Here’s a rundown at The American Thinker on the TRUTH about Hillary’s email server and the FACTS that we do know so far:
Category Archives: Culture Wars
On America’s side
“The side I’m on is that of America. And for very, very positive reasons.” – Minta Marie Morze
A couple weeks ago my 10 year old granddaughter, a very bright student enrolled in the gifted program at her public school, mentioned something she learned at school, which I told her is not correct and what she learned really plays into the problems plaguing America and it also speaks to our future. My granddaughter said, “America is a democracy.” Reflexively, I corrected her and said, “No, America is a republic!” Thus began a stream of back and forth, because as of yesterday she told me that her teacher still says, “America is a democracy.” I told her again that her teacher is mistaken, because assuredly, America is a republic, set up as a constitutional federal republic. However, watching the demise of federalism and the reliance on pop culture and public opinion polls to silence dissenting opinion, I’m wondering if America has descended into that hellish, brutish state where on the whims of ginning up anger and use of slick mass media manipulation (propaganda) to sway the mob, the only thing that matters is the “majority rules”.
On polar ends of the American electorate, this fraying of trust or even understanding of this basic fact crops up in ever disturbing ways. On the political left, they’ve got angry mobs taking to the streets to compel justice by force and college bullies silencing opposing views with rules imposed by fiat, “I disagree, so you can’t speak!”. In the Presidential run they’re wading in a shallow geriatric pool with a dyed-in-the-wool socialist resonating with disenfranchised Democrats and a pathological liar, riding on her gender and spewing paranoid vitriol about some imaginary dangerous right-wing conspiracy out to do her in, and by extension do in the American people too. She sees a vast right-wing conspiracy around every corner. Her answer to every problem in America is another federal program, to encroach evermore deeply into the lives of American citizens.
Freedom for local communities and states to manage their own affairs falls to the ever-expanding beast that crushed the very breath of liberty out of not only local and state governments, but out of individual American citizens. We’ve become a people conditioned to bow to the popular opinion poll on issues, as manipulated by mass media propaganda. When the left wants to sway Americans to a particular view – big bucks go to various activists and groups (many Soros funded) and the propaganda blitz ensues – Hollywood makes movies and TV shows promoting that view and mainstreaming it into the culture, “experts” hit the airwaves extolling it, and then the media reinforces the idea with polling data, much of it dubious, selling this view as popular and reporters will grill the outliers, who dare speak up against that view, lecturing that the majority of Americans believe the now carefully manufactured and manipulated view. It’s a type of insidious brainwashing and peals the death of liberty and The Constitution.
Now, on the political right, the use of mass media manipulation has rarely been understood, let alone used, that is until the Trump campaign, which is using the Carville/Begala playbook, as I’ve stated repeatedly. That’s what I see – Bill Clinton’s perfect triangulation lining up, if Hillary can avoid an indictment. This post is not going to be a regurgitation of my own conspiracy theory, but here’s the link to my thoughts on that. Assuredly, as I’ve stated many times, I will not ever vote for Donald Trump, because his campaign highlights the capitulation on the right to accepting manufactured hype about polls over principles. The heart of conservatism, weak though it beats, will not survive if it succumbs to the reality TV culture and slick mass media manipulation of Donald Trump, who rambles on about his poll numbers endlessly, but does not hold to conservative principles or even basic civility.
On the right then who, well, Ted Cruz promised to be a principled conservative who would take on Washington and he has stood up against the Washington insiders, but in the process his personal style engendered absolute loathing among his fellow senators, on both sides of the aisle (read Charles Krauthammer’s very astute assessment). Do I agree with Cruz on the issues? Absolutely, but here again we get to reports, many which Trump helped spread, that Cruz is so despised that many GOP establishment people would rather support Trump, whom they know is not conservative, to destroy Cruz, who is. In a less polarized era and where pop culture celebrity didn’t carry more credence than ideas and republican principles, most of the other GOP candidates, admittedly with both pluses and minuses in my view, would still be able to gain some traction. Every single GOP candidate running against Trump offers more coherent policy, offers complete sentences and thoughts, and from this Mom and grandmother, displays better manners. Trump may be mega-rich, but he behaves like a boorish jerk!
