About Me

Name: Politically Exposed
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

New York Times a Laughinstock, Again

Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Posted by Hugh Hewitt  | 3:07 PM
Read some NIE excerpts available at In From The Cold."  It is sort of a preview of the political right hook the left already senses is on the way, and another brick in the wall sealing off the New York Times from credibility in any matter connected to the war.  Chumps or fanatics --those are the two choices when it comes to categorizing the Timesmen who fell for this one.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Clinton Meltdown on Fox News Instructive to Our Enemies and Will Help the GOP in November

Clinton Meltdown of Fox News Instructive to Our Enemies
and Will Help the GOP in November

Monday September 25, 2006
Bill Sinclair


Watching former President Bill Clinton lose his cool with Chris Wallace provides lessons beyond the obvious, that being Clinton's defensive nature about his record, his inability to keep from making accusations of political assassination against even the slightest criticism and the rude nature in which he goes about fielding questions about his views and the actions of his administration.  Hugh Hewitt straight out called Clinton a "total baby" in his agitated reponses to the mild question from Chris Wallace, to put it bluntly, he went off on Chris Wallace.  As to the accusation from Clinton that the right wingers went after him for the Wag the Dog controversy, the Republicans stood behind him while all the major TV Networks and the New York Times, ever the friend of the liberals, all went after Clinton on this score.

After Wallace asked him a fairly basic question, Clinton started to fume and set about jumping around like a frog on a hot plate.  Then he began wagging that famous finger, we  remember this gesture, while running through a litany of his admirable efforts in tracking down Osama Bin Laden, keeping the country safe and the vast number of conspiracies arrayed against poor, defenseless Bill Clinton. 

Of course, we all can agree that many in positions of reponsibility were caught with their pants down on 9/11, and that, as Dennis Prager noted, civilized societies have a hard time imagining the committed ferocity of enemies such as the current breed of Islamo-Fascists.  Many did not predict the truly evil nature of Hitler, and one needs only to read newspaper articles from the 1930s to get a taste of that brand of appeasement.   Or how about the legions of supposed intellectuals who praised Stalin for his enlightened conduct of Soviet governance.

But what truly disturbs and really scares me is that the enemies of Western Civilization, specifcally Islamo-Fascists, learn from the shouting down and accusatory tactics exhibitied by Clinton and those trying to tear down their own Western societies, and there are many.  Everyday we hear them claim to be patriotic while alternatly discounting the threat of Islamo-Fascists, labeling the United States as a racist and imperialist country, calling Israel occupiers and genocidal maniacs and continually refering to President Bush as a religious fanatic who is out to conquer and convert the world.  These accusations from within can and do stay the hand in our efforts to smite the fundamental Islamic quests to murder innocents in their bloody reign of terror as they, in fact, set about to create a Muslim caliphate all over the world.  AND THE MUSLIMS FANATICS LEARN ALL TOO WELL FROM THESE TACTICS.

We must fight such trends and label them for what they are: DANGEROUS AND SHORT SIGHTED.  Clinton was acting in his own self-interest, as usual, while many on the front lines are at risk.  Tragically, beyond the troops fighting around world, the front lines in this war now include subway riders, pedestrians, patrons of pizza parlors and night clubs and  normal citizens going about their own business. 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

News Max: General Hayden Moves to Unify CIA

Monday, September 25, 2006
News Max.com article by Ronald Kessler
Part 1 of two part aritlcle
GEN. HAYDEN MOVES TO UNIFY CIA

Copy and Paste the Link Below

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/9/24/202758.shtml?s=al&promo_code=260C-1
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Palestinian Pope-Hatred

About those doctored and staged photographs...

Monday, September 25, 2006

Palestinian Pope-Hatred

Here’s a lovely cartoon from the current issue of Palestinian weekly Al Risala, a Hamas publication, courtesy of Palestinian Media Watch. The Arabic script reads, “The Pope and those who live under his cloak.”

And a Friday sermon broadcast on Fatah’s PA TV swears vengeance on the Pope:

“The second message is for the criminal Benedict the 16th, the Vatican Pope. For this ignorant and stupid Pope, who has no one to attack besides Islam and the Prophet [Muhammad], may the Creator have mercy on him and protect him. He [the Pope] characterized Islam as a cruel religion, and characterized Muhammad, may the Creator have mercy on him and protect him, as a cruel man, spilling blood, who strove to kill. This hostile Pope refuses to apologize to Muslims; and, instead of apologizing he blames the Muslims for not understanding, thereby adding crime upon crime. This arrogant Pope sees the Muslims as too inferior that he should apologize to them. To this arrogant Pope - criminal and arrogant - this message is from Allah the Elevated and the Exalted, as it was said: ‘Think not that Allah is unaware of what the wicked do. He but gives them a respite until a day when eyes will stare (in terror).’ [Sura14:42]”

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who's Against John Bolton?

