Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Websites and blogs I recommend
Blog Archive
-
▼
2013
(388)
-
▼
February
(22)
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 28, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, February 27, 2013
- Barker's Ramblings
- Pat Buchanan (and yours truly) Opine on What the S...
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, February 25, 2013
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., Feb. 23 & 24, 2013
- The Wisdom of Patrick J. Buchanan
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 21, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, February 20, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, February 19, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, February 18, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 14, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, February 13, 2013
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, February 11, 2013
- I... Want... Them... Dead...!!!
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, February 8, 2013
- Censor the Truth...? Or Just Ignore It...?
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 7, 2013
- Just a Quick Note...
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., Feb. 2 & 3, 2013
- And We're Back! Dow 14,000 Fuels a New Wealth Boom!
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, February 1, 2013
-
▼
February
(22)
About Me
- William R. Barker
- Pearl River, NY High School Class of '81; Northeastern University, Boston, MA Class of '87.
14 comments:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/340174/voter-fraud-never-happens-keeps-coming-back-john-fund
Critics of voter ID and other laws cracking down on voter fraud claim they’re unnecessary because fraud is nonexistent.
For instance, Brennan Center attorneys Michael Waldman and Justin Levitt claimed last year: “A person casting two votes risks jail time and a fine for minimal gain. Proven voter fraud, statistically, happens about as often as death by lightning strike.”
Well, lightning is suddenly all over Cincinnati, Ohio.
The Hamilton County Board of Elections is investigating 19 possible cases of alleged voter fraud that occurred when Ohio was a focal point of the 2012 presidential election. A total of 19 voters and nine witnesses are part of the probe.
Democrat Melowese Richardson has been an official poll worker for the last quarter century and registered thousands of people to vote last year. She candidly admitted to Cincinnati’s Channel 9 this week that she voted twice in the last election. This is how Channel 9′s website summarized the case:
According to county documents, Richardson’s absentee ballot was accepted on Nov. 1, 2012 along with her signature. On Nov. 11, she told an official she also voted at a precinct because she was afraid her absentee ballot would not be counted in time.
“There’s absolutely no intent on my part to commit voter fraud,” said Richardson. . . .
The board’s documents also state that Richardson was allegedly disruptive and hid things from other poll workers on Election Day after another female worker reported she was intimidated by Richardson. . . .
During the investigation it was also discovered that her granddaughter, India Richardson, who was a first time voter in the 2012 election, cast two ballots in November.
Richardson insists she has done nothing wrong and promises to contest the charges: “I’ll fight it for Mr. Obama and for Mr. Obama’s right to sit as president of the United States.”
(But, of course, as you know there is no voter fraud. Pay no attention to that lightning coming out of Ohio.)
http://www.showbiz411.com/2013/02/08/oscar-first-shirley-bassey-bringing-goldfinger-to-show
Okay, this is so cool: Dame Shirley Bassey will be performing “Goldfinger” on the Oscars.
* YES, INDEED...!!! THAT CERTAINLY IS COOL...!!!
For some reason, she’s never been on the Academy Awards show. But this is part of the James Bond 50th anniversary tribute.
(*THUMBS UP*)
Bassey will join Adele, who will sing her James Bond theme, “Skyfall,” the fourth Bond song ever nominated for an Oscar and possibly the first to win the prize.
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
* OH, WELL... GOTTA TAKE THE BAD WITH THE GOOD. ("ADELE" DOES NOTHING FOR ME. I SAW SKYFALL AND I COULDN'T HUM ANY OF THE SKYFALL THEME SONG. TOTALLY UNMEMORABLE.)
Who’s next? Paul McCartney? Carly Simon? Sheena Easton? Rita Coolidge? Duran Duran?
* THAT WOULD BE PRETTY COOL... (*THUMBS UP*)
http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Jesse-Jackson-Jr-Signs-Plea-Deal-190383261.html
It’s been nearly three months since Jesse Jackson Jr. resigned from Congress, but now NBC News confirms that Jackson has signed papers in a plea deal within the past several days.
Jackson’s case is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington DC.
* THE FOX GUARDING THE HENHOUSE...