With Trump monopolizing the media cycle, with the aid of the mainstream media selling people on polls over principles, none of their messages even get noticed as the GOP’s Paris Hilton spews mostly incomprehensible gibberish. In fact, Paris Hilton actually marketed a clearer campaign message in her cute video (see above) with easily understandable policy positions, but disgruntled GOP base voters project their hopes and beliefs onto the blank canvas that is Trump’s “making America great again”, because assuredly if you write out Trump’s rambling speeches and comments, there’s a lot less there than you’d imagine and a whole lot of conflicting ideas, beliefs, proposals, all overshadowed by the relentless repetition that he is winning in the polls (popular). He’s created this aura of “inevitability”, which now is reaping a snowball effect, as more and more GOP kingmakers are weighing their options and opting to throw in with Trump, despite reservations that Trump is even loyal to the Republican party – they are willing to toss the reins of their party to a man who converted less than a year ago and has spouted conflicting gibberish, all based on he’s a winner and great at making deals. Trump is already working out deals with those despised GOP establishment folks his supporters want destroyed. Trump admitted he talked to Mitch McConnell last month – so yes, the backroom cronyism moves full-speed ahead.
That’s the gist of Trump’s campaign, because I dare anyone to actually make lists of Trump’s statements on various topics to include the incomplete sentences too, compare how they line up for consistency, try to discern core principles, then look at what he said with whom he was speaking (he’s a chameleon and can cozy up to Bill Clinton as easily as Rush Limbaugh on the golf course). Finally, when you’ve done that honest assessment, devoid of how you feel, analyze how many times he repeated his poll numbers and stated he is winning and look at how many times he said that to divert attention from an issue or question he did not answer. It’s a deliberate media manipulation tactic and it’s one perfected by the American political left, not GOP political operatives.
Here are a a few other oddities with the Trump campaign, from someone who has followed presidential campaigns since I was 8 years old in 1968. Trump wrote about not liking to shake hands in one of his books – he has a germ thing and doesn’t want dirty people touching him. Has he ever done the usual shaking hands that’s par for the course in politics? From what I have seen he flies in, does his rallies and flies back out, then does his “connecting” with voters via late night Twitter attacks and the cable news circuit, not up close and personal. His campaign started with Roger Stone as his campaign manager. Stone quit or was fired in August, when the Trump/Megyn Kelly dust-up happened. Oddly enough, Stone is still out there speaking for Trump and no other visible campaign advisers or spokespeople emerged until November, when this former Tea Party activist, Kat Pierson, started hitting the airwaves as the Trump spokesperson. Stone, according to Wikipedia, has a book due out January 26, 2016 – “Jeb! And the Bush Crime Family”. Note that since Stone quit or was fired he seems uneasy and nervous whenever he appears on TV defending Trump – something smells off to me, but hey I’m a woman and we roll with that female intuition thing.
Another thing I noticed is that the Trump camp sure compiled massive opposition research, which Trump and his campaign advisers (whomever they really are) dump these nasty stink bombs at the most strategically brilliant times. For a novice politician, who can’t even spit out coherent political policies, the political astuteness of both content and timing of these attacks seems quite incredible. Any GOP competitor rises in the polls – boom, the Trump campaign dumps a full payload. The Trump campaign even seems to be feeding opposition research to The Last Refuge blog, which has become Trump Polling Update Central, and when Mark Levin came out criticizing Trump for attacking Cruz, yesterday that blog ran this hit piece of opposition research asserting the son of Levin’s fianceé works on the Cruz campaign. For Trump, who isn’t much on the details, his campaign is more effective than the Dem operatives who launched that Bush DWI stink bomb years ago. The irony of The Last Refuge blog is they no longer welcome opposing opinions from actual conservatives. It’s Trump or the road, and they ran this hit piece on Levin, which appears to be opposition research (sleaze to damage Levin’s credibility) provided to them by the Trump campaign. If Trump ends up exposed as a fraud, there will be a lot of very angry populist mobs, with so many conservatives investing so much hope and belief in Trump, so hope I am wrong about Trump being a fraud, as this could get very ugly, very quickly.
National Review orchestrated a “Stop Trump” campaign, ostensibly to save conservatism. My friend, Minta, sent me an email last night stating:
“This new issue of National Review is a big problem, but not for the reasons someone might think. The general view around here is that instead of the authors writing a manifesto about what Conservatism is, and what it means, they look as though they are attacking one person. They could have achieved the better result by supporting someone like Cruz. I love the authors of the Nat’l Review this time, but they are risking looking like elitist snobs. Where were these manifestos when Lois Lerner wasn’t indicted, when the IRS was going after the Tea Parties, when the military was being dismantled, when the VA was shown to be anti-military?”
