running for President of the U.S. Even if you don’t condemn her activities on ideological grounds, you should condemn them on constitutional grounds. This is not her job, and those Presidential candidates who refuse to speak up are saying that it’s OK for the Congress to have its own separate, contradictory foreign policy when they become President (Apparently, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards are all OK with that.). Even if you don’t condemn her actions on a constitutional basis, you should at least be suspicious of someone who justifies her anti-American activities with a vacant, robotic stare except when she declares that “…there’s a new congress in town…” Who is the cowboy now?

You should now have a sense of constitutional urgency that a lying politician, unable and/or unwilling to do her own job, interfering with those who want to do theirs, acting like the cowboy Al Gore once accused President Bush of being, and providing aid and comfort to our enemies, is just two heartbeats away from becoming the leader of the free world. Suddenly, the freedom of the good guys appears in greater jeopardy while the freedom of the bad guys looks pretty solid.

Remove Nancy Pelosi!

Responsible politicians will work for Nancy Pelosi’s removal from her position. Republicans should work to convince their counterparts on the other side of the isle. Democrats should realize that she doesn’t represent mainstream Democrats – just the crackpots who voted to remove the U.S. military from contact with schools in San Francisco. If Nancy Pelosi became President, where would the U.S. military be removed from next? Would there be a U.S. military at all? Probably not. The U.S. military was weakened substantially under Clinton, and he wasn’t nearly as radical as Pelosi.

This is dangerous for the top, the bottom, and everyone in-between.

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Congress Doesn't Even Disgrace Itself Well

Not only has the U.S. Congress passed bad war funding bills, buying souls and votes for pork in an effort to pass bills that every single person in both houses of congress knows will not be signed into law, but they couldn’t even agree on a unified, bad bill to send to the White House before Easter vacation – a vacation that they neither need nor deserve.

In a time of war, the U.S. Congress takes two weeks for an Easter break rather that complete work on a bill (even a bad one) that would go to the President to fund our troops so they can protect our country.

As long as I’m at it, how many of us get 2 weeks off for Easter? How many of us here at the bottom (You know, the people who pay these hardy vacationers their hefty salaries and fund their ample staffs.) get anything more than 1 day off, usually for Good Friday, and that is usually a floating holiday. The U.S. Congress, however, which continually disgraces itself by passing legislation designed to turn the middle-east over to terrorists, needs a 2-week vacation from its otherwise grueling 3-day work week – not the 5-day work-week we were promised pre-election. On the bright side, it’s 2 weeks during which the Congress is likely to do no further harm.

Not that I hold President Bush blameless. I don’t. Why is he not calling members back for an emergency session of Congress? I thought we were at war. I know we are at war. The soldiers in Iraq are not getting an Easter vacation; neither should the U.S. Government as long as their futures are being held up by partisan politics.

Remember that new direction we supposedly voted for back in November, 2006? It’s now almost 5 months later, and this wasn’t it! We did not vote for the American people to be forced to fight the war on terror on 3 fronts - Iraq, Afghanistan, and the U.S. Congress.

Wake up, people.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Congress Disgraces Itself Yet Again, Part 4

The U.S. Senate joined the House of Representatives in disgrace today by selling out for the same dirty pork that the House members sold out for. Who gets the blame today in addition to the Democratic Party leadership, written off long ago as hopeless, America-hating, white-flag marketers and the Democrats who sold out for pork and/or rubber-stamped the House pork? It’s the Republican members joining them.

Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is seeking the presidency, and has turned on the administration in an apparent effort to court the anti-war vote that the Democrats have convinced him carried the 2006 election. I encourage Senator Hagel to switch parties as quickly as possible. His presidential ambitions are over. Conservative Republicans are not defeatists and will therefore never choose him to carry their banner. The Democrats cannot respect him because of the ease with which he flipped, so despite the fact that they are happy to use him as their pawn, he won’t carry their banner either. But at least if he switches parties, the good people of Nebraska can see who he really is and vote him out of office.

