That’s Right Nate

The more I hear from Liz Cheney, the more I am sure that she is ready to take her father’s place as our country’s preeminent conservative.   Today, she called out Obama for repeated criticism of Afghanistan leader Hamid Karzai.  Her comments were from the heart and cut right to yet another failing as President:

Afghan President Karzai, whose support we need if we are going to succeed in Afghanistan, is being treated to an especially dangerous and juvenile display from this White House. They dress him down publicly almost daily and refuse to even say that he is an ally.

I understand that Obama may have been tempted to call Karzai out several times this past year like when he rigged his reelection, or when he recently threatened to join the Taliban, or even recently as he has strengthened ties with Iran and Ahmadinejad.  However, can Obama understand how hard it is to govern when you are being attacked daily as an enemy of the United States and when every move you make is derided as being against the best interests of our country?

To spotlight just how horrible Obama’s comments about Karzai have been, I have created a little quiz.  Simply identify which of these comments were directed from Obama or his staff at Hamid Karzai and which of these comments were directed from Liz Cheney or her father at President Obama.

1. “[He]has dishonored fallen soldiers by engaging in a strategy of appeasing its enemies.”
2. “[He]has been declared the winner … so obviously he is the legitimate leader of the country.”
3. “We ought to calm the rhetoric and engage as strategic partners intent on bringing about peace and security.”
4. “He is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack.”
5. “[He] must stop dithering while American troops are in danger.”
6. “Every time he delays, defers, debates, changes his position, it begins to raise questions: Is [He] really behind what they’ve been asked to do?”

How did you do?  The answers are posted below the picture of the Cheneys.

Answers: #2 was said by Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.  #3 came from Obama himself.  The others were all courtesy of the Cheneys.

7:02 Catchy theme song, but I like Hail to the Chief

7:05  I’m glad that Bush was able to put an end to that acting as one thing

7:06 I hate how Obama says Taliban. It sounds like he’s Harry Belafonte counting bananas

7:07 Wow! When did West Point start admitting women?

7:10 Why is Obama having so much trouble with Afghanistan? Bush was doing so well that he was able to start a second war

7:11 @Greytdog on Twitter suggested that he should have Hail to the Chief when he enters and the NCIS theme when he leaves.  I like that idea.

7:14  If the threat is this serious, we should have color codes for it.

7:20 Pakistan is pretty much Afghanistan with a good cricket team…oh yeah and nuclear missiles.

7:26 If the wars cost a trillion dollars then why weren’t they in the budget?  Liberals are such spend thrifts.

7:29 He just said we have to be nimble? He is channeling Belafonte. Barack be nimble, Barack be quick, Barack go under the limbo stick

7:31 All we’re asking for is a little gratitude.

7:36 Well it was quick enough, I’ll say that.

The biggest question in American foreign policy is where do we want to keep our forces in order for them to do the most good in the war on terror–Iraq as John McCain believes or Afghanistan where Barack Obama believes we need more troops.

Iraq was not really a hot bed of terror before we invaded, but you can be sure it is now.  Things have calmed down a bit in the country and the President is asking us to leave on the same time table that Obama wants.  In fact, we have been unable to come to a deal with the Iraqis to protect our troops from Iraqi courts.

Afghanistan under the Taliban was where al-Qaeda trained terrorists like the ones in the 9/11 attack on the World Train Centers.  The invasion of Aghanistan was a military success, but the Taliban continues to regroup.  The President wants the United States to stay as do most of the people.

That is why the United States needs to focus on Iraq.  The very fact that the Afghans want us there should tell us that they really don’t need us anymore.  On the other hand, by wanting us out the Iraqis have demonstrated that they have not yet been brought under control.  If Iraq was a fully functioning government they wouldn’t care if there were US troops there.  Their desire to see us out demonstrates their instability.

McCain clearly understands this.  Anybody can send American troops to a country where they’re wanted, but that isn’t the same as sending them to the country where they are most needed.  Obama obviously does not understand this, by electing him the American people run the risk of him sending troops only where they are wanted or only into situations where they have a clear objective.

I am a big George Bush supporter, but he’s not too loved right now and it presents Obama with the difficult job of distancing himself from George Bush.  The McCain camp called out Obama yesterday when McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann.

“I think the American people have had enough of inflexibility and stubbornness in national security policy,” Scheunemann said. When asked later by the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein whether the campaign was disparaging President Bush, Scheunemann dug in: “We cannot afford to replace one administration that refused for too long to acknowledge failure in Iraq with a candidate that refuses to acknowledge success in Iraq.”

It is amazing that Obama has proven himself to be both inflexible and a flip-flopper at the same time.  Truely Obama is a historica candidate for his ability to refuse to budge from his own beliefs on an issue while at the same time not having personal beliefs on an issue and instead going whichever way the wind blows.