Minta got it exactly right, the Trump supporters get angry when other conservatives disagree and conservative stalwarts like George Will end up screamed at by populist pundits like Bill O’Reilly, another speaker for the little people, who also is a friend of Trump’s, so when Trump doesn’t articulate his positions clearly, O’Reilly helpfully fills in the blanks on what Trump meant and does character references for Trump too. In this environment, Trump’s supporters are emotionally invested in Trump, in the same way Obama supporters became cultish in their belief that one man could singlehandedly transform America. They want a Messiah or a strongman, not a President, with clear CONSTITUTIONAL checks on his/her power. I want less government control and less power in Washington’s hands, especially after President Obama’s imperial presidency. Herein is why I don’t think Cruz will ever gain much traction – his fellow GOP establishment peers in Washington want him annihilated and Cruz talks like an elitist Harvard lawyer. Cruz has nowhere to go to attract voters, if he moves to the middle he loses the conservative base voters who stuck with him, the GOP establishment is throwing in with Trump and moderates will never gravitate to Cruz, with his hardline conservative record and on top of that he comes across as an elitist Harvard lawyer who talks down to the little people. He is not someone your average Joe would want to have a beer with. Rubio, Christie, Kasich all have more personal appeal frankly. They come across as nice people. Jeb is doomed by his last name, Carson hasn’t been able to convey he’s a viable Presidential choice and Fiorina, smart, does her homework, but she always comes across too scripted and worse than that she usually seems angry and uppity. She does not convey much personal warmth.
Trump has severely damaged the entire GOP field with his scorched earth campaign style, so it’s hard for me to envision any of them being able to repair that damage by November, but this is the season where anything is possible. And on the bright side, for this conservative, at least the Democrats have an even worse mess on their hands. Whatever happens, the larger question of, “Are we a democracy, where angry mobs silence dissent and popularity polls rule over principles or are we a republic grounded in The Constitution?” may become the defining issue of the 2016 campaign. In the meantime I am looking for some good books or sources to explain Our Republic to my 10 year-old granddaughter, so if you have any recommendations, please let me know.
The plot thickens, runaway narrative or fatal system error?
Yesterday afternoon The Daily Caller ran an article on the US sailors captured/released by Iran, adding more pieces that do nothing to fill in this puzzle. Before delving into this chapter of the Obama Chronicles, let me toss out another odd bit of news released just this morning, from FOX news, stating Iran is releasing the US prisoners, it has been holding, in a swap. A “swap” where the full terms of what the US swapped seems unclear, but I’ll quote my husband, who responded to my question, asking if he heard anything about who the US is “swapping”, “No, they haven’t released that information yet, but whoever it is, we won’t like it once we find out!” Assuredly true!
Watching these Obama “narratives” unfold follows a familiar pattern – ever-evolving “facts”, shifting story lines, major plot twist, turns, even complete rewrites, where the administration feverishly tries to use mass media propaganda techniques to create mass delusion. By dragging their feet, throwing out numerous false leads, obfuscations to goad a reaction from the Republicans, who always take the bait, the administration successfully casts the Republican reaction as the problem and just more partisan politics or right-wing witch hunts. The original matter in question fades into the background, while the partisan rancor takes center stage as the “real problem”.
The Daily Caller article mentioned above states:
“Congress wants to know if the State Department held any influence on the U.S. Navy sailor who apologized to Iran after he and his nine other sailors were arrested and detained by the regime. The video, which aired on Iranian television, showed all ten sailors kneeling on the decks of their ships with their hands behind their heads.”
John Kerry pompously hurled snide attacks toward the Bush administration’s war-mongering, while bragging about his brilliant diplomacy in this matter. He rambled on about how a few years back a situation like this would have led to a war. Josh Earnest, the puppet-on-a-string, bobbed about, but recited his ludicrous talking points in a serious tone, asserting that the Iranian photos and video of our sailors kneeling before Iranian forces is nothing to be embarrassed about. Really??? Why and how these US sailors were captured remains unclear. The Kerry State Department diplomacy effort also remains unclear. The young US commander’s apology seems quite clear – he apologized to Iran. The Pentagon has remained mum about details, in fact, the Pentagon seems to have abdicated its command of US Forces to John Kerry and the State Department.
An anonymous leak from the Pentagon suggested that the US sailor’s apology came after contact with the US State Department, Was the sailor told to apologize by the Kerry State Department? Why isn’t the Defense Department speaking to an incident involving US sailors?
All the incident specific questions will lead to the usual partisan charges and counter-charges, along with the added fuel being tossed on by 2016 Presidential contenders and their campaign teams. None of this gets to the larger system failure of the US Armed Forces corrupted chain of command, which really is a grave national security risk. In the last three US administrations I believe this occurred, to varying degrees. The politicization and enforced regimen of political correctness within the US military also escalated, where we now have retired generals forming partisan cheerleading squads for the two major political parties in the US. Each political party even has its own set of retired top brass to parade out to sell their political agenda and fight it out in a propaganda war on TV news and in print media.
