Andrew Sullivan supports Ron Paul for the Republican presidential nomination. That’s a good thing. But he spends a considerable amount of time talking about how the war in Iraq has been lost… Perhaps, trying to convince himself.
Let's be clear: we have lost this war. We have lost because the initial, central goals of the invasion have all failed: we have not secured WMDS from terrorists because those WMDs did not exist. We have not stymied Islamist terror - at best we have finally stymied some of the terror we helped create. We have not constructed a democratic model for the Middle East - we have instead destroyed a totalitarian government and a phony country, only to create a permanently unstable, fractious, chaotic failed state, where the mere avoidance of genocide is a cause for celebration. We have, moreover, helped solder a new truth in the Arab mind: that democracy means chaos, anarchy, mass-murder, national disintegration and sectarian warfare. And we have also empowered the Iranian regime and made a wider Sunni-Shiite regional war more likely than it was in 2003. Apart from that, Mr Bush, how did you enjoy your presidency?
McCain, for all his many virtues, still doesn't get this. Paul does.
First of all, the Left can neither stomach, nor afford, a victory in Iraq. Too much of the Left’s time, effort and momentum has been invested in our defeat in Iraq. Let’s be crystal-clear on that fact.
The stated goals of the invasion have largely been achieved. The biggest goal being the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime.
It’s true that large stock piles of WMD’s were never found. But that makes no difference. Iraq is no longer able to produce WMD’s. So in that sense America was successful. The outcome would have been the same even if large WMD stock piles had been discovered.
Mr. Sullivan goes on to say we have not stymied Islamist terror, but rather stymied terror we helped create. Again, I’ll agree that the initial occupation of Iraq caused an increase in resentment of us, not less. But we have stymied Islamic terror in a very big way. Al Qaeda made Iraq its central front in its war against the West. And we’ve dealt them a mortal blow on two fronts: we’ve beaten them militarily, and American forces now occupy the moral high-ground. They’ve virtually given up on Iraq. An event that is well documented by bloggers and other journalists embedded with front-line troops for more than just a few days.
As for Iran, they are nearly surrounded on all sides by American forces. They obviously feel threatened, so I hope this President and the future President can resolve differences with that country without using military force. Besides, the men and women serving overseas need a well-deserved rest.
Our soldiers have done remarkable work in spite of poor post-invasion planning on account of the current administration, powder-keg politics in Iraq (and here), a biased media, troop-bashing liberals and blow hard politicians who put politics ahead of our national interest.
Read Mr. Sullivan’s entire piece: Ron Paul For The Republican Nomination.
Posted on:
December 17, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Iraqi Freedom, Liberalism, Media Bias . •
No Comments • .
Even if you’re not a Ron Paul supporter, you have to agree, he’s right on target when it comes to this country’s run-away fiscal policy.
Posted on:
December 15, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Elections 2008, Videos . •
2 Comments • .
I may not agree with all of Congressman Ron Paul’s views; especially in regard to the War in Iraq. But his message does resonate with me for a lot of reasons. One day, as we get closer to “tax time,” I’ll be sufficiently motivated to share them with you.
I recently came across one of Congressman Paul’s campaign videos. For now, I’m posting it for your viewing pleasure.
Update: And this video too:
I’m curious to know what liberals think of his message?
Posted on:
December 2, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Elections 2008, Videos . •
No Comments • .
I find this memo from former Bush advisor, Karl Rove, to presidential candidate, Barack Obama, very odd, but fascinating at the same time. Here’s an excerpt from the Financial Times article:
Not that you have asked for advice, but here it is anyway: Iowa is your chance to best her. If you do not do it there, odds are you never will anywhere. You are way behind her in most national polls. The only way to change that is to beat her in Iowa so people around America take another look at you. You did a smart thing organising effectively in the early primary states. But you can take advantage of that only if you win Iowa and keep her from building an overwhelming sense of invincibility and inevitability.
The good news is you have again got “the buzz”. Polls are looking better for you in Iowa and the other early states. Your press is improving, with your performance at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner a big help. Hillary Clinton has made unforced errors. But she is still the frontrunner and there are several things you need to do quickly to win.
Read the rest, it’s fascinating: Memo to Obama: win Iowa or lose the race.
UPDATE: Is Obama already heeding Rove’s advice?
Looks like the good Senator from Illinois just launched a website called “Hillary Attacks”.
An excerpt:
Her lead in the polls shrinks, Senator Clinton's flagging campaign grows more desperate each day. This web site will chronicle and rebut the increasingly desperate attacks and accusations being produced by the Clinton campaign.
