TOP

China’s First Aircraft Carrier and Why It’s A Big Deal

Dec 15
Posted by kevintracy in 2012 Elections, China, History, Huntsman, National Security, Politics

20111215-065303.jpgThe world is getting one of its first unclassified looks at the Aircraft Carrier Varyag. What kind of name is Varyag for an aircraft carrier, you wonder? It’s a Chinese name. And no, this they aren’t selling to us. It’s China’s first aircraft carrier and its size rivals the largest counterparts in the US fleet.

Officially, China says the aircraft carrier Varyag will be used for research and training purposes. Perhaps they want to research how they as the world’s largest polluter are damaging the world ecosystem? And perhaps they want to do military training for blowing it up.

Of course, China shouldn’t be trusted at its word on this one.

Now, many of you may think the era of Naval power is long over. Therefore, this aircraft carrier was a colossal waste of money and time, but is otherwise no big deal. That’s not entirely true.

That misconception is probably rooted in the fact that all of the United States’ conflicts since WWII, and all of the world’s conflicts for that matter, have featured third world countries with land access (except the Falklands). The overwhelming majority of these conflicts have involved asymmetric warfare, too. If Osama bin Laden had access to carriers, stealth bombers, and other modern weapons, he wouldn’t have been a terrorist, but a respected world leader in the Arab world.

China is not quite as inadequate to fight a traditional conflict. Just ask the bruised and battered people of occupied Tibet. Since then, the People’s Liberation Army of China has literally copied the plans for many high-tech Soviet and Russian weapon systems and begun producing their own versions of them. They still aren’t more capable than the United States systems, but the gap is slowly closing.

So why is this a big deal, again? Two words: Force Projection.

No, that’s not what happens when a Jedi throws something with the Force. We’d be totally screwed if China had that.

Force projection is a nation’s geographic ability to create a show of force. China’s capabilities with its troops behind their own borders and no significant international bases is limited to its immediate neighbors.

By contrast, the global system of US military installations gives us the ability to create a show of force almost anywhere in the world. Coincidentally, this is why Russia was so upset over US bases north of Afghanistan. Even though our force was aimed south, an aggressive military force on the border of the Russian Federation was totally unwelcome.

The importance of responding to a global conflict anywhere in the world from all direction is critically important and proof that Ron Paul is an idiot. Our international bases play an important role in force projection.

But just as significantly are our Aircraft Carriers. Within days (or less), US Airpower can be at full strength anywhere in the world. It sends a VERY strong message to whoever receives it: STAND DOWN OR ELSE!

Well, pretty soon, China is going to have that ability.

Jon Huntsman and other politicians think China is simply an economic threat to the United States. In fact, they are in the verge of becoming a military threat to our allies and our interests, too.

Read More
Comments (5)
TOP

Occupy Moscow?

Dec 10
Posted by kevintracy in International, Internet, Politics, Russia, Vladimir Putin

Protests illustrate that communism still survives in fringe radical corners of Russian society.

Not quite, but anywhere between 25,000 to 50,000 nationalist, liberal, and communist protesters gathered in Moscow earlier today… now yesterday over there… to protest recent parliamentary elections; which they argue were rigged. Smaller protests like it were held in other cities across the Russian Federation, including St. Petersberg (about 7,000 showed up there). The protests were peaceful and when the people dispersed, police (which were obviously out in force) had arrested nobody. I suspect the people knew Moscow was too freaking cold to occupy, so they wouldn’t have been able to do it without killing themselves.

However, the political leaders using this protest promised that an even larger crowd of protesters would return on December 24th. That very likely will happen, since today’s protest was completely peaceful and people won’t be afraid of getting hit by a rubber bullet when the communists start their usual behavior against authorities.

I want you to think about this, however. In a country that is supposedly entirely controlled by Vladimir Putin and his United Russia Party, why are dissident movements like this allowed? Freedom of Assembly in an authoritarian dictatorship isn’t generally permitted. Even the Russian news networks; which are largely controlled by the state; reported on the protests. And the bloggers who helped incite the protest in Moscow and tell people about the protest? Well, even though some of the bloggers have been arrested, their Russian-hosted websites are still online. The police, while present, made no aggressive moves to shut down the protests… something that was common during the eras of the Soviet Union and the Czar before then.

The real problem these people have is that Vladimir Putin wants to be President again and the people of Russia like him enough to elect him back into the Presidency. Vladimir Putin, regardless of what we may think of the man and his relations with the outside world, is ENORMOUSLY popular in his country and he’s going to be re-elected legitimately.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Democracy Evolving in Libya, Egypt, and the United States

Oct 25
Posted by kevintracy in Barack Obama, Christianity, Egypt, George W. Bush, History, Intolerance, Islam, Libya, National Security, Politics, Racism, Religious Intolerance, Theology, United Nations

During President George W. Bush’s second inaugural address, the President spoke about his freedom doctrine; which many conservatives correctly tied to the developments in North Africa and the Middle East over the past year. In this address, President Bush (or at least his speech writers) shared some very relevant information with those who were paying attention and cared to remember six years later.

“This is not primarily the task of arms, though we will defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary. Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way.”

It’s like he could see into the future. Maybe Karl Rove has a time machine!

As much fun as it would be, conspiracy theories about Karl Rove aren’t the reason why I’m writing this post on a train with my iPhone. I’m writing to address conservative and libertarian criticisms of the governments forming in Egypt and Libya (especially Libya); which have adopted elements of Sharia Law in forming their new nations.

It is as though the people of Libya, finally free of Gadhafi, are now expected to instantly form an entirely free and secular society… Or at least a Christian society if they absolutely MUST have a faith built into their national identity.

Well, that’s not who they are. I mentioned in an earlier post that Libya is dominated by varying and often conflicting tribes. The trick is for the National Transitional Council to find a common set of laws that everyone can agree with. Call me crazy, but in a country with such an enormous percentage of Muslims, finding those common laws and a sense of national identity in God through the Qur’an seems like a pretty darn good idea!

