Tonight’s Democrat Primary Debate started off with Iraq and Iran and spent a lot of time on that subject. Some thought calling Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (aka Quds Force) a terrorist organization was provocative and some, like Hillary, thought it was correct, as was the resolution that stated such. Again, some signed that, some didn’t. That says a lot right there. None of them spoke about winning. All of them spoke about just getting out of Iraq.
The most astounding thing about this so-called debate was that the moderators allowed all the time on Iraq and Iran to go by without once asking any of the candidates about the 107 mm Iranian made rockets that are landing in and around Baghdad. Not a word about the Iranian made super penetrating IED’s. What I saw was the candidates tripping over each other to say how negotiations and diplomacy is the way they would handle Iran. Most of them wanted Congress to make some kind of resolution to declare that there will be no military action on Iran without Bush coming to Congress for permission, and some wanted to just take that option off the table. It was that dual reality again. Their “reality” was as if Iranian made rockets and IED’s had never happened, but which continue on an almost daily basis. They are all clearly in denial regarding Iran. And the moderators let the Commander in Chief wannabes get away with that.
What is NBC going to do with three Chris Matthews? Lets see, they have the original Chris Matthews, they have Brian Williams and Tim Russert. For letting Iran’s active involvement in Iraq to pass without one question earns them “Chris Matthews” status in my book.
Unarmed. This particular Rowan University student, Donald Farrell, was murdered in an unprovoked attack. It was the fifth attack this fall and the second in eight days at Rowan. Most, if not all, of the attackers are ‘outsiders,’ meaning people from off campus, not students.
Update 11/03/07: I have come across a website that is quite relevant to the topic. The site name is Students For Concealed Carry On Campus. It is an organization of students, but you don’t have to be a student to join or support the organization efforts. They have 7,000 members so far. And some neat shirts.
While Democrats and Republicans debate just how to deal with Iran over Iraq; diplomacy, sanctions, or military force, Iran has made up their mind on how they choose to handle it. Iran prefers to use the 107 mm missile style of ‘diplomacy’.
Iran uses diplomacy as a way to buy time to help insurgents in Iraq by supplying more weaponry and military training to kill Iraqis and coalition forces. It’s the same rope-a-dope they employ over their nuclear program with the United Nations. The debate in the US should be what kind of military force should be used to fight back.
Not making news lately is the fact that things are going well in some places. That should be news but it isn’t. Anyway, US forces have handed control of the mainly Shia province of Karbala in central Iraq today to the Iraqi government. That makes 8 out of 18. That’s good news.
At the ceremony, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the country had been slow to rebuild its security forces this way . . .
Allow me to say that we are late, very late, to reconstruct, to rebuild our forces for reasons that I do not want to mention here.
That’s an understatement, but honest nonetheless. The BBC reporter has him saying this year would be the year of Iraqi security while next year the focus would turn more towards reconstruction. al-Maliki also said that he expects the country’s southernmost province, Basra, to be handed over in December 2007.
Shahid Malik, an “international development minister” in Great Britain says he is “deeply disappointed” that he was detained by airport security officials at Dulles International Airport, near Washington D.C..Â The BBC apparently thinks it’s a Muslim thing, based on this question they pose at the end of the article.
Until the illegal border crossings are stopped, and some form of policy is enacted to deal with the 12 to 20 million illegals who have already illegally crossed, some politicians seem to be on a mission to grant people who are not legal citizens to obtain a drivers license. From Jeb Bush (former Gov. of Florida) to Elliot Spitzer (current governor of New York) to the latino activist group La Raza, there seems to be a willingness to solve a problem while creating another more perilous one.
The common justification to granting DL’s to illegals is that it will make the streets safer. That is arguable but it is at least a valid point. So on that basis alone I find myself in agreement with Jeb, Elliot, and La Raza to insure that they know how to drive a car and read traffic signs and are aware of the laws regarding driving a motor vehicle. But that is where my agreement ends.