Just a few short examples to make the general point, during the Clinton administration, bad military decisions were followed by gauging public opinion polls before making a decision and those decisions were subject to change by a dip in the opinion polls – polls guided the Clinton foreign policy, not substance nor long-term US national strategic interests. The Bush administration stuck to a foreign policy in the Mid-East based on two tracks, the “war on terror, no safe havens for terrorists” and a belief that democratization was the magic pill to cure the Islamic malignancy known by many names, radical Jihad, radical Islam, Islamism, Islamic imperialism, Wahabbism, but never acknowledging the “holy war” and religious components to this malignancy. PC often overruled acknowledging and speaking to hard facts in the Bush White House and while they did use military force, they were reluctant to acknowledge serious strategic failings or facts on the ground that differed with their policy. The Obama administration tries to run two separate US foreign policies, of the shabby caliber of tin-pot dictators, where they’ll use one set of talking points for foreign leaders and a completely different set for domestic partisan political consumption. You could liken it to a Wizard of Oz operational system.
Within the Obama administration, all semblance of a clear-cut organizational control structure collapsed and herein lies the serious big picture system failure. In each Obama administration scandal a pattern of obfuscation emerges, which ends up being cast as a partisan witch hunt of Republicans out to get them. Democrat partisans in Congress and the media serve as willing purveyors of the Obama “narratives”. The Republican partisans rant and rave and conduct endless investigations, that lead nowhere. A recent example demonstrating this point is the collusion of Democrats in Congress, who aided in obstructing the 13 hours of Hillary Benghazi testimony. The Democrats on that committee stuck to an organized talking points campaign to obstruct the Republicans. There was obvious collusion between the Clinton camp and Congressional Democrats to orchestrate this. The Republicans threw everything, except the kitchen sink at Hillary Clinton in their questioning, but never honed in on specific wrongdoing.
The release of the Benghazi movie, 13 Hours, revived public interest in the so-called “stand down order”. The Obama administration tried to pin the attack on Benghazi on an obscure filmmaker, but it’s obvious the attack was a pre-planned terrorist attack. Hillary Clinton sent the terrorist explanation to her daughter in an email and to an Egyptian official, while publicly stating the filmmaker caused a spontaneous riot in Benghazi. Then you add in the “stand down order” question and here is my question: “Why on earth would the Secretary of State be considered as a source for a stand down order given to the US military?”
This, who is in charge in the Obama administration and who makes the decisions and calls the shots, remains nebulous. President Obama has not come out and made any statements on the US sailors being taken hostage by Iran. It appears John Kerry speaks for both the State Department and the Defense Department, with an assist from the Vice President, Joe Biden. Often, Valerie Jarrett’s name gets tossed around as the force within the White House or narratives by Ben Rhodes, a political flunkie with no military or foreign policy experience. So, where are the Joint Chiefs of Staff in military matters in this administration and what in the heck is the chain of command if a State Department official instructed an US commander on what to do when held hostage by an American adversary, whose government rants, “Death to America!”? This lack of a clear-cut chain of command puts US troops in grave danger!
With the laxity of operational behavior, our entire executive branch is a very compromised system from how information flows up and how it flows down, from how decisions and orders are made and carried out and from how US servicemembers in harm’s way are forced to operate under vague, conflicting, confused rules of engagement. This administration put a retired military officer flunkie as the State Department spokesman and removed trained military Public Affairs officers at the Pentagon, who were replaced by a civilian political flunkie. Domestic partisan battles subsume national security. This lax operational behavior permeates the Obama administration: John Brennan and Obama reviewing drone target lists in the White House, ISIS bombing targets subject to White House approval serve as two striking examples, but the day-to-day casual and reckless handling of information, decision-making process and relentless back and forth to thwart domestic partisan opponents creates a huge opportunity for foreign intelligence agencies to exploit this operational weakness.
The Republicans want to focus on Hillary Clinton, but with Benghazi and the stand-down order issue – if she gave it, did the President or someone in the White House tell her to, but why would she be giving an order to US commanders? That is what confuses me in this administration – who the hell is in charge??? And then we can talk about Madame Secretary and her private email server, where she ran the State Department on an unsecured server, but the true scope of the unsecured email problem in this administration looms large and as yet unexposed. We have the Lois Lerner and her numerous undisclosed personal email accounts, we have the US embassy in Japan email chaos, run by Caroline Kennedy, but assuredly among this administration, where no one seems to be attuned to sound information and operational security protocols, this information compromise likely goes much deeper and much higher. This lax operational system, compounded by grave polluting of national strategy by domestic partisan political battles, took decades to reach this crisis point. Our national security structure appears to be dangerously compromised. How convoluted the inner-workings of the White House really are, remains unknown, but the glimpses of serous internal hemorrhaging keep leaking out.