Plus, with all this patriotic and self-righteous testosterone running through conservative opinion in the United States, it seems necessary to remind people of America’s history in such matters.

For the first half of our national history, roughly 1/4th to 1/3rd of our total population consisted of slaves. Liberty, indeed.

Until the 20th century, half of our population couldn’t vote because they were women. Democracy in action. It wasn’t even until the latter half of the 20th century that all citizens were guaranteed equal rights.

Oh, and our freedom of religion? Catholics were only allowed to vote in two states when our nation, the champion of freedom, was born.

And I know I needn’t go into all the abuses our government and national founders waged against the native American-Indian population.

It took us 235 years to get where we are as a country today, and we’re still a work in progress. Expecting Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other newly free country to magically turn into a mini-America overnight is ridiculous, arrogant, and condescending.

What we too often fail to realize in our short-sighted political goals and is that liberalism (lower-case “l”) is an experiment. Freedom means many things to many different people and western liberal political ideology isn’t necessarily the path for all the diverse people’s of this world to realize their personal dreams of freedom.

One thing I’m certain of, however, is that overnight libertarianism is far more dangerous to the people of Libya and the world than a moderate and modern approach to Sharia Law.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Gadhafi Dead

Oct 21
Posted by kevintracy in Crime, Death Penalty, International, Libya

I am so torn on this. I’m thrilled that the Libyan people have freed themselves from the shackles of oppression. I’m disappointed that they didn’t take Gadhafi alive, though. I’m not sure if we’ll ever know what happened, but I think many of us are going to conclude it’s most likely he was shot by an angry Libyan rebel soldier or civilian who lost many loved ones at the hands of this brutal and likely unstable dictator.

After this uprising started earlier this year, Gadhafi swore he would never leave Libya, and as was pointed out by CNN last night, that ended being true. It was one of the few promises he kept to the people of Libya.

As much as I disapprove of the killing of heads of state in any circumstance, it’s difficult to feel any kind of animosity towards Gadhafi’s killer because of all the personal pain and suffering he and his family endured because of this man.

Revenge is never the answer we should seek, though. And that’s what killing a deposed and disgraced dictator amounts to. The moment Gadhafi was in rebel hands and yelled, “Don’t shoot!” – he was harmless.

Ultimately, many will argue, it wouldn’t matter because either the New Transitional Council (NTC) in Libya or the new government would have sentenced him to death in a pre-decided trial, not unlike Saddam Hussein a few years ago.

Even if Gadhafi faced an international court for his role in acts of international terrorism and mass murder, it’s difficult to imagine him not facing a Libyan court down the road.

At least now, the blood spilled in revenge is only on the hands of a few individuals ignoring NTC soldiers yelling, “We want to take him alive!”

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

Live Blogging the CNN Debate

Oct 18
Posted by kevintracy in 2012 Elections, Bachmann, Barack Obama, Cain, Christianity, Democrat, Economy, Gingrich, Huntsman, International, Iran, Jobs, National Security, Obama, Palin, Paul, Perry, Politicians, Politics, Presidential Race, Presidential Race, Republican, Romney, Santorum, Tea Party, Theology

The CNN debate saw Cain, Romney, and Perry spill blood... lots of blood.

POST-DEBATE

9:00 – Holy crap.  Jon Huntsman wasn’t there.  I didn’t even miss him!

8:51 – Gingrich: Bickering isn’t going to get us to the White House.  I’ll do three 3-hour debates Lincoln Douglas style… DAMN!  That might have actually earned my unconditional support… if he was serious about running.

8:50 – Cain and Romney are tied in some polls… impressive for Cain… Huckabee was still a 3rd tier candidate at this time.

8:49 – This audience appears more pro-Romney than that at any other audience from any other debate in 2011 or 2007/8

8:48 – Perry is performing stronger, but Romney is still beating him senseless, still.

8:47 – Perry, if you want to know what to expect from someone in the future, look at their record in the past… Wasn’t Perry a Democrat?

8:46: Has Romney really spent his life in the Private Sector?  He’s spent the last 20+ years playing politics.

8:45 – Most voters think Romney has the best chance of beating Obama.  Santorum: I ran as a conservative and won in a liberal state.  Romney ran to the left of Kennedy and lost.

8:40 – Gingrich seems to know Reagan better than Santorum and Ron Paul right there on the matter of hostage exchanges.

8:39 – Cain is trying not to say Israel has wrongly imprisoned thousands of Palestinians.  That’s a tight-rope act.

8:36 – Ron Paul: We should cut aid to Israel. Look what happened in Egypt.  You mean a bunch of anti-government folks stood up and got a more oppressive government in return?  Irony!

8:35 – Romney: We’re spending more in foreign aid than we should.  Then rambles off an impressive plan.

8:34 – Perry: We need to stop funding the UN… do you remember how well it worked out when we opted out of the League of Nations?

8:33 – I’m running out of ways to call Ron Paul a dumbass.

8:32 – Santorum impressed me with his knowledge of Iran’s motives over its latest attempted attack.

8:30 – Cain says we shouldn’t negotiate with terrorists ever.  HOWEVER, not realizing there was a tie to al-Qaida seems to suggest Cain recognizes that most of Israel’s prisoners weren’t terrorists and were wrongly imprisoned in many cases.

8:29 – Ron Paul thinks a 15% cut in the military budget would enhance our security.  ”What our troops doing in Korea anyway?”  I have never seen a guy so ignorant as Ron Paul…

8:28 – Gingrich: I’m a hawk, but I’m a cheap hawk.  NICE!

8:27 – Gingrich is by far the MOST intelligent man on this stage, yet again.  I really wish he was taking this campaign seriously, because I’d vote for this guy.

8:26 – Bachmann: Iran disrespects America a lot… DUH.