Gordon Smith of Oregon represents the state where our troops are being burned in effigy. Coincidence?

These two senators had the power to stop the Senate from joining the House in the disgrace that is the surrender movement. They declined to step up.

I am sorry to say this as well, but I must. I am sick to death of the people in government (and in the media for that matter) referring to each other as great Americans and patriots. Here at the bottom, people who pander, and surrender, and sell out their principles for pork are never, ever seen as great Americans or patriots. They are seen as third-rate politicians who fear for their own petty, cushy, careers (and little else) while squandering taxpayers’ money and being effective only at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Anyway, that’s how it looks today from here at the bottom. We wanted Victory – You gave us Surrender by a vote of 51-47.

Lies – The Price of Discrimination

On 3/14/07, I published an article titled “Why Did America lie to my generation.” I promised more and I am promising more yet. It’s important and is yet another issue our politicians should be paying attention to but are not because they are too busy trying keep themselves in office.

This article outlines some of the costs of discrimination of various kinds. Knowledge of the cost forces us to ask ourselves if maintaining prejudice is worth the cost. You may think this is a no-brainer in 2007 and if so, good for you. Unfortunately, that is not everyone’s reality as some discrimination is still widespread despite its lack of affordability and stress level increase.

The price of discrimination is that you lose the unique contribution of the class of people that you discriminate against. The price of lying about discrimination is that you lose the contribution of the class of people you are pretending not to discriminate against, plus you further alienate them, plus you will eventually have to eliminate discrimination for real, resulting in at least a double-billing of the investment required to accomplish real non-discrimination.

Sometimes the price can be counted in dollars. Sometimes the price is that we just feel like crap because we know we did the wrong thing. That is a valid cost because that’s what dollars do for us too. Dollars make us feel better because we can bask in the financial security they provide. Either way we, as humans, need to feel good regardless of the feel-good dimension or cause.

Race – we instinctively know it’s wrong to discriminate on the basis of race (at least most of us do). In terms of dollars, we are deprived of the perspective and ideas as well as the maximized economic and tax contribution of about 13% of the U.S. population. We also deprive ourselves and our children of the fruits of our labor as we pour tax money into a welfare system doomed to failure from the beginning, hated by both those who fund it and its recipients.

Gender – Again, we know this type of discrimination is wrong. Discrimination against 50%+ of the population is no longer discrimination; it’s civil war. We also know it’s futile because women will have their revenge no matter what. They always have; they always will. They also see things differently than men, which makes them invaluable in businesses where reaching out to women is essential, which includes every business worth mentioning.

Disabled persons – We are inspired by seeing the disabled being productive in much the same way that we are inspired by putting a human on the moon. There are, obviously potential downsides, hence the word “disabled.” However, these are the people who point out the mistakes we make in taking people and things for granted – the things we never thought about before we allowed them to contribute – ramp access on sidewalks replacing curbs, for example.

Sexual orientation – About the only way to understand anyone who discriminates on this basis any more is that we all know that it’s annoying to have homosexuality thrown in your face, just as it is to have anything thrown it your face. I am not suggesting a “don’t ask, don’t tell” scenario. I am suggesting an “I don’t care, don’t bother me with it” scenario. This is almost totally within the control of the affected class. Having said that, we welcome the creativity and other contributions brought to the table by these community members and miss them when they are absent.

Veteran Status – It doesn’t seem right to be discriminated against because you defended your country. It is currently popular to give war veterans a break. Well, I’m one of them and I don’t remember any breaks, mainly because my war was very unpopular. In fact, I remember some pretty crappy treatment courtesy of Jane Fonda and Jane Fonda wannabes. They are currently at it again, so beware active veterans. The tide can turn on you quickly. For what it’s worth, you’ll always have me. From a dollar perspective, there is the potential for a substantial loss of experience – and not just any experience. We throw away the dogged determination, thorough-training, and crisis-seasoned experience that we need in the business world of 2007 and beyond.

