Wednesday, November 26, 2008

NEW YORK TERROR WARNING--NOT THE FIRST

Somehow the Bush-haters are so mindlessly addicted that they are incapable of ceasing and desisting even as the President enters his final days in office. He was lambasted for attended the economic summit in Peru; dimwitted utterly contemptuous op-ed columnist Gail Collins called for the President to resign (after VP Cheney resigns) and simply hand over the government to Nancy Pelosi (ugh) until Messiah Obama takes command of the ship of state; even a numbskull Colorado State University newspaper editor cost his paper $30,000. in advertising after printing a “F**k Bush” column. He, at least, has been asked to resign. I’m still receiving not-funny anti-Bush slams from a woman who gets her “facts” from the Huffington Post, the Daily Kos, and bathroom walls.

I look at the President in a different way although his second term was hardly up to par. The United States, unlike many countries around the world, has not been hit with any more attacks. Under President Bush, we have been kept safe.

Read these excerpts from an Associated Press release, November 26th:

NEW YORK – Police bolstered security in subways and trains Wednesday after the government warned that al-Qaida suicide bombers were contemplating an attack on New York's mass-transit systems during the holiday season. An internal memo obtained by The Associated Press says the FBI has received a "plausible but unsubstantiated" report that al-Qaida terrorists in late September may have discussed attacking the subway system…A Pakistani immigrant was arrested and convicted for a scheme to blow up the subway station at Herald Square in 2004. There was also a planned cyanide attack on the subways by al-Qaida operatives that authorities say was called off in 2002; another aborted al-Qaida plot to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge in 2003; and a plot to bomb underwater train tunnels to flood lower Manhattan, which was broken up in 2006 by several arrests overseas.

How many foiled plots were there of which we are not aware? Under President Bush’s watch, we have not had a repeat of 9/11 even as the ACLU, activist judges, anti-warmongers as well as members of our own Congress have sought to limit or eliminate our ability to gather intelligence or punish those who have sought to destroy us. Fifty of the released “unfairly treated” prisoners of Guantanamo have been re-captured as they’ve tried to kill American military.

It will be interesting to see how our next President deals with Guantanmo and the scum imprisoned there. No country wants to take them because they are exactly what they appear to be. Let’s leave that to see what develops.

Meanwhile, thank you President Bush, for working hard to keep us safe.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

PUNISH LIEBERMAN?--ANOTHER NEGATIVE FOR THE DEMOCRATS

There’s no doubt that the Democrats think they know what’s best for us. Joe Lieberman’s constituents returned him to the Senate despite efforts by the Democrats to block this Dem-turned-Independent from gaining re-election, the Dems want to punish Lieberman for voicing his honest opinion and supporting McCain. This is also despite the fact that Lieberman remains a registered Democrat and primarily aligns himself with the Democratic Party. But Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., doesn’t think that’s enough. He doesn’t want Lieberman “rewarded” for his defection even though Lieberman already holds the Chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He was good enough before the election but somehow falls short now? Apparently the continued abandonment of the idea of merit remains for the Democrats.

One would think that the members of Congress have no responsibility to act according to the wishes of the voters who put them there. It’s about them and not about us, or in this case at the very least about the voters who returned Lieberman to the Senate. The Democratic leadership apparently feels nothing about their rights, wishes, or representation. It’s about consolidating Democratic power so theirs is the only voice heard. That’s pretty scary.

Ironically the only argument I’ve heard against punishing Senator Lieberman is that it goes against Obama’s pledge of bi-partisanship and therefore might alienate some of his supporters and that might cause Lieberman to bolt and join the Republicans. The latter argument is so in line with the Democrats because they don’t seem to work on principle. Lieberman is simply not in step with many of the Republican views; they’re accusing him of doing what they do—compromise principles in order to get ahead. That’s pretty scary.

The Republicans, of course, would welcome Joe Lieberman to the GOP caucus. It’s in a shambles and lacks direction. Someone who can actually take a stand and articulate it well would be welcome addition. They certainly did not have that in John McCain.

If he plays his cards right, Joe Lieberman can wield a lot of power and influence in the new administration. As both sides vie for his vote, he may be able to make political deals to do some real good. Wouldn’t that be a nice result for Congress for a change?


Sunday, November 16, 2008

WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?

With the election over, we will have a new President in Jan., and he has already given pause to think. I’m not going to spend the next four years berating him idiotically as many of my friends berated President Bush. Imagine saying, “He’s stupid. Anyone can fly one of those jets with all the gizmos in it.” Anyway, I’m not going to throw hissy fits and sit and glare whenever Obama’s name is mentioned. But I am going to continue to think, to listen to different sources and different points of view and not, as another friend does, check in on The Huffington Post or the Daily Kos for her facts. I wish the new President the best of luck in keeping our country on course. He is, after all, my president too. I’m not offering up any of the deranged, irrational hatred I’ve heard for the last eight years.

But here are some issues that are troublesome:

1. After making a statement that “there can only be one president,” Barak Obama found a way not to weigh in on some matters but then threateningly posed that if Congress doesn’t act “in this lame duck session” on another stimulus package, he will immediately after the inauguration. Additionally he will now offer HIS OWN weekly address via radio and internet until the inauguration. One president? I thought that was George W. Bush.

2. At his first news conference, no reporter from FOX or any of the papers that endorsed John McCain were called upon for a question. Is this more of the vindictive behavior that had reporters thrown off his campaign plane in favor of reporters from Essence? I will keep a close eye on the “Fairness Doctrine” debates.

3. How will the auto industry be handled? Pelosi has said that there will be limits on “executive pay,” but it is the backbreaking unions who also must give up something to keep the industry going. Will the Dems challenge the unions that support them? How can the money keep the auto industry afloat if there is no restructuring of management AND if the money offered is earmarked for smaller, more efficient cars in an industry that is not tooled to build them?

4. How will our military be treated? Barney Frank & Co. has already promised a 25% cut in military spending. Do we want our military in the shape it was at the beginning of the Iraq War—under-supplied, and under-protected? I certainly do not!

5. The economic crisis is huge. How could it not be? The Dems tossed aside every economic rule to make sure people who cannot afford homes got them. Then they watched with feigned surprise as those very people could not pay their mortgages and the snowball became an avalanche. I want to keep a close eye on my taxes!

That certainly is enough to keep me busy, but there were many more campaign promises our “country’s savior” made. It will be interesting, and probably very painful to watch. I am thinking of adding another bumper sticker to my car. The first one says, Mark Twain for President “It’s better to be popular than right.” My new one should succinctly read, “What did you expect?”