What America needs is a flexible candidate like John McCain who is steadfast and strident in his flexibility.  McCain didn’t hesitate to co-opt Obama’s policy on Afghanistan and make it his own, yet at the same time while Obama would bring troops from Iraq, McCain wouldn’t interfere with our success in Iraq and would get the 3 brigades needed to sure up Afghanistan from some as yet unspecified location.  To me that’s leadership.  Some other positions McCain has remained flexible on can be found at http://thatsrightnate.com/2008/07/04/the-real-candidate-of-change/

I really hate when this happens and the only clip you can find of an important speech like John Mccain’s Town Hall Meeting on the Economy today in Denver.  I’ve posted one edited by a lefty group, but I do believe it shows McCain’s low key yet riveting speaking style.

Today John McCain announced his plans to balance the budget within his first term of office.  This would be an amazing trick and its one that McCain can pull off.    There are three points to his strategy:

Now anybody who has spent time with a grandparent who takes butter, cream, or dinner rolls from a restaurant table for later consumption knows how the first two works.   In a building as large as the White House you must imagine that just having McCain to turn off the lights in rooms nobody is using at the time will save a lot of money.

The third point is a bit more technical.  Obviously McCain is sure that it won’t take more than a year or so to win those two wars.  Then its just a question of reinvesting the money.  Now what makes things tricky is the war has been funded by deficit spending.

An easier way to look at it would be if you had a credit card and for 10 months you paid all your bills except you charged a $900 plasma television.  At the end of those 10 months you would have a credit card balance of $9000 + interest.  Now, let’s say that you stopped buying those televisions (The war).  Since the televisions cost $900 each, it would take you a little over 10 months to pay off your balance if you spent the money you had been spending on televisions and used it to pay off the balance.  Its that simple.

Now Obama is going to say you need to raise taxes or some other economic mismanagement, but McCain’s way is much simpler and still allows him to cut taxes on the wealthy who will continue to make more jobs for the rest of America.

Yesterday on Fox News, Fred Barnes encouraged John McCain to go after Barack Obama on gays in the military.  It is sad that the campaign has been reduced to this when everybody knows that gays do not belong in the military in the first place.  There is no constitutional right to serve in the military.  Being able to serve multiple tours of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan is above all a priviledge.  As a priviledge, the government has the right to deny it to anybody they want to.  The grand adventure of being a soldier is reserved for those patriotic young men (and now women) who uphold American standards of morality and decency.  When the insurgents attack and a soldier finds himself surrounded by heavily armed militants do you think he wants to see a homosexual with a gun next to him?  Of course not, he’d rather be there alone.

If we were to open the military up to homosexuals they would take jobs away from heterosexual troops.  The homosexuals would naturally stand out at inspections where their uniform would be impeccably neat compared to the heterosexual soldier next to him.  Their barracks would not only be ship shape, but decorated as well.  Straight soldiers would not be able to compete with this and would not be able to ascend to leadership positions.    By all means, let’s put the facts out there and lets see how many people support Obama’s position.

Just when I think that there is no hope for the future and that all college kids care about is the next kegger, along comes a story that shows you the spirit of free enterprise and entrepeneurship is alive and well. 

House sleuth Henry Waxman (D-CA) wants 22 year-old AEY President Efraim Diveroli, his 25 year-old VP (and masseur) David Packouz, and the company’s general manager, also 25, to testify before Congress about how they managed to get a $300 million U.S. contract to supply (sometimes forty year-old) ammunition to the Afghan Army, among other contracts. Waxman also wants officials from the Department of Defense and Department of State to appear as well.

If Bill Murray was a bit younger he’d be the perfect guy to play Diveroli.  This would be an awesome premise for a movie.  Keep in mind that Diveroli took over this company when he was 19.  That takes some gumption. Now it seems the Afghans are a bit unhappy with the company who is their main weapons supplier.  Some of the ammo was manufactured in China and it was shipped in cardboard boxes, but isn’t this just the time when those crazy kids pull that big stunt to save the day and get the girl at the end of the movie.  Time to show Senator Wermer I mean Waxman just what you’re made of kids.

You really have to hand it to him.  A whole lot of people dream of someday being President of the United States, but what job would our Commander in Chief want?  He’d love to be just an ordinary grunt on the front lines of the war against terror.  While speaking to soldiers in Afghanistan, The Pres. was quoted as saying:

“I must say, I’m a little envious. If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed. It must be exciting for you … in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You’re really making history, and thanks.”

Just when you think that this generation is going be confined to sitting in front of computer screens doing menial tasks along comes the war on terror to give us a good old fashioned jolt of adventure and romance.  I know he’s to old to serve, but you have to believe W. would be one heckuva soldier.