The problem that is created is the potential for abuse that a DL affords an illegal alien. With a drivers license, an illegal alien can purchase an airline ticket and open bank accounts which, you will recall, is a major enabler for terrorists. Neither of which any citizen could or should support. For legal citizens, the drivers license will get you access to federal and state government services as well. And in New York State, it allows one to register to vote. Left as is, giving a drivers license to an illegal alien is merely a step towards back-door amnesty without calling it amnesty, and facilitating voter fraud, and that’s not a good thing.
The only way I would support drivers licenses for people who are not here legally is for the license to read “Drivers License for Non-Citizen” or “Non-Citizen Drivers License,” or even “Illegal Alien Drivers License.” The license should also contain a line stating “This drivers license is for purposes of driving a motor vehicle only and is not a valid identification for voting or any other government or private service.” There is a way to effectively deal with the millions of illegals who are already here, and this is but one step in dealing with it.
Confused as to why Democrats aren’t just steamrolling over the administrations foreign policies as regards to Iraq, Iran, health care and the lot, they think its because they just aren’t using the right words.Â Â That their message is not persuasive.Â I think they are wrong in that assessment.Â Their agenda is not being widely accepted because people DO know what their message is.Â Trying a different color lipstick on the pig just won’t fly any more.
Democrats are losing the battle for votersâ€™ hearts because the partyâ€™s message lacks emotional appeal, according to a widely circulated critique of House Democratic communications strategy.
The reluctance of the federal government to be more pro-active in ‘managing’ illegals in this country has resulted in many States in the country to take small steps within their purview to help in curbing, not facilitating, illegal aliens from using this country illegally. To its credit, the State of New Jersey is one of these States and Bridgton, NJ has become a focal point for the pro-illegals apologists, like immigration attorney Valentine Brown.
For Pensacola and the State of Florida the question now is, what do our local and state police do when they encounter an illegal? Do they let them go on their merry way with a summons for no drivers license, for example? Are they supposed to ignore their legal status, or take steps at enforcement?
The 90’s were ripe with one Chinese contributor after another returning to China to avoid questions and, ostensibly, an investigation. And to this day, she has not yet learned how to stop taking money from Chinese bundlers.
The most recent two donation incidents were Norman Hsu, that Hillary first agreed to return, then changed her mind. Her last word on that was if the donors asked her for ‘their’ money back then her campaign would return it. So there was no return made. The Chinatown scandal in New York City, where donations were made from non-existent people and places was the other.
Her latest scheme was for the so-called Woodstock museum. That became better known when Sen. John McCain commented on it at a recent Republican primary debate. It was about a $1 million earmark that both Hillary and Charles Schumer tried to sneak into a bill. But this story does not end with the killing of the earmark.
You have to look long and hard to find out the logistics of this particular earmark. The recipient of the one million dollars of our tax money is a billionaire named Alan Gerry who is also one of the promoters of Woodstock ’69. On the third page of this Washington Post article, you will find this. . .
Gerry and his family contributed $20,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, headed by Schumer, and $9,200 to Clinton’s presidential campaign after the earmark was inserted into legislation.
Here’s the deal, for a $29,200 total donation from a billionaire, Hillary and Schumer will spend $1 million of yours and my money for the donor’s pet project. There are a lot of questions about the ethics that should be asked of the woman who wants to be President. I think those questions need to be asked under oath.
Former Senator and presidential hopeful John Edwards’ campaign staff tried to kill a news story of a student at UNC-Chapel Hill. See the video story that so upset the Edwards campaign. Once an ambulance chaser, always an ambulance chaser I guess. Wouldn’t you think that if anything, the Edwards campaign would respond to the article rather than try to have it suppressed? Excuse me if you’ve heard this before but, that’s what liberals do.
Associate Professor C.A. Tuggle said two top staffers for the former North Carolina senator demanded that the school drop the segment from the student-run television program “Carolina Week.” They also asked to have the video removed from the YouTube Web site.
People who want to be president should not be trying to suppress speech. One would think that they should be able to defend and protect the Constitution even before being elected. Edwards isn’t that stupid. But this being the second time people running his campaign have caused him some embarrassment. Well, at least it should have. It does show, however, that Edwards does not know how to pick his campaign staff. Would it be appropriate to question his ability to surround himself with good talent if he were Commander in Chief? That is something a President must be able to do. Hiring grown-ups would be a good start.