While no public announcement is expected today, those with knowledge of the investigation believe the loose ends now deal with Jackson’s wife, former Alderman Sandi Jackson, and whether or not she is ultimately charged.
* I WON'T HOLD MY BREATH...
Under the terms of the deal Jackson signed, he pleads guilty and his fate – as to jail time – would be in the hands of a federal judge, not yet assigned.
* AGAIN... NOT HOLDING MY BREATH...
He would repay the government hundreds of thousands of dollars – for items like the $40,000 Rolex watch, travel expenses for a woman he described as a “social acquaintance” and furniture purchased for his home.
* PAY BACK OUT OF WHAT... HIS "SAVINGS" FROM PAST THEFTS...?!?!
(*SNORT*)
Converting campaign contributions for personal use is strictly prohibited by federal law. It opens Jackson up to “not more than 5 years” in prison.
* IF HE SERVES ANY TIME IT'LL NO DOUBT BE SURVED IN A FEDERAL "COUNTRY CLUB" PRISON.
It’s clear Jackson’s move to resign from Congress works in his favor as his attorneys negotiate this plea deal.
* WHY...? WHY SHOULD IT...?
Just last month his wife also resigned from her elected position as Chicago’s 7th Ward alderman, however her role in the alleged misuse of campaign funds still may land her in legal trouble.
* MAY...
For years she received a $5,000 a month check from her husband as his political consultant.
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
* FOLKS... THESE PEOPLE ARE SCUM... AND THESE PEOPLE REPRESENT CHICAGO POLITICS.
* THRE-PARTER... (Part 1 of 3)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-remote-control-assassinations/2013/02/07/4d13e024-715e-11e2-ac36-3d8d9dcaa2e2_story.html
* BY EUGENE ROBINSON
If George W. Bush had told us that the “war on terror” gave him the right to execute a U.S. citizen overseas with a missile fired from a drone aircraft, without due process or judicial review, I’d have gone ballistic.
* WITH GOOD CAUSE! (AS I MYSELF WENT BALLISTIC EVERY TIME GEORGE W. BUSH CROSSED A CONSTITUTIONAL RED LINE... AS I MYSELF DO EVERY TIME BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA CROSSES A CONSTITUTIONAL RED LINE...)
It makes no difference that the president making this chilling claim is Barack Obama. What’s wrong is wrong.
(*NOD*)
The moral and ethical questions posed by the advent of drone warfare — which amounts to assassination by remote control — are painfully complex. We had better start working out some answers because, as an administration spokesman told me recently, drone attacks are “the new normal” in the ongoing struggle against terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda. But one of the few bright lines we can and should recognize is that in the exceedingly rare instances when a U.S. citizen may be targeted, our government bears a special burden.
The Obama administration acknowledged as much in a secret Justice Department “white paper” obtained this week by NBC News. The document lays out a legal argument that the president, without oversight, may order a “lethal operation” against a citizen who is known to be a “senior operational leader” of al-Qaeda or an affiliated group.
* "KNOWN BY" DOESN'T CUT IT. "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW AFTER A FAIR TRAIL" IS THE RULE OF LAW. (AT LEAST... IT USED TO BE.)
* LISTEN... IF THE TARGET IS A TERRORIST TARGET ABROAD AND AN AMERICAN CITIZEN IS THERE... WELL... THAT'S A DIFFERENT STORY.
* AS TO TARGETED ASSASSINATIONS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS ABROAD... AT THE VERY LEAST WE NEED TO HAVE TRIAL AND CONVICTION IN ABSENTIA PRIOR TO SUCH A DEATH SENTENCE BEING ISSUED.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 3)
This is not an academic question. In 2011, a CIA drone attack in Yemen killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S.-born cleric who had become a leading figure in the terrorist franchise known as al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Two weeks later, another drone attack killed Awlaki’s 16-year-old son. Awlaki was believed to have been directly involved in the near-miss “underwear bomber” plot to down a civilian airliner on Christmas Day 2009, as well as the planting of two bombs — fortunately, discovered before they could explode — on Chicago-bound cargo planes in 2010. Perpetrators of several other attacks cited Awlaki’s fiery sermons and, in some cases, his personal messages as their inspiration.
