- + - + - + - + - + - + -

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Obama's Afghan Kid Gloves: Fatal Misunderstandings of Islam

From "Let Them Fight or Bring Them Home" (H/T Atlas Shrugs):

Jim Sauer is a retired Marine Corps Sergeant Major and combat veteran with over thirty years of service. Since retiring he has worked in support of U.S. Government efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel.

Once again, 1st Sgt Bernard hits the nail directly on the head. His mission is not “anti-war” nor is his aim bellicose. His position is sane.

There have been some phony arguments put forth for another “surge” in Afghanistan. We need not a surge of troops, we merely need to let our forces there do what needs to be done – kill the enemy.

There is this misconception of Afghanistan in particular (and Islam in general) that somehow we can bring Central Asia (and the rest of the Islamic world) kicking and screaming into the 21st Century through good will. This is simply not the case. There is no amount of money to spend, infrastructure to build, schools to provide, hospitals to heal, or good will that Americans can display toward the Afghan people that will produce a lasting effect. I was once told by an accomplished Afghan intelligence analyst that, “you can rent an Afghan, but you can’t buy him.”

The hard fact is that the “hearts and minds” of the Afghan “people” are not for sale! The descendants of “The Great Khan” and their tribal cousins have no interest in being Westernized in any way. And, the human sewers that serve as their political leadership can only be rented. Americans are interlopers in a land where interlopers generally have their heads lopped off.

Nobody read their Kipling. (I know, “who or what was Kipling?” Look it up.) Americans do not know their OWN history (except the spun trash that passes for “social studies” in our heavily socialistic high schools) much less the history of Afghanistan. And, this includes our political leadership! Ask an American on the street – or a congressman in the House – to point to Afghanistan on a map, and they will probably start with their finger cautiously orbiting somewhere over Rhode Island.

This writer spent thirty years listening to and deciphering military acronyms and idiotic jargon. The catch phrase today is “COIN” – Counterinsurgency doctrine. Our political and military leadership act like this is some sort of secret knowledge – Gnostic esoteric knowledge – that is now coming to light. That is crap. There is nothing new here.

Counterinsurgency predates Rome. In modern times, the first COIN doctrine called Small Wars Manual was written by the U.S. Marine Corps in 1935 with the final edition being published in 1940. The first few decades of the 20th Century saw Marines intervening as “State Department Troops” from Central America and Hispaniola to China and the Philippines. The Small Wars Manual is a compilation of information describing nation building, establishing “constabularies”, civil affairs, infrastructure repair, election management, donkey packing and inspiration, river crossing, intelligence gathering, psychology and ethnicity of native peoples, disarmament of the populace, force composition, supply and logistics chains, public image (both in the target nation and in the United States), and everything else it takes to drag a Third-World backwash into the current day and age. There is even a section on inspecting the feet of native troops for bunions, corns, and severe trichophytosis (athlete’s foot).

The manual is also full of contradictions. If one were to summarize in a sentence or two the center of conflicting mass, one might say, “Try to be nice, but if they don’t go along with the program manipulate them. If that doesn’t’ work, kill them – every one of them.” It reminds one of a quip from Vietnam that went, “Let us win your hearts and minds or we’ll burn your damn huts down.”

It seems our current crop of political and military geniuses think that COIN can be conducted in a sanitary manner. This belief is insane. The “small wars” of the 20th Century were every bit as dirty and brutal as any conventional war ever fought.

Legendary Marine Corps hero and two time Medal of Honor recipient Major General Smedley Butler wrote of his “COIN” experience a short tome titled “War is a Racket”. It spelled out the misuse of American forces and the waste of American lives during the first three decades of the 20th Century. General Butler was an unlikely critic of the use of military force – the more reason to heed his caveats.

Though published in 1940, the intervening years of conventional war (World War II and Korea) saw the Small Wars Manual fade into disuse.

