Want to know why America lags behind in education? Seems educators are more concerned with their unions and Democratic endorsements. This past Monday the National Education Association endorsed Obama in 2012 for a second term as President. Don’t take my word for it, read this:
How about the educators that do not endorse Obama? It apparently doesn’t matter, they get pulled into the fray regardless of their political standing.
In the latest rankings compiled by the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment(PISA) the United States lags far behind. It is an absolute disgrace and nothing that our educators should be proud of and certainly not enhanced by union participation.
Educators should be as passionate with providing quality education as they are with union membership and partisan politics.
What is this incessant need and desire of the President to continually inform the enemies of the United States of our military intentions? This military retiree finds it extremely galling to observe the Commander-in-Chief standing in front of the world attempting to explain a military retreat when our troops are fully engaged with the enemy and there is nothing that even closely resembles a victory at this time.
These military devices, leading to victory, must not be divulged beforehand.
~excerpt from Sun Tzu’s Art of War
Wouldn’t it be nice if our enemies would report in kind their numbers, troop movements and intentions.
“Starting next month, we will be able to remove 10,000 of our troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year, and we will bring home a total of 33,000 troops by next summer, fully recovering the surge I announced at West Point. After this initial reduction, our troops will continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan Security forces move into the lead. Our mission will change from combat to support. By 2014 this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security.”
~President’s speech to the nation (and our enemies), July 22, 2011
The leader of Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai, is a loathesome creature who is part of the problem and fully aware, as is anyone else that wants to be honest with themselves, that his country will quickly revert back to the days of Taliban control after our troops are removed from this moonscape wasteland.
Don’t fight a battle if you don’t gain anything by winning.
~ Erwin Rommel, German Field Marshal in World War II
The Taliban and al-Qaida need only sit back and wait out our withdrawal as so eloquently outlined by Barack Obama. They are a patient enemy and in no hurry and will quickly have the country of Afghanistan back in their grip soon after the United States departs.
In the future, when embarking on a military solution, it is imperative that our political leadership understand when our country and people are threatened by an unrelenting force of evil it then becomes necessary to unleash “hell and damnation” upon those that would do us harm and allow our armed forces to fully deploy their might to crush our enemies at all costs.
“May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won’t.”
~ General George S. Patton
If our politicians are unwilling and lack the “guts” to commit to this strategy then they have no business sending our military men and women into harm’s way. When our military might has to tip-toe around Rules of Engagement our troops bear the brunt of this policy with unnecessary casualties, prolonged war and a fleeting victory.
In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.
~excerpt from Sun Tzu’s Art of War
Where in the annals of military history has it ever been appropriate to notify the enemy of our intentions? It seems to be the modern-day modus operandi of the political establishment. Whatever happened to “loose lips sink ships”, a reference to too much talk tips off the enemy in their favor. At this point it appears to be a futile thought to expect any political philosophy that would allow our military to achieve a victory before withdrawal.
Is the main stream media highlighting Congressman Weiner’s online Twitter escapades a “wag the dog” moment? Taking the spotlight off of the President at this time must be a welcome distraction for the news media’s favorite son. Not only is Obama’s approval ratings dropping but in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll Mitt Romney was tied with the President in a general-election trial heat.
For those unfamiliar with the term “wag the dog” it is when an event of lesser importance is purposely brought to primary importance taking the attention off of an event that would otherwise be of greater significance.
Obsessive attention has been given to Anthony Weiner and sucking the life out of every other newsworthy story. There is very little reported lately of the many American troops serving in harm’s way with a pending pullout in an unstable Afghanistan to start this summer per order of the Commander-in-Chief. 2011 stock market gains are gone after six consecutive weeks of falling share prices and no end to high gas prices with seemingly no attention to this by the Obama administration. Unemployment is on the rise indicating a slow-growth economy with plunging consumer confidence which directly reflects the failed policies of this President.
It has been non-stop Weiner dominating the headlines. Will we now have to be subjected to the sordid details of Weiner’s “treatment” over the coming months to mask any further bad news from the White House? The only way for Weiner headlines to go away is for him to resign, the sooner the better. There is real news happening out there that needs to be reported.
It’s crunch time, time for all remaining prospective GOP Presidential candidates to commit and formally announce their intentions of running for President of the United States of America. The pool of current candidates so far is weak and leaves little hope of ousting Barack Obama from office in the 2012 election.