Restoring integrity in the system is the only way to prevent a total bleed-out. How we restore that integrity will be a looming question that goes far beyond the 2016 election, it goes to do we the American people want to restore our constitutional Republic?
Filed under American Character, Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics
What if there was an opinion cascade about pet rocks?
“Availability cascade” is an academic term that basically has to do with manufacturing public opinion approval for a policy of some sort. Any kind of policy at all. In fact, think about how you might make an implausible idea seem plausible in public discourse, an idea no one ever even considered before. Next, think about …
Source: What if there was an opinion cascade about pet rocks?
Filed under Culture Wars, General Interest, The Media
Blue cheese still stinks
As a child my mother taught us to eat whatever was served when we were guests and to never utter a word of complaint. I vividly recall eating dinner at a friend’s home, where there were 8 children in that family. Her father dished out the food from the head of the table and they passed the plates around to each child. Everyone got the same thing. On this particular night, her mother had made spaghetti and there was a large bowl of tossed salad, from which her father dished out salad and poured on blue cheese salad dressing, then he dished out spaghetti right next to the salad. I had never eaten blue cheese salad dressing and the first bite startled me and made me want to spit it out, but of course I couldn’t do that, so I swallowed it. Her mother asked me if everything was okay and I said, “Yes, everything is very good.” Then I focused my attention on eating every bite of that salad and the spaghetti, without giving any indication that all I wanted to do was barf.
That’s the kind of focus it takes to swallow the blue cheese dressing on the tossed salad of PC lies about Islamic terrorist attacks in America. The reporting of the attack on a Philadelphia police officer by a 30 year-old black man had the mayor of Philadelphia declaring there was no Islam to see with this attack, yet the Philadelphia police commissioner stated that the shooter said he had declared allegiance to ISIS and shot the police officer to defend Islam. Clearly the shooter expressed a religious belief in his actions.
As the afternoon wore on, some politicians and some in the PC media insisted the shooter was nuts, after all the shooter’s mother had told them that her son had been hearing voices and had mental health issues. The mother also reported that her son had become a very devout Muslim.
Are being mentally-ill and being a radical Islamic terrorist mutually exclusive conditions?
The shooter reportedly used a stolen gun. From whom did he get that gun?
The shooter was reportedly a known felon who turned to Islam in prison. Might we inquire if the shooter belonged to a black Muslim prison gang or who his spiritual advisers were in prison? Or is that too inflammatory to ask? Did he attend a mosque?
Late in the evening several TV news reports said the FBI is checking into whether the shooter had traveled to Saudi Arabia. If that turns out to be true, might we inquire where he came up with the money for such a trip?
President Obama always quick to jump into racial dramas where he can cast the police as acting stupidly remained silent on the white Philadelphia police officer shot in cold blood by a young black, self-proclaimed Muslim man, who stated he had pledged allegiance to ISIS. Did I miss the President taking to the air to condemn this terrorist attack on American soil?
Here’s a rundown on the story:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/man-accused-shooting-philly-cop-confessed-committing-act/story?id=36169588
Look, here’s a clue – the black community has it’s own radical Islam problem. Much of it percolates from within the US prison system, where foreign money and Islamic prison gangs convert many young black men to Islam. Outside of the prisons many black gangs and groups recruit, agitate and incite crimes and promote radical Islamic ideology. Clue, they were there in Ferguson and Baltimore, but some hide under benign names like National President of Black Lawyers for Justice . And some of that blue cheese comes straight from the White House. The Islamic/black gang/ black grievance industry nexus needs to be thoroughly investigated. I’ve written about this before: here, here, here.
Blue cheese still stinks, but I think I could choke that down better than these pathetic politicians trying to cover-up the truth.
Added thought: After a look into the Islamic/black gang/ black grievance industry nexus, perhaps it’s time to look into decades of Arab money directed toward American black colleges and black college students too. Perhaps, President Obama can offer some insights into this topic…
Filed under Culture Wars, General Interest, Islam, Politics, Terrorism
No crows in sight
With the 2016 presidential race well under way, foreign policy “strategies” get tossed about, but so far no candidate has offered a clear policy or worse demonstrated a clear understanding of the threats facing America. While the GOP candidates jostle to outdo each other on sounding tough, Hillary offers more of the Obama failed policies and Sanders doesn’t even have a foreign policy.
