"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," he said Wednesday. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

July 3, 2008 Chicago Tribune

It is beginning to become clear now that Obama is modeling his POTUS mission statement on Hugo Chavez.  While it all may seem innocuous enough at first pass.  However the apparent intent of the wording of Obama would point to something akin to Chavez's Mission Miranda, where Chavez dispersed 100,000 AK-47 to his "Red Shirts."


 

Example of type of flag in video at this link.

EDIT: Actual picture of inside office showing flags here.

In the video below you will see a Che flag displayed prominently in one of "two new Houston offices opened by volunteers" for the Obama Campaign that "paid staffers will occupy in less than a week."

Houston Fox26 Video

Meanwhile the Fox 26 website states:

"The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign."

Which directly contradicts what is said in the news feature (that "paid staffers will occupy in less than a week") and stinks of cooperative damage control.

It is amazing that the moonbats think they are so in the drivers seat that they can bring out their mass murderers and celebrate them publicly in a capacity associated with the Presidential elections.

If it was Huckabee with a confederate flag you know the media would be tripping over themselves to talk about it 24/7...oh wait there's always a precedent isn't there?  How about George Allen?

Che, and B.H. Obama get a pass.

It's sad that he makes Hillary look good.

By KENNETH LOVETT

February 12, 2008 -- ALBANY - A prominent Democratic Queens assemblyman yesterday warned that Gov. Spitzer's proposed tax on illegal drugs - dubbed the "crack tax" by critics - could unfairly impact the drug dealers themselves.

Assemblyman Jeffrion Aubry told Spitzer Tax Commissioner Robert Megna during a legislative budget hearing that requiring drug users and dealers to pay state sales tax on their illegal stash is an undue burden since they already face fines and possible forfeiture of property and money.

"This component adds another financial hardship on people who don't have a lot of money," Aubry said.

Aubry, chairman of the Assembly Corrections Committee, added that the plan could "create another class of individual who can't escape the process and has to go back out and sell drugs."

Said Megna, "It is not our intent to burden certain portions of the population."

There are citizens of the united states who are not very good Americans.
There are non-citizens of the united states who are good Americans. (industrious, good people)
There are non-citizens of the united states who are bad Americans. (non-industrious, criminals)

We can't do much about the people in the first category...they are not necessarily Democrats, but they are usually liberal more than conservative...minus those of the Aryan Brotherhood and Jonesboro Baptist Church ilk.

However we should be able to do something about people in the second category, WITHOUT having to accept the persons of the third category in the same bargain. This is the whole purpose of proper immigration procedures as executed by the United States INS AND nearly every other country/nation on the planet; you accept the people you want, decline those you don't because it is your right as the nation they wish to immigrate to.

On top of that, even if it is someone of the second category - they in NO WAY should go to the FRONT of the line ahead of persons who are actually trying to do things the right way...regardless of relative merits.

Why should a Mexican Illegal of the second category go ahead of an Indian, British, Canadian, Argentinian, Italian, Russian, Chinese, Malaysian, etc. Legal immigrant of any category?

I work with Mexicans and Central Americans of both legal and illegal variety. I have no ill will towards any of them, but have utmost respect for those who go through the painful legal process and have been very proud of them and share their pride and happiness on the day they become citizens.  While the process does not need to be long or painful, many of the best things in our lives only come after suffering and sacrifice.

Another issue that gets lost in all the race bating is the Smuggling operations, the Coyotes, the modern equivalent of the slave traders. They do not care if they have to dump a load of smuggled people into the ocean, abandon them in some freight car or truck. The whole smuggling economy on our Mexican border needs to be squelched immediately by any and all means necessary because the smuggling itself is a far more heinous blight than the actual illegals they bring for the most part.

There is no reason the Tamil Tigers should be running a smuggling ring on our southern border (which they do to raise money and have indicated that while they have no direct quarrel with the United States per se, they would still transport "allied" terrorists into the United States.)

The illegals are not going to be rounded up and shipped out so we need to come up with a way to give them each a choice to be a guest or get on track to citizenship behind those already in line.

The smuggling is something we could mostly put a stop to if we acted in as much self interest in that regard as our friendly country to the south, Mexico, does in protecting its own southern borders.

Well we are seeing the pattern very clearly now, Huckabee has abandoned all pretense at actually running for office and instead is clearly colluding with the McCain team to shut down Romney.   This is beyond wrong, it is dishonorable and violates the spirit of our electoral process if not the actual law.  Is this what we are to expect from the McCain - Huckabee ticket that is certainly being formed?

DO NOT LET THEM STEAL OUR VOICE THROUGH THEIR SHENANIGANS! 

If you want Romney as President we may have to start thinking about a Nationwide "Write In" Presidential Vote if these "smoke filled back room" deals continue to rob our voice.

GET LOUD, GET MAD, GET MITT ON THE TICKET!

Notice how the liberals always roast the gay conservatives?  They take glee in it.  Now they don't do that for gay liberals who do really nasty things...because that is accepted.

I've seen the rationale for this from OT liberals...they point out the "hypocrisy" of being conservative and gay, as if that were as likely as a matter and anti-matter to get along.