With only six months before Presidential primaries begin there is little time for procrastination. Once a strong conservative candidate has emerged there needs to be a groundswell grassroots movement promoting this individual as the unquestionable frontrunner. It is important this candidate have a well coordinated, strong internet presence keeping supporters and voters informed. The American people must be reminded of the shortcomings of this current President.
Barack Obama has fallen far short of his campaign promise of hope and change, whatever that meant. There is a list of letdowns for the Obama faithful. Tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans have been extended, CBO estimates that 22 million Americans will still be without health care when health reform takes effect in 2014, the Patriot Act has been extended, after promising to walk the picket lines with union workers he has failed to do so in states that have reduced collective bargaining rights, failed to close Guantanamo Bay prison, and the war in Afghanistan is going strong and despite a surge in troops there is no apparent end to the influx of insurgents into that country.
Let’s not forget that unemployment remains high, the housing market is dismal, and the current administration has created tremendous debt and wants to raise the debt ceiling without significant spending cuts. All of these adversely affect hard-working American families.
The GOP must not underestimate the Barack Obama campaign team. They are well-funded and very adept at winning. There’s much work to be done with a formidable adversary that needs to be defeated.
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee removed all doubt last night on his self-titled show on whether he would take a second shot at a White House bid. He, and his heart, said “no.” I voted for Huckabee in the 2008 New Hampshire Presidential primary. My reasons for voting for Huckabee were two-fold. First, I agreed with all of his policies and felt he was a man of true convictions. Secondly, Chuck Norris threatened that if I didn’t vote for Huck, he would dispatch me with a flying round kick to the face.
At the time of the primary, I was a senior at the University of New Hampshire in the Political Science program. That fall I enrolled in renowned political pollster Andy Smith’s “New Hampshire Primary” course. Yes, that was an actual class. Yes, it was taken for credit. Yes, I paid money for it. All kidding aside, this class was unique among all American universities because of New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary status. Almost every candidate either personally spoke or sent a representative to speak to our class. We also received free tickets to the Republican debates that were held at the University’s Whittemore Center. For a political junkie like me, this was pure political “heroin” in my veins.
At the end of the course, Professor Smith held an ad hoc vote asking us who would win both the Republican and Democratic primaries. Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nod, while John McCain won his party’s endorsement. On January 3, 2008, three weeks after this informal vote was held, Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama, neither of whom won our class vote, won the Iowa caucuses. I was sure “the Huckster” would carry this momentum into New Hampshire. It was not to be.
The moral to this story is not an idle recitation of primaries gone by. It’s about knowing when to hold them, and knowing when to fold them. But seriously, I’m about to make a bold prediction that may upset some of our readers: Barack Obama will win the 2012 Presidency. As of today, the Presidency is Barack Obama’s to lose. To be frank, the Republican Party does not have any candidates currently in the race, or any on the horizon even, that could oust the “Osama Killer” from the White House.
Yes, it is true. Mike Huckabee has led in most of the recent Republican primary polls, particularly those in Iowa. But as we saw in 2008, this does not mean that he will win in New Hampshire. The point that is lost on most, if not all, of the current and potential GOP candidates, is that just because you CAN run, does not mean you SHOULD run. Huckabee recognized this, and I give him all the respect in the world for his decision.
Now the mad scramble for Huckabee’s endorsement among the pathetic Presidential hopefuls begins. If the GOP’s mystery savior candidate exists, he or she better throw his or her hat in the ring soon. As we all know, the race for the 2012 Presidency began the day after Obama’s election – and there is some major catching up to do.
To release, or not to release – Osama bin Laden’s death photograph that is. This is the question that U.S. President Barack Obama faced after U.S. Navy SEALs finally killed bin Laden at his Pakistani getaway on May 2nd. Anyone not living under a rock could give you the blow by blow of this operation by now, so I will spare you all of the bleeding details. It is reported that bin Laden was killed from a gunshot wound to the head. Photographs of bin Laden’s corpse were taken as verification of his demise. Since the announcement of his death, American journalists have been foaming at the mouth to have bin Laden’s photographs released. It was finally announced that President Obama will not release the photographs. As an outspoken critic of President Obama, I have to admit – the President made all the right moves this past week.