I shed no tears for him. But as the Justice Department document admits, U.S. citizens have constitutional rights. I am deeply troubled by the notion that the president can unilaterally decide those rights no longer apply.
* EXACTLY! FOLKS... FOLLOWING THE LOGIC OF THE PRESIDENT'S POSITION... WHY IS THE FORT HOOD SHOOTER NIDAL HASAN BEING GIVEN A TRIAL? WHY DOESN'T THE PRESIDENT SIMPLY ORDER HIS EXECUTION...? WHY WOULDN'T SUCH A UNILATERAL PRESIDENTIAL ORDER BE LEGAL ACCORDING TO THE LOGIC OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S OVERARCHING POSITION? IF YOUR ANSWER IS "BECAUSE NIDAL IS ON AMERICA SOIL" THEN ALL THE PRESIDENT NEED DO IS ORDER HIM MOVED TO GITMO OR MAYBE YEMEN OR PAKISTAN WHERE "WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER WE PLEASE."
* AND BTW FOLKS... THIS "AUTHORITY" THE PRESIDENT CLAIMS ISN'T LIMITED TO AMERICAN CITIZENS ON FOREIGN SOIL. HE BELIEVES HE HAS THE RIGHT TO ORDER TO EXECUTION OF AMERICAN CITIZENS ON AMERICA SOIL AS WELL AS I UNDERSTAND HIS POSITION.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)
The white paper specifies the conditions that must be met before a citizen is targeted for obliteration. Among them is that he or she must be planning an “imminent” terrorist attack.
* SO... IF POLICE HAVE A SUSPECT... A SUSPECTED ACTIVE SERIAL KILLER... THE CHIEF OF POLICE... THE MAYOR... THE GOVERNOR... THE POTUS CAN JUST ORDER THE SUSPECT'S EXECUTION...??? (YOU KNOW... BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY!?)
The document then argues for a remarkably elastic definition of imminence — which, you may be surprised to learn, apparently does not mean “in the immediate future.”
* NOPE... (*SIGH*)... NOT SURPRISED AT ALL...
That part is shaky, but I accept that Awlaki was a legitimate target.
* I... DON'T... KNOW. (*SHRUG*)
What I don’t accept is that the president or a “high-level official” gets to make the call without judicial oversight.
* "OVERSIGHT?" NO. IT SEEMS TO ME THERE MUST BE TRIAL IN ABSENTIA. A PUBLIC CHARGE MUST BE LEVIED. A TRIAL MUST BE HELD. IF THE DEFENDANT REFUSES TO TAKE PART... THAT'S HIS/HER PROBLEM. IF THE DEFENDANT IS CONVICTED... THEN ALL'S FAIR!
When the government wants to violate a citizen’s right to privacy with wiretaps and other forms of electronic surveillance, a judge from a special panel — the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court — has to give approval. Surely there should be at least as much judicial review when the government wants to violate a citizen’s right not to be blown to smithereens.
* ONE WOULD THINK...
* AGAIN, THOUGH... JUDICIAL "REVIEW" IS NOT ENOUGH. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ONLY A GUILTY CITIZEN - LEGALLY JUDGED GUILTY BY A COURT OF LAW - CAN BE LEGALLY TARGETED FOR ASSASSINATION. OTHERWISE... THE PRESIDENT BECOMES SIMPLE "THE VIGILANTE IN CHIEF."
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... IF THE FOUNDERS HAD MEANT TO GIVE A PRESIDENT SUCH POWER THEY WOULD HAVE! THEY DIDN'T!
No president could become aware that specific enemies are planning attacks against the United States and not take action. This would be an unconscionable dereliction of duty.
* AGREED. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. (*SHRUG*)
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/02/07/ethanol-mandate-leads-to-social-unrest/
The conversion of corn to ethanol has contributed to a doubling in global food prices since 2005, according to a report by the New England Complex Systems Institute.
In a presentation at The Heritage Foundation, Dr. Yaneer Bar-Yam elaborated upon earlier research done by NECSI demonstrating a link between global food price increases associated with the corn-to-ethanol conversion and violence in the Middle East and North Africa known as the “Arab Spring” causing “unrest and upheaval.”