8:22 – Romney: The Baptist dope who introduced Perry said we should choose people based upon their religion.

8:21 – Gingrich: Faith is absolutely important.  But we shouldn’t judge Romney about his.  Who you pray to doesn’t matter, suggesting the god of Mormons is not the Abrahamic God of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

8:19 – Santorum: Don’t pay attention to religion, pay attention to values.  Doesn’t say whether he thinks Mormonism is a cult or not.  Says he’s Catholic (coincidentally, Mormonism is considered a cult by the Catholic Church)

8:18 – NumbersUSA had a commercial arguing we should reduce LEGAL immigration.  Ummmm… no.

8:17 – Why was everyone standing and clapping for that reminder segment?  The candidates weren’t even on the stage.  The PBS minority-issues debate in Baltimore in 2007 made us clap, but not do a standing ovation.

8:14 – COMMERCIAL BREAK!

8:12 – Wouldn’t it be funny if Google released a “Ron Paul has died” April Fools joke?

8:10 – Ron Paul: Cain is blaming the victims… he pays attention about as well as his idiot supporters.

8:09 – Cain: People at the Occupy Wall Street Protests are angry, they should be angry, but they need to blame the White House

8:08 – Bachmann – Blah blah blah moms moms moms I’m a mom blah blah moms mom blah blah blah hold on moms.

8:07 – Cain: I supported the concept of TARP, but not the specifics.  Reform Dodd-Frank.

8:07 – Romney doesn’t really address his support for it.

8:06 – Santorum to Perry: You signed a letter telling Congress to pass TARP the day of the vote.

8:05 – Santorum: We need to let the market fix itself.

8:04 – Santorum: Perry and Romney and Cain all supported the TARP program.  You guys complain about Governor Romney flip-flopping.  3 birds with one stone.

8:03 – The candidates (other than Gingrich) don’t appreciate the national security and environmental risk this is.

8:02 – Ron Paul: Let the free market handle waste… uh-huh… how about we sell it to the highest overseas bidder?  I know the Chechens would love to get their hands on it.

8:00 – Gingrich: We need a safe way to store nuclear waste… It’s too dangerous keeping it all over the country.  I’m not a scientist, but we need to ask scientists where the safest place to store this is… is it Yucca Mountain?  I don’t know.

7:59 – Santorum: The problem is that our faith and families are being destroyed… Huh?

7:59 – Nobody wants to answer the question about the 14th Amendment.

7:58 – Bachmann doesn’t seem to understand how the Constitution works.  You can’t change the 14th Amendmnt without a Constitutional Amendment.

7:56 – Perry to Cooper: I get to answer your questions however I want to (in other words: not answer them)

7:55 – Cain says the Economy is on the Life Support… all the candidates want to eliminate government involvement in the economy… isn’t that the “Life Support?”  Wouldn’t that kill the economy?

7:53 – Ron Paul: A fence is symbolic of Latino oppression.  We shouldn’t have a fence at all.  (Yeah, he’s gaining momentum… psh)

7:52 – Romney is winning this debate so far.  Perry and Santorum look, sound and behave desperate.

7:52 – Perry: Romney, you hired illegals.  Romney: sounds like audience agrees with me (applause)

7:51 – Romney: Just turn off the magnets!  Tuition breaks and jobs for illegals need to STOP.

7:50 – Cooper to Bachmann: Shut up and be quiet.  You’re bad for ratings.

7:48 – Bachmann seriously needs to stop using Facebook updates from her ignorant supporters as talking points.  It doesn’t make her look any smarter.

7:46 – Cain: Enforce immigration laws that are already on the books and protect our citizens and border guards

7:45 – Cooper to Cain: Would you build a fence on the entire border and electrify it?  Cain: Seriously, I just want to secure the border.

7:45 – Perry got PWND

7:44 – Romney to Perry: If you want to be President, I suggest you let both sides talk.

7:43 – Romney: You don’t know what you’re talking about – Texas gave illegal immigrants free tuition

7:42 – Romney to Perry : You’ve had some bad debates, so I understand you’re going to get “PISSY” – HAHAHA!

7:40 – Perry’s tie is crooked.  Wait, is he answering a healthcare question by criticizing Romney on immigration?

7:39 – Cain suggests HR 3400 to encourage market driven reforms.  I’ll have to look into this.

7:38 – Why the hell would Anderson Cooper ask Ron Paul a question?  I would have gotten a refill on my drink during the commercial break if I knew I had the extra time.

7:34 – COMMERCIAL BREAK!

7:33 – Romney actually pinned the idea of individual mandidates against Gingrich… in Krista’s word’s: “Newt Gingrich kind of looked like a cornered rat there.”

7:31 – Gingrich: Romney care is a top down, big government solution.  We need a bottom up solution with doctors and patients figuring out how to make things work.

7:29 – Santorum gets into a pissing match with Romney… that seemed like a Fox News segment for a minute… two guys yelling over each other and we couldn’t understand either one.

7:28 – Santorum to Romney: You have no track record to back up your rhetoric and you can’t be trusted.

7:25 – Rick Perry seems to think talking loud and moving his hands with force can make up for him not saying anything impressive… the crowd applauded, so I guess it works.

7:24 – Bachmann seriously needs new talking points.  I’m tired of hearing them.

7:22 – My thoughts: Why don’t we just have an enormous tax on the sale of USED goods?  Wouldn’t that have a positive impact on jobs?

7:21 – Equally nice rebuttal to 9-9-9 by Gingrich.  Gingrich then credits Cain for having courage and getting us on a good topic rather than BS rhetoric.

7:20 – NICE rebuttal by Romney “I’m going to be getting a bushel of apples and oranges.”

7:19 – Herman Cain to Romney: That’s an apple.

7:17 – Michele Bachmann is an idiot.   She seriously needs to read Cain’s plan at http://www.hermancain.com - there’s no Value Added Tax

7:17 – It took too long to get a computer to blog from.