Yet I am more than certain there are conservatives who are gay.  Obviously they are not the classic conservatives of the so-called "moral majority" era.  But they do exist.

So if being gay is not a choice, and that gay someone feels they have more in common politically with the right than the left...why roast them for being gay? 

The sad thing is that once exposed they do not seem to recover...they are rejected by both parties while if they were to have been Democrat they would be re-elected, even if they had run a gay brothel out of their homes.

The fact of the matter is that we as a society are not going to be "cleansing" gays from our midst, no matter what the anti-gay side of things feels...so some form of compromise needs to be worked out to allow these people to follow as "normal" a life outside their bedroom as is possible for the greater society at large to deal with.  I'm suspicious of legislating morality beyond the obviously illegal (sex with minors, murder, rape, thievery, etc. the commonly acceptably moralities...regulating sexual mores is simply an antiquated concept in the 21st century, and ignores the fact that these people are not going anywhere.)

Maybe a step in the right direction there would be for both sides of politics to work something out so that being gay isn't so much a scarlet letter.  Do I want to see a bunch of gay couples all over the place?  Probably not.  But we are going to see them anyway, sooner or later...and we will have to deal with that as mature adults tolerating life's eccentricities, as much as we would anything else that we would run up against that is distasteful to our view but in the big picture is relatively benign.

In our society we have concocted this "family values" shallowness.  Merit plays very little part in how we select our representatives.  If a person lives their lives within the law, treats their neighbors honorably, gives back to their nation...they deserve to be treated with respect.

In my time in the military one of the most conflicting things I had to do was help exit process an out-ed gay man.  This was someone that I knew for at least a year and had no clue...but he was someone that I knew could trusted to be competent and capable.   Yet this man of merit was being removed when I was sure that at least 1/4 of the rest of the crew were less deserving to be there than he.

My thoughts at the time were that the rules were unfair (this was before "dont ask/dont tell")...but just the same - this nation has come to be the first place in the world were merit *can* count more than category.  Here in America who someone is  *should* matter more than their perceived class/category.

If there was a conservative candidate who's only "stigma" was being gay...a candidate who I thought could run the nation, honor the constitution, protect all our citizens...in short do the job as best could be reasonably expected of anyone...then why toss them away because I can't deal with my own imagination of what goes on in that persons bedroom?

Tolerance is the key to the future of the conservative movement in America.  It is the biggest club the liberals use because it provides the starkest relief between the supposed close-minded right wing religious types and the assumed open-minded left wingers.  

The truth we know is more complex, as the left wingers can only tolerate those who agree with them (thus a black conservative is "not really black" and any discussion of an issue can be solved not by debate but by shouting bumper-stickers loudly.)

The conservative movement needs to move away from the narrow "family values" front and become more inclusive.  Return the conservative focus to national security, eliminating open-ended entitlements, technological innovation, economic growth, and removing unnecessary bureaucracy and idiotic ear-mark pork.

The Conservative Movement should become a movement of Inclusive Merit for All Americans...not be saddled with the perception of being the party singing "Those Were the Days" with Archie and Edith while imagining they are Ozzie and Harriet.

Do you know?

I didn't know!

Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq?

Did you know that the Iraqi government currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated,

364 schools are under rehabilitation,

263 new schools are now under construction

and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq?

Did you know that Iraq's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities,

46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers,

all currently operating?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United State s in January 2005

for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational?

They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons,

which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft

(under Iraqi operational control)

which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000

fully trained and equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq

that produce over 3500 new officers each 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq?

They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations,

22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5

have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq

and phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations,

180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a televised debate recently?

OF COURSE WE DIDN'T KNOW!

WHY DIDN'T WE KNOW?

OUR MEDIA WOULDN'T TELL US!

"not convinced...reasonable doubt" these are the words a liberal I respect used to describe the results of the Army's investigation into the stories and allegations made by a soldier and published in the New Republic.{Link to news Story)  However those four words could easily be applied to the views of many a liberal regarding GWB's administration, the US military, the US Government, Tillman, 9/11, Katrina, et al.

Thus the true damage done to the American psyche by the lies and distortions and undermining of credibility.

I'd like to put all the blame for this on the door of the loony left conspiracy theorists...and they certain do their fair share...but the foppery of the current Administration which seems to want to sabotage its own successes doesn't help either.

Of course it is deeper than what we would commonly attribute to politics...our ceremonies, traditions, and institutions are also damaged by credibility lapses - the right to an anonymous and secure grand jury process for instance.  Or the "leak" from prosecutors/investigators.  It is all fine and dandy when it is someone else, but can you honestly tell me that you would want it in your case?  When we are sacrificing impartial justice to our preconceived guilt or innocence views...why not just have mob justice and be done with it?

Both of the major political parties and each of us as individuals are responsible for these credibility problems.  When elections are close - we get conspiracy theories about missing votes or rigged/hacked machines...just as frothing at the mouth crazy as certain right wing conspiracy theories in the Clinton years.  

However "not convinced" and "reasonable doubt" are the subjective measures of base credibility...and many on the left  barely accept the nation itself as a credible or legitimate entity, expecting them to make the leap of credibility for those across the political divide seems so fanciful.

