Bush’s Job After Politics
Jan 24, 2007 Political
I have figured out what George Bush can do once he leaves office. He can tell Susan Sarandon what roles she should take, how to rewrite parts, and pass judgment on scripts she is offered. He can also serve as a critic of her work and publish reports on how well she did or did not do.
After all, that is what she is doing to him. She is telling him how he should be doing his job, expressing her political views and acting as if she could do a better job, or even do it at all. She was bored by his speech and wants the troops home now. She is even going to participate in a protest this weekend with fellow idiots Sean Penn and Tim Robbins.
They can all get together and smoke a few joints, pass the bong around and put on tie dyed jeans. Then they can march and sing anti war songs. That would be great and given their lack of talent in their chosen professions it might just be a perfect gig for them, something they can handle.
I think it would be great for Bush to become a critic when he leaves office. He could go on TV and review the work of these has-beens and let them know how he feels about their work. He is certainly as qualified to tell them how they should do their jobs as they are to tell him.
Source:
Breitbart
Tags: Political
Barbara Boxer Responds
Jan 24, 2007 Political
I wrote a letter to Senator Boxer expressing my concerns about the way she questioned Condoleezza Rice with regard to not having children. To her credit, Boxer sent me an email response. In it she makes the same statement that she has made to the press about the issue. She explained to me that she was trying to make a pint about whom the war affects. I understood quite well what her intent was when she made the statement, but I appreciate her response. I still feel that it was unnecessary and that it was a knock on women who choose not to have children. Like I said before, the war will not affect either woman for the reasons Boxer stated but then again it will not affect anyone who chooses not to join the service. It will not affect any member of Congress because they are all too old to serve (unless they are already a reservist).
Let me say this Ms. Boxer. Please leave the members of the military alone and let them do their jobs. As Liz Cheney pointed out in today’s Washington Post, you are making a mistake in interpreting the results of the last election. She indicates that the American people said they wanted change in the direction of the war but they did not say they they wanted to lose or that they wanted to fight the war here. Americans want to win and cutting and running is not winning, regardless of what name you call it. Our men and women in uniform volunteered for service and they are reenlisting to continue to serve. They understand the mission and they do not want politicians trying to undermine them as happened in Vietnam. Mark my words Ms. Boxer, and you can pass this on, if you hand victory to the enemy and bring our troops home in shame you will likely never get another group of people willing to fight any future battles. Think about how it will feel when a really bad thing happens and no one answers the call to arms. If you and your colleagues allow this to happen I will strongly encourage the thousands of military members I know to end their service when their time is up and I will tell the prospective recruits with whom i speak to consider another profession because our elected leaders do not have the guts to stay in a battle for the long haul and they will make you sacrifice and bring you home in defeat. I am a strong supporter of the military and have a great deal of time in service. I think that it is a great place to learn skills, discipline and patriotism but in order to gain the trust of the military the leaders must be trusted. If you cause our defeat you will never be trusted again. Look how long it took to rebuild our military after the Congress allowed us to be disgraced in Vietnam. The failed rescue attempt in Iraq during the hostage crisis was a direct result of low morale and poor training as a result of the backlash of Vietnam.
The world situation will get worse before it gets better and if we do not have a good military we will be screwed. The leaders might think they can start the draft if such a situation develops but that just might result in civil disobedience the likes this country has never seen. How dare our so called leaders draft people to fight when they would not let them fight when they were perfectly willing. I pray for this country because our Congress lacks leaders in either party and they spend more time worrying about how to be reelected than they do winning. If they worked as hard to win the war as they do to win reelection we would be done by now.
This item at the end of the email got my attention:
Since American forces went into Iraq in March 2003, more than 3,000 of our troops have been killed and over 20,000 more have been wounded. Yet we are nowhere near a solution to the grave crisis in Iraq – and the price goes higher and higher.
Again, thank you for writing to me. Please do not hesitate to contact me about this or any other issue of concern to you, and please know that I will continue to speak out as clearly as I can against this escalation.