Read More
Comments (3)
TOP

Iran’s Act of War

Oct 17
Posted by kevintracy in 2012 Elections, Crime, Economy, International, Iran, Jobs, National Security, Obama, Politics, Presidential Race, Saudi Arabia

If you’re looking to criticize the Obama Administration on matters of foreign policy and national security, the response to this latest incident with Iran may give you intellectually honest ammunition.

If you haven’t heard, a man named Manssor Arbabsiar (who has dual US-Iranian citizenship) paid an undercover agent posing as a Mexican drug cartel hitman $1.5 million to assassinate an ambassador from Saudi Arabia in a bombing near a Washington, D.C. restaraunt.  The money came from Iran’s Quds Force.  Two men were arrested in connection with this case.  Not surprisingly, Iran’s government and every libertarian who believes in a 9/11 conspiracy theory are denying everything about this.

The finer details of this are still somewhat secret because of the sensitive nature of the information and its sources.  That’s good.  If a source in the Iranian Army or government provided some kind of information, revealing too much would risk his safety and limit how we or our allies collect information to prevent attacks in the future.  So I’m content with not knowing exactly what happened.

However, without all the evidence, we as citizens are left to make one of two conclusions.  Neither is good for the Obama Administration.  The first possibility, as I’m sure you’ve heard nut-jobs arguing, is that this is all fake.  I reject this for the simple fact that a military conflict is the last thing Obama wants.  His voter base hates military conflict and the only crowd it might impress is a crowd that already knows Obama isn’t the guy they want leading us into another war.  Plus, conspiracies are almost always bogus anyway.

The second conclusion is that the US government has information that the Iranian government has attempted to commit a heinous act of international terrorism on US soil.  Regardless of what everyone says, that is an act of war.  Not only would we be justified in launching an air campaign against Iran’s government, but I would argue we have a responsibility to do just that.  This isn’t the first time Iranian agents have attempted to attack the United States on our own soil.  Nor is it the first time they have attempted to assassinate foreign officials.  In fact, they’ve succeeded in doing it before.

For me, this has nothing to do with Israel or Iran’s nuclear program (which I actually suspect is legitimate).  This is about a foreign government making blatant attempts to kill American citizens and foreign representatives on US soil.

Forgive me if I missed something, but isn’t it this kind of aggressive behavior that creates what is called a “just war” for the United States?

Even if our response is measured in the form of Clintonesque air strikes because of how extended we already are, there needs to be a military response to all foreign government sanctioned attacks against the United States.

Now, maybe President Obama wants the court process to do the job of justifying the war.  That’s a lack of domestic leadership.  If he’s not planning on doing anything more than sanctions, then it’s really time someone brings up the national security issue in this year’s campaign.  The first job of the government is to protect the people, not create jobs.

Read More
Comments (0)
TOP

A Brutally Honest Assessment of the Republican Field

Oct 12
Posted by kevintracy in 2008 Elections, 2012 Elections, Bachmann, Barack Obama, Cain, Christianity, Economy, France, Gingrich, Homophobia, Huntsman, International, Internet, Intolerance, Islam, Jobs, National Security, Obama, Palin, Paul, Pawlenty, Perry, Politicians, Politics, Presidential Race, Presidential Race, Religious Intolerance, Republican, Romney, Santorum, Tea Party, Texas, Theology

The 2012 Republican candidates during the Politico debate.

It’s October and the Iowa Caucuses are going to be coming right around the corner pretty soon. State by state, the Republican Party will hold primaries, caucuses, and conventions to determine the next Republican Presidential Nominee.  There’s just one problem: All of our candidates suck.

In alphabetical order:

Representative Michele Bachmann

Ask her any question and her answer is that she’s adopted nearly two dozen at risk children and she’s going to repeal Obamacare.  When asked for specifics, she reminds you that she’s adopted nearly two dozen at risk children and she’s going to repeal Obamacare.  The woman makes Sarah Palin look half-way intelligent.  Her response to Cain’s 999 plan last night was to turn it upside down and find out that it’s a 666 plan.  Brilliant (sarcasm).

Former CEO Herman Cain

Let’s put aside the fact that he believes all Muslims should have to take a special loyalty oath before working in government.  Herman Cain simply lacks the understanding of Washington.  For some, that’s a plus.  Practically speaking, however, it means he lacks a fundamental understanding of the underlying problems in Washington.  His prize 999 plan is a perfect example of this.  If implemented, would it work to bolster the economy?  Almost certainly.  If implemented, though, it would likely face the fate Rick Santorum described for it in the Washington Post | Bloomberg online debate: the three taxes wouldn’t stay at 9% for very long.  Cain argues that he would veto any tax hikes, but as one of the candidates pointed out, he won’t be President forever.  If Cain had even a basic knowledge about the workings of Washington, he would know his plan is a bad idea.

To his credit, he’s outperformed the other lower tier candidates during the debates by being forceful at just the right times, making sure he gets his point across.  The Cain train-wreck during the debate last night would have been a lot worse had he been as docile as the other bottom tier candidates.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich

Let’s put aside the fact that he foolishly backed Cain’s idea to require Muslims to take special loyalty oaths.  Newt is easily the most intelligent and capable candidate in the Republican field.  Every time he speaks during a debate, he runs circles around the other candidates.  Some people say his lack of success is due to his being perceived as a Washington insider.  Perhaps that’s true to some extent, but he’s been fighting the good fight before a lot of the candidates even considered themselves Republicans.  The perception of being a Washington insider is really easy to overcome.  The reason why he hasn’t overcome it is because he’s not trying.  Seriously, he shows up for these debates and he’s virtually invisible until the next one comes around.  Newt has next to no ground organization and, just as bad in this day and age, he has no online organization. (He doesn’t even have a .com web address)

A few friends and I all tried to reach out to Newt Gingrich’s campaign to offer our support when he first got in the race.  We received no response.  Since then, in addition to the attempts of other bloggers, I’ve tried reaching out to the Gingrich campaign on at least five different occasions, the last of which being a month ago.  Still, no responses.