I'm sure the stock response of certain people will be to lay this at the foot of GWB...which is ignorant, as he is as much a victim of this process as those who came before.

The truth of this is that since the shattering to the core of the American psyche in the 60's - the process of undermining the pillars of American cultural indoctrination (Ceremony, Education, Service...of which only one remains -> Service)...combined with final fallout of the removal of frontier...the nation has lost some vision of itself.

We need frontier, we need to get into space in a big way; and we need to re-invent an "American" culture for persons to acclimate to...there is no such thing as African-American, Chinese-American, French-American, Mexican-American, etc. this world of hyphen American is just stupid -> you choose to be an American you are an American, you speak English, you use Dollars, you produce a good or service, you raise your kids to be Americans and do your best to teach them right and wrong and be respectful to themselves and this great nation, it's traditions and ceremonies.

So many people don't do these things...but they are the things that count the most when push comes to shove.  We all should be Americans first...and we all seem to loose sight of this sometimes.  Even people like me who believe it should be this way can loose sight of the American forest as we skirmish amongst the partisan trees...imagine how nearly impossible it is for those who were never taught respect for the nation to pull themselves up to a higher place and see further than the next tree.

Wealth - Race - Gender - Culture - Religion

Honestly none of these things should not be an issue in selecting an employee or a representative.  The question should be about their capability to do the job...in other words a meritocracy.  Liberals place little value on merit as a rule, best exemplified by their love of big social programs that "level the playing field" between achievers and slackers...normally at the long term expense of those who actually need social programs.

A meritocracy - our system will never be that way, of course...because we are all human with human flaws and human paranoia about those who are even slightly different.  (Liberals will claim this to not be true about themselves...until they run into someone who disagrees with them)  Instead we focus on the gender/race/culture in our efforts to pigeonhole everything we see into nice digestible reference points.

The difference between Conservative and Liberal is the sort order of these things...liberals read the line below Left to Right, Conservative Right to Left.

Race - N. Gender - Wealth - Culture - Religion - (A. Gender)

Where:

Wealth = Socio-economic class, i.e. your income or lack thereof

Race = Degree of pigmentation

N. Gender = Plumbing, natural (male/female...for liberals this also includes sexual orientation)

Culture = All ethnic/cultural aspects not directly involved with religion or race ("American" or "other)

Religion = (belief in god or lack thereof) and (christian  or non-christian)

A. Gender = Plumbing, altered (for brevity, conservatives would place same-sex orientation in this category too - the A. Gender category does not exist for liberals and thus they would place orientation in the N. Gender group)

So where does Merit fit in here?  I suppose it could be "Wealth"...but just because someone is wealthy does not mean they have merit...just because someone is poor doesn't mean they lack merit.   The entrepreneurial spirit that the United States is founded on is one totally of merit.  Yet it is the one category that both ends of the political spectrum exclude the most, albeit that liberals do so by definition and conservatives acknowledge the merit of merit, if not always make it a priority.

Many commentators have drawn allusions and metaphors between the prosecution of the Civil War and the current anacronym filled GWOT.  To the “average” man or woman on the street whos knowledge of that previous conflict may possibly extend to Ken Burn’s PBS documentary, if not those two weeks in American History back in high school, the methods, words, and actions of the 1860’s may be surprisingly similar to what we see today in our own world.  To that end I have assembled some relevant excerpts and references from the acclaimed book, “Battle Cry of Freedom” by James M. McPherson (ISBN 0-345-35942-9)

First, The Positives

“In the North the two-party system disciplined and channeled political activity.  The Republican party became the means for mobilizing war resoruces, raising taxes, creating a new financial system, initiating emancipation, and enacting conscription.  Democrats opposed most of these measure; the existance of this well-defined opposition caused Republicans to close ranks when the chips were down.  Because measures were supported or opposed by parties, voters could identify those responsible for them and register their approval or disapproval at the polls by voting a party ticket.” (p. 690)

 

This part seems to be working about the same as it did in the Civil War.  Each voting cycle has become a referendum on either policy or conduct of the war in our modern times.  On the local level there are the same personal attacks on candidates of both parties regarding party loyalty, individual ethics, manfucatured scandal, and the candidates position on the war depending on the status of the conflict (Peace candidates benefit from the war being percieved as going badly, War candidates from the war going well. p. 692)

Even some of the anti-war language the candidates use is virtually unchanged in over a century, for example:

 

“Other opponents…brand the war a failure and demand peace through negotiations even if this risked the country’s war aims.” (p. 692)

 

The Current Regime

“Regime change begins at home” says the bumpersticker…this is the same sentiment expressed by the Copperheads in their war years.   Compare the usage of the words “regime” and “despot” as applied to the Bush administration by the current Democratic leadership and the following from the Civil War years (all bold are my emphasis):

 

“By 1863 some Peace Democrats proudly accepted the label [“Copperhead”] and began wearing badges bearing likenesses of the Goddess of Liberty from the copper penny to symbollize their opposition to Republican ‘tyranny.’ “ (p. 494 footnote 8)

 