The death of any service member is tragic and the horrors of war are things that no one should have to live with. The reality is that wars are sometimes necessary. Ms. Boxer, we lost this many people on Normandy Beach during the D Day invasion. What would our history be like today if you and this Congress had been in charge? Would you have called for the “redeployment” of our troops and allow the Germans to win? Would you have felt comfortable knowing that by cutting and running you allowed millions more Jews to be slaughtered? How would you feel knowing that all of Europe was taken over by German and its allies? What kind of world would we be living in today if people such as you and your colleagues had been taking the decisions at that crucial time in our history? Lastly, How would you feel knowing that it was only a matter of time before the newly formed German Empire assaulted the United States in its quest for World domination?
These are real questions and they apply just as much today. Radical Islam is hell bent on killing or converting the World to their twisted religion and imposing Sharia Law. You Ms. Boxer will not hold a position of power in such a state. You will be relegated to second class citizen, worth only half a man and you will be beaten for failure to comply. This might sound like an alarmist position but keep in mind what has taken place in places like France, the UK, and Somalia. Listen to what our enemy says and pay attention. We need to fight and win the war over there to keep them from coming here. If we allow them to get here and bring the fight to us it will be a little too late to point fingers (though Boxer and the Democrats will blame George Bush).
In the movie The Karate Kid Pat Morita’s character said “fighting not good, but if must fight, win.” We need to keep that in mind. We can win by allowing our soldiers to see some unity at home and seeing their so-called leaders stand behind them in this battle. To do anything less is disgraceful and traitorous. If Congress allows us to be attacked again because they decided that they did not have the testicular fortitude to fight AND win then we will need to try them for treason and execute any who are found guilty. Think Hussein video.
Senator Boxer made it clear that she will continue to speak out against sending more troops. Perhaps next time Boxer gets a chance to email me she can explain why so many Democrats were calling on the President to send more troops a few years ago but now they think it is a bad idea. Boxer supported John Kerry for President and when he was running in 2004 he called for 40,000 additional troops in Iraq. Why is it she does not support the man who is President when he wants to put more troops there? Could it be partisan politics and placing the desire to win above national security and our troops’ safety?
Our military is full of the best and brightest and if the members of Congress would actually listen to them instead of pretending to know everything they would see a group of people who want to come home, but not until they finish their mission. The death of an American soldier is a tragic thing but the death that soldier suffers when his leaders betray him by raising a white flag is the most painful, vile death that can be imagined. Soldiers who fight for their country and die in battle have died an honorable death. The death by a thousand cuts inflicted by the cut and run policies of inept, self centered leaders is the most despicable, dishonorable way any human being can die.
Shame on Congress if they allow it to happen.
Tags: Political
Holding Political Office is About Power, Not Service
Jan 23, 2007 Political
How efficient would a company regard a CEO that spent millions of dollars in order to see a $400,000 payoff? Right now the Democratic field of contenders for the nomination to the Presidency has a group of people who will do just that and Republicans will not be far behind. The President of the United States earns $400,000 a year so in a four year term the President receives 1.6 million dollars. In order to get to that job the Presidential candidate will need to spend about 400 times that amount of money. In other words, the person installed as the next CEO of the country will spend about 500 million dollars in order to earn 1.6 million.
Most of the people who run for office either have a great deal of money or they know people who have a great deal and are willing to part with it. The latter is usually the case rather than the former because, with very few exceptions, candidates get a lot of money from people in order to win an election. Those donations are not free and they often involve a quid pro quos once the candidate has been bought and paid for and is safely in office. People who donate money, especially large sums of money, expect something in return for their investment. Whether it is an appointment to a government position for themselves or family members or support for legislation favorable to them, backers expect a return on their money.
While many of the candidates for office do not have the money to finance their own campaigns, they are exceptionally wealthy and make a great deal more than the annual salary of any elected official. Hillary Clinton earns more than 400 thousand dollars a year even without her Senate pay. Her husband routinely receives that amount for one speaking engagement and therein lies the catch. Prior to becoming President, very few people knew who Bill Clinton was. He was elected to office and bumbled through eight years earning an annual salary more than he had ever earned in his life. His service however, put him in high demand and offers that he would never have received had he never been elected President, began to pour in. Book deals, speaking engagements, honoraria, all items that are the spoils of service to this country.