My frustration with the foreign policy “experts” centers squarely on the cherry-picking of events, intelligence and “expertise” to bolster domestic partisan political views rather than dealing with what General Mike Flynn referred to as it’s time to “get real”. In order to “get real” it’s way past time to look at American foreign policy actions and then assess how those actions actually fared in achieving the strategic objectives. Another big problem rests with the experts themselves, whose careers and reputations become intricately linked to the policies, leading to myopic clinging to bad policies or policies that worked in the short term, but also instigated large scale, long-term blowback.
For instance, President Reagan armed the mujahadin in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union and thwart Soviet expansion. Certainly, the Soviets were thwarted, but those radical mujahadin evolved into Al Qaeda. Too many Republicans try to ignore or gloss over that nexus of arming radical Salafist nuts, to later find those weapons and training used against the US. The Clinton administration spent the 1990s trying to minimize and trivialize the threat Al Qaeda posed, preferring to turn a blind eye to increasing radicalization and targeting of Western and US interests around the world.
In Bosnia the Clinton administration embarked on choosing a side in a bloody civil war and chose to arm Bosnian Muslim radicals, while the Western press propagandized the combatants, turning some into saints and some into evil incarnate. No clear US national security interest ever surfaced for US intervention, just a lot of feel good humanitarian claptrap. Atrocities were committed by not only the Serbs, but by the Bosnian Muslims too. In the intervening years, arming and aiding the Bosnian Muslims has allowed radical Islamists and Iran to use Bosnia as a European training ground and smuggling corridor into Europe. John Smith, wrote a piece on this yesterday, “Clinton’s Bosnia Adventure Goes South”. John Schindler, at the XX Committee blog, had a piece on this a few weeks ago. Schindler has researched the Bosnia misadventure extensively, penned a book on the subject, but he also offers many free links to information at his blog: “Operation CUT: Bosnia versus the Islamic State”.
After 9/11, the US embarked on a “war on terror”, which took several strategic paths, but none of them achieved a decisive defeat of “terror” or defeat of the Islamist terrorists waging that war. Throughout the GWB years, adminsitration officials endlessly announced the death of Al Qaeda #2 or #3 or “high-ranking”, all to no avail, because this decapitation strategy doesn’t work to degrade or defeat Islamist terrorist organizations. John McCreary’s Nightwatch printed a very insightful comment on this approach 11/7/13.
“It also highlights a degenerative leadership pattern resulting from the US program of leadership decapitation. First, there is always someone waiting for the chance to be leader. Second, the new leaders are less experienced and wise than the men they replace. Third, the new generation of leaders is more extreme and theologically rigid than its predecessors. Finally, the new leaders tend to be unknown to intelligence relative to their predecessors. Decapitation is not a permanent solution to an insurgency or an uprising.”
The Obama administration continues this decapitation strategy, without any positive strategic outcome.
President Obama decided to try a novel and extremely foolhardy approach to extract the US from the stuck military occupations of the Bush administration. Yes, partisan politics aside, the ouster of Saddam Hussein was a strategic mistake. It destabilized the region even more and emboldened Iran. Enter President Obama and he compounds the errors with catastrophic blunders – announcing a withdrawal date before he even got troops on the ground in Afghanistan for his ballyhooed surge, that never materialized. The Taliban hunkered down to wait us out and they sit poised now to seize control of Afghanistan after we leave. In Iraq, Obama decided to pull out too and created a power vacuum, which the Islamic State capitalized on setting up a pseudo-state.
From the minute the glorious Arab Spring hit the news, an endless cycle of feel-good, fairy tale “democratic” beliefs replaced sound, hard-nosed strategic analysis. In Egypt, the US supported the ouster of a staunch US ally, all to champion the Muslim Brotherhood, which US officials, from the President to his intelligence gurus James Clapper and John Brennan, to his clueless Secretary of State, with her MB affiliated top aide by her side, proclaimed as a mostly “secular” organization. Of course, that was a lie, mayhem in Egypt ensued and the Egyptian military restored some semblance of order, albeit within an autocratic military regime state structure. In the process of tossing aside Mubarak, US credibility plummeted, because now all leaders in that region know the US can not be trusted. In that strategic blunder, President Obama cavalierly created an existential threat to Israel, the US’s closest ally in the region. Israel had to rethink it’s entire national security strategy when the Sinai security framework disappeared.