“Governor Horatio Seymour of New York promised ‘to make every sacrifice…for the preservation fo the Union,’ …and pledged to ‘maintain and defend the sovereignty’ of New York against unconstitutional violations by the [Lincoln administration.]” (p. 592)

 

Vallandigham denounced this ‘wicked, cruel and unnecessary war’ waged ‘for the purpose of crushing out liberty and erecting a despotism’” (p. 596)

 

“Vallandigham professed himself a better unionist than the Republicans whose fanaticism had provoked his ruinous war.  These same Republicans, he continued, were now fighting not for the Union but for abolition.  And what had they accomplished?  ‘Let the dead at Fredericksburg and Vicksburg answer.’  The South could never be conquered; the only trophies of this war were ‘defeat, debt, taxation, sepulchres … the suspension of habeas corpus, the violation … of freedom of the press and of speech … which have made this country one of the worst despotism on earth for the past twenty months.’” (p. 592)

 

“A prime issue in both elections was the draft, enacted by Congress on March 3, 1863.  Democrats added conscription to emancipation and military arrests in their catalogue of Republican sins.”(p. 600)

 

“In a confidential interview with a Confederate agent, Vallandigham said that if the South ‘can only hold out this year…the peace party of the North would sweep the Lincoln dynasty out of existance.’” (p. 598)

 

“’Abe Lincoln….is brutal in all his habits…he is obscene…he is an animal.’  Lincoln was ‘Abe the Widowmaker’ who had sent half a million white men to their graves in this insane war…a Pennsylvania newspaper urged citizens to ‘go a step further, brethren, and suspend Old Abe – by the neck if necessary to stop the accursed slaughter of our citizens.’” (p. 790)

 

Except for the last, which would get someoen a visit from the Secret Service today, these could all be lifted directly from Democratic speaches and sound bytes today.

 

One of the current Democrats greatest dirty secret is that they play race as much as their Civil War predecessors do.  They utilize the race card domestically by assuming the mantle of the party annointed to protect the minorities of the nation, and then with equal vigor paint a racist picture of those lazy Iraqis who can not seem to fight for themselves, i.e. the “those backward people over there are incapable of democracy.”  That is the two headed snake of the modern Democratic talking points…pig headed multiculturalism at home, the subtle racism of the old “White Mans Burden” projected abroad.  The Democrat concept that the Iraqis and Afghanis are not “worthy” or are otherwise “incapable” of democracy…that is their modern rejection of Emancipation.

 

You could just as easily take this:

 

“An Ohio editor branded Lincoln a ‘half-witted usurper’ and his Emancipation Proclamation ‘monsterous, impudent, and heinous…for it declares those ‘equal’ whom God created unequal.’“ (p. 594)

 

and see this today:

 

“NY Times columnist calls Bush a ‘half-witted usurper’ and the spread of democracy to support the GWOT as ‘monsterous, impudent, and heinous…for it declares those ‘equal’ whom are unequal to the rigours of democracy.’“

 

 

The War

 

Vallandigham denounced this ‘wicked, cruel and unnecessary war’ waged ‘for the purpose of crushing out liberty and erecting a despotism’” (p. 596)

 

“…cried a former governe of Illinois in December 1862, ‘no more bloodshed to gratify a religious fanaticism.’” (p. 594)

 

“…warned Vallandigham in January 1863.  ‘If you of the East, who have found this war agaisnt the South, and for the negro, gratifying to your hate or profitable to your purse, will continue it…[be prepared for] external divorce between the West and East.” (p. 593)

 

Democratic Convention plank of 1864 – “After four years of failure to restore the Union by experiment of war…[we] demand that immeidate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities…” (p. 772)

 

“This became the platform of the Peace Democrats for the next two years.  Durign the early months of 1863 this faction commanded the support of a large minority of the party – perhaps even a majority.  A mass meeting of New York Democrats resolved that the war ‘against the South is illegal, being unconstitutional, and should not be sustained.’” (p. 592)

 

This period commentator  sums up both the Civil War and the modern Democratic platform eloquently: “Upon the whole it is [a platform] of both peace and war, that is peace with the rebels but war against their own government.” (p. 776)

 

Supporting the Troops not the War

 

“Altough the sourthern peace societies did not achieve the visibility or influence that an established political party gave northern copperheads, they drained vitality from the Confederate war effort in certain regions and formed the nucleus for a significant peace movement if the war should take a turn for the worse.” (p. 613, my emphasis and italics)

 

So as it was then it is now…the Democratic party has given itself over to the Neo-Copperheads.  And if the southern peace societies were draining the Confederate war effort, what was the Democratic party’s vetted Copperheads doing to the North, or more importantly effect are the descedent Copperheads of today having on our troops?   Oddly enough their solution to supporting the troops is the same…bring them home now, irregardless of consequences:

 

“What was the solution? ‘Stop fighting.  Make an armistice … Withdraw your army from the seceded States.’  Start negotiations for a reunion.”

“Vallandigham had no use for the ‘fanaticism and hypocrisy’ of the objection that an armistice would preserve slavery.  ‘I see more of barbarism and sin, a thousand times, in the continuance of this war…and the enslavement of the white race by debt and taxes and arbitrary power’ than in Negro slavery.” (p. 592)

 

You switch out the racial ending with the current Democrat racially oriented views regarding the spread of democracy in the Middle East and you could have a speech from Harry Reid.