The formation of the U.S. Army Special Forces in the 1960s led to an attempt to bring COIN doctrine to Vietnam. While this effort met with some success against the Viet Cong, the introduction of North Vietnamese Army (NVA) forces diminished the strategic effectiveness of the Special Forces effort. Further, as the NVA entered the fray and the war progressed, the Viet Cong themselves, although diminished by the Special Forces effort, became more sophisticated with regard to their remaining cell structures, logistics, and weapons employment.

There are several things to consider:

  1. With the exception of Malaysia, there have historically been very few – if any – real, long lasting counterinsurgency success stories.

  2. Wars are like fingerprints and snowflakes – no two are alike.

  3. The sophistication of the insurgency with respect to tactics, weapons, as well as ethnic loyalties to and from the populace, can negate COIN efforts.

  4. The subtleties and grace of Tae Kwon Do are nice, but there’s nothing like a good punch in the mouth.


COIN may be a legitimate strategy in a limited sense when the “insurgents” are seen as outsiders – or at least trouble makers with a foreign ideology – by the native population in a fixed geographic region. However, the insurgency we face is not limited to Afghanistan. It is a global movement. Civilian casualties must be avoided whenever possible – not at all costs. There is no excuse for the wanton slaughter of innocents. However, if a COIN strategy is to succeed, our political and military leadership must demonstrate the willingness to adjust the tactics used in the battlespace in order to allow our troops to kill the enemy.

When The Great Khan rode through Central Asia in the early 13th Century, he did not take into consideration public opinion. He had lands to conquer, people to rule, and resources to exploit. He spread fear and misery across Persia and into Europe. Whether an Afghan is Pashtun, Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek, or Turkmen, some – the real Afghan warriors – still have the spirit of the Mongol Horde in their blood.

That having been said, their blood has been thinned by time and centuries of misery. The current crop of Afghanistan’s “Warriors” is almost exclusive to the opposition. The true believers are fighters – cowards too, but fighters nonetheless. By contrast, the bulk of the Afghan National Army (ANA) and Afghan National Police (ANP) are not fighters, nor are they “true believers”. They are simply cowards – frauds – corrupt to the core by any standard and an apostate to their own faith. They are slovenly, drug-addicted, dimwitted, and totally unreliable at any level. Like the Taliban, they are brutal to their own countrymen. They thrive on their petty powers and refuse to shoulder any burden or responsibility. Does this sound too harsh? Not for the Marines and Soldiers who have been killed by the treachery of ANA and ANP who have purposely led them into ambush.



According to the great military minds of our time, these ANA/ANP forces can be trained and formed to fight their own war. At what cost? How many American lives? How many taxpayer dollars? It would take decades if it were simply a matter of sophistication and military training. However, the obstacle is the way and philosophy of life in the Islamic world.

Iraq is a case study in deception. You have been told by the media and our politicians that the Iraqi Army is now capable of maintaining order in Iraq with limited U.S. support. Well, read the news. Iraq is still in chaos. As we withdraw it will become worse; Sunni v. Shitte, Kurd v. Sunni and/or Shitte. Arabs are as brutal as Central Asians. However, they are even worse soldiers, and bring new meaning to the term cowardly. An American colonel who tried to train an Iraqi brigade regularly quips that his greatest accomplishment in twelve months was to get the Iraqis to use the toilets. He was not exaggerating. Americans have no idea how screwed up the world is east of Greece. Iraq is not yet a success story. The insurgency is just laying low. The Muslim mind thinks in terms of years, decades, and centuries – not election cycles. You will hear optimistic talking heads speak otherwise. They will tell you of the great success in Iraq. You will even hear this occasionally from Soldiers, Marines, and “Operators” who have had good experiences with the Iraqi forces. However, their experience is the exception.

Americans have been conditioned and have become accustomed to tiptoeing about, fearing to offend anyone – even those who are offensive to the bulk of humanity. Thus, there is not an American politician or a media guru who will speak the truth clearly.