“[Corn] is a huge part of the global food system,” Bar-Yam said. Corn forms the basis for everything from high fructose corn syrup and cereal to feed for livestock. “Why did the revolutions happen?… [W]hy did it happen now?” Bar-Yam asked, pointing to the beginning of turmoil in the region at the end of 2010. His research team submitted a report to the federal government demonstrating the connection between higher food prices and social unrest and political instability just four days before the self-immolation of Mohammed Bouazizi in Tunisia in December 2010.
Driving the food crisis, according to Bar-Yam, is legislation mandating ever-increasing amounts of ethanol production and consumption — the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The mandate caps corn-ethanol production at 15 billion gallons per year. “Ethanol is corn. Corn is food. When you’re pulling into the gas station and you’re filling your tank of gas, 10% of what you’re putting into the tank is food. It could be eaten by people instead,” said Bar-Yam.
“Today, the amount of corn that is being used is about 50% of all the corn that the U.S. produces,” Bar-Yam continued. That amount is up from 15% before 2005. As a major exporter of corn globally, the consumption of food as fuel drives food costs higher by reducing it as a source of food, Bar-Yam explained. His findings show that the amount of corn used to produce one gallon of ethanol fuel would feed one person for a day, and the U.S. diversion of corn for ethanol could feed as many as 570 million people worldwide annually.
* BUT WAIT! IT GETS WORSE!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
Additional benefits, such as increasing energy yields, are virtually a wash. “The same amount of fossil fuel energy goes into making a gallon of ethanol as can be obtained by using that ethanol in a car,” the report found. Those energy inputs include fossil fuels for the production and transportation of fertilizers and pesticides, farmland irrigation, and the cultivation and delivery of the corn to plants for conversion into the final ethanol gas.
Bar-Yam also argued that in addition to the $20 billion in ethanol subsidies received over the past three decades by corn producers, consumers pay a premium for the fuel blend. While the cost per gallon is lower, the cost per mile is higher — “as if the gasoline is watered down.”
* YEP... I'VE ALWAYS STRESSED THIS!
“[E]very gallon of gasoline with ethanol bought is an extra subsidy from consumers to the ethanol producers,” the report said.
* DUH!
Bar-Yam’s conclusion is not alone on ethanol’s contribution to world food price spikes that threaten political upheaval and even starvation in developing countries. The New York Times examined the situation in Guatemala in January 2013: "Recent laws in the United States and Europe that mandate the increasing use of biofuel in cars have had far-flung ripple effects, economists say, as land once devoted to growing food for humans is now sometimes more profitably used for churning out vehicle fuel. In a globalized world, the expansion of the biofuels industry has contributed to spikes in food prices and a shortage of land for food-based agriculture in poor corners of Asia, Africa and Latin America because the raw material is grown wherever it is cheapest. Whether we use corn for food or fuel should be for the free market to determine. Corn producers should be able to seek the most profitable use for their product, but that process should not be determined by mandates, targeted tax breaks, or other subsidies that incentivize corn-based ethanol as a fuel source.
The Heritage Foundation’s research on the renewable fuel standard and the impact of ethanol on the price of corn demonstrates that even small changes in corn commodity pricing can have a large effect on global prices due to shifts from food consumption to ethanol conversion. (David Kreutzer puts that price increase between 8% and 68%.)
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/fracked_with_indecision_yRNKHI1HXidKlsCjdfuyuN
Here he goes again. Every time Gov. Cuomo comes close to meeting one of his own deadlines to approve fracking, he finds another excuse for delay — which starts the whole process all over again.
So, with all eyes on a Feb. 27 deadline to draw up regulations and OK the drilling process, we weren’t surprised on Monday to hear the head of the governor’s Department of Environmental Conservation admit it will be “difficult to . . . get the regulations finalized” on time.
Plus, the DEC says it’s now hired an expert to determine if fracking causes earthquakes, which may push a decision back another six months. This joins a long list of manufactured delays:
When the gov revealed his first fracking plans in 2011, DEC pledged to take public comments on them through the fall.