 

“Did such rhetoric fall within the rights of free speech and a free press?  A case can be made that it stimulated desertion from the army and resistance to the war effort.  Democratic newspapers that circulated among soldiers contained many editorials proclaming the illegality of [the war.]” (p. 595)

 

“Newspapers printed many alleged letters written by family members at home to soldiers in the army.  ‘I am sorry you are engaged in this … unholy, unconstitutional and hellish war,’ a father supposedly wrote to his son” (p. 595)

 

“Another letter advised an Illinois soldier ‘to come home, if you have to desert, you will be protected – the people here are so enragted that you need not be alarmed…’ Such propaganda had its intended effect.  So many members of two southern Illinois regiments deserted  ‘rather than help free the slaves’ that General Grant had to disband the regiments.  Soldiers from several other regiments allowed themselves to be captured so they could be paroled and sent home.” (p. 595)

 

Also it would seem some things do not change when the Copperheads or Neo-Copperheads take control of the legislatures:

 

“Equally serious were the actions of the newly elected Democratic legislatures of Indiana and Illinois.  The lower houses of both states passed resolutions calling for an armistice and a peace conference.  Both lower houses also demanded retraction of the ‘wicked, inhuman, and unholy’ Emancipation Proclamation as the price for continued support of the war.  [Then] the two legislatures began work on bills to take control of the state troops away from the Republican governors.” (p. 595-6)

 

Hillary, Edwarsd, Obama, et al. should take note of Democratic Presidential hopeful and former General George B. McClellan, “If I am elected, I will recommend an immediate armistice…” (p. 771)  Which was a fine election winning sentiment when his country was on the ropes and the war was not going well, “’…an armistice isbound to come during the year ’63,  The rebs can’t be conquered by the present machinery.’  Into this crisis of confidence strode the copperheads with their program for peace without victory.”(p.590)…but immediately came back to bite McClellan with the final reversal of fortunes when Atlanta fell.   Of course now a days we have the upcoming Tet Summer that will create the perception through the media that the war is hopeless…unless some grand “Atlanta” moment can be found in the Iraqi insurgency, modern warfare conditions would seem to favor the side which can most cynically manipulate the American public.

 

Peace, Perception by the Enemy:

 

“Before leaving the South, [Vallandigham] spoke with several Confederate congressmen and army officers.  He made clear to them his commitment to reunion through an armistice and negotiations.  Southerners replied that they would accept peace only on the basis on independence.  If [he] thought the Union could be restored by compromise, they declared, he was ‘badly deluded.’  In a confidential interview with a Confederate agent, [he] said that if the South ‘can only hold out this year…the peace party of the North would sweep the Lincoln dynasty out of existance.’” (p. 598)

 

This is no doubt what happens when Pelosi’s go to Syria…even if the Syrians were to directly tell her that there is no compromise, which they would not, she still would not choose to believe them, just as her predecessor Vallandigham in his exile to the south.

 

“One of Lee’s purposes in ordering restraint toward (white) civilians was to cultivate the copperheads.  He placed great faith in ‘the rising peace party of the North’ as a ‘means of dividing and weakening our enemies.’  Lee wrote to Davis on June 10, that the copperheads professed to favor reunion as the object of peace negotiations while the South regarded independence as the goal.   But it would do no harm, Lee advised Davis, to play along with this reunion sentiment to weaken northern support for the war, which ‘after all is what we are intereested in bringing about.’” (p. 650)

 

“War-weary rebel soldiers hoped fervently for McClellan and peace.  ‘The enemy are exceedingly anxious to hold out until after the Presidential election…and that desertions [in the southern army] would be more frequent but they believe peace will be negotiated after the fall elections.’” (p. 803)

 

Just as the soldiers and generals of the Confederacy observed and took efforts to exploit the Peace Party, just as General Giap and the North Vietnamese did the same…just as it is today.  If you profess to be a party that will stop fighting, the enemy will support you.

 

Conspiracy Theories as Rhetoric:

 

Cynically manipulating the public brings us to Conspiracy Theories.  Conspiracy theories are nothing new either.  In 1864 a newspaper owned by Democratic Presidential hopeful Goerge B. McClellan published an anonymous story supposedly of Republican origin.  This Miscegenation Program hoax report was widely circulated by the Democratic press as a real, but only the copperheads swallowed it whole without question.   However it did not really matter if anyone actually believed that initial hoax report, the Democrats continued to hammer away with the themes and terms of the hoax as if it was real in order to turn public opinion against the Republicans. (p. 789)

Hoppy had some good common sense rules...maybe it is not all practical, but who can argue that there is a standard we should try to hold ourselves to other than acting like animals?

