Category Archives: Political Commentary

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, War Commentary

Good News And Bad News

12 Comments

From Carolyn Glick, who was never fooled by the Obama administration:

If the Palestinians follow through with their threat to renew their terror war against Israel it will be quite bad. This is so not because Israel will be unable to defend itself. Israel has the means to defend itself. It will be quite bad because, in light of the hostile treatment Israel is suffering at the hands of the Obama administration, and given the central role the U.S. under Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton is playing in arming and training the Palestinian army that will likely be attacking Israeli targets in Judea and Samaria, the U.S. may well side with the Arabs against Israel. The administration is already placing limitations on arms sales to Israel. In this event, Israel will have to move quickly to find other suppliers.

It is unlikely today that Arab states will go to war with Israel, although that could change quickly if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. In that event, the Iranians will be in a position to blackmail Arab states like Egypt and Jordan into abrogating their peace treaties with Israel and opening hostilities against it. Iran would accomplish this task by threatening to overthrow the Mubarak regime and the Hashemite Kingdom. It is this specter — along with the specter of nuclear attack and chronic terror violence conducted under Iran’s nuclear umbrella — that makes it essential for Israel to move quickly to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

LOPEZ: How nervous is Israel about Ahmadinejad’s “reelection”?

GLICK: In a round about sort of way, Ahmadinejad’s “reelection” empowers Israel to take the necessary action. By stealing the election, Ahmadinejad now stands in open opposition to the Iranian people. This decreases the likelihood that the public will rally around the regime in the event of an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear installations.

Ahmadinejad’s open hatred of the U.S. and his humiliation of the Obama administration will similarly make it more difficult politically for the administration to prevent Israel from striking Iran. If before the Iranian elections it was easy to see the administration signing on to U.N. Security Council sanctions against Israel in the event of an Israeli strike against Iran, or even shooting down Israeli aircraft en route to Iran, in their aftermath, such prospects seem more unlikely.

Emphasis mine. I wish that it were unthinkable, but it’s not.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

All In The Family

2 Comments

“Seeking Answers on IG Firing, Sen. Grassley Asks About Possible Role of First Lady’s Office.”

Why should we be surprised? She’s from Chicago, too.

And of course, if a Republican president had fired an IG who was getting too close to a campaign contributor, it would be a huge scandal. But it wasn’t, so it’s not.

If true, this would be Michelle’s Travelgate. Except Hillary didn’t actually suffer that much from Travelgate. Because…you know…she wasn’t a Republican. Of course, it also helped that there were a lot of other Hillary scandals to distract from that one.

Political Commentary, War Commentary

On The Wrong Side Of History

21 Comments

Victor Davis Hanson:

Iraq is proving to be amazingly resilient, not only functioning as a democracy, but by withstanding the best efforts of Iran to kill it off, proving destabilizing to Iran itself.

By removing Saddam, and trying to isolate Ahmadinejad and appeal to the Iranian people, Bush at least tried to prep the landscape for democratic change.

In contrast, Obama’s past siren calls to quit Iraq, the “optional” war, his snubbing of Maliki, his ahistorical efforts to charm the Islamic Street, and apologies to theocratic Iran while lavishing attention on Ahmadinejad put him on the wrong side of history.

If Obama were wise, he would get out pronto a statement condemning the anti-democratic violence of the Iranian government, and suggesting it follow the Iraq example of free and internationally inspected elections.

At some point, one should see that moral equivalence and multicultural non-judgementalism, however catchy for the moment, are as stupid as they are amoral, and will put the U.S in a foolish, “make it up as we go along” position.

“One” should see that, but they never do. And Obama clearly isn’t wise, and his non-stop criticism of establishing a democracy in Iraq, which got him the nomination last year, puts him in an awkward moral position to now point to it as a beacon of true hope and change in the Middle East. But that’s what the nation voted for.