That September, DEC extended the public-comment deadline to December.
In November, DEC extended the deadline again, to January.
In February 2012, Cuomo promised a fracking decision “in a couple of months.”
Two months later, DEC said it would finish up “over the course of the summer.”
When summer arrived, DEC requested a new health-impact review from the state commissioner of health by Nov. 29.
In November, Cuomo asked for a 90-day extension into February to finish up.
Now comes DEC Commissioner Joe Martens admitting, “We do not have a timetable” for a decision.
Of course, just because the governor hasn’t announced his decision, it doesn’t mean he hasn’t made one. By repeatedly extending deadlines, Cuomo appeases green activists who want to stop New York from tapping into the Marcellus Shale reserves — but without having to pay any political price for admitting he’s closing the door on new jobs, new energy and new revenues.
In short, the sun will probably burn out before Andrew Cuomo makes up his fracking mind. Then again, that’s the game plan.
http://news.usni.org/2013/02/08/navy-lincoln-refueling-delayed-will-hurt-carrier-readiness
The U.S. Navy will delay the refueling of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) for an unknown period because of the uncertain fiscal environment due to the ongoing legislative struggle, the service told Congress in a Friday message obtained by USNI News.
The move by the navy is the second this week involving funding for carriers. On Wednesday it announced it would delay the deployment of the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) to the Middle East do to the ongoing budget strife bringing the total number of carriers in U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to one until funding normalizes.
The delay in the RCOH for the Lincoln translates into a carrier that will be undeployable for the foreseeable future. It is ‘not possible to restore,’ the carrier to active service without the $3.3 billion overhaul, Hillson said.
Under the current Continuing Resolution (CR), the Navy is $1.5 billion short on its accounts. Combined with coming sequestration in March the number grows to $9 billon for FY 2013, according to Navy documents.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/02/08/quinnipiac-poll-hillary-clinton-easily-the-most-popular-actor-on-the-american-political-stage/
A new poll reveals that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is the most popular national figure among American voters.
* AND I HAVE NO DOUBT THE POLL IS ACCURATE.
* FOLKS... IT'S OVER. AVERTING YOUR EYES AND WISHING IT WEREN'T SO DOESN'T CHANGE THE REALITY.
* THREE-PARTER... (Part 1 of 3)
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/02/08/buchanan-endless-war/
* BY PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
“When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” So said Richard Nixon in his interviews with David Frost.
Nixon was talking about wiretaps and surreptitious entries to protect lives and safeguard national security in a violent and anarchic war decade. The Nixon haters pronounced themselves morally sickened.
Fast forward to our new century.
[S]ince 9/11, we have heard rather more extravagant claims by American presidents.
Under George W. Bush, it was presidential authority to waterboard, torture, rendition and hold enemy aliens in indefinite detention at Guantanamo.
* BUCHANAN EQUATES WATERBOARDING WITH TORTURE. I DO NOT. THAT SAID... HIS POINT IS VALID.
Under Barack Obama, we don’t have a Nixon “enemies list” of folks who are not to be invited to White House dinners - rather, we have a “kill list” — a menu from which our constitutional law professor president selects individuals to be executed abroad.
(*CLAP...CLAP...CLAP*)
Killed not only in Afghanistan, but Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and who knows where else. And not just foreigners, but Americans, too.
(*PURSED LIPS*)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 3)
When may Obama order an American killed? According to a Justice Department “white paper,” any “informed high-level official” can decide a target is a ranking operative of al-Qaida who “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States,” and if we cannot apprehend him, order him eradicated with a Hellfire missile. ... As law professor Mary Ellen O’Connell argues: The [white] paper denies Congress and the federal courts a role in authorizing the killings or even reviewing them afterwards.”
(And they called Nixon the imperial president?)
As killing a U.S. citizen is a graver deed than waterboarding a terrorist plotter to get information to save lives, Obama, who bewailed Bush’s detentions, renditions and interrogation policies, appears guilty of manifest hypocrisy.
* IT APPEARS THAT OBAMA'S LINE IS "IT AIN'T ILLEGAL WHEN THIS PRESIDENT DOES IT."