Newt is not taking this race seriously, so why should anybody interested in supporting him?

Former Governor and Ambassador Jon Huntsman

I’ve seen video of Huntsman inside and outside of the debate setting.  To be perfectly honest, it just seems like he has a passive personality.  Granted, that perception is probably wrong because you don’t get to be the Ambassador to China and the Governor of Utah by being a passive person.  Still, perceptions are important; and when the economy is this bad, I have to believe the people want a President who is going to be a forceful leader.  That’s not the impression one gets from Huntsman (or Santorum, for that matter).  Obviously, Huntsman’s candidacy also raises the same concerns in me as Mitt Romney, relating to the dangers electing a henotheist as President while we are at war with radical Islam.  I’ll detail that concern more in depth with Mitt Romney since most of you don’t care enough about Jon Huntsman to actually read this paragraph.

Vietnam Veteran Jimmy McMillan

Most of you probably didn’t know that Jimmy “RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH!” McMillan was running for President on the Republican ticket.  That’s probably because he hasn’t been allowed at any of the debates.  I’m assuming that’s also because he failed to make it on any of the ballots.  In other words, it is statistically impossible for him to win.  But that doesn’t change the fact that the RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH!

Representative Ron Paul

Ron Paul isn’t a Republican.  He’s a French Anarchist who twisted his rhetoric to represent what he wants you to believe was the intention of the founding fathers.  Of course, this representation is horrifically false and the vast majority of intelligent Americans recognize that.  Ron Paul is a crack pot and a fraud.

Governor Rick Perry

I had really hoped Rick Perry was going to be the saving grace of the Republican Party this year. Instead, Rick Perry has turned out to be the Fred Thompson of this election cycle.  No, Perry didn’t star on a hit crime drama on NBC.  However, the job figures coming from Texas made him just as popular prior to entering the race.  Like Thompson four years ago, we have seen how Perry can be a great speaker.  Yet, we have also seen how horrible he is at thinking on his feet during debates… like Fred “um” Thompson.

Okay, maybe Perry isn’t THAT bad.  Still, I doubt he could win a debate against President Obama and a lot of voters base their votes on the candidates performances during those debates.

Strangely, Rick Perry doesn’t own RickPerry.com – like Newt, he lacks a .com web address.

Former Governor Mitt Romney

In the midst of this utterly incompetent field, Mitt Romney looks pretty damn good.  Granted, that has as much to do with his excessive use of hair products as it does his silver tongue.  Many of us involved in the 2008 campaign remember all too well how big of an ass Romney is.  The liberal kind of ass.  Sure, he’s been talking like a conservative since deciding to run for President about five years ago; but his record isn’t a conservative record.  Also, there are foreign policy considerations that arise from his faith, as well.  In my opinion, Mormons are no different from protestants.  That point of view, however, isn’t shared by most in the Islamic world.  That’s because Mormonism is a henotheistic faith tradition; which is a pretty big deal from the Islamic point of view.  Despite the rhetoric you read from those bigots see on Facebook, Muslims are directed to protect Christians by the Holy Qur’an.  Henotheism (the belief in the existence of more than one god), however, does not sit well within the Qur’an.  The fear I have is that electing a henotheistic President could potentially serve as an unnecessary tool of propaganda to enlist Muslims, who were otherwise inclined to live in peace, into various terrorist organizations.

As I wrote above, I have as much respect for Mormonism as I do any other protestant denomination.  And I really have no problem being represented by a henotheist or polytheist; whether that person is a Mormon, Hindu, or a worshiper of the Greek god Ares (Greek god worship might actually make politics more entertaining).  However, given the fact that we’re trying to secure a lasting peace between ourselves and the Muslim world, I don’t think it would be prudent to elect a henotheist at this time in our history.

Plus, I really don’t like Mitt Romney, his record, or his excessive use of hair product.

Former Senator Rick Santorum

I really think Rick Santorum should have run in 2008.  With the pain of the 2006 elections still fresh in the minds of conservatives, the image of a man willing to fight and die by his conservative values would have been really attractive in the face of John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and Mitt Romney.  Four years later, however, the people have all but forgotten how badly the Democrats slaughtered the Republicans in 2006.  Now, Rick Santorum is operating on the false assumption that we remember how conservative he really was and how much he really did for the conservative cause while in the US Senate.  Rick Santorum’s strength is in a narrative the majority of conservative voters have long since forgotten… a narrative he doesn’t have time to recreate because he’s too busy running for President.  Rick Santorum is what a lot of Republicans are looking for, but they just don’t know it.  Unfortunately for Santorum, he’s been unable to find a way to tell them.

Santorum is also a little bit too homophobic for my personal taste, but he’s done a pretty good job of keeping that rhetoric to a minimum throughout the course of this campaign.

Read More
Comments (10)
TOP

Live Blogging the GOP Debate… the online one that couldn’t get on national TV

Oct 11
Posted by kevintracy in Economy, Energy, Health, International, Jobs, New Hampshire, States

Seriously, his hair looks lopsided.

8:52 – Again, the debate ends 8 minutes early.  That happened during the CNN debate, too.

8:51 – Romney: The people no longer think their children will be better off than they are… isn’t that a Huckabee talking point from 2007?

8:51 – Perry: I talked with unemployed people.   They need someone to make America America again.

8:50 – Huntsman: I kicked unemployment butt in Utah.  More people need the dignity of a job.

8:49 – Santorum: When manufacturing left, middle-income left.  Economic mobility is greater in Europe than in the United States.

8:49 – Ron Paul’s last question!  Yay!

8:48 – Gingrich: I grew up an Army brat, my family has been out of work, I feel their pain.  But we aren’t being hired to sympathize with everybody.  We’re hired to solve the problem.