Hopalong Cassidy's "Creed for American Boys and Girls"

1. The highest badge of honor a person can wear is honesty,
     be mindful at all times.

2. Your parents are the best friends you have. Listen to them and    
    obey their instructions.

3. If you want to be respected, you must respect others. Show good
    manners in every way.

4. Only through hard work and study can you succeed. Don't be lazy.

5. Your good deeds always come to light. So don't boast or be a show off.

6. If you waste time or money today, you will regret it tomorrow.
    Practice thrift in all ways.

7. Many animals are good and loyal companions. Be friendly and kind to
    them.

8. A strong, healthy body is a precious gift. Be neat and clean.

9. Our country's laws are made for your protection. Observe them
    carefully.

10. Children in many foreign lands are less fortunate than you. Be glad
     and proud you are an American

Gene Autry's "Ten Commandments of the Cowboy"

1. A cowboy never takes unfair advantage.
2. A cowboy never betrays a trust.
3. A cowboy always tells the truth.
4. A cowboy is kind to small children, to old folks, and to animals.
5. A cowboy is free from racial and religious prejudice.
6. A cowboy is helpful and when anyone's in trouble he lends a hand.
7. A cowboy is a good worker.
8. A cowboy is clean about his person and in thought, word, and deed.
9. A cowboy respects womanhood, his parents, and the laws of his
country.
10. A cowboy is a patriot.

 The Lone Ranger's Creed

I believe that to have a friend, a man must be one.

That all men are created equal and that everyone has within himself the
power to make this a better world.

That God put the firewood there, but that every man must gather and
light it himself.

In being prepared physically, mentally, and morally to fight when
necessary for that which is right.

That a man should make the most of what equipment he has. That "this
government, of the people, by the people, and for the people," shall
live always.

That men should live by the rule of what is best for the greatest
number.

That sooner or later...somewhere...somehow...we must settle with the
world and make payment for what we have taken. That all things change, but the truth, and the truth alone lives on forever.

I believe in my Creator, my country, my fellow man.

I think that the diluting of history as taught in the schools is one problem...the second problem is utilizing historical metaphor.

Everyone knows the famous line, "He who does not know history is destined to repeat it."  This would seem like common sense, but it is entirely misunderstood.  It is commonly trotted out in liberal arguments against Iraq, where they point at Vietnam and parrot the quote.

I wish they would actually know their history as we come up on what will likely be the Tet Summer of the Iraq War...where the insurgents and jihadists destroy themselves militarily to achieve a strategic victory in US poll numbers and Congressional votes in the fall.

I wish they would actually know what happened after we withdrew from South Vietnam...how the rebuilt NVA blitzed the South knowing that the US would not do anything concrete to stop them, having shown no will to fight.  How the South Vietnamese did not all supinely submit to the North with flowers and candy...and how millions paid the price.

I wish the liberals could wrap their heads around American policy with Hussein's Iraq in the 80's.    If they could be made to understand that his Iraq was actually a Soviet client, that it was Soviets helping his WMD development...that America of the 80's was just as horrified of Iraq becoming a regional hegemon in the Gulf as it was of Iran doing the same.  That just enough aid and intelligence was supplied to BOTH Iraq *AND* Iran during their war by us...the goal being to bleed them both out and maintain the status quo.  An outstanding, perhaps genius example of realpolitik at work...and the cost to us were the lives lost to two exocets and one mine.  Those exocets likely being a certain dictators expression of displeasure upon realizing he had been played.

However it is not just the liberals who fall into this metaphoric trap.  I'd like to find the bright minds that thought using the German/Japanese Occupation model was the metaphor to latch onto, ignoring the historical circumstances and natural tendencies of the cultures involved.  Additionally the war fighters seem to ignore Vietnam like the plague...however there were what we would term "nation building" type programs from that conflict that were totally ignored in designing the post-war occupied Iraq.

Historical Metaphors can be powerful tools, they can be very insightful if you understand the roles and actors involved.

Another example of misinformed history is the characterization of the 1940 French soldier as a coward...because many of them left their stories of valor to be told only by their adversaries.  Those Frenchmen of 1940 who fought to the last at Sedan or in vicious house to house fighting for two days in the forests and towns just west of Sedan...they do not deserve such dishonor.  If you want to dishonor someone - then point your fingers at those who lost their will to fight, the French politicians, the inept General staff, the foolish socialistic defense establishment...blame the Comintern for telling their labor parties in France to not resist the Germans (who were on good terms with the Soviets for the moment.)  

When you give up the will to fight, you surrender.  You loose, you lay down upon the ground and fight no more.

Blame all those actors from pre-war France for the failure of 1940...and recognize their descendants in our own midst today, because that would be learning from the history. 

Victor Davis Hanson Is Sky Falling on America?

Hugh Hewitt Drop Dead America

Peter Wehner John Edwards's irresponsible and revealing address

What do Shrek and Bush have in common?  Actually I had not even pondered this seemingly on the surface vacuous question until I had read through the latest copy of Entertainment Weekly (#935 May 25, 2007) that got delivered to my doorstep.

Now granted you are to expect a certain amount of bashfoonery from a magazine directed at the entertainment focused crowd…but then again conservatives like to be entertained too.  Case in point, the “Hit List” in that magazine is always good for at a minimum one gut buster delivered with at most three lines…priceless genius gold in a single column, I tell you what. J

Anyway, I digress.