A question raised by Donald Rumsfeld years ago — "Are we creating more terrorists than we are killing?" — needs re-raising. But with 3,000 to 4,500 now killed by drones in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen over 10 years, and an estimated 200 children and other civilians among the “collateral damage,” it is past time for a debate on where we are going in this “war on terror.” For if these drone strikes that kill innocent and guilty alike are creating new millions of sympathizers for al-Qaida, and recruiting new thousands of volunteers willing to dedicate their lives to taking revenge against us, we have entered upon a war that may never end.
* AND THAT'S THE OBJECTIVE OF OUR GOVERNMENT - TO ALWAYS BE "AT WAR" AND THEREFORE ALWAYS HAVE "JUSTIFICATION" FOR "EMERGENCY MEASURES" WHEN THOSE IN POWER THINK SUCH ARE NECESSARY.
* THINK I'M EXAGGERATING...??? REVIEW THE HISTORY OF THE POST-9/11 ERA AND THE GROWTH OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER AND GOVERNMENT POWER IN GENERAL.
Al-Qaida in Afghanistan is said to be ravaged and on the run.
* CHRIST... IT WAS ONLY A FEW MONTHS AGO THAT THEY DID MORE DAMAGE TO A U.S. AIR BASE AND TOOK OUT MORE U.S. COMBAT AIRCRAFT IN ONE SINGLE DAY THAN AT ANY TIME SINCE WORLD WAR FRIGGIN'TWO!
Yet we read of al-Qaida affiliates cropping up not only in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, but Iraq, Syria, Libya and Mali. How many of these new cells were inspired by past drone strikes to destroy old al-Qaida cells?
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)
The New York Times and The Washington Post have admitted they acceded to White House requests not to publish their discovery that we had established a drone base in Saudi Arabia for attacks in Yemen.
* AND BOTH ORGANIZATIONS WERE WRONG TO DO SO.
But planting a U.S. drone base on Saudi soil is no small matter. Osama bin Laden gave as a primary cause for his declaration of war on America that we had defiled the sacred soil of Arabia that is home to Mecca and Medina by planting our infidel bases there. After 9/11, at the Saudis’ request, we removed our bases. What will this revelation mean for that royal family? What will it mean for America’s image in the Muslim world? Is any benefit we derive from a drone base just north of Yemen worth enraging much of an Islamic world of 1.5 billion?
* ABSOLUTELY NOT... (BUT EVEN IF ONE DISAGREES WITH ME HERE, THE POINT IS THAT THESE ARE NATIONAL DECISIONS THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE A VOICE IN!)
In his 1951 address to Congress, Gen. Douglas MacArthur declared: “Once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War’s very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.”
* 2001... 2001... 2001...
Congress, the administration and the American people need to ask: Why have we been unable to bring this war on terror to a “swift end?"
* BECAUSE... THEY... DON'T... WANT... TO...!
Why this “prolonged indecision?"
Why has the battlefield in the war on terror not narrowed, but expanded from South Asia to the Middle East to North Africa?
(*SIGH*)
Is the war on terror to be like the war on crime, eternal, with U.S. soldiers policing the world forever, even as cops police our cities?
What is Obama’s plan, the Republicans’ plan for ending or winning this war, whose scope widens with each year?
* THERE... IS... NO... PLAN...!
“No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare,” wrote the author of our Constitution.
* A DEAD WHITE MAN. (*SHRUG*)
* AN OUTDATED DOCUMENT. (*CLENCHED JAW*)
* AT LEAST... THAT'S THE LEFT'S PERSPECTIVE. THEY PROCLAIM IT LOUDLY ENOUGH.
As we see the great buildings of our capital enveloped in concrete barriers, as U.S. citizens are forced to submit to intrusive searches before boarding airliners, one wonders: How long before the Republic becomes a garrison state?
* IN CERTAIN WAYS... CERTAINLY IN COMPARISON TO THE AMERICA I AND MY FRIENDS GREW TO ADULTHOOD IN... IT ALREADY IS.
If we do not end this war, this war will one day bring an end to the freedom for which the Fathers fought.
* TOO LATE.
Post a Comment