In 2006, I deployed to Fallujah, Iraq. My company lived in a bombed-out, defunct train station that served as a casualty collection point for both major 2004 Fallujahan battles. Fallujah was home to Al Qaeda in Iraq (AIQ) leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi. For a time, Zarqawi’s name was even bigger than Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi became notorious for gruesome propaganda videos showing him beheading American Nicholas Berg and British national Ken Bigley. On June 6, 2006, my unit received intelligence on the location of Mr. Bigley’s decapitated body. An insurgent involved in Mr. Bigley death was arrested and faced execution. He provided the rough location of Mr. Bigley’s remains in exchange for a life sentence. Recovering Mr. Bigley’s body was a top priority for the British government who faced tough questions at home over Britain’s continuing involvement in the Iraqi quagmire. I, along with a few other Marines and British soldiers, were sent to the area to locate Mr. Bigley’s body. We did locate a body, but DNA tests would determine it was not Mr. Bigley.
Why did I tell this story? One day later, Al Zarqawi was killed during an airstrike in the Iraqi town of Baqubah. This was a huge moral victory for U.S. troops and celebrations rang out across the free world. One day later, Zarqawi’s swollen, bloodied face was plastered in Stars and Stripes and thousands of other media outlets. Even with the photographs, rumors persisted in the Arab world whether the photograph really was Zarqawi. In the city of Fallujah, the bastion of the Iraqi insurgency, Zarqawi’s death was not welcome news.
Mere hours after searching for Zarqawi’s decapitated victims, I was risking my life distributing his death photograph in the streets. The powers-at-be believed that if we distributed fliers showing Zarqawi’s corpse, the locals would realize the tide was turning against the insurgency and we would win their support. The fliers also included a message written in Arabic detailing the account of Zarqawi’s death. The decision to release Zarqawi’s photograph was not wise and demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of Arab culture. We witnessed an immediate backlash of attacks after the flyer distribution. In Arab cities, many walls (particularly near mosques) are plastered with posters of the dead in their coffins. This is how Muslims honor their dead – particularly martyrs. Passerbys can pay their respect to those in the photograph. Children can see that if they die a martyr, they too, can have their picture plastered on mosque walls. To release bin Laden’s photograph would only inflame passions and make him out to be a martyr. Years from now, when bin Laden’s name is a mere footnote in history books as a mass murderer, our troops are home and safe, and insurgents cannot use the picture as a cause, then we can release these photos. Until that day, President Obama has made the right decision to keep the photograph from worldwide dissemination.
Osama bin Laden is dead, buried beneath the sea and being served up as dinner for a number of unknown species. Very appropriate. But it’s not over, there are still Islamic extremists who intend to do harm to as many “infidels” as possible. We cannot allow ourselves to let down our guard or become complacent. Now maybe our political and senior military leaders are possibly convinced that the rest of our military units are also quite capable of killing our enemies. Allow them to do just that by dropping the foolhardy Rules of Engagement policy currently in place that our warriors must live and die by.
It should now be perfectly clear that Pakistan is no ally in our pursuit of terrorists. I actually posted an article in 2008 – Pakistan Fiend or Foe – that bears re-reading. That is not a misprint, I meant fiend not friend.
Any thought process that even remotely suggests that Pakistan is a friend or ally should be quickly quashed. If I hear any more claims that they are even remotely
loyal or faithful partners of America I may have to issue my own fatwah condemning this rhetorical nonsense. Furthermore, given our country’s present economical situation the amount of financial aid that our government gives to Pakistan is obscene and should offend each and every American. There should no longer be any question that money handed over to this country is obviously being used to aid and abet our enemies. Not so you say – convince me otherwise.
Obama’s one mistake may have been a missed opportunity by having bin Laden killed. With the presidential campaign coming into full swing a live Osama bin Laden would have been a great campaign prop. Obama could occasionally rattle his cage and bin Laden would spew out some hateful message to the world and we would all be reminded that he is safely locked away. Then there would be the long drawn out pathetic circus trial that would bring out a myriad of once obscure characters vying for the inevitable spotlight. I must admit that the President made the right choice in having this pathetic excuse for a human being exterminated and resting as bottom-feed.
So it’s time to celebrate the demise of this monster. It’s not a pretty picture or pleasant thought when one tries to envision some guy scrubbing down Osama’s nasty ass before placing him in a burial shroud. Hopefully he got a five star belly flop when his wretched carcass hit the water during the burial at sea.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus announced on Tuesday that it is time to move away from “birther” claims and concentrate on the urgent issues of the day. With today’s release of the Obama birth certificate one would have to agree that this issue should be laid to rest. Potential presidential candidate Donald Trump claimed a victory today on being the one responsible for the release of the birth certificate.