Although this writer has read extracts from the Koran, there is no claim from this quarter to any real Islamic theological scholarship. My understanding from Muslim acquaintances is that a true Muslim understands the Koran as literally as an Evangelical Protestant understands the Bible. Those who do not are apostates. Relying on the New Testament we believe that “By their fruits ye shall know them.” This is how we know them:

  • Dismemberment of American soldiers in Somalia while Somali Muslims danced in glee – October 1993.

  • The celebrations in “The Arab Streets” (include all of Islam from Gaza to Indonesia) after the bombings of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and the downing of United Flight 93, animating Muslims throughout the world to joy and celebration – September 11, 2001 and the weeks following.

  • Dismemberment of Americans from Blackwater in Fallujah complete with the hanging of burned bodies from a bridge to the delight of the Muslim crowd – March 31, 2004.

  • Decapitations of Nick Berg, Daniel Pearl, Kenneth Bigley, and others at various times and places.

Lest we think that this barbarism is reserved for Westerners, Islam promotes:


  • Honor killings of girls and women not only in Islamic nations, but right here in the good ‘ol USA.

  • Child brides.

  • Conversion killings of anyone even thinking about leaving the Islamic faith.

  • Child abuse and indoctrination via children’s cartoons (Muppets no less!) that make sport of killing Americans and Jews and portray us as pigs and dogs. (You can find them on YouTube!)

  • Punishing children for petty theft by having their arms broken beneath the wheel of a truck. (You can find this gem on YouTube as well!)

  • Slavery in all its glory. Both for labor and sexual purposes. This is rampant in the Islamic world particularly among our Saudi “allies”. Victims are Indonesian, Sri Lankan, Filipino, Indian, and from any country where one could be lured with the promise of an escape from poverty. Some victims are from the West.

  • Cruelty in all its forms to one and all.

Having spent the best part of five years in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel (Gaza/West Bank), I can tell you that I have personally seen an adult man take off his shoe and beat a toddler around the head and shoulders with its heel. The little boy was wearing only a dust soaked shirt that came up above his belly. Yet, not a tear fell on his dirt-smudged cherubic face. He fell down breaking his fall with his tiny hands, but would not – or could not cry. I have seen an adult man suddenly and repeatedly strike a burka-wearing woman with a stick when she tried to exit a compound through a gate without a male escort. I have seen a man beat a donkey on the legs and back with a club until the panicked, pleading, and bleeding animal fell to the ground.

Kabul has astounding traffic tie-ups. Road rage is limited because one never knows if the other guy may have a flamethrower in his vehicle, but the cursing and honking is legendary. In the spring of 2007, during a massive, two-hour traffic jam on Jalalabad Road, I watched as an Afghan driver and his assistant got out of their flat bed truck in an attempt to beat the heat by lying down in the shade under the tires. The truck was hauling two large containers of medical supplies marked with a Red Cross. The driver apparently forgot to put out the tire chalks, and the truck rolled over both men crushing their heads like peas. Nobody – nobody – lifted a finger to help them. Their bodies were simply pulled to the side and the honking and shouting went on as usual. Life means nothing.

Apologists will bring up the crimes of the West – especially the Crusades. The fact is that the Crusades were waged to counter the Seljuk advance on Byzantium and the atrocities inflicted on Christians and Jews in the Holy Land. The Crusades were waged during a period of time when life in general – not to mention war – was totally barbaric. That degree of barbarism is unimaginable to modern Western sensibilities, but still considered absolutely reasonable by Muslims. Had the Crusades not been waged; had the Habsburg Monarchy not turned back the Ottoman tide at the end of the 17th Century; had Isabel of Castile not driven the Moors from Grenada, you would not be reading this diatribe. You would be illiterate, ruled by a tyrant, and squatting on the dirt floor of a mud-brick shack picking your nose.

On September 24th, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly. He basically put the world on notice. Israel will not tolerate any more nonsense from the Islamic world. In contrast to the incoherent rambling of Gadhafi, the rancorous rants of Ahmandinejad, and the lame political oration given by President Obama, Netanyahu made his points with force, conviction, and clarity. Speaking of Islam he stated:

“In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times. Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.”



President Obama and General McCrystal need to review their history. When you treat the Afghans with kid gloves, they will bite off your hand.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Thursday, September 24, 2009

We'll Always Have ... Libya?

Just fabbo.

While the Obama administration is quickly alienating our allies (Israel and Poland, just to name a few), he seems to be finding support in the strangest of places. First Cuba and Russia, and now ... praise from Libyan President Muammar al-Quadhafi.



Via Gateway Pundit:

The Libyan tyrant wants Obama to be president forever.
...Just like him.

The Hill reported:


Libyan President Muammar al-Qadhafi showered Barack Obama with unexpected praise on Wednesday, telling the U.N. General Assembly he hoped Obama "can stay forever as the president of the United States."

It was, perhaps, the only kind words Qadhafi had for anyone in his hour-long speech, during which he vented against what he called the "inequality" of the United Nations.

"You are the beginning of a change," the Libyan leader said of the U.S. president. "But as far as I'm concerned, Obama is a glimpse in the dark for the four years or the next eight years, and I'm afraid that we may go back to square one. How can you guarantee America after Obama?"

"We are content and happy if Obama can stay forever as the president of the United States of America," he added
.




Some of us are a little worried about guaranteeing America after Obama too.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Monday, September 21, 2009

Cap & Trade: The Wall Street Tax


Via Red State

By Rep. Michele Bachmann

The cap and trade national energy tax is being sold to the American people as a free-market answer to environmental problems. Dressed in green as it is, people are led to believe that it was a scheme hatched by the environmentally conscious. The truth is that cap and trade is a product of the very same minds that gave us subprime loans and market bubbles, credit default swaps and the financial meltdown. Cap and trade is actually a child of Wall Street. But, nowadays, that doesn’t help in the marketing, does it?

Cap and trade is based on government setting a cap on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally. Companies will then be allowed to buy or sell permits to emit carbon dioxide. So, at a time when Congress is already grappling with the appropriate solution for restructuring our nation’s financial regulatory system, Congress also wants to simultaneously introduce a new, and potentially the largest, commodity market into the mix? As Tyson Slocum, director of energy for Public Citizen, has stated, “You have to ask yourself if it is wise policy to create a new derivatives market on the heels of the collapse of derivatives markets.”


Some environmental watch groups who support the climate change goals of cap and trade have withheld support for the legislation in part because they know that the financial risked posed by this piece of legislation would shake an already volatile financial market. In a recent report, Friends of the Earth warned that the U.S. carbon market could be the next “subprime market” since it carries the same high-risk characteristics. Their report notes that the high risk comes from the fact that carbon credits can be sold before credits are officially issued. As they become more and more scarce, as the legislation guarantees year after year, these new financial products with essentially no actual value will increase in price. The report continues to warn that this provides the potential for speculators to push up market prices, which will “create a bubble and spur the development of subprime assets,” setting the stage for another potential financial meltdown.

They have good reason to worry. After all, the very same people who created the risky financial products which contributed to our financial collapse helped create and then promote cap and trade. And, those very same institutions will be selling carbon credits on Wall Street. Cap and trade’s creator, Goldman Sachs, which is reported to have spent $3.5 million to lobby on climate issues last year, envisioned it as a tax imposed by Washington with the revenues collected by private interests.

According to the Washington Post, Enron – which has gained a more notorious public reputation than most others in corporate America, was one of cap and trade’s chief promoters because they believed it would bring them a major financial windfall. In an internal memo, according to the Post, Enron stated that the Kyoto Agreement, which would regulate energy use, would “do more to promote Enron’s business than almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring the energy and gas industries in Europe and the United States.” When the Kyoto Agreement failed, Enron executives pushed hard for the implementation of a cap and trade policy.



As hedge fund director Michael Masters told Rolling Stone in its article, The Great American Bubble Machine, “We’re saying that Wall Street can set the tax and Wall Street can collect the tax.” The author of that article, Matt Taibbi, remarks that, “This is worse than the bailout: It allows the bank to seize taxpayer money before it’s even collected.” (Emphasis is the original author’s.)

Read the rest here.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Breaking: Dems Lack Votes to Pass Health Reform - With or Without Public Option

Whip Count - Dems Lack Votes to Pass HRC

Via Drudge Report:

At least 44 more moderate Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record in opposition to the current health care bill in the House, a Hill source claims. Likewise, at least 57 liberal Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record saying they will vote against a health care bill without a strong public option.



Unless multiple Democrats flip on their stated position on health care, Speaker Pelosi lacks the votes to pass a bill through the House on the strength of Democrat votes alone.

WHIP COUNT

44 Democrats Opposed

1. Rep. Altmire
2. Rep. Adler
3. Rep. Barrow
4. Rep. Boren
5. Rep. Boucher
6. Rep. Boyd
7. Rep. Bright
8. Rep. Carney
9. Rep. Childers
11. Rep. Cleaver
12. Rep. Cooper
13. Rep. Costello
14. Rep. Cuellar
15. Rep. Dahlkamper
16. Rep. Davis
17. Rep. Driehaus
18. Rep. Ellsworth
19. Rep. Gordon
20. Rep. Griffith
21. Rep. Halvorson
22. Rep. Hill
23. Rep. Holden
24. Rep. Kanjorski
25. Rep. Kaptur
26. Rep. F Kratovil
27. Rep. Marshall
28. Rep. Massa
29. Rep. Melancon
30. Rep. McIntyre
31. Rep. Minnick
32. Rep. Murtha
33. Rep. Oberstar
34. Rep. Ortiz
35. Rep. Perriello
36. Rep. Peterson
37. Rep. Polis
38. Rep. Pomeroy
39. Rep. Ross
40. Rep. Shuler
41. Rep. Stupak
42. Rep. Tanner
43. Rep. Taylor
44. Rep. Titus

57 Liberal Democrats to vote no on a bill without a strong public option

On July 31, 2009, the Congressional Progressive Caucus sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi expressing their opposition to a weakening of the public option. The letter on behalf of 57 Progressive Democrats concludes, “In short, this agreement will result in the public, both as insurance purchasers and as taxpayers, paying ever higher rates to insurance companies. We simply cannot vote for such a proposal.” The text can be read here: http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/uploads/57%20member%20letter%20to%20PelosiWaxman%207%2030%2009.pdf

1) Rep. Woolsey
2) Rep. Grijalva
3) Rep. Kilpatrick
4) Rep. Nadler
5) Rep. Hare
6) Rep. Roybal-Allard
7) Rep. Ellison
8) Rep. Blumenauer
9) Rep. Watts
10) Rep. Edwards
11) Rep. Olver
12) Rep. Kucinich
13) Rep. Richardson
14) Rep. Waters
15) Rep. Conyers
16) Rep. Chu
17) Rep. Hinchey
18) Rep. Johnson
19) Rep. Watson
20) Rep. Spier
21) Rep. Pascrell
22) Rep. Doggett
23) Rep. Kaptur
24) Rep. Hirono
25) Rep. Filner
26) Rep. Sanchez
27) Rep. Fudge
28) Rep. Lee
29) Rep. Carson
30) Rep. Jackson Lee
31) Rep. Honda
32) Rep. McDermott
33) Rep. Clay
34) Rep. McGovern
35) Rep. Clarke
36) Rep. Massa
37) Rep. Pingree
38) Rep. Jackson, Jr.
39) Rep. Cummings
40) Rep. Thompson
41) Rep. Moore
42) Rep. Payne
43) Rep. Stark
44) Rep. Towns
45) Rep. Brown
46) Rep. Hastings
47) Rep. Valezquez
48) Rep. Gutierrez
49) Rep. Napolitano
50) Rep. Sires
51) Rep. Tierney
52) Rep. Capuano
53) Rep. Fattah
54) Rep. Serrano
55) Rep. Farr
56) Rep. Delahunt
57) Rep. Johnson

