Archive for the ‘security’ Category

« Older Entries  Newer Entries »

I blame YouTube (Patriotic Eagle Edition)


Got this in email. Thought I’d share.

See also: Three Birds, No Perspective

/ /

Comment, sucker!

Non–gotcha on the Bush Doctrine

politics / security

Just a minute ago, I was thinking about Sarah Palin’s gaffe over the Bush Doctrine. I was thinking about it, because I couldn’t tell you what the Bush Doctrine was. And I was part of it (got the Bronze Star Medal to prove it).
Seeing her answer again just shows me what I was thinking: she was describing the Bush Doctrine. And so was Charlie Gibson. The non–gotcha comes because they weren’t describing the same Bush Doctrine.
As Joshua Treviño points out, there have been at least ten versions of the Bush Doctrine floating about. And that’s just the ones that haven’t been diluted through the AP. So, while it may look like Gotcha Time!™, it ain’t.

Comment, sucker!

More Palin vs. Obama

economics / politics / security

If this doesn’t prove Team Obama is scared, look at this: the comparison of Obama as presidential candidate versus the former job of the VeeP candidate. That’s right, the latest great move by the Obama camp is to ignore her current job and try and make his current job sound important:

COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question — your — some of your Republican critics have said you don’t have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska. What’s your response?
OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin’s town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.
So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years. And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.

Uh, she’s the Governor of Alaska. With a multi–billion dollar budget and tanks and helicopters and stuff. In a non–contiguous state less than an hour away from Russia, not one of our best buddies in the world.
And, again, she isn’t running for the presidency. John McCain is. It’s just amazing to see the comparisons of two people who are should be incomparable.
[Via Ed, from whom all stories flow]


Leadership with tanks, not diplomats


I keep hearing this trope (that’s my word of the day!) about ‘Global Leadership.’ That is, to say, that the United States needs to be more diplomatic, rather than using force. This is a welcomed idea from — you guessed it — our enemies. And, you know, the countries that don’t have as much as we do.
Yet, when there’s a tsunami, earthquake, or other natural disaster, who’s always out there with an open hand? The same people who seem to curse us for our strength. Coincidentally, these are also the same nations who come crying to us when the big bads take their things. When your country gets invaded, you don’t want diplomats — you want killers.
Protection comes from tanks, not words. Strongly phrased statements don’t quell the sounds of suffering. A bowl of rice will do what no speech can ever do. I would gladly use my tanks to ensure the hungry are fed and the people are safe, rather than use my jets to codify world leaders.
Quite frankly, I don’t care what other countries think about this country. The United States is the greatest nation on the earth, and by a fair margin. Success will breed the detractors some seem to be stubbornly courting. If you don’t have somebody hating you, then they just don’t know you exist.
One of the first things I have to teach young leaders is this: their leadership creates enemies. Anyone willing to take a stand for something will, by human nature, create enemies willing to stand against them. I can assure you, we will never reach a full consensus in this lifetime, Being a leader means taking risks, doing what you think is right, even if it means going against what others say is right.

Comment, sucker!

Palin vs. Obama

politics / security

Since seeing this video (thx, Ed) we’ve gotten knee–deep in the ‘Sarah Palin is not experienced enough’ trope. So much so, that now there’s a pool on when she’ll drop out. But beyond the vapid, amorphous arguments that are the basis of the hypothesis that she will excuse herself comes this inevitable conclusion: the presidential race is now—at least in part—about Palin vs. Obama.
And that contest horrifies some people. As Bob Owens points out…

We now know far more about Sarah Palin in just four days than we’ve learned about Barack Obama in 17 months. That is just sad. It’s a pathetic reflection of the mainstream media’s unwillingness to do their jobs for fear of finding stories that would hurt the candidate so many of them openly desire to win.
But periodically appearing to read teleprompters isn’t vetting, not matter how many months a candidate has done it, and Obama’s ability to perform in set-piece debates is both dubious—Hillary once famously took him apart—and irrelevant. Barack Obama really has never been fully vetted. He hasn’t even come close.
You want examples?

Four days of vetting has produced more ink about the VPette’s daughter than the former community organizer’s ties to an American terrorist who bombed the White House. Just sad, really. And telling.
I mentioned that some people were horrified by the Palin pick. That’s because she stands for, in a real way, everything that Obama says he is for, but isn’t. And there are people that realize this — an they’re panicking.

Comment, sucker!

I blame YouTube (Cop Fail Edition)

judiciary / security

Coming soon to a DARE program near you!

Comment, sucker!

I blame YouTube (G Unit/Hitler Edition)


You knew this was going to happen eventually. It’s like Godwin’s Law.
Godwin’s Law with Spongebob Squarepants.

Comment, sucker!

Talking points

economics / environment / politics / security

Since I’m not feeling bloggy today, feel free to discus amongst yourselves.

  • The Olympics (my take: boring)
  • Russia is at war with Georgia
  • The John Edwards affair now acknowledged by the media
  • President Bush says to drill, price of oil plummets
  • Political stunt becomes movement, Republicans stay in D.C

If anybody needs me, I’ll be watching NFL preseason football.

1 Comment »

The Happening (South Park)

environment / security

At least we don’t have to worry about ManBearPig.

Comment, sucker!

No Crisis Is Immune From Exploitation

economics / politics / security

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
…“Under Bush.” So says Hillary ‘Mrs. Bill Clinton’ Clinton?!?:

There appears to be no crisis, tragedy or disaster immune from exploitation under the Bush administration.

So unlike 1993–2000. And that’s just while the Clintons were in the White House. Their shady dealings go way beyond just Mrs. Bill’s time in the White House.
Two points I wanted to make here: first, that this piece is like the kettle is calling the pot a kettle. Second, that who exactly is always exploiting these things? Let’s go down the list, shall we?
In the past few years, the number of corporations flocking to places like the Cayman Islands to evade U.S. taxes has exploded.
Like, say, China? You know, China. The formerly not–on–the–most–favored–nation–list–before–Mr.–Bill–put–them–on China.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but American businesses are in the business of making themselves money, not paying taxes.
In the weeks after Hurricane Katrina, for example, FEMA…
Did what they did on Bill Clinton’s watch.
Only faster.
While touting fiscal responsibility, President Bush and his administration have lined the pockets of political cronies like Halliburton and Blackwater. While calling for earmark reform, the president has allowed no-bid and questionable contracting throughout the federal government to dwarf earmark spending by a 10-to-1 ratio.
Quick, everybody, name a company that’s American owned that builds ports.
Alright, let’s check our answers. The correct answer to the question is…Haliburton. That would be the list. Hard to contract something to another company when another company doesn’t exist.
And earmarks? Are you kidding? Are you aware that the Democrats in Congress control spending? That’s the thing that galls me the most.
There’s more there to chide, but it doesn’t really matter. In calling for changes in the way government does business, she’s basically saying that the government (which has proven to be clumsy and inefficient) is the savior to our problems. To that, this quote from another famous American politician:
Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
President Ronald Reagan


« Older Entries  Newer Entries »

© 2003-2017 John Stansbury. All rights reserved. Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS). 18 queries. 0.375 seconds.