So with my usual guarded filters on I read through the magazine and eagerly pounce on the Shrek 3 review “In Ogre His Head” by Lisa Schwarzbaum to get an idea of if I should wait for video or not…which is a fine review until I get part way down the left column on page 62 and am totally blindsided by this:

“Shrek isn’t keen on the running-a-kingdom gig.  Like our own stubbornly folksy head of state, he’s not a grown-up comfortable with the niceties of formality.  All he’d like to do is get back to his swampy equivilent of a ranch in Crawford, Tex., and surround himself with vermin.”

As they say in my country of Kalifornia, “¿qué?”

You know, forget the front cover of the issue that made me feel like a dirty old pervert looking at  Kelly Clarkson airbrushed to resemble a twelve-year old with the little bubble caption next to hear that said “Her Most Revealing Interview Ever!”  That only gave me a moments pause, forget the obvious liberal slant of the magazine…just think for a moment on how pathologically hateful someone has to be to have the first association in their minds be the President of the United States to a cartoon character.  After all I am almost 100% certain that the writers of Shrek 3 were going for the “hey lets slip some Bush bashing in, everyone knows that the only movies conservatives watch are the “Left Behind” series.”  (as an aside:  it’s really nice that Kirk Cameron can still get work.)

Where does this blind hatred come from? The topic is covered by Michael Medved, however I know it all started with that 2000 election…that is when the caterwauling, frothing at the mouth, and gnashing of teeth became a staple of the rabid left.  By the way, someone remind me what the time table for Alec Baldwin withdrawing from the United States is again, and how many children is he going to scream at along the way?  Maybe those poor kids did not watch Inconvenient Truth that day...because all good children should watch it once a day.

These neo-Copperheads are so focused on destroying first Bush, then the Republican Party, that they no longer see anything else.  For them the war is not overseas, there is no event in the world that cannot be tied back to George Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, or Kevin Bacon.  Except for the fact that Bacon is given a free pass, we have this erosion of common sense on the left which has trickled into the mainstream through their almost Stalinistic hold over the media.  The irony here is that the actual war occurring in the wider world is almost directly fueled by the liberal western culture, the lofty ideas and the atavistic porn, all of which are the hottest items to be consumed world wide for the past half century.

While I would not want to live in a world with a rigid conservative or right-religious media driven content 100% of the time…I’m willing to bet that such a media beamed worldwide would only make the jihadists half as willing to kill us all.

As far as George Bush and Shrek.  What’s next for the Neo-Coppers? Comparing him to an ape?

Abe as Ape

Abe as Ape (with Abes version of Wesley Clark, et al.)

Abe as Ape

Abe as Ape

George as Ape

George as Ape

George as Ape

These modern Copperheads or Neo-Coppers, are just as selfishly oblivious to what occurs outside their own quest for power and view of the world as the old Copperheads were…and to top it off, they are not even capable of making original rhetoric.

I am going to shamelessly steal the following priceless Goreintologist quotes from Talk Radio KFSO 560 AM's Sussman Files, from their 6-8pm host Brian Sussman.   This is all just to good to not pass along.

"We already have too much economic growth in the United States. Economic growth in rich countries like ours is the disease, not the cure."
Paul Elrich, Stanford University biologist and Advisor to Albert Gore

"I think if we don't overthrow capitalism, we don't have a chance of saving the world ecologically. I think it is possible to have an ecological society under socialism. I don't think it's possible under capitalism."
Judi Barri of Earth First!  

"Capitalism is a cancer in the biosphere."
Dave Foreman, Founder, Earth First!

"The northern spotted owl is the wildlife species of choice to act as a surrogate for old-growth forest protection," explained Andy Stahl, staff forester for the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, at a 1988 law clinic for other environmentalists. "Thank goodness the spotted owl evolved in the Pacific Northwest," he joked, "for if it hadn't, we'd have to genetically engineer it."
Andy Stahl at a 1988 law clinic for environmentalists, staff forester, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund

"Now, in a widening sphere of decisions, the costs of error are so exorbitant that we need to act on theory alone, which is to say on prediction alone. It follows that the reputation of scientific prediction needs to be enhanced. But that can happen, paradoxically, only if scientists disavow the certainty and precision that they normally insist on. Above all, we need to learn to act decisively to forestall predicted perils, even while knowing that they may never materialize. We must take action, in a manner of speaking, to preserve our ignorance. There are perils that we can be certain of avoiding only at the cost of never knowing with certainty that they were real."
Jonathan Shell, author of Our Fragile Earth

"A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect."
Richard Benedict, an employee for the State Department working on assignment for the Conservation Foundation

"[W]e have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Stephen Schneider, Stanford University Professor and author Quoted by Dixey Lee Ray in Trashing the Planet (1990)

"I honor Earth First for having the guts to do the things they do. It's not for me, but I understand why they do what they do. And, ultimately, we all help each other."
Brock Adams, VP, Audubon Society, quoted in the Los Angeles Times.