Who's against John Bolton?
By Robert D. Novak
Thursday, September 21, 2006

The focus temporarily is on Sen. Lincoln Chafee, a frequently unfathomable maverick Republican, as the days dwindle down for this Congress to permit John Bolton to continue as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. But Bolton's two-year struggle to get confirmed can be directly traced to a determined Democratic senator and the vengeful UN secretariat.

Senate Republican Whip Mitch McConnell sat down Tuesday for a heart-to-heart talk with Chafee, pleading with him to permit Bolton's nomination to reach the Senate floor. The reason Chafee is in this pivotal position can be attributed to Sen. Christopher Dodd's fierce open opposition to Bolton, and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's stealthy sabotage, executed by his deputy, Mark Malloch Brown.


John Bolton, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, speaks during the United Jewish Communities International Lion of Judah Conference, Sunday, Sept. 10, 2006, in Washington. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

Bolton's ordeal provides a cautionary tale for any foreign policy conservative who wants to serve his country in Washington. Nobody can deny Bolton's intelligence and vigor in a lifetime devoted to public service. Nor can anybody deny that Bolton has been faithful to the program of any president he served even when official policy conflicted with his own views. But those views have caused him no end of trouble.

Indeed, some of Bolton's colleagues in the State Department (where he was an under secretary in George W. Bush's first term) were backstabbing when the president named him UN envoy. Bolton's overriding defect was his anti-Castro views, which collided with Dodd's goal of "normalizing" relations with Communist Cuba. Dodd was able to mobilize Democratic colleagues in a deadlock -- creating demand for executive branch documents involving Bolton.

Republican Sen. George Voinovich did not like Bolton's blunt answers to his Democratic antagonists in last year's Foreign Relations Committee hearings. He unexpectedly voted against Bolton but permitted the nomination to reach the floor without recommendation. That did not help find the 60-vote supermajority to cut off a Dodd-managed filibuster.

Bolton's vigorous UN performance under a recess appointment made Aug. 1, 2005, when the Senate was not in session, convinced the fair-minded Voinovich to change his position. But Sen. Chuck Hagel, second ranking Republican on Foreign Relations and a thoughtful critic of Bush administration foreign policy, indicated he might drop his support and vote no when Bolton again came up for confirmation. In a conversation with Hagel after Labor Day, Bolton won a yes vote.

So, Bolton was set for a favorable committee roll call on Sept. 7, when it became clear that the White House had misread Chafee in believing it had his vote for Bolton. The president's political team had gone all out for Chafee, who was fighting for his political life in the Sept. 12 Rhode Island Republican primary. Nevertheless, Chafee informed Chairman Richard Lugar he could not support Bolton, and Lugar cancelled the committee meeting.

Chafee's avowed complaint, laid out in a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, had nothing to do with Bolton's performance at the UN. Chafee complained that U.S. Middle East policy under Bush tilted too much toward Israel, and demanded an answer before he would discuss Bolton's nomination.

Although the Bush administration generally answers letters from Capitol Hill with glacial speed, Rice immediately responded to Chafee. The senator, however, was in no hurry to get back to Washington from Rhode Island after his renomination. Thus, McConnell waited a week before pressing Chafee Tuesday to support Bolton (as he did last year) or at least permit the nomination to go to the Senate floor. The outcome of the meeting was not divulged.

Dodd still lies in wait, hoping to filibuster Bolton again, but he does not appear to have the votes this time. AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby, now backs Bolton, and the usually partisan Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer has indicated he will change his vote from last year and vote for cloture to end debate.

Bolton's confirmation for another two years at the UN would be bad news for the secretariat. According to UN sources, Malloch Brown has been stirring up anti-Bolton sentiment with his fellow ambassadors, who in turn have contacted senators. Bolton has demanded reform at the UN, and that has not made him popular with the world organization's bureaucrats. They would like nothing better than to give this conservative diplomat his comeuppance.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Congress Should Stay and Finish Its Work

Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Posted by Hugh Hewitt  | 4:29 PM

I just concluded an interview with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist which will play in the first hour.  I am left with the sinking feeling that the country will be lucky if it gets one or two more judges confirmed before next Friday's recess, and with the impression that John McCain and Lindsey Graham have killed the military tribunals legislation via their rejection of the second effort by the White House to put forward a bill.  Finally, it sounded as though the Majority Leader expects the Democrats on the Intelligence Committee to block the legislation confirming the president's authority to order NSA surveillance of al Qaeda contacting its operatives in the United States without a warrant.