BACKGROUND:

Rep. John Adler (D-NJ): “Isn’t good for America.” But dissatisfaction extends beyond Blue Dogs. Rep. Rick Boucher (Va.), a conservative Democrat but not a Blue Dog, says he doesn't like the public option. Rep. John Adler (D-N.J.) told an audience, "The bill that's coming through the House, with or without the public option, isn't good for America." (Mike Soraghan and A.B. Stoddard, “Dem Split On The Public Option Casts Doubt On Reform Of Healthcare,” The Hill, 8/31/09)

Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA): Voted Against The Health Care Bill In The Education And Labor Committee. “Two key House committees moved along Democratic healthcare legislation on Friday, only days after the bill was introduced. … The Education and Labor Committee approved their portion of the bill by a 26-22 vote. Democratic Reps. Jared Polis (Colo.), Dina Titus (Nev.) and Jason Altimire (Pa.) voted against the bill.” (Michael O’Brien, “House Committees Advance Healthcare Overhaul,” The Hill, 7/17/09)

Rep. John Barrow (D-GA): “I still voted against the bill.” Barrow said he does not believe that the changes they made are permanent or adequate.“I still voted against the bill, even after we had gotten these amendments passed, not because I didn’t think they made it better, but because I didn’t think they made the bill good enough,” he said. (Sandi Van Orden, “Barrow Offers Why He Voted Against Health Care Bill,” The Effingham Herald, 9/3/09)

Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK): “The House Bill That’s Out There, I Can’t Support.” “Second District Congressman Dan Boren said Monday that health care reform rests largely on President Barack Obama's willingness to accept bipartisan compromise on the issue. ‘If health care reform is going to happen it will have to happen in a bipartisan way,’ Boren told the Tulsa Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. ‘It's really up to the president.’ Boren, a Democrat, said he is trying to keep an open mind but said, ‘The House bill that's out there, I can't support.’” (Tom Gilbert, “Boren: Bipartisanship Key To Health Care,” Tulsa World, 7/20/09)

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA): I have a problem with this government option plan," Boucher said. "I'm troubled that the government option plan could become very popular and if it became sufficiently popular it could begin to crowd out the other" private insurance companies. Furthermore, he said, the public option could "financially destabilize" rural hospitals. (Sarah Bruyn Jones, “Boucher Unconvinced On 'Government Option' For Health Care,” The Roanoke Times, 8/19/09)

Read the rest here.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Sept 8th Presidential Address to Our Nation's Schools and the Resulting National Day of Truancy

Wowzers!

Communists-in-the-White-House-say-what?? (Insert Hannah Montana voice here.)

From The Examiner (Emphasis mine):


On September 8th Barack Obama is going to address the children of our Nation in an unprecedented webcast to the nation’s public schools. In a letter sent to principals across the nation, from Secretary Arne Duncan, it was announced that the White House website would be broadcasting a live speech intended to reach the majority of the Nation’s youth as they begin the school year. The speech, according to the letter, will concentrate on the importance of education and, according to an interview Obama gave to a young reporter, how the administration plans on improving the system. The letter came accompanied with two proposed teaching plans for the classes. One plan addressed children in PreK-6th grade, while the other addressed children in 7th-12th grade.