The money that elected office pays is not what attracts these people, it is the power. Hillary does not care about 400 thousand a year; she cares about being the most powerful person in the world. She is looking forward to the spoils similar to what her husband has received as a result of his service but not until she has had a chance to have her name placed in the history books as the first woman President of the United States, not until she has had the chance to rule over the masses, not until she has had her bite of the apple of power.
Hillary is not unique in this regard. Obama, Richardson and the rest can all claim that they see America needs to go in a different direction or that they can change the world but the fact is these are the same things they all say every four years and very little changes. Government gets larger and its appetite for our hard earned money becomes ever more insatiable. More and more social programs are introduced and more legislation is introduced to choke off the productivity of this great nation. In all this, one thing remains a constant and that is the people who are doing it are exercising power over others and that is what they want more than anything. They do not care about this country or the direction in which it heads so long as they are the ones doing the directing. People who allow polls to determine their positions are neither principled or leaders. They are appeasers who will do anything for the financial support offered by the wealthy regardless of how that position affects the country. Hillary, for example, changes her positions (though many of her supporters will deny this) in order to be more appealing (as a candidate, the other could never happen). Look at her early positions on government and compare them to now. Her recently discovered support of the military runs contrary to her words and actions while she was in college and when she was First Lady but she knows the appearance of support is essential to improving her chances for greater power.
As previously stated, these people, in their quest for power, will spend millions of dollars of other people’s money in order to get into positions where they can spend billions of dollars of other people’s money. They seek power in order to increase their personal wealth and to foster an environment where they will be in demand after leaving office. Earning millions of dollars for speaking is another demonstration of power and a position they desire greatly. When someone pays a former elected official huge sums of money to speak it reaffirms, in their minds, the power they have to command such a thing.
The founders of this great nation never intended for the people to be ruled by the government, they intended for the people to rule the country through representation. If they had wanted us ruled they would have kept the monarchy. Instead, they pointed out that our Creator has given each of us the right to live as a free people, unencumbered by subservience to others. They certainly envisioned that there would be people who sought office solely for the power involved and they attempted to keep that from happening by setting up three branches of government that would oversee each other. Unfortunately, these three branches have become coconspirators in the fleecing of the populace. The idea the founders had of citizens serving in elected office was that they would serve the country for a short period and return to their regular lives. The founders never intended for public service to become a lifetime job. Back then serving was not lucrative and people left to return to their lives. Elected officials do not earn a great deal of money (though more than they are worth); it is the other money, the power, and the opportunity to become part of the elitist class that they are in search of and constantly strive to protect.
[tags]president, election, money, campaign, Hillary, government, contribution[/tags]
Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website | Mark My Words | The Random Yak | Adam’s Blog | basil’s blog | Shadowscope | Common Folk Using Common Sense | The Amboy Times | Conservative Cat | third world county | stikNstein… has no mercy | The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns | Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove | Constitution Matters | The Pink Flamingo | Planck’s Constant | Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker | Dumb Ox Daily News | Right Voices | and Gone Hollywood
Thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Whites Only for President?
Jan 22, 2007 Political
As many know, Martin O’Malley beat Robert Ehrlich to become Governor of Maryland. When he assumed office his spot as Mayor of Baltimore was filled until the next election. Many candidates have lined up on the Democratic side in order to take a shot at that office. A prominent black lawyer in Baltimore sent a letter to the handful of black candidates and urged them to drop out and unite around one candidate or a white person will win the office.
Being a lawyer he immediately said that it would not be a bad thing for a white person to win but that a black person would be more responsive to the needs of the predominantly black community. Can you imagine how it would look if a Republican sent out a letter saying that Republicans needed to rally around one candidate or a black guy like Obama might win? In law, a side is allowed to pursue things that were addressed by the opposition. So, since this lawyer opened the door, let us investigate more closely.