When I pressed the Majority Leader on the need to keep the Senate in session as long as it takes to get its critical work done, he demurred, and thought it was both difficult to do, and also not useful to the elections when senators need to be home drawing contrasts between themselves and their opponents.  I pointed out that the easiest way to draw contrasts is while a divided Senate is in session arguing over the most crucial issues of the day.  I don't believe I persuaded the senator.

Given that the national security is involved,  the Senate and House should not adjourn without bills on both the tribunals and the NSA program, even if it cuts into campaign season. The additional time will allow the judicial nominees to receive their votes as well.

Voice your opinions to the Majority Leader.  Phone: (202) 224-3344  E-Mail Senator Frist's PAC here.

And call Senators McCain and Graham and ask them to end their obstruction.

Senator McCain:  Phone: (202) 224-2235  E-mail here.

Senator Graham: Phone:  (202) 224-5972  E-mail here.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Senator McCain Wants a Compromise

Monday, September 18, 2006
Posted by Hugh Hewitt  | 6:50 PM

Four days after grandstanding the issue and imperiling the necessary legislation to establish military tribunals and try terrorists, Senator McCain wants a compromise.

No doubt he has sampled the e-mails and phone calls, and read the blogs and the conservatiev op-eds.

Or perhaps he read Senator Graham's less than persuasive defense of the trio's (McCain, Warner and Graham) obstructionist tactics.

Or maybe he figured out that he almost single-handedly stalled the GOP momentum, opnce again imperiling the majority that is absolutely necessary to win the war for the sake of his personal political agenda.

Whatever the reason, add the sabotage of this crucial legislation to the list that includes McCain-Feingold, the Gang of 14, and McCain-Kennedy.

John McCain: Great American.  Lousy senator. Terrible Republican.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Appeasers Object

Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Posted by Hugh Hewitt  | 9:12 AM

The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson lets fly with a howler today, the latest complaint from the appeasers camp that complains about being labeled appeasers.  Here's what passes for an argument among that circle:

We can pretty much set aside Cheney's recent remarks, since he's been wandering in the rhetorical wilderness for a long time now. But I can't resist citing one line. He told the VFW that the "Bush Doctrine" is to hold accountable "any person or government that supports, protects or harbors terrorists." So what about the newly installed Iraqi government, with its suspected ties to Shiite death squads? And what about the Pakistani government, which gives the Taliban and al-Qaeda safe harbor?

Apparently the policy of the Appeasement Democrats is to attack out friends and ignore our enemies.  Thus in Mr. Robinson's world, we should withdraw support for the newly elected Iraqi government and turn on President Musharraff because, in the former case, the government in Baghdad is alleged to have ties to extremists and in the latter because the Pakistan ISI did indeed support Islamists before 9/11.

Send Robinson's column to all your friends, especially those who vote.  This is a glimpse of the Democratic foreign policy in waiting, a foreshadowing of the deamnds of a Democratic Congress for investigations of human rights abuses of the new Iraqi government and for a cut-off of aid to Pakistan.  As was the case with foreign policy under  Presidents Carter and Clinton, today's Democrats find it much more compelling to attack our friends while turning a blind eye towards our enemies.  This approach brought us the Islamic Republic of Iran during Carter's years and a nuclear North Korea and 9/11 under Clinton's watch.

Eugene Robinson longs for the good old days when our leaders did not speak of the dangers of the world.  "Peace in our time" did not appear in his column, but it surely is on his mind.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Pentagon's New Map

Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Posted by Dean Barnett  | 11:19 AM

Thomas P.M. Barnett (no relation) is the author of the brilliant “The Pentagon’s New Map” and a creative and insightful analyst of military and geo-political matters.

Tom also writes a blog that to my tastes is more of a hit-and-miss affair. His stuff on global affairs is must reading; the material that focuses on the prosaic details of his daily life less so. (If you’re going to write publicly about stuff like that, you best have the observational skills and writing talent of James Lileks, or you should forego the exercise altogether.) Because Tom’s stuff on world events is so insightful, however, his blog remains an everyday stop.

Today, Tom strikes gold:

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »