Obama requires Leap of Faith
May 28, 2009 by Steven Ting
Filed under General, Politics
A recent Wall Street Journal article compared the life of Obama by using “South Park” as an analogy.
Consider the 1998 “Gnomes” episode — possibly surpassing Milton Friedman’s “Free to Choose” as the classic defense of capitalism — in which the children of South Park, Colo., get a lesson in how not to run an enterprise from mysterious little men who go about stealing undergarments from the unsuspecting and collecting them in a huge underground storehouse.
What’s the big idea? The gnomes explain:
“Phase One: Collect underpants.
“Phase Two: ?
“Phase Three: Profit.”
Lest you think there’s a step missing here, that’s the whole point. (“What about Phase Two?” asks one of the kids. “Well,” answers a gnome, “Phase Three is profits!”)
The article then goes to describe a bunch of other Obama policies. Let’s look at Guantanamo, the Middle East, North Korea and Nuclear Weapons, Energy, Health Care, and the Government Deficit. You’ll get the idea once we get started.
Guantanamo
- Order that Guantanmo is Closed during first weeks of Presidency
- ???
- Close Gitmo!
Umm. What’s Step 2? In this case, it could be to move the prisioners somewhere else. It could be to get funding for the closure. Have any of these happened? No. Is Obama Dumb? Yes.
The Middle East
- Talk to Iran, Syria, Antagonist States
- ???
- Peace!
So what’s missing here? From the article:
In this case, the administration seems to think that diplomacy, like aspirin, is something you take two of in the morning to take away the pain. But as Boston University’s Angelo Codevilla notes in his book, “Advice to War Presidents,” diplomacy “can neither create nor change basic intentions, interests, or convictions. . . . To say, ‘We’ve got a problem. Let’s try diplomacy, let’s sit down and talk’ abstracts from the important questions: What will you say? And why should anything you say lead anyone to accommodate you?”
North Korea and Nuclear Weapons
- Tell NK they’ll be punished if they continue Nuclear development.
- ???
- No more nukes!
This is a fail by both Bush and Obama. We told NK that they were doing bad things. We told them they would have consequences. We even condemned their actions. But what was done? Nothing. What did the United Nations do? Nothing. I thought everyone loved Obama and would do what he said. With the ballistic missle launch by NK last month, the UN Security Council failed to get the votes for a resolution condeming NK. And even if they did, does it affect NK? No. It’s just a piece of paper. Is Obama dumb because he thinks he can bring change? Yes!
Global Warming and Energy
- Use Renewal and Clean Sources of Energy
- ???
- Carbon Neutrality!
Universal Health Care
- Provide Insurance to the Uninsured
- ???
- Everyone Has Insurance!
Reduce the Deficit
- Spend Trillions of Dollars
- ???
- No More Deficit!
Save the Automobile Industry from Bankruptcy
- Raise the CAFE standards to 35.5 MPG
- ???
- Auto Industry is Strong!
Is there a pattern here with Obama? As you can see, Obama has all of these dreams. He hasn’t woken up to experience reality. It’s great to have an idea and to have an end result. We just need to know how to get there. Anyone can propose ideas. An effective president will show us how to achieve these ideas. So far Obama is lacking on the effective side and on the leadership side. Since November 2008, things have just gotten worse. I thought once he took office, there would be some type of change? The only change I see is from bad to worse.
Just because Obama went to Harvard does not mean that he is smart. In many instances, Obama is Dumb.
Guantanamo: Not Closing Yet
May 22, 2009 by Guest Writer 1
Filed under General, International, Politics
President Obama faces a major setback in his plans and promises of change, as the Senate has disallowed all funding for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay military prison. This marks the first real opposition to Obama’s agenda by Majority Democrats, who are largely responsible for blocking the funds for closing the prison.
Here is some of what has occurred lately in the Senate over this issue:
Democrats had been hammered by Republicans, many of whom don’t want Guantanamo shuttered at all, over the possibility that detainees could be sent to live in the United States — in prisons or otherwise.
… It’s unclear what Democrats would be okay with approving in a closure plan. The party has been a state of disarray over the issue recently.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., nearly had it both ways on Tuesday.
He first said, emphatically, that Democrats “will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States,” and then said Democrats also don’t want detainees to be transferred to U.S. prisons.
