Friday, June 08, 2007
Divide And Conquer
We're starting to see real progress in Iraq, and we've even seen rival insurgent factions warring with one another. While it's great to see the locals rise up against Al-Qaeda, it's worth noting that if they are fighting to clear their own streets of bad guys, we can focus on other areas and clean up Iraq quicker then normal. However, it's an uneasy partnership.
"After we are done with al Qaeda," Abu Ali says, "we will ask the Americans to withdraw from Iraq. ... If they do not withdraw, there will be violations and the American army will be harmed."He adds, "Especially after the help the U.S. Army has provided us, we would like them to go home as our friend, not enemy."
As soon as Iraq is able to stand on it's own, we'd be happy to leave Ali. Maybe you can help out more then you know.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
"After we are done with al Qaeda," Abu Ali says, "we will ask the Americans to withdraw from Iraq. ... If they do not withdraw, there will be violations and the American army will be harmed."He adds, "Especially after the help the U.S. Army has provided us, we would like them to go home as our friend, not enemy."
As soon as Iraq is able to stand on it's own, we'd be happy to leave Ali. Maybe you can help out more then you know.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Newt Gingrich States The Obvious
Republican Newt Gingrich, in a jab at President Bush, warned on Friday that the GOP will lose the White House and Congress in 2008 if the nominee is perceived as a continuation of the Bush presidency.
Well no shit. The President's recent job approval rating was at 33%. If people see the next candidate as a continuation of that, why would they vote for that person?
The only things that can bring Bush's approval ratings up (which I'm glad he's doing the right thing instead of the popular thing), would be the following:
Capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden and his top guys.
Finding WMD's in Iraq.
Pulling troops out of Iraq.
Putting Iran's nuclear program to bed.
Getting North Korea's nuclear program eliminated.
Putting together a program that eliminates the nations debt (ie. laws that mean a mandatory balanced budget unless of emergency.)
But of course, Newt isn't going to just criticize, he's going to offer us a few ideas of his own.
He would shut down public schools that aren't performing and offer a $20 billion reward for the first private company that successfully completes a Mars mission.
The public schools one I can kind of see. However, there are repercussions to that. If you close one school, then those children need to be bused to another school and the staff at that other school now need to deal with an influx of more children, thus, possibly strain those schools to the point of breaking.
How's this for an alternative: fire teachers who aren't performing.
Stop keeping teachers on who's students are failing time and time again. That's not to say that students aren't stupid. Some people just aren't as smart as others, but if you have a teacher who's not up to snuff, don't keep him/her simply because they have tenure.
That's how it works in the real world. If I wasn't performing my best in my job, I'd be fired and would be forced to look elsewhere for a job.
But that's what I'm talking about when you ask for differences between Republicans and Democrats. Newt just offered us a plan for a problem that we all face. I don't agree 100% with his solution, but it's at least a start and not some babbling on about vague ideals like you see from Democrats (Barack Obama is the worst offender).
The point is is that both Congress and the President have low approval ratings and that Newt is pointing out the blatantly obvious: If you're like the guy before who I didn't like, don't expect my vote.
Well no shit. The President's recent job approval rating was at 33%. If people see the next candidate as a continuation of that, why would they vote for that person?
The only things that can bring Bush's approval ratings up (which I'm glad he's doing the right thing instead of the popular thing), would be the following:
Capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden and his top guys.
Finding WMD's in Iraq.
Pulling troops out of Iraq.
Putting Iran's nuclear program to bed.
Getting North Korea's nuclear program eliminated.
Putting together a program that eliminates the nations debt (ie. laws that mean a mandatory balanced budget unless of emergency.)
But of course, Newt isn't going to just criticize, he's going to offer us a few ideas of his own.
He would shut down public schools that aren't performing and offer a $20 billion reward for the first private company that successfully completes a Mars mission.
The public schools one I can kind of see. However, there are repercussions to that. If you close one school, then those children need to be bused to another school and the staff at that other school now need to deal with an influx of more children, thus, possibly strain those schools to the point of breaking.
How's this for an alternative: fire teachers who aren't performing.
Stop keeping teachers on who's students are failing time and time again. That's not to say that students aren't stupid. Some people just aren't as smart as others, but if you have a teacher who's not up to snuff, don't keep him/her simply because they have tenure.
That's how it works in the real world. If I wasn't performing my best in my job, I'd be fired and would be forced to look elsewhere for a job.
But that's what I'm talking about when you ask for differences between Republicans and Democrats. Newt just offered us a plan for a problem that we all face. I don't agree 100% with his solution, but it's at least a start and not some babbling on about vague ideals like you see from Democrats (Barack Obama is the worst offender).
