I've been hearing in the news, today, that noone can fault Sarah Palin for her daughter Bristol's pregnancy. I thought she was supposed to be a leader. I thought she was tough. I thought she had the right ideas about how the country should be run. No, she's none of that. She can't keep her own house in order. She can't even impart her values on her own daughter, nonetheless the American public. What would make me excited about a woman that purports teaching abstinence only education, but has a pregnant 17 year old? I was under the impression that we still had SOME control over a minor still living in our homes.
This brings me to the question of just how much conservatives believe in their own values. We saw so many conservative politicians get caught in gay sex scandals last year, I don't even want to name them all. But if you want to read about a few of them check out the top 5 on badmouth.net. http://www.badmouth.net/top-five-republican-gay-sex-scandals/.
Is their whole platform a ruse that appeals them to the bible thumpers of America? Have they decided to become the "moral" party only to appease people that actually have morals, while living private lives that don't reflect the rhetoric? Remember the Michael McManus story? He was the author that got caught taking a five fiure sum of money to promote marriage, in 2005, for the Bush campaign. Do they know no limits?
It seems to me, that until liberals start calling out these conservatives on they're deceptive tactics they will continue to mislead and miscreate. I would like to know if we could get a class action theft by deception suit against conservatives. They stole my money for a war that was sold as being about terror. When actually, Bush has just been trying to get his father's One World Order agenda furthered. They've taken away my way of life and freedoms by telling me they need to take my freedom so that I keep my freedoms and liberties - go figure that. They can listen to my phone calls and review my emails under the guise of protecting the country from terrorism. Yet, local police use it to boost their incarceration statistics. Many national security experts agree that rules like the Patriot Act have limited effect and should be re-thought.
"…the Patriot Act was enacted in an environment where
there was virtually no discussion or careful scrutiny.
Maybe there shouldn't have been because we needed
to act quickly. But now we have the time and room for
thought about what we need in the post-9/11 world."
- Stephen Schulhofer
national security expert at New York University School of Law
I have to say, without hyperbole, that the conservative agenda has completely changed our way of life - negatively. And since it was all done under false pretense, then I want to get restitiution. I am truly disappointed in the GOP, the Libertarians, the Evangelicals, and anyone else of their ilk. I think they should pay or be punished for the degradation of the lives of good moderates and liberals such as myself.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Troop Withdrawal Talks in Iraq Benefit McCain or Obama?
Recently, in an article for a German magazine (Der Spiegel), Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki supported the Obama strategy of completing troop withdrawals and redeployments within 16 months in office. This, among other comments, surface amid talks of a "general time horizon" withdrawal strategy by the Bush administration. So much talk of withdrawal would suggest a benefit to the Obama campaign, especially as he is in the middle of a Congressional Middle East tour. Al-Maliki's endorsement should end critic's talks of Obama's foreign policy inexperience, vindicate his consistent rhetoric and allow him to be consistent with his foreign policy comments that have come under fire from Senator McCain.
This news comes to light, though, as "the surge is working" oratory spews from the PR machine of the GOP. Rightfully so, Bush intends to highlight one of seemingly few good decisions he's made in this particular war. Muddying the waters even further are the talks between the two countries of a "general time horizon" withdrawal strategy. Unfortunately, the Executive Branch has been careful to say that they only support this hypothesized plan if positive gains continue. The problem is the occupying force could very well wear out its welcome and turn the Iraq government against Republican policies...if they aren't already, that is.
Naturally, proponents of Obama's ideals would be optimistic of these developments. At the same time this could bolster the military credentials of his rival, Mr. McCain. If played properly, McCain could use this to show how his support for the surge was the correct decision all along. Mr. Obama would have to make the argument that there never should have been a surge or original invasion in the first place - a much more complicated and difficult argument to win at this stage in the conflict.