According to Senator Obama:
Days since Senator Clinton promised she was not interested in attacking Democrats: 23
Days that Senator Clinton has spent attacking Democrats since making that promise: 19
Watching two democrats have a go at one another, priceless.
Update: Robert Reich jumps into the fray
In his post, Why is HRC stooping So Low?
I’m becoming increasingly concerned about the stridency and inaccuracy of charges in Iowa — especially coming from my old friend. While I’m as hard-boiled as they come about what’s said in campaigns, I just don’t think Dems should stoop to this. First, HRC attacked O's plan for keep Social Security solvent. Social Security doesn’t need a whole lot to keep it going – it’s in far better shape than Medicare – but everyone who’s looked at it agrees it will need bolstering (I was a trustee of the Social Security Trust Fund ten years ago, and I can vouch for this). Obama wants to do it by lifting the cap on the percent of income subject to Social Security payroll taxes, which strikes me as sensible. That cap is now close to $98,000 (it’s indexed), and the result is highly regressive. (Bill Gates satisfies his yearly Social Security obligations a few minutes past midnight on January 1 every year.) The cap doesn’t have to be lifted all that much to keep Social Security solvent – maybe to $115,00. That’s a progressive solution to the problem. HRC wants to refer Social Security to a commission. That's avoiding the issue, and it's irresponsible: A commission will likely call either for raising the retirement age (that’s what Greenspan’s Social Security commission came up with in the 1980s) or increasing the payroll tax on all Americans. So when HRC charges that Obama’s plan would “raise taxes” and her plan wouldn’t, she’s simply not telling the truth.
It annoys me that “progressives” think a portion of our hard-earned money is rightfully theirs to use for progressive tax solutions. Translation: We screwed up, so you taxpayers can hand over more money to fix it…
In any case, Reich criticizes Hillary for her attack strategy. I would ask, why is Mr. Reich so concerned about the character assassination strategy? It’s what liberals have perfected and continue to use in every situation where the facts just aren’t on their side. It’s part of the Democratic play book. I guess maybe he just wants HRC to save it for the Republican nominee.
Posted on:
December 2, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Domestic Politics, Elections 2008, Hillary Watch . •
No Comments • .
WMUR 9, New Hampshire:
ROCHESTER, N.H. — An armed man has taken two campaign workers hostage at the Hillary Clinton campaign office in Rochester, police said.
Officials with the campaign confirmed that there were two workers taken hostage in the office on 28 North Main St.. A woman and her baby told workers at a neighboring business that she was released by the hostage-taker.
“A young woman with a 6-month or 8-month-old infant came rushing into the store just in tears, and she said, ‘You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape,’” witness Lettie Tzizik said.
Check the following page for updates: Man Takes Hostages At Clinton Campaign Office.
Posted on:
November 30, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Miscellaneous . •
No Comments • .
This is part of a headline from an article appearing on Guardian’s web site:
Fraud, intimidation and bribery as Putin prepares for victory
State workers forced to vote in effort to rig result for president.
The Kremlin is planning to rig the results of Russia’s parliamentary elections on Sunday by forcing millions of public sector workers across the country to vote, the Guardian has learned.
Local administration officials have called in thousands of staff on their day off in an attempt to engineer a massive and inflated victory for President Vladimir Putin and his United Russia party. Voters are being pressured to vote for United Russia or risk losing their jobs, their accommodation or bonuses, the Guardian has been told in numerous interviews with byudzhetniki (public sector workers), students and ordinary citizens.
Doctors, teachers, university deans, students and even workers at psychiatric clinics have been warned they have to vote. Failure to do so will entail serious consequences, they have been told.
However, I thought the headline should have read:
Fraud, intimidation and bribery as Putin Hillary Clinton prepares for victory…
Read more: Fraud, intimidation and bribery as Putin prepares for victory.
Posted on:
November 29, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Hillary Watch, International . •
No Comments • .
More lying from the Clinton camp:
UPDATE: Allahpundit exposes the BS details over at HotAir.com.
Posted on:
November 28, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Hillary Watch, Videos . •
No Comments • .
This kind of relates to my previous posts, Hillary Clinton and Tough Questions part one and part two. Michelle Malkin has once again produced a terrific video roundup of how liberal activists were sold to the public as “undecided voters” during the last Democratic debate hosted by CNN.
Watch the video and try to maintain a straight-face.
Posted on:
November 21, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Elections 2008, Hillary Watch, Videos . •
No Comments • .
« Previous Posts —— More Posts »