The point is is that both Congress and the President have low approval ratings and that Newt is pointing out the blatantly obvious: If you're like the guy before who I didn't like, don't expect my vote.
Jefferson Pleads Not Guilty
"I am absolutely innocent of the charges that have been leveled against me," Jefferson said afterward. "I'm going to fight my heart out to clear my name."
I would LOVE to hear an explanation for the $90,000 found in your freezer Mr. Jefferson. I don't know about any of you folks out there, but I imagine that $90,000 in MARKED bills found in your freezer would doom any defense you could possibly have. This guy is going to jail, it's just a matter of how much can the defense deflect to help keep his sentence to a minimum.
He doesn't even ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that the money was in his freezer. He knows he's been caught, he knows he's going to jail. It's all a matter of time.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
I would LOVE to hear an explanation for the $90,000 found in your freezer Mr. Jefferson. I don't know about any of you folks out there, but I imagine that $90,000 in MARKED bills found in your freezer would doom any defense you could possibly have. This guy is going to jail, it's just a matter of how much can the defense deflect to help keep his sentence to a minimum.
He doesn't even ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that the money was in his freezer. He knows he's been caught, he knows he's going to jail. It's all a matter of time.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
John Edwards Has A Problem
Every single time I get a chance to see what Democrats are made of in terms of fighting against terrorism, I see cowardice and appeasement. John Edwards is no exception. Recently, Hillary Clinton of all people has said that “I believe we are safer than we were.", which is ironic since it was her husband who failed in such spectacular fashion that allowed 9/11 to happen in the first place.
However, she is right. We've taken measures since then to hunt down, capture or kill as many of them we can find. We've done much better with airport security, border patrols, and such. It's not perfect by a long shot, but we're improving.
John Edwards doesn't see it that way. "Today, as a result of what George Bush has done, we have more terrorists and fewer allies," Edwards said at a news conference. "There was no group called al-Qaida in Iraq before this president's war in Iraq."
Really John? That very well may be true, but before Iraq, there was Al-Qaeda. Many of them moved to Iraq when we invaded. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have well armed and trained soldiers dealing with terrorists then a banker or office worker. If we have "fewer allies" John, why is it that the first thing the new President of France said was "American friends that they can rely on our friendship ... France will always be next to them when they need us." Doesn't sound like we've alienated them do you?
The fact is, is that for once, Hillary Clinton is right (ewww, I really shudder to say that), and she's being vilified by her Democratic peers for speaking the truth. So if you're so smart John, where's your plan to defeat terrorism?
I have yet to see any real, hard evidence that ANY Democrat has for going after terrorists. They say such blindingly obvious and vague things that it makes them appear that they have a plan. "We will go where ever they are and use our allies and our resources to hunt them down and bring them to justice". Pretty vague isn't it? How about: "I propose we build a 20 foot high, 10 feet thick wall along the border of Mexico AND Canada." or, "I propose we stop sending aid to countries that hate our guts. That includes humanitarian aid. If you want to spew hate against America, then starve to death and deal with the riots that will happen once your people find out what kind of shitty government they really have."
Those are real, concrete, specific plans that deal with various elements that foster terrorism. You always hear hate speech from Hamas, but we keep sending these idiots food and medicine. Stop it. Let them find out that terrorism and electing terrorist organizations has consequences. America has taken a beating lately in world opinion and we've done nothing about it. Let the world know that our friends are practically family. Our enemies will no longer be getting a dime from us and they are on their own.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
However, she is right. We've taken measures since then to hunt down, capture or kill as many of them we can find. We've done much better with airport security, border patrols, and such. It's not perfect by a long shot, but we're improving.
John Edwards doesn't see it that way. "Today, as a result of what George Bush has done, we have more terrorists and fewer allies," Edwards said at a news conference. "There was no group called al-Qaida in Iraq before this president's war in Iraq."
Really John? That very well may be true, but before Iraq, there was Al-Qaeda. Many of them moved to Iraq when we invaded. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have well armed and trained soldiers dealing with terrorists then a banker or office worker. If we have "fewer allies" John, why is it that the first thing the new President of France said was "American friends that they can rely on our friendship ... France will always be next to them when they need us." Doesn't sound like we've alienated them do you?
The fact is, is that for once, Hillary Clinton is right (ewww, I really shudder to say that), and she's being vilified by her Democratic peers for speaking the truth. So if you're so smart John, where's your plan to defeat terrorism?
I have yet to see any real, hard evidence that ANY Democrat has for going after terrorists. They say such blindingly obvious and vague things that it makes them appear that they have a plan. "We will go where ever they are and use our allies and our resources to hunt them down and bring them to justice". Pretty vague isn't it? How about: "I propose we build a 20 foot high, 10 feet thick wall along the border of Mexico AND Canada." or, "I propose we stop sending aid to countries that hate our guts. That includes humanitarian aid. If you want to spew hate against America, then starve to death and deal with the riots that will happen once your people find out what kind of shitty government they really have."