On the other hand, Maliki, once deemed as weak and ineffective, has been making great strides. First, he has reduced the Iraqi debt to the United Arab Emirates by $7 million after negotiating to have it erased. He has also begun the process of engaging Arab countries with Iraq after reluctance to the Shi'ite lead government. Additionally he's said that he would like to see an end to foreign immunity. The latter would definitely change the effectiveness of contractors in the war torn country, possibly rekindling hostility. All talks of Iraqi Independence should favor Obama, since he is looking to refocus forces in the Afghan territory, to chase the terrorists where they're most potent. Nuri al-Maliki even seemingly endorsed Obama by stating he agreed with his troop withdrawal strategy. Could a Muslim leader's endorsement help Obama or fuel the rumor that he's secretly a Muslim himself? He must take this and grow the sentiment in Iraq and neighboring countries to make it positive. McCain may need to acquiesce, which could show his flexibility or get him labeled as the dreaded "flip-flopper."
With over 80% of the country currently thinking we're on the wrong course, the right course is to have a leader that has coalescence around his ideas. Obama should be seen as a forward thinker and go on the offensive with the notion that he understands the issues. Also, he should make note that he's long purported that a military strategy is not the answer. Thus, he could actually win hearts and minds by helping to build infrastructure in a country that sorely needs basic services like water and sanitary living conditions. McCain would only ultimately benefit if he backs off of his stance that troop levels will need to remain constant because of the surge. The "surge," which is actually just a troop increase was always a short-term solution and must be positioned in this light if he's to elicit political gain from it. Still, his position is too precarious, and still sounds too dogmatic in his incessant need to get a traditional military victory. If played correctly, Obama should be the benefactor of the recent withdrawal talks.
This news comes to light, though, as "the surge is working" oratory spews from the PR machine of the GOP. Rightfully so, Bush intends to highlight one of seemingly few good decisions he's made in this particular war. Muddying the waters even further are the talks between the two countries of a "general time horizon" withdrawal strategy. Unfortunately, the Executive Branch has been careful to say that they only support this hypothesized plan if positive gains continue. The problem is the occupying force could very well wear out its welcome and turn the Iraq government against Republican policies...if they aren't already, that is.
Naturally, proponents of Obama's ideals would be optimistic of these developments. At the same time this could bolster the military credentials of his rival, Mr. McCain. If played properly, McCain could use this to show how his support for the surge was the correct decision all along. Mr. Obama would have to make the argument that there never should have been a surge or original invasion in the first place - a much more complicated and difficult argument to win at this stage in the conflict.
On the other hand, Maliki, once deemed as weak and ineffective, has been making great strides. First, he has reduced the Iraqi debt to the United Arab Emirates by $7 million after negotiating to have it erased. He has also begun the process of engaging Arab countries with Iraq after reluctance to the Shi'ite lead government. Additionally he's said that he would like to see an end to foreign immunity. The latter would definitely change the effectiveness of contractors in the war torn country, possibly rekindling hostility. All talks of Iraqi Independence should favor Obama, since he is looking to refocus forces in the Afghan territory, to chase the terrorists where they're most potent. Nuri al-Maliki even seemingly endorsed Obama by stating he agreed with his troop withdrawal strategy. Could a Muslim leader's endorsement help Obama or fuel the rumor that he's secretly a Muslim himself? He must take this and grow the sentiment in Iraq and neighboring countries to make it positive. McCain may need to acquiesce, which could show his flexibility or get him labeled as the dreaded "flip-flopper."
With over 80% of the country currently thinking we're on the wrong course, the right course is to have a leader that has coalescence around his ideas. Obama should be seen as a forward thinker and go on the offensive with the notion that he understands the issues. Also, he should make note that he's long purported that a military strategy is not the answer. Thus, he could actually win hearts and minds by helping to build infrastructure in a country that sorely needs basic services like water and sanitary living conditions. McCain would only ultimately benefit if he backs off of his stance that troop levels will need to remain constant because of the surge. The "surge," which is actually just a troop increase was always a short-term solution and must be positioned in this light if he's to elicit political gain from it. Still, his position is too precarious, and still sounds too dogmatic in his incessant need to get a traditional military victory. If played correctly, Obama should be the benefactor of the recent withdrawal talks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)