Obama 2012: It Could Be Worse!

Remember when Barack Obama used to say thing like “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”? He was the candidate of hope, of change, of the future. His minions claimed that he would bring in a new age of togetherness, that he could reach across the aisle. He was the man of no no Red or Blue states. Of course, that was all a hoax and he is a doctrinaire Marxist, which should not have surprised anyone who bothered to look at the man’s associations. However, it is still amusing to see how far Obama’s rhetoric has fallen.

At a campaign rally speech in Wisconsin, President Obama observed that unemployment has stagnated at nearly 10%, even though his administration promised that the Stimulus bill would halt unemployment at 8%. Obama’s response to the evidence that his economic policies have been a complete and total failure: “Things aren’t as bad as they could have been, this could have been a catastrophe, in that sense it [the stimulus] worked…unemployment’s at 9.6%…but it’s not 12 or 13 or 15.” That sure sounds like the much maligned “politics of cynicism” Obama railed against. In fact, a cynic might say that the entire ‘hope and change’ campaign was a textbook example in the politics of cynicism.

The Obama administration has been a futile socialist experiment. Obama sycophants denounced Republicans for being stuck in the “old politics,” not accepting the new age ideas of The One. However, despite Obama’s rhetoric, it is his party that is stuck ion the past. See if this sounds familiar: “we’ve sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan.” That was said by Ronald Reagan in 1964 about the Johnson administration, but it could have been said by Sarah Palin last week about the Obama administration. The porkulus bill cost nearly $1 trillion and unemployment is still 10%. The solution: another stimulus. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac created the housing bubble. Solution: encourage them to continue their risky behavior. The government keeps on making new plans, to correct old plans, that invariably consist of throwing boatloads of money, that the country doesn’t have, at Democrat constituencies. But hey, at least unemployment isn’t “12 or 13 or 15.” Obama has been an unmitigated disaster – the number don’t lie. When defending his record in this year’s midterm elections and eventually in 2012 gone will be the false promises of ‘hope’ and ‘change,’ replaced by “it could be worse!”

Libertas Post Profile of Andrew Lawton

Nate Hendley from the Libertas Post interviewed me a couple of weeks ago for his website. I really enjoyed chatting with him about Ann Coulter, Tea Parties, my public healthcare nightmare, and lots of other stuff, so I would encourage you all to check it out here!

What’s your opinion of Harper? Is he doing a good job or are you angry at the Conservatives now?

I’m not angry at the Conservatives. I’ve never been one of those people that wanted to throw the Conservative Party under the bus. I am a member of that party. I will vote for that party in the next election, most likely, unless something really major comes up. From an analytical standpoint, I think Harper does need to do a lot between now and the next election to get back some of the base—our listeners, people who read our blog. There are some genuine conservatives out there, who have been conservatives their whole life who have issues with Harper as a leader. They feel he has been going too much to the centre. I think there are reasons for making compromises in government. I’m not blind, however. I do think he has some work to do to hold onto the base.

From the Ottawa U files: Anti-Ann Coulter emails released

Most of you probably remember the embarrassment from a couple of months ago when the second of Ann Coulter’s three Canadian university campus appearances was canceled due to rioters at the University of Ottawa. A few days prior to the event, Ann was served with a letter threatening criminal prosecution for the speech that hadn’t even been given from the Ottawa University Academic Provost, Francois A. Houle (or as Ann translated to English: Frank A-Hole.)

University president and former Liberal Party Cabinet member Allan Rock isn’t as innocent as he claimed, with emails aquired by the Canadian Press showing some disgusting things said about Ann, and that Rock was the one who told Francois Houle to write the famous letter in the first place. Not only did Rock tell Houle:

“You, Francois, as Provost, should write immediately to Coulter informing her of our domestic laws. … You should urge her to respect that Canadian tradition as she enjoys the privilege of her visit.”

But, he also approved the letter before it was sent to her.

“Quel excellent message! Merci et felicitations. I am sure she has never been dressed down so elegantly in her life!”

In true university fashion, comments found in Allan Rock’s emails also reveal an interesting take on the kind of open-mindedness and liberal thought that is so common on college campuses:

“Ann Coulter is a mean-spirited, small-minded, foul-mouthed poltroon.”

“She is ‘the loud mouth that bespeaks the vacant mind’.”

“She is an ill-informed and deeply offensive shill for a profoundly shallow and ignorant view of the world. She is a malignancy on the body politic. She is a disgrace to the broadcasting industry and a leading example of the dramatic decline in the quality of public discourse in recent times.”

Rock, who attempted to position himself as being far removed from this situation was for days spreading his vitriol (interspersed with random French words) among the highest levels of governance at the University of Ottawa.

I suppose it’s called the “U of Zero” for a reason.

Toy Story 3 vs. Obama Administration

Until today, I can’t say I ever thought I would be saying ‘Obama’ and ‘Woody’ in the same blog post. But hey, life’s full of surprises.

Reader Steve sent me a great piece from Andrew Klavan over at Ricochet (the only podcast that comes close to Strictly Right Radio in terms of greatness) comparing the latest Pixar film, Toy Story 3 with the Obama administration. What motivated him to put this together remains unknown to me, but in case there was any doubt, Klavan makes a pretty convincing case that Toy Story 3 and the Obama administration have little — if anything — in common.

This was my favorite section:

Toy Story 3 Includes American First PrinciplesToy Story 3 centers around an apparently lovable and benign leader who is really a corrupt bully  – so okay, it’s like the Obama Administration there.  But in the movie, even the Barbie doll understands that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.  That doesn’t mean if you win an election you can do anything you want.  It means you have to follow the rules set down by the nation’s founders and traditions.  Backroom deals to pass incomprehensible regulations hidden away in unread legislation do not live up to that test.  When you’ve lost Barbie, you’ve lost the