Those are real, concrete, specific plans that deal with various elements that foster terrorism. You always hear hate speech from Hamas, but we keep sending these idiots food and medicine. Stop it. Let them find out that terrorism and electing terrorist organizations has consequences. America has taken a beating lately in world opinion and we've done nothing about it. Let the world know that our friends are practically family. Our enemies will no longer be getting a dime from us and they are on their own.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Putin Offers Alternative
Vladimir Putin offered a concession on the proposed missile defense shield that the Russians seem to have their panties in a twist over. He offered to have the missiles installed in the tiny nation of Azerbaijan. While that may work as it's much closer to Iran and North Korea, it does have a few problems. What do the Azerbaijanian's think? If you put a system like that close to Iran, you cut the time you have to react much shorter. What would the Iranian's do if a new missile shield goes up in their backyard? Are they going to back down from their nuclear program or are they going to feel like they're backed into a corner and be willing to use a nuke?
I think Bush's response was a perfect one though: "Interesting proposal. Let's let our experts have a look at it." That allows us to take a look at it, which gives the Russians the notion that their opinion matters, which is important. It allows us to have a possible strategic advantage over the Iranians, and, it pushes the Iranian's into making a decision on how far they want to take their nuclear program.
It is equally important that Russia has publicly said that the US and them share a common threat: Iran. While that may just be public speak, it does show Iran that the Russians will throw them under the bus if they need to.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
I think Bush's response was a perfect one though: "Interesting proposal. Let's let our experts have a look at it." That allows us to take a look at it, which gives the Russians the notion that their opinion matters, which is important. It allows us to have a possible strategic advantage over the Iranians, and, it pushes the Iranian's into making a decision on how far they want to take their nuclear program.
It is equally important that Russia has publicly said that the US and them share a common threat: Iran. While that may just be public speak, it does show Iran that the Russians will throw them under the bus if they need to.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
I'm Back
I'm back from my vacation in Vegas and just as I leave, a ton of news happens. :) It figures. :)
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Monday, June 04, 2007
One Last Thing
Well it's about time! William Jefferson, the US Congressman who was found to have had $90,000 of a $100,000 bribe in his freezer, was indicted today on various charges. He faces a whopping 235 years in jail for the various charges his faces including racketeering, bribery, and obstruction of justice.
His attorney was the one who said the sweetest thing: "There will be no plea bargain."
Well if there's no plea bargain and he's found guilty, that means he's facing an assload of jail time. Of course, this is simple attorney bullshit. If a plea bargain comes around that Jefferson likes, he'll take it.
I wonder how Nancy Pelosi plans on spinning this one? She put a suspected corrupt member of Congress in a position of power and he's going to go to jail over it. There's too much overwhelming evidence for him not to go to jail. Even the folks at Daily Kos are calling for his resignation, which says something significant.
So if you truly want to get rid of the "culture of corruption" Nancy and other prominent Democrats, you need to act, not promote. This is why you have an approval rating lower then the Presidents.
Although I'm also a bit pissed at CNN for this blatant attempt at partisan politics by suggesting this had something to do with the recent firings of several US attorney's.
U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg
It obviously didn't have anything to do with the firings because this came out in JANUARY when the US attorney firings were in March. Knock it off CNN, just report the news, don't get involved in politics, it isn't your forte.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
His attorney was the one who said the sweetest thing: "There will be no plea bargain."
Well if there's no plea bargain and he's found guilty, that means he's facing an assload of jail time. Of course, this is simple attorney bullshit. If a plea bargain comes around that Jefferson likes, he'll take it.
I wonder how Nancy Pelosi plans on spinning this one? She put a suspected corrupt member of Congress in a position of power and he's going to go to jail over it. There's too much overwhelming evidence for him not to go to jail. Even the folks at Daily Kos are calling for his resignation, which says something significant.
So if you truly want to get rid of the "culture of corruption" Nancy and other prominent Democrats, you need to act, not promote. This is why you have an approval rating lower then the Presidents.
Although I'm also a bit pissed at CNN for this blatant attempt at partisan politics by suggesting this had something to do with the recent firings of several US attorney's.
U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg
Fisher and Rosenberg denied that Monday's announcement was in any way affected by recent controversy surrounding the Justice Department and the firings of federal prosecutors.
"Frankly, we don't give a damn about politics," Rosenberg said. "... We believe he broke the law. That's why we brought the charges. Period."
It obviously didn't have anything to do with the firings because this came out in JANUARY when the US attorney firings were in March. Knock it off CNN, just report the news, don't get involved in politics, it isn't your forte.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]