Except for a select handful of people no other American witnessed the birth of little Barack Hussein Obama. Therefore, even though not present during this event the facts remain that he was born and he is President. Any time and energy spent after today proving his birthplace should instead be used to ensure that the latter does not happen again in the 2012 election.
To the average American it appears nothing is moving forward in a positive way. Unemployment numbers are dismal, a gloomy housing market, gas prices are skyrocketing, horrendous national debt, war still raging, and an out-of-control deficit and spending mindset with no positive message that any of this is going to change in the near future. Additionally, we have a President that seems content on globetrotting around the planet bowing and apologizing on behalf of America – disgraceful.
The fact that Barack Obama was born cannot be changed but what can change is preventing him from being elected to a second term in office which is where the GOP should be placing their emphasis.
“Hank Aaron smacked it. Dr. King paved it. Number 3 drove it. Jack Daniels drunk it. Hank Williams sang it. Dolly Parton graced it. Billy Graham saved it.” These are not my words, they are Tim McGraw’s. It is a language I am intimately familiar with. I am the proud grandson of a small town southern man and woman. My mother still rocks one. What is McGraw talking about? He is talking about the “Southern Voice.” More specifically, the southern accent.
Growing up it was sometimes difficult to pronounce words correctly. I look back fondly when I used to pronounce ‘water,’ ‘warter,’ and ‘Massachusetts,’ ‘Massa-TU-setts.’ Even today, I speak in a quasi-southern, quasi-New England, quasi-Mark Wahlberg Boston accent. My poor mother is sometimes the subject of intra-family teasing when all of the boys are back together at the house. This article will serve two purposes. First, it will defend the southern accent as “the” American accent. Second, it will answer the question if the southern accent is electable in twenty-first century America.
In places north of the Mason-Dixon Line, the southern accent is the subject of ridicule. Many think that those with southern accents are unintelligent, ignorant, and racist. Let’s explore the facts, shall we? Fifteen Presidents hail from south of the Mason-Dixon. Names like Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, who founded our great nation, are from Virginia alone. These men who risked their lives and fortunes for our independence formed the tongue now known as the Southern accent. The Southern accent is unique throughout the entire world. When you hear English spoken in far corners of Earth, one cannot be for sure if the speaker is American. With a southern accent, all doubt is erased. It is the AMERICAN accent.
Let’s look at the South today. Many think of Southerners as beer-drinking, pick-up truck driving, NASCAR racing fans. This is probably a fair assessment for some Southerners, but have you ever seen the opening of a NASCAR event? The National Anthem is sung, while everyone is singing. A Christian prayer is said, while everyone is praying. Flags are waving everywhere… American flags that is. In the Southern states, there is an unapologetic, blind love for the United States that is so sorely lacking from most parts of the country – particularly the Northeast. Shockingly, it is this love and patriotism that the South exudes for the United States that angers the rest of the country! Does anyone else see a problem here?
This brings us to the ultimate question – is a southern accent electable? This question first entered my mind when Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour stopped by the Granite State last week to feel out a possible 2012 Presidential run. The 63-year-old Barbour toured various gun shops in southern New Hampshire to shake hands with a typical Republican demographic. Barbour is already drawing anti-Southern hatred with many calling him Haley “Strom” Barbour, after the late U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. Thurmond was a well-known segregationist. I tried to determine how Barbour could be compared to Thurmond and his segregationist policies. Then I figured it out. Both have a southern accent. So does this mean all Americans with a Southern accent are racists? Does this mean all Southern politicians are segregationists? Hardly! In actuality, the southern United States is far more diverse than the northern states. Is this the pot calling the kettle black?
The last three of six U.S. Presidents had southern accents. Can you remember them? Time’s up. George W. Bush, William J. Clinton, and James Carter all had southern accents. Bill Clinton, unofficially known as the “first black president,” is one of the most popular Presidents in United States history. Carter was a virtual unknown before winning the 1976 Democratic primary in New Hampshire with 28% of the vote.
If Barbour is seriously considering a Presidential run, he needs to take a page from both Clinton and Carter’s playbook. If he campaigns early like Carter, and uses the southern charm of “Comeback Kid” Clinton, there may be a chance that the southern accent rises again in New Hampshire.