[Update a few minutes later]

Obama, then and now:

In 2008 he sounded serious and committed to stopping the Iranian nuclear threat and was candid about the nature of the regime. In Cairo, all that was gone. Nary a direct word of criticism of the Iranian regime (Holocaust denial was never tied to the Iranians and was covered in a separate section of his address). In 2008 he was telling Iran it would have no nuclear capability; in 2009 he was declaring no country could tell Iran it couldn’t have a nuclear capability. A complete reversal in tone and substance.

It’s almost like he’ll say anything to get into power, after which his true agenda becomes clear.

And in this case, of course, the Jews who voted for him were the rubes (as are the astounding number of Jews who continue to vote for Democrats in general).

[Update a couple minutse later]

“Hope and change” for me, but not for thee. At least if thee is Iranian. Yes, this administration will probably cheerfully sell out the Iranian people for a “deal” with the mullahs. Which will be useless for both us and the Iranian people, but it will make the diplomats happy.

[Update a few minutes later]

Who did you vote for, Marty? I’d like to know, too.

Education, Political Commentary

An Utter Waste Of Money

13 Comments

That’s what the first two years of college are for most people:

Good students from good high schools, who have not taken advanced placement, know how to play the repetition game. They cut class and recycle their high school term papers.

Early in my teaching career, I had a student from one of the state’s best high schools. She was bright, but hardly exceptional. I found she was taking more than a full class load and holding down a full-time job. I was amazed. She told me that her classes at a suburban high school were more demanding than their repetition at the university. She chose classes where attendance wasn’t mandatory. Was she recycling her high school term papers? Of course; so was everyone else from her class.

A student in the sciences or engineering could not remotely do this, but the liberal arts have become intellectual wastelands, with an emphasis on persuading a captive audience as to the eternal verities of professors’ beliefs about racism, sexism, and homophobia.

A colleague in engineering used to remind me that in his college “PC” stood for personal computer, not political correctness. His dean was reprimanded for not sending his graduate students to diversity training during orientation week. The dean stated that engineering was a serious subject and his students had important assignments during that week. Told that he would have to answer to an administrative hearing, he said that he would be pleased to show up along with several of his alumni, successful businessmen and big contributors to the university. He then said to the diversity apparatchik, “This is a career decision you are about to make.” The hearing never took place. An engineering dean could get away with this. A liberal arts dean could not.

Higher education is the next overvalued and overpriced bubble to pop, I think.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary, Space

More History Lessons For Senator Shelby

4 Comments

Jeff Krukin’s piece has been republished over at the Commercial Space Gateway, with a lot of comments (including one commenter who doesn’t know where the Delta IV is manufactured, or where the Atlas V is planned to be).

[Update a few minutes later]

Actually, in rereading that comment (I notice now it was from the SSF’s Bob Werb, who presumably does know where the EELVs are built), it was probably sarcasm.

Political Commentary, War Commentary

“Iran On Fire”

17 Comments

Is the country on the verge, or already in, a civil war? Michael Totten is on the case. Hit his tip jar if you can.

[Update a couple hours later]

More over at Gateway Pundit.

[Late afternoon update]

More from Michael Totten: Insurrection, Day Two.

More news at PJM. This is interesting:

There are widespread reports of police and security forces, around Tehran and other big cities where there have been demonstrations, who are not Iranian and either speak Persian with a very pronounced Arab accent or speak no Persian at all.

From Iraq? Or elsewhere?

[Update early evening]

Iran doesn’t have elections — it has circuses:

Stalin would be proud. But even his Soviet Union eventually succumbed to the dissidents, and while the regime has most all of the guns, the chains, the clubs, the tear gas cannisters, and the torture chambers, there are tens of millions of Iranians who hate the regime. The question is whether they are prepared to face down the Basij, the police, and the Revolutionary Guards. It is usually a matter of numbers in these cases: if a million people gather in front of the Supreme Leader’s palace and demand freedom, while half that number make the same demand in front of the government buildings in Isfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz and Mashad, they might win.

Until quite recently, the Iranians did not believe they could do such a thing on their own. They believed they needed outside support, above all American support, in order to succeed. They thought that Bushitlercheney would provide that support, and they were bitterly disappointed. But nobody believes that Obama will help them, and they must know that they are on their own.