As the current administration concentrates on yet another way to reach yet another captive audience, the mainstream media has largely ignored the proposed September 8th speech. The teaching plans that accompanied the letter from the Secretary raised suspicions from conservatives alerted to the intention of the administration. The teaching plans include such “thinking exercises” as asking “What is the president asking me to do?” and suggesting that the teachers build background knowledge (one suggestion given in the teaching plan is to read books about Barack Obama.). Some think this type of influence on our children is nothing short of propaganda. (Gee, ya think?)

In the teaching plans for 7th-12th grades it is suggested that the students examine and read “notable quotes” from the president’s past speeches. (I wonder if one of those “notable quotes” is his infamous “spreading the wealth” comment to Joe the Plumber.) The teaching plan also gives suggestions on how the teachers can help the students “increase retention and deepen understanding of an important aspect of the speech.” It seems Barack Obama’s community organizing days are not behind him as he pushes for an obvious and overt attempt to ask the students to consider the importance of the community’s goals and needs. In one part of the K-6th teaching plan, it is suggested that “it might make sense to focus on personal and academic goals so that community and country goals come more readily.”



Rest assured that my first phone call tomorrow morning will be to the headmaster at my children's school to see if they will be participating in this propaganda circus. If so, my kids will be happy to learn that WE will be participating in the newly formed National Day of Truancy.

I think the first reading assignment of the day will even be "Shh! We're Writing The Constitution!" Because it would certainly appear too many people in this country need to brush up on their history.

What will *you* do?

Will you call or email your schools to find out their plans? Will you keep your children home? If so, what would you like them to learn that day?

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Friday, August 28, 2009

Remembered In Spite of Himself

It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me.

Like many on both sides of the political spectrum, my thoughts on the passing of Senator Kennedy are mixed. While compassion is most certainly owed to the family that has endured such a long list of tragedies, it is also worth noting that black clouds generally do not just follow us around and circumstances are most usually the result of the situations in which we insert ourselves. Senator Kennedy's record of public service is also notable and has earned him respect by both liberals and moderate conservatives but I, for one, have to wonder what the pomp and circumstance would be if the decedent had been say, John McCain. Regardless, my thoughts and prayers are with his family.

What is really disconcerting however, is the (*gasp*) lack of complete reporting by all of the television media. I know ... because that NEVER happens. What a selective memory we have. Kudos should go to several major newspapers who have, at the very least, included references to the should-be infamous Kopechne murder. Sadly, any mention of what should have been the undoing of Kennedy's political career garners accusations of partisanship and disrespect of the man's life.



In a time of what most conservatives perceive as fierce political double standards, Ted Kennedy's life actually serves as the perfect example. The screenplay of the life currently being played out on the small screen does not and should not take the place of the true portrait of the man.

If our actions truly define us, and speak louder than the often empty words we say, than who was Edward Moore Kennedy?

Reading Carl Cannon's account of the murder of Mary Jo Kopechne provides a chilling timeline of the events of that fateful evening and what I believe is a look inside the mind of a man who knew he could probably literally get away with murder.

The idea that Edward M. Kennedy could be a viable national politician – let alone a much-admired and lionized political figure – has convinced millions of everyday citizens and succeeding generations of conservative activists that among the elites of academia, politics, and the media two standards of behavior exist: One for liberal Democrats and another for conservative Republicans. Along with sweeping changes in immigration law, soaring oratory, and strengthening the nation's social safety net, this reservoir of class resentment is also part of Kennedy's legacy.

(snip)

I ... stand in awe of Kennedy's effectiveness as a politician myself. But hold on a minute: The "college problems" were serial cheating. The "silver-spoon" stuff, I suppose refers to, among other things, the speeding and reckless driving that ominously foreshadowed Chappaquiddick. And that phrase "redeeming himself in the eyes of all but the committed haters," well, the problem with that is that to many people, redemption implies that a sinner has come clean.