Religion & National Origin – Let’s face it. The problems we face in today’s world – the important problems, the issues of survival – are foisted upon us through the vehicle of religion, and implemented through the tools of state (nationalism). It is time we resurrected a basic truth. Your freedom ends where my space begins. That having been said, no serious person in America believes in this type of discrimination. Profiling is a different matter. That being said, it is the members of these classes who, by attempting to protect the few bad seeds or by rubbing our noses in a known dimension of danger (like the Minnesota Imams did), make the rest of us wary of them all. The vast majority of us want to give you opportunity and benefit from your unique culture. Help us.

Age – We don’t want to go quietly into our golden years. We weren’t raised in quiet times; we didn’t grow up in quiet times; we didn’t foster quiet times; we don’t see quiet times ahead; we aren’t ready for quiet times. We also don’t relish the idea of draining the Social Security system and depriving our children of this valuable resource. This is the dollar cost of age discrimination. If the Social Security is depleted, it will be through the discriminatory actions of those who put us out to pasture.

The common thread through all these elements of discrimination is expressed in a very old, very good book – the best-selling book of all time, in fact.


“…for whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” (Galatians 6:7)

Monday, March 26, 2007

Dead Heroes=9/11 Victims - The Ignored Upside

Not too long ago we reached a grizzly milestone in Iraq – to the apparent glee of the blathering anti-war crowd so deeply invested in American defeat. Almost as depressing is the fact that the conservative commentators that I have heard have blown this off as irrelevant. If they don’t believe that they haven’t blown it off, they certainly haven’t emphasized or embraced the silver lining in this dark cloud enthusiastically enough to suit me. They are wrong. It is extremely relevant and extremely silver.

What is most relevant is that the grizzly milestone was reached more that 5 years after 9/11/2001 and after 4 years of combat in Iraq. To see what is most silver, let’s do a little math, keeping in mind that the purpose of the military is, ultimately, to protect the citizenry who supports them at home while they implement and support diplomatic policy and initiatives at home and around the world.

I’ll use round nice numbers in an attempt to keep this simple enough for even the most logic-challenged anti-war activist to follow. On 9/11, 3,000 people were killed by terrorists in an unprovoked attack here on United States soil. REMEMBER? In the months after 9/11, the military disrupted ongoing terror operations that would have killed more Americans – by most estimates, many more Americans. How many? Although I firmly believe that there could have been the equivalent of a 9/11 about every 3 months, I am willing to concede a minimum of 1 per year.

Doing the math based on the minimum yearly 9/11-equivalent, the military and related intelligence has saved about 15,000 (3,000/year for 5 years) American lives at a minimum. The more realistic scenario of a 9/11-equivalent every 3 month would yield a total of 60,000 (3,000/quarter for 5 years) American lives. And this doesn’t even take into account all the dead terrorists who will never harm anyone again, American or other – BONUS! Keep in mind that a single dirty bomb would likely triple this number and a single nuclear strike could send the number soaring into the hundreds of thousands if not millions. Overstated you say? Not with maniacs out there who already have nuclear capability or are trying desperately (happily risking the well-being of their citizens) to develop nuclear capacity and are unrestrained by instructions from their God that using it would be wrong.

So is the military doing its job? You betcha! Has the cowboy from Texas done his number one job? Yep! Do Americans recognize and appreciate it? Based on the polls, I must conclude that they apparently do not.

Are the anti-war, cool-aid drinkers really that anxious to have us all incinerated or do they require some remedial math? I have done my best to provide the remedial math, but, truthfully, I have no clue. Maybe you do.

But I do know two things:

  • Right now, this much maligned cowboy-President from Texas, his Vice-President (hated in America for once running a successful American corporation successfully, of all things), and his team are all that stands between you and the next holocaust.
  • We have less than 2 years to find someone as tough and principled as President Bush to take his place and be willing to stand between us and the next holocaust despite the politically-correct pressure to surrender and the lack of appreciation demonstrated by the American public.


Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the armed services and intelligence services as well as to your chains of command.