Any hope they might have had in the Obama White House was quickly dismissed in the administration’s two statements on the matter. The first came from the president himself, anticipating a Mousavi victory (it is too soon to speculate on the source of this happy thought), and of course, in his narcissistic way, taking personal credit for it:

“We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran and obviously, after the speech that I made in Cairo, we tried to send a clear message that we think there’s a possibility of change and, ultimately, the election is for the Iranians to decide but just as what has been true in Lebanon, what can be true in Iran as well, is that you’re seeing people looking at new possiblities, and whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact that there’s been a robust debate hopefully will help advance our ability to engage them in new ways.”

I’ve reread the Cairo Sermon, and I can’t find a single word calling for freedom for the Iranian people. Au contraire, Obama’s words about Iran were penitent, apologizing for the American role, back in 1953, in removing what the president called an elected government (Mossadeq, that is. Except that he was appointed by the shah, not elected at all). But then, history is not his strong suit.

No, it never has been.

On the other hand, as Michael points out, the Bush administration never covered itself in glory with Iran policy, either. There was a potentially huge pro-American youth movement there that they never engaged. I though that one of the (many) purposes of removing Saddam Hussein was to intimidate the Iranian regime and encourage its opponents, but that was never obvious from administration policy post 2003. Colin Powell never really bought into that grand strategy, and perhaps Condi didn’t either. Seriously, this time, I say that I blame George Bush.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary

We Have Ways…

22 Comments

…of making you take the bus:

In this new religion, taking the bus, riding a bike, or walking instead of driving are pious good works. And there is no surmounting the religion’s faith in solving transportation problems by addressing every mode of transit but what most people actually use to get from point A to point B.

During Idaho’s last legislative session, the legislature was presented with information that our existing highways and bridges were in disrepair. One State Senate Democrat focused on the “need” for bike lanes even in rural areas, where riding a bicycle is not an option for most because of the distance involved. Yes, I’m sure there are some people that ride their bicycles in Challis (pop: 909) but does it really make sense to spend the money?

It seems that part of the faith is that these options — even if barely used — are good in and of themselves.

Of course, empty bike lanes are a waste of money. Empty buses are a waste of money and fuel. In the private sector, a company whose service was as unpopular as mass transit would carefully evaluate the service and the marketing, and figure out why people don’t ride.

Not so much with the federal government. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood admitted at the National Press Club recently, regarding the administration’s policies: “It is a way to coerce people out of their cars.”

And here’s some more of this fascistic foolishness from the new Transportation Secretary:

The conservative columnist George Will recently denounced you as the “secretary of behavior modification,” in reference to your plan to have Americans give up cars.
When George came over here for lunch, I could tell from the tone of our conversation that he wasn’t particularly keen on what we were trying to promote here.

You first were elected to Congress out of Peoria, Ill., as part of the so-called Republican revolution.
I came to Congress in 1994. I had no idea I was going to be a part of the majority party.

Now you’re in the minority.
I’m in the majority.

But aren’t you a Republican?
I am. But I’m a part of the Obama team. And they’re the majority party.

Does that make for any awkwardness with your fellow Republicans?
Not one bit. I’ve had a lot of Republicans calling me asking me how they can get some of the stimulus money and how they can get their projects funded.

…But if Americans increasingly get around by rail, bus and bicycle, as you’ve planned, who will be buying cars in the future?
I think everybody will have an automobile. I think it’s amazing in America when you drive around and look at new homes that are being built, there are three-car garages. I don’t think you’re going to see families with three cars. I think you’re going to see families with one car, possibly two.

We will change our lifestyles to conform with the state religion of our moral betters, regardless of the economic madness of it, or the impact on our personal freedom.

[Update a couple minutes later]

And then there’s this:

It is a six-mile stretch of guardrail near a manufactured lake in a desolate patch of the Oklahoma Panhandle. There’s little reason for anyone to visit. Weeds are overgrown; the lake bed is virtually dry.

Yet repairing the guardrail is on a list of projects developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to tap into President Obama’s $787-billion economic stimulus program.

The country’s in the very best of hands.