8:47 – Cain: “I was pooe before I was poor”

8:47 – Bachmann: blah blah blah…. your clones are ready… blah blah blah

8:46 – Who is that idiot shouting in the background?  Probably a Ron Paul supporter.

8:45 – Santorum: The problem is the break down of the American family, fathers not taking responsibility, and if people don’t support traditional marriage.

8:44 – Perry: So many people live in poverty because Obama is a job killer.

8:43 – Romney: Let’s fundamentally restructure our economic system.

8:42 – Romney: We don’t need stimulus bills, we need permanent changes to the tax code.  Tax breaks shouldn’t be temporary, because employers don’t hire people for only a year or two.

8:41 – Cain: People protesting on Wall Street should blame themselves… the 14 million unemployed Americans aren’t to blame for not being rich.

8:40 – Gingrich: You have to be able to afford it before you buy it.  That’s where we went wrong.

8:39 – President Bush video: Bush is bragging about more people owning homes than ever before.  Says the more the better.

8:38 – Perry: We created tons of thousands of jobs and 75% of those we subsidized didn’t donate to my campaign.  (So 25% did)

8:37 – Perry: The Federal Government shouldn’t be involved in subsidizing new industries.  (Turns out Perry got money from the companies he subsidized as the Governor of Texas)

8:36 – Ron Paul again… why is he even invited to these things?

8:36 – Cain: Get rid of the capital gains tax… my plan will do that.

8:34 – I wonder if Bachmann has a speech disability where she only knows how to speak using empty rhetoric she reads on Facebook.

8:33 – Romney – Obama’s heart is in the right place, but the Democrats have no idea what they’re doing.  Regulation is hampering small community banks that focus on small businesses.

8:32 – Q: How can you loosen credit for small businesses?

8:31 – Ron Paul again… and Krista just got here!  Yay, I’ll talk to her for a little bit.

8:30 – Cain likes how Alan Greenspan handled the Fed in the early 1990s.  He has two unnamed candidates to fill that place.

8:29 – Perry: States shouldn’t have to go before Washington, DC asking “Mother, May I” whenever they want to try something.  Each state is a laboratory of Democracy.

8:26 – Hey, New Jersey’s governor is in the crowd.  (He endorsed Mitt Romney earlier)

8:23 – That was actually a REALLY neat segment.  I want to see an entire debate run like that where each candidate asks questions of the other candidate.  THAT is how to find the differences between the candidates.

8:22 – Cain wants to create a 2/3rds of Congress mandate before increasing the tax and that he would veto any tax increases.  Somebody mumbled, “You won’t be President forever.”

8:22 – Santorum asks Cain, “Can we trust you with your lack of experience to not give away our freedoms?”

8:20 – Bachmann is talking about Obamacare.

8:19 – Bachmann isn’t answering the question.  She has no specifics.

8:18 – Romney asks Bachmann, “Expand on your OTHER ideas to get people back together.”  (He knows she’s an idiot)

8:18 – Romney:  The plan is favored 3-to-1 by the people in Massachusetts.

8:17 – Romney: Massachusetts has the lowest percentage of kids uninsured (less than 1%).  Over 1 million kids in Texas are uninsured.

8:16 – Romney: We helped out 8% of the population that was uninsured, but left the 92% of the people with insurance alone.

8:16 – Perry: Romneycare is Obamacare.  How would you respond to that criticism?

8:16 – Cain doesn’t object to the audit of the Fed.

8:15 – Ron Paul’s people ARE ignorant… even if Herman Cain didn’t say so.

8:14 – Okay, I need to keep my Diet Coke further away from my desk.  That air head is still talking.

8:13 – *Sigh* Ron Paul… I’m going to go grab a Diet Coke.

8:12 – Romney: That’s BS.  My background is awesome.  We created tens of thousands of new jobs and created companies like Staples and the Sports Authority.

8:12 – Huntsman: Romney, your background sucks.  How do you expect to win?

8:11 – Romney says he’s not worried about rich people and that’s why he focused his tax cut on the middle class.

8:10 – Gingrich claims there’s a lot in the Romney plan that’s good, but says on page 47, there’s a capital gains tax cut at a point lower than Obama’s plan… I can’t summarize that question, dammit!

8:09 – Romney: Simple solutions are inadequate.

8:08 – Cain: Romney, can you lay out all 59 points of your 165 page plan?  Is it honest, open, and transparent?

8:07 – Rick Perry says he came to the GOP at a younger age than Ronald Reagan.

8:06 – Rick Perry was campaigning for Al Gore when Reagan was saving the economy… Bachmann wants to know how he expects us to trust him.

8:03 – I kind of wonder how many people are watching this debate live.  The streaming quality is pretty darn good.  Usually these things break down after 1,000+ people tune in to the same live stream.

7:59 – Hahaha!  The microphones kicked back on unexpectedly to some guy saying, “Look how warm everybody looks,” followed by a woman laughing.

7:58 – My favorite part of the last segment was that part where they didn’t let Ron Paul talk.  Awesome!

7:57 – The candidates will ask questions of each other after the break… now this might be interesting.

7:57 – Romney challenges each candidate to put out a plan on what he will replace Obamacare with.

7:56 – Romney will repeal Obamacare on Day 2.

7:54 – Santorum is assaulting Cain and the 999 plan like crazy.  He’s right saying the 999 plan won’t remain a 999 plan because the tax rates will increase. (This is why the Fair Tax is superior to it)

7:54 – Santorum: “I want to go to war with China.”  Seriously?

7:53 – Great, it’s a YouTube debate for CEOs and special interest groups.

7:51 – Perry says we shouldn’t be focused on China cheating… or 999… we should be focused on putting Americans back to work again.  I wonder how competent he is on foreign policy, because Romney is right on this one.

7:50 – Tough talk on China during an election always results in a President displaying cowardice before the Chinese.  Mitt says he’ll take action against China against the WTO on day one of his presidency.