The suggestion was that the United States should not taken [sic] any prisoners under any circumstances, raising questions about where the Democratic leadership wants detainees to go should the closure plan be executed.
But Reid’s spokesman walked back his statement, saying the leader went too far and would actually be open to putting them in American prisons, if the administration puts forward a plan to do so.
The discord between Reid’s own words was emblematic of the clash among Democrats on Capitol Hill.
Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va, said on a Sunday talk show that he opposes the release into the United States of 17 Chinese Uighurs who were captured in Afghanistan after Sept. 11, 2001. The prisoners, de-listed as enemy combatants by a federal court that deemed them not a danger to the U.S., are eligible for release.
The administration is considering releasing them in Northern Virginia, something Webb vehemently opposes. Webb’s language left the door open to an even broader opposition to any Gitmo detainees being released in the United States.
Sens. Jon Tester and Max Baucus, both Montana Democrats, have said emphatically that no detainees will be brought to their state. The same goes for Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb.
FBI Director Robert Mueller told the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday that he’s concerned some detainees could support terrorism if sent to the United States, either through financial support to terror networks, radicalization of others or taking part in attacks.
Still, Inouye left the door open to bringing the prisoners to the U.S. eventually, refusing to rule out any opportunity to incarcerate detainees on U.S. soil.
Reid’s No. 2, Dick Durbin of Illinois, told FOX News that while Democrats were very concerned about taking a vote defending moving prisoners to the United States, he is not opposed to it, adding that American prison facilities can hold these prisoners safely.
Durbin took on Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor Wednesday, saying that while it’s true no prisoner has ever escaped from the Guantanamo, “it’s also true that no terrorists have ever escaped from U.S. supermax prisons.”
The outcry in the U.S. over the issue of closing the prison and where to house the prisoners has also caused some problems with foreign relations, and presented no solutions to the Obama administration:
Both Democrats and Republicans have been retreating from an uproar in their districts over the possibility that terror suspects would be housed in local prisons.
That’s a fairly empty sales pitch for administration officials who are trying to persuade European and Muslim allies to take some of the detainees.
And they got no help Wednesday when FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress that bringing Guantanamo detainees to the United States could pose a number of risks, even if they were kept in maximum-security prisons.
Gibbs and Attorney General Eric Holder both quickly responded that Obama would never do anything to endanger Americans.
Obama has named senior diplomat Daniel Fried as special envoy on the issue. So far he’s had little success in garnering commitments abroad and his task only grows more onerous with the votes in Congress to deny money to close the prison.
While France has accepted one prisoner, fulfilling a promise made when Obama attended a NATO summit in April, other European allies have refused or given nonspecific commitments.
It seems that though Obama may be passionate about closing this prison, he has very little support from people in this country or others in how to practically make that happen. The people and leaders are justifiably concerned about the safety of their countries and/or states with the possibility that some of the most dangerous terrorists (and now possibly with more cause to hate the U.S. than ever) would be released or transferred to places where they could pose a greater threat than they ever had before.
Closing Guantanamo Bay
April 24, 2009 by Guest Writer
Filed under General, International
Congress is back from its Easter recess and this week it debates President Obama’s request for $84.3 billion to fund America’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Buried in the 99 page bill submitted on April 9 was a brief section asking that $80 million to go toward closing Guantanamo Bay Prison.
What exactly is going to happen to these 240 or more men if Guantanamo is closed? Obama’s bill includes a request for funds for foreign countries that accept prisoners. Previous efforts to get other countries to take in these detainees have been unsuccessful, however. It’s understandable that security fears have prevented other countries from complying with Obama’s desire to have Guantanamo detainees rehabilitate on their soil. Americans don’t want them here either.
One of those dangerous men at Guantanamo is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He is believed to be a mastermind of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Does anyone believe he can be rehabilitated?
Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, is chief among those asking the important questions like this concerning American’s safety if Guantanamo is closed. Yesterday, in a New York Times article, McConnell is quoted as saying, “The administration says Guantanamo will close, will be closed by next January. What they haven’t told us is what they plan to do with these killers once it closes. Well, Americans want some assurances that closing Guantanamo won’t make them less safe and, frankly, that’s a very important and understandable request.”
One of those dangerous men at Guantanamo is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He is believed to be a mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Once again, Obama has not thought things through.