Certain theological questions present themselves here, ones that are well above, as our president memorably said, the "pay grade" of most political writers. One of them is whether one can completely atone for a sin that is not truthfully confessed. Kennedy did say, in a wrenching 1976 interview with the Boston Globe, that his behavior that night was "irrational and indefensible and inexcusable and inexplicable."


To be fair, Cannon's opinion is that this one incident should not define a man's life. Read the article and the account of the events of that night and judge for yourself. After all, is there anyone else who could have committed this horrible act and had the same outcome?

By all accounts, it would appear a self-imposed perception of immortality and infallibility more defined Kennedy than anything else. I have to admit not knowing about some of his other ... escapades until after his death.

I have to wonder where all the liberal feminists stand on this little incident, so well written by Mike Kelly, a journalist killed in Iraq.

It is after midnight and Kennedy and [Senator Chris] Dodd [D-CountryWide] are just finishing up a long dinner in a private room on the first floor of the restaurant’s annex. They are drunk. Their dates, two very young blondes, leave the table to go to the bathroom. (The dates are drunk too. “They’d always get their girls very, very drunk,” says a former Brasserie waitress.) Betty Loh, who served the foursome, also leaves the room. Raymond Campet, the co-owner of La Brasserie, tells Gaviglio the senators want to see her.
As Gaviglio enters the room, the six-foot-two, 225-plus-pound Kennedy grabs the five-foot-three, 103-pound waitress and throws her on the table. She lands on her back, scattering crystal, plates and cutlery and the lit candles. Several glasses and a crystal candlestick are broken. Kennedy then picks her up from the table and throws her on Dodd, who is sprawled in a chair. With Gaviglio on Dodd’s lap, Kennedy jumps on top and begins rubbing his genital area against hers, supporting his weight on the arms of the chair. As he is doing this, Loh enters the room. She and Gaviglio both scream, drawing one or two dishwashers. Startled, Kennedy leaps up. He laughs. Bruised, shaken and angry over what she considered a sexual assault, Gaviglio runs from the room. Kennedy, Dodd and their dates leave shortly thereafter, following a friendly argument between the senators over the check.

Eyewitness Betty Loh told me that Kennedy had “three or four” cocktails in his first half hour at the restaurant and wine with dinner. When she walked into the room after Gaviglio had gone in, she says, “what I saw was Senator Kennedy on top of Carla, who was on top of Senator Dodd’s lap, and the tablecloth was sort of slid off the table ‘cause the table was knocked over—not completely, but just on Senator Dodd’s lap a little bit, and of course the glasses and the candlesticks were totally spilled and everything. And right when I walked in, Senator Kelly jumped off…and he leaped up, composed himself and got up. And Carla jumped up and ran out of the room.”


At some point, you have to wonder how many definining moments a man needs before the truth becomes obvious.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sunday, August 23, 2009

The Big Bang-O

From Dan Collins at Piece of Work in Progress on "how Obama and his administration’s lack of candor might have affected perceptions of his trustworthiness":

…they get stonewalled at town halls packed deliberately with union supporters, or find that their Representative has literally decided to phone the meeting in, and they are accused of being astroturfed, even as they watch people from out of state bused in to support the health care fiasco. They see Lyndon LaRouche wackos carrying Obama Nazi signs characterized as right-wingers. They hear that their concerns are those of a small and demented minority. They see videos cropped to make it seem as though they’re racists. They are told that their opposition to Obama’s policies springs from racism on talk shows and in editorials. They receive unsolicited emails from Axelrod after being told that their information’s not being kept by the White House, and then it’s blamed on advocacy groups across a broad political spectrum. They recall that there were 8 years of BusHitler rhetoric that went unchallenged in the MSM, which suddenly is up in arms about the extraordinary incivility of such comparisons.

[snip]

Oh, yeah, they’re angry. But it’s not because they’re stupid. It’s because “Trust us; we despise you” isn’t really very civil, is it?



Read the rest here. You won't be disappointed.

Stumble Upon Toolbar