7:49 – Foreign trade laws!  Woohoo!  My attention is peaked!

7:47 – Bachmann says you should turn the 999 plan upside down: a 666 plan! “The devil is in the details.”… and if you fold the dollar bill a certain way, you can see the twin towers burning!  I didn’t think it was possible for me to disrespect Bachmann anymore than I already did.

7:46 – Bachmann claims the 999 plan is a tax plan, not a jobs plan.  Claims the sales tax pipeline is not something you want to give the Congress.

7:45 – Bloomberg says the 999 plan wouldn’t do everything Cain says it will.  Cain says Bloomberg is wrong… but doesn’t really explain WHY… but insists it will be revenue neutral

7:44 – This would be a lot more interesting if there were a hand full of Democrats at this table, too.  Let’s see who can handle the Democrats the best!

7:42 – Seriously, she looks like the aliens in Episode 2 that made the clones.

7:41 – Newt interrupts again and calls the super-committee bill was “stupid” and that it will be repealed before defense cuts are made

7:40 – Mitt says it’s a terrible idea to cut defense, so the super-committee needs to find some serious ways to cut spending

7:38 – Perry wisely quotes Reagan’s diary where Reagan lamented on tax increases but the failure of congress to pass spending cuts

7:37 – Hey! It’s Ronald Reagan!

7:33 – I really wish there was a timer when Ron Paul starts talking.

7:30 – Gingrich interrupts.  Claims our economic advisers in the Fed are incompetent and don’t have a clue.

7:30 – Cain also agrees with the bailout, but disagrees with it’s implementation, like Romney.

7:27 – Mitt Romney says the financial system bailout was necessary, but not perfect.

7:25 – Mitt claims the financial crisis in Europe and the threat to the US financial system is hypothetical… right

7:24 – Cain must be gaining ground if he’s becoming a target for everyone else at that target.

7:23 – Cain demanded a chance to respond… describes his plan and says it WILL pass because the American people want it to pass.

7:23 – Huntsman earned some points with me on this round.

7:22 – Huntsman claims Cain’s 999 plan is not doable.

7:22 – Huntsman claims that those good people wouldn’t want to get into government, today… though he criticized background checks… why?

7:20 – Huntsman wants men like his father (an entrepreneur) to advise him on economic matters…

7:19 – Michelle Bachmann looks like an alien from Star Wars.

7:18 – Gingrich is defending Palin on her “death panel” comment… the difference is that Gingrich actually explained himself whereas Palin is clueless.

7:16 – Huntsman claims there is a barrier between innovation and the marketplace created by the government.  Well said.

7:15 – Santorum attacks Cain: “Unlike Cain, My plan will actually pass.”

7:13 – Anybody want to take bets on when Santorum will drop out?

7:12 – Ron Paul is talking… so I’m going to take a bathroom break.

7:11 – Newt Gingrich claims the politicians need to be arrested and gets the first applause of the night.

7:10 – Newt Gingrich says leftist activists are slobs, honest people who are worried pick up after themselves… sad but true.

7:09 – Michelle Bachmann claims the government (and Democrats in particular) alone is responsible for the bad bank loans… not 100% honest, is it?

7:08 – Woa, Michelle Bachmann is still in this race?

7:07 – Rick Perry says he doesn’t have a plan out there because he’s been working on it for 8 weeks… Romney has had 6 years.

7:06 – Rick Perry just had the most unapproving, elitist face while Mitt Romney was talking.  Classic.

7:05 – Mitt Romney’s hair looks lopsided.

7:04 – Dear God!  What happened to Rick Perry’s face?  The wrinkles!!!!

7:01 – Cain wants to end the paralysis in Washington by throwing out the current tax code… that may not be the best place to start.

Read More
Comments (1)
TOP

Lugar’s “Un-American” T-Shirts Weren’t So “Un-American”

Oct 06
Posted by kevintracy in 2012 Elections, Dick Lugar, Economy, El Salvador, Indiana, Indiana, International, Jobs, Politicians, Politics, Republican, Senate Races, States

By now, most of you have probably heard that Senator Lugar’s campaign shirts were made in El Salvador.

Well, that’s not entirely true. The fabric for the shirts was actually made in the USA. The fabric was then made into shirts in El Salvador. The shirts were then sent to Indiana where a Hoosier company printed the shirts for the Lugar campaign. So, in fact, 2 of the 3 steps of making the controversial campaign shirts took place here in the United States. (Technically speaking, all three steps did take place in America)

From the Lugar campaign’s perspective, they went to an Indiana company and asked them to print the campaign shirts. That created American jobs… Hoosier jobs. It was the company that looked overseas for cheaper t-shirts, which increased their profit margins. Therefore, it seems obvious that, if Lugar’s irrational critics were really capitalists instead of shameless children, they wouldn’t object to the campaign shirts being sewn together overseas; because it was beneficial to the bottom line of a private business.

But wait, there’s an update. I received an e-mail from Lugar’s campaign team earlier today, informing me that they were getting rid of all these campaign shirts and starting over with shirts made entirely in the United States of America. While I don’t think that’s necessary, when you’re sitting on the kind of war chest Lugar is, re-printing some t-shirts really isn’t going to break the bank.

Still, it’s pretty sad that Lugar’s opponents feel the need to attack him on something this trivial and unimportant because they lack the creativity to fabricate any new lies and misrepresentations after their old ones all failed to stick.

It’s worth mentioning that Mourdock’s supporters sold campaign t-shirts made in El Salvador, as well. They charged $20 for those shirts.

You can visit Senator Lugar’s re-election website here.