In America white people are the majority of the population. There are more minorities collectively than whites but as an individual demographic, white outnumber all other races. So, using this lawyer’s logic, is it fair to say that the President should be white because a white person will be better able to address the concerns of the white community? Forget that most of Congress is white because most of Baltimore’s City Council is black. The fact is this guy believes that it is important to have a person that is the same color as the population representing that population. Given that sentiment, our presidents should always be white so black people should not run and we should never hear some silliness about discrimination when they are beaten.
I found something really telling in the article. When O’Malley ran for Governor all the city folk supported him. All the political leaders came out of the woodwork to endorse him, to say what a great guy he is and to say what a wonderful leader he is. This, as it turns out was a bunch of political tripe and these people were not really looking out for their interest of the state. You see, they lied about what a great guy O’Malley really is:
She also says that Brown’s views are common among some African-Americans and reflect what she believes is disappointment with former Mayor and now Governor Martin O’Malley.
“There’s more of a move, or a sentiment against a white mayor, because of many people’s dissatisfaction with the previous one,” Carter told WBAL’s “Bruce Elliott Show.”
On the same program, former Delegate Neil Quinter, who campaigned for O’Malley last year said O’Malley captured a large number of African-American votes in bids for mayor and governor.
“Factually, he did win a majority of all of the voters, and the exit polls show he got a significant chunk of the African American voters too,” Quinter told WBAL’s “Bruce Elliott Show.” WBAL
Here we have O’Malley getting the support of the politicians of Baltimore and a vast majority of the black vote in Baltimore but we have this assertion that he did not do good job for them. This might be similar to those in Arkansas who wanted Clinton as President so they could get rid of his “leadership” in that state. Maybe the City residents figured that if O’Malley won he would stop messing up the City. In reality, the City has been messed up for a long time (and has been run by Democrats forever) and it is unlikely that the school system or crime will change at the hands of a black guy. O’Malley succeeded a black guy who failed to fix the problems of the City. The reality of the situation is that people in Baltimore City have been trained to vote for the person with the D next to his name. It does not matter if the person is a murdering, child molester, so long as there is a big D next to the name, that person will get the vote.
Maryland’s major city and its surrounding counties are densely populated with people who expect the government to wipe their butts when they are done. They vote by habit and indoctrination rather than by taking intelligent choices. I imagine a bunch of non-human primates could be trained to vote in a similar fashion (and probably other animals if they had opposable digits).
In the Army we had this saying; Screw up, move up. Looks like that is what the City allowed O’Malley to do. I am now, more so than ever before, convinced that people should have to pass a test before they can vote.
Tags: Political
Another Botched Joke?
Jan 22, 2007 Political
U.S. Rep. Steve Kagen apologized for some remarks he made saying that his attempt at humor wasn’t delivered or received well and he promised it would not happen again. Then he told everyone the attention was distracting from the important work he needs to do in Congress. As is usual for the Democrats, their mean spiritedness and nastiness is dismissed and excused with the “bad joke” or bad attempt at “humor.” (ala John Kerry).
It is reported that this guy blocked a door to the restroom and told Karl Rove that he [Kagen] kicked Rove’s ass (in the election). He also thanked George bush and Dick Cheney for helping him get elected. Then, in the tactless manner the Democrats are famous for, he referred to Laura Bush as Barbara.
I could never work in DC because if this guy blocked the bathroom door I was trying to enter I would show him what a real ass kicking is and if I felt for one minute he insulted my wife they would be flying flags at half staff in honor of his short Congressional career. Of course, he excuses his behavior and says it was bad humor.
It is amazing to me that when Democrats say something that does not go over well it is excused as a bad joke or humor gone awry. When they are confronted with their words they claim it is a distraction to the important work they have to do. To me they are nothing more than cowards who do not have the courage of their convictions. If they feel strongly enough to say something they should have the courage to stick by what they said and not cower when confronted. This guy was intent on being a schmuck and now that he was called on it he wants to dismiss it and get back to his important work. Typical of a coward, when confronted he runs.
Things like this help me to understand why the concept of the duel was introduced.
Source:
Appleton Post Crescent
Trackposted to Pirate’s Cove | Perri Nelson’s Website | third world county | Conservative Cat | basil’s blog | Right Voices | Shadowscope | DragonLady’s World
Thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.