Moving on, the Obama administration and many GOP leaders, like John McCain and Lindsey Graham jumped onto the Arab Spring bandwagon too. Libya became another strategic disaster – the US displaced a strongman dictator, who had been cooperating with US anti-terrorism efforts, all to support some imaginary moderate rebel “freedom-fighters”. That these rebels turned out to be Al-Qaeda-affiliated and Islamist radicals should surprise no one, because here again the intelligence contained these facts, but politicians chose to believe the myths. In the case of Libya, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton received updates of unvetted information from her long-time friend, Sidney Blumenthal, who was promoting his own business interests and her own privately-funded intelligence operative, Tyler Drumheller.
Who was the US arming in Libya? And where did the US send those weapons it was gathering up at Benghazi? Well, the likely answers are radical Islamists (you know, the types who are ideological bedfellows of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State). The action then moved to Syria, where the Obama administration and many Republicans decided it was in US national interest to oust a dictator and create another power vacuum. The balanced weighing of vetted intelligence again fell to the “experts” outside of the US intelligence apparatus. In Syria, the Obama administration, many top Republicans, neocon pundits and the media all relied on one young woman as the fount of knowledge on the Syrian rebels – one Elizabeth O’Bagy. How this one young woman became the go-to definitive source that both Secretary of State, John Kerry and GOP leader, John McCain relied on defies reason. How did this one young woman become THE source the US government was relying on???
In Syria, more of the same, the Obama administration had the CIA arming “moderate” Syrian rebels, although all of these rebels are Islamists and none of them indicates a willingness to respect ethnic and religious minorities, but these are the “moderates” the Obama administration chose to back.
GOP candidates like Rubio, still tout the neocon talking points and the one that irks me the most is the charge that if only Obama had intervened sooner in Syria civil war, then things would be different. Why in the hell and by what reasoning is it in US national interests to jump into the middle of a civil war in a country that is not of vital national security interest to the US? This same humanitarian argument is the same one President Clinton used in Bosnia.
And here’s where we are at – none of the candidates on either side wants to actually sit down and objectively assess the good, the bad and the ugly when it comes to US foreign policy. Every strategy comes with unforeseen, unpredictable blowback and consequences. Ignoring these unpleasant realities, to prop up partisan, not quite strategic talking points, leaves us falling further and further afield of comprehending the reality on the ground and of being able to choose a better path forward. We are lost in the land of false narratives, faux experts and fallacious reasoning. Surveying the 2016 field, as far as the eye can see, it’s very unlikely any of the 2016 candidates will be able to cut through the crap and as JK advised, “learn to be a crow and seek the golden nuggets” from the pile. The 2016 field appears to be all magpies and mockingbirds – no crows in sight.
Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism, Uncategorized
Rebuilding the American Team
Dear Readers,
Upon entering the blogging world in 2012, I almost talked myself out of continuing after the first few posts. Whether for good or ill, here it is almost 2016 and I’m the one shocked that I’m still enjoying writing this blog. Now, with that said in the new year, it’s time for some changes.
Instead of endless political and foreign policy commentary (402 posts in 2015), I’m going to attempt to move my blog in another direction. Anyone can be an armchair critic about all that is wrong in American politics and culture, but let’s face the truth, it’s not the politicians’ fault for the state of our culture, our communities or the problems in our own lives. Despite the hype about the 2016 election, neither political party can fix America. Only committed citizens can do that.
Assuredly, failed social programs do deserve criticism, but let’s enter the new year facing the truth. Rebuilding the American team starts at the individual level, in fact, it starts with each of us. So, with this wide open internet why can’t we start working to share ideas, resources, and most of all inspirations geared toward that mission: rebuilding the American team.
Sure, there will still be politics and some of my trademark snarky commentary, but I’m inviting all of you to email me ideas, links, posts, with important lessons in American history, stories of heroes, stories of grassroots programs that work, educational information, life stories, whatever you feel like sharing and I will happily post it! You can just post it as a comment too and I’ll convert it to a blog post. Use your real name or a pseudonym, whatever you feel comfortable with, but I would like to turn my blog into more of a chat around my kitchen table type atmosphere rather than me droning on and on and on.
My email address is libertybellediaries@yahoo.com
Wishing y’all a very Happy New Year!
Sincerely,
Libertybelle
Filed under American Character, Blog Notes, Culture Wars, General Interest
This and that
The following is a short list of interesting links to read:
Britain designates the Muslim Brotherhood as an ideological organizing force for terrorists – http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/28/muslim-brotherhood-report-by-britain-contradicts-u/
John Schindler details the Bosnian terrorism connection – http://20committee.com/2015/12/22/operation-cut-bosnia-versus-the-islamic-state/
Retired General Mike Flynn discusses President Obama’s ideological fallacies – hint, it’s not about guns or Islamophobia – http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/26/obamas-former-intelligence-director-presidents-strategy-not-working/
JK posted this opinion piece from the NY Times in a comment, but it’s a must read: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/21/opinion/saudi-arabia-an-isis-that-has-made-it.html?_r=1
Now a short personal story on how computer inept yours truly really is. For Christmas, I gave my four granddaughters Kindle Fire tablets. As a loyal amazon customer, how could I pass up Kindle Fires for $49.99? So, because I am an avid book collector (hoarder), there are hundreds of books on my kindle already, but in all fairness, many are free books from their classics listing or old history, that very few people want to read.