"If we seek only personal redemption we could become solitary ecological saints among the masses of those we might classify as 'sinners' who continue to pollute."
Bill Devall & George Sessions, Deep Ecology: Living As If Nature Mattered Layton

"More science and more technology are not going to get us out of the present ecological crises until we find a new religion, or rethink our old one."
Lynn White, Jr. "The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis," Science, (Mar. 10 1967), p 1206

"Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license.... All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."
David Brower, Friends of the Earth

"The right to have children should be a marketable commodity, bought and traded by individuals but absolutely limited by the state."
Keith Boulding, originator of the "Spaceship Earth" concept

"If radical environmentalists were to invent a disease to bring human populations back to sanity, it would probably be something like AIDS. It [AIDS] has the potential to end industrialism, which is the main force behind the environmental crises."
Earth First! newsletter

In August 2005 the author Salman Rushdie cemented his position as the Muslim John Wycliffe when he endorsed the Muslim Reformation movement.   This collection of islamic progressives have the goal to filter Islam through the sieve of core classic liberalism -- gender equality, separation of church and state, and tolerance to name a few of the high points.

This kind of movement should not be surprising as there are many intelligent and travelled muslims in the world who understand the stagnant condition of their religion.  The counter-reformists are the jihadists, the death cults of islam, who tolerate no discussion or violation of religious law.  However, much like our own troubles with drug cartels in Colombia, the jihadists issues with the Western culture begins at home with the choices they see their fellow muslims make.  We see the smoking ruins of the WTC when we think of these death cultists, what we do not see or are more than dimly aware of how these hardliners terrorize their own brothers and sisters.  You decide to not wear a veil or to shave your beard, you can die for that – and they do die for similar infractions of religious law every day.  The jihadi’s are the Robin Hoods of the Arab world, they fight the Great Satan Crusaders and Zionists for every muslim man, woman, and child – if they want to be defended from those crusaders and zionists or not.

It’s all about choices and free will.  For jihadis and theocrats the status quo is the removal of choice, the submission of free will to the theocracy.  That is literally the definition of the culture, submission of individual free will to the will of the theocratic order, laws, and decrees.

The arab muslim world is in state that is very reminiscient of the pre-reformation european christian culture. 

• You have two major sects with an assortment of minor sects, and one of the two major sects greatly outnumbers the other.  (Sunni = Western, Shia = Orthodox, Sufi = Oriental Orthodox, Kharijites = Nestorians, etc.

• These sects are separate due to an early religious power struggle (Great Schism,  Succession of Muhammad)

• There are factors outside the culture that are putting pressure on the traditional monopoly of theocratic power.

In Martin Luther’s day it was the culmination of several factors which were in essence proto-Globalism issues.  The Black Death having ravaged Europe causing social upheaval, the movable type allowing the wide dissemination of information, and new humanistic philosophies to be spread with that technology.

While the modern Islam is still awaiting their Martin Luther, you have some similarities occuring.  Today there is the internet which allows information to drill down to the individual at the keyboard, be that actual data or something from Playboy.  We have cable television beamed across the planet which shows the highs and lows of our western media culture.  This is ten or hundred times the “making the world smaller” factor that movable type provided in Luther’s day.  Back then it would have been revolutionary to have your own personal copy of the Bible when only a score of copies at best would exist in large population centers.  Today it is not just one religious book, but virtually all books at your fingertips, and that does not include The Naked News and all that program would imply to a muslim household.  Who needs the Black Death to cause social upheaval when you have Paris Hilton?

It is not Israel, nor the troops in Saudi Arabia, the occupation of Iraq, or any other excuse that is placed on the table which really gets to the heart of the jihadist fury…instead it is the concept of free will that so permeates our Western Culture that we do not even see it.  The only way for them to remove this alien influence is to contain the spread within their own culture while they attempt to eliminate the source.  That is the real reason they are the Robin Hoods of their cultures, because they are the defenders of that culture – just as the KKK was begun as the rearguard defense of Southern Culture and has morphed over the years into something even more abhorrent and sinister.

Their prospects of ultimate success in this endeavor are extremely limited, absent the use of WMD’s of some form that would allow a reshaping of the world ala a James Bond plot.  Before 9/11 the West was generally content to allow the muslims take care of the problem themselves with the realization that with a globalizing world a progressive change in Islam would be inevitable.

Now because of the 9/11 attack, we are in Afghanistan and Iraq taking the equivilant step of  posting the 95 Theses.  Attempting to create a market of free debate where progressive islamists can have a fair opportunity to get some of the aspects of the Muslim Reformation operating in practice.  The very nature of Iraq provides both the best opportunity for these practices to rise to the forefront of the debate and some of the major roadblocks to preventing progress.  A calculated risk who’s benefits if we are only half successful will be positive in the wider conflict.

The honest bottom line is that the people and leaders of Iraq need to realize that their long term peace and security does not reside on the primacy of Sunni or Shia, but in a progressive Reformed Muslim view which would bring tolerance of both, the acceptance of their position as a modern representative nation state.  In this aspect each leader and voter of Iraq and Afghanistan face very real danger in making their choice, similar to that made by the Burghers and Princes of Germany.  However we must also respect their nascent processes, expect setbacks when your actions spark the Muslim equivilant of the Thirty Years War…and understand that you may have to be committed off and on for that long to get the job done.

Edit:

Dinesh D'Souza covers this same ground here.

Walid Phares makes truthful points here