Read More
Comments (1)
TOP

Palestinians taking statehood bid to the UN

Sep 19
Posted by kevintracy in 2012 Elections, Barack Obama, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Britain, China, Columbia, Egypt, France, Gabon, Germany, History, India, International, Intolerance, Israel, Lebanon, National Security, Nigeria, Obama, Palestine, Perry, Politicians, Politics, Portugal, Presidential Race, Religious Intolerance, Republican, Romney, Russia, South Africa, Syria, United Nations

It’s times like these that international politics can be really fun to cover and discuss.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is in New York and has officially requested that the United Nations grant the Palestinians full UN membership; which means Palestine would be a recognized and sovereign state.  The process for this is pretty simple.  First, the United Nations Security Council (United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, Brazil, Colombia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, South Africa, Nigeria, Gabon, Lebanon, India, Portugal, and Germany) must vote on the matter.  While the vote doesn’t have to be unanimous, the five permanent members of the Security Council (US, UK, FR, RU, CN) each of the power of veto.  From there, the General Assembly of the United Nations; which is highly sympathetic to the Palestinian plight; would vote on the matter.  Obviously, they would vote overwhelmingly to create a Palestinian State based on the 1967 borders).

Yet the UN Security Council will likely stop President Abbas in his tracks because the Obama Administration has constantly said that a Palestinian State must come from negotiations with Israel and not from the United Nations.  While the White House and the State Department haven’t officially said they would veto the Palestinian bid for statehood, the odds are pretty good that the veto is inevitable.  The Obama Administration is probably just hoping that they can convince President Abbas and the Palestinians to withdraw their request so they don’t have to veto it.  After all, the Obama team has made great strides in improving US relations with not only the Arab world, but the rest of the world as well.   Blatantly denying Palestinians statehood would tarnish our international image again.  The US may not be the only veto, however.  France has recently come forward as well, saying the current bid for statehood would not make it out of the Security Council.  It is very probably that the State Department is working behind the scenes to get as many “No” votes and vetoes as possible prior to the vote.

But wait a minute!  According to virtually every Republican politician and conservative news commentator, President Obama is in bed (figuratively) with the Palestinians and secretly hates Israel!  Why on earth would he behave like this?

The truth is this.  Even if the United States allow the UN Security Council to pass the resolution for Palestinian Statehood and the measure passed in the General Assembly of the United Nations, it wouldn’t do a whole heck of a lot.  Israel’s government and military has ignored virtually every United Nations resolution and international agreement it has come across.  Murdering civilians (including Christians), political assassinations (not including the Palestinian terrorists who had it coming), home demolitions, crop destruction, denial of hospital care, illegal settlements, and encroachment on the 1967 borders are just a few of the many violations committed by the Israeli government.

I would like to now make a point that the Israeli people are in no way responsible for all the illegal actions of their government.  My criticism is directed at a government, not at the people.  In fact, many Israelis are openly opposed to the violent and illegal actions of their government.

So, let’s say the United Nations acknowledges a Palestinian State.  Will Israel end its violations of the Palestinian people?  No.

History has proven that to be true.

Will anybody come to their defense?  No.

History has actually proven this to be untrue.  Several times, the Arab nations of the world have attacked Israel and each time, the Israelis counter-attacked and took more Arab land.  However; given the peace overtures of the last 20 years by Jordan and the civil unrest in Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Egypt; it is hard to imagine any Arab nation pledging enough military support to defend the Palestinians.  Even more remote is the idea of any of these countries working together given the sharp contrast between their political systems right now.

And with the exception of the Ivory Coast, the United Nations has been  unwilling to engage in any kind of conflict.  Even if they were willing to, the United States would veto any action against Israel, so it’s really pretty pointless to hope they would show up to enforce any of their resolutions.

The truth of the matter is that Israel needs to be included in any talks about the creation of a Palestinian State if the state is going to exist in any practicable way.

Yet, herein exists the problem.  Israel isn’t interested in negotiating seriously.  The closest Israel ever got to creating a Palestinian State was in negotiations with President Clinton.  Yet, Israel insisted that the large water reservoirs under the West Bank would remain the property of Israel.  (If you were ever curious as to why Israel’s settlements are green and land outside of there looks like a desert, this is why).  It’s the equivalent of the British offering the to give sovereignty to the American colonists  in 1776, but insisting that our natural resources will always belong to them.  You can bet your militia clothing allotment that the revolution would have continued.

Furthermore, even if the Israeli government was interested in peace, they wouldn’t dare negotiate now.  They realize that Rick Perry and Mitt Romney would be in their corner while moderating the talks.  Personally, I suspect Obama would be relatively fair in how he negotiates the discussions, but whether he’s fair or working with the Palestinians doesn’t matter.  What matters is that the Israeli government knows they will have an advantage if Obama is voted out of office.   Of course, the negotiations won’t go anywhere because the Palestinians won’t be given a fair offer.  Thus, feeding the false-illusion that the Palestinians don’t want peace.

Of course, this is all assuming the Obama Administration vetoes the proposal for the Palestinian State.  President Obama’s rhetoric on the Israel-Palestine situation has been more in line with the rest of the international community.  It is completely possible that a last minute decision will be made to abstain from the Security Council vote.  Russia and China often abstain from UN Security Council votes for posturing purposes.  In the short term, it is their way of saying, “This doesn’t concern us.  We don’t care what you do.”  In the long term, if things go wrong, Russia will then be critical of whatever action was taken.  If things go well, they’re no worse off than they were before the vote.

If Obama were to decide to abstain, the United Nations would be satisfied that they did their part for the Palestinian people (even though nothing would change).  Israel; which is already under a tremendous amount of international pressure; wouldn’t find the global picture much worse than it already is.  Then, the only thing left to do would be to have peace talks moderated by the United States whenever President Obama leaves office, whether that be in 2013 or 2017.

If Obama abstained, however, the odds of him leaving office in 2013 would be increased.  Abstaining from key votes during his time in the Illinois State Senate was a problem for him in 2008 and this plays into that narrative.  Compounding things for President Obama politically is that abstaining from this key vote would be used to further the illusion that Obama is anti-Israel and antisemitic.

Democracy in action.

 

Read More
Comments (3)