So, due to already having given my older two granddaughters plain kindle e-readers last year and linking those to my account, I had put a lot of books in my library for kids – to include many free classics that I deemed appropriate for their ages. After a discussion with my daughter, we decided to link these Kindle Fires to my account and my library, but amazon has this “Family Library” you can set up, which my daughter did for me, but then she told me I would have to sort out which books I wanted to put in their libraries and that’s when the problems started.
I kept trying to remove my books from their libraries to no avail and then I decided that perhaps instead of “remove”, I should be hitting the “delete” books from the Family Library. Of course, in my usual bumbling fashion, I deleted 616 of my books, believing that by removing them from the “Family Library” it was like removing books from my Kindle device – which archives them.
Nope, it deleted them permanently, so I called amazon’s customer service. The poor women talked me through deleting this “Family Library” but then we came to my books. I asked her how to get my books back and at first she said I’d have to repurchase them and I said I’ve spent a lot of money on books for years. Then she had to do some checking and she told me I had deleted 616 books and she asked me which ones I wanted back. I responded, “All of them.”
This lady stayed polite and courteous, even though, as my son told me, “You know she hates you and everyone there is talking about how stupid you are, right?” Justifiably so, but she did restore all of my books to my account and it took her quite a while, because she said there was no way to do them all at once and she’d have to do them one at a time. She asked me if it was okay if she called me back when she was done. And an hour later she called me back and told me all my books were restored and was very gracious and she sent a signed email message:
We’d appreciate your feedback. Please use the links below to tell us about your experience today.
I’ve restored your access to “616 books,” which you previously purchased from the Kindle Store. It is now available to download from your Archived Items or Cloud tab on your device. You can also download your content through the Manage Your Content and Devices page. I am very grateful for that kind and warm approach you gave during the call. I’m glad I was able to help you out today.
I hope I was able to assist you today. Please use the links below to provide us your valuable feedback
I love Amazon.com and that lady deserves a raise!
Filed under Culture Wars, General Interest, Politics, Terrorism, Uncategorized
Enter Jim Webb?
Former Virginia Senator, Jim Webb took to Twitter and facebook to attack Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy record on Saturday, according to a Bloomberg report, “Webb Attacks Clinton With Eye on Independent Run.”
Rumors about a third party run have been swirling since Webb dropped out of the Democratic race, so this appears to be a step to test the waters. This bizarre 2016 continues to elude easy predictions, so in light of the likely Dem and GOP candidates, Webb can only be a much better choice for many Americans. The press and punditry labeled him grumpy after the first Democratic debate, but I guess I was watching a different debate. Webb’s answers on foreign policy showed a wide breadth of knowledge on the issues, a no-nonsense and non-partisan analysis and he far outshone the other candidates. Plus he has the distinction of having served and bled for this country as a war hero in Vietnam.
Perhaps here is the candidate who can help rebuild our national character and out of the other contenders, in both parties, he’s the one I could support without a great deal of heartburn……..so far. Unlike some people who go “all in” for a particular candidate, I don’t trust politicians in general, so my vote has to be earned over the entire course of the campaign.
I’ll give you the example of Ted Cruz, who articulates many of the conservative views that appeal to me. During that last debate he launched into a heated immigration scuffle with Marco Rubio. The dreaded “A” word, which sends conservatives into apoplectic seizures, was bandied about. Well, Cruz lied about a previous position he took, which later video proved. Instead of saying he changed position, his minions insist he never did support amnesty and that his previous position wasn’t really his position, but a position he took to put a poison pill in a bill. All that speaks to conniving and underhanded political machinations and therein, I was back to my original hesitation over him – every move he makes is too contrived and calculated, which here again being a careful planner is a good thing, but being willing to twist facts to promote yourself (not a cause, but your own political aspirations) goes too far in my book. Hence, he lied and while it’s not the huge mountain of lies Hillary Clinton spews, while trying to claw her way to back into the White House, it’s still an outright lie. This speaks to character. I still admire many things about Ted Cruz, but my willingness to back him has softened a great deal.
I’m curious how y’all decide on who to support???
Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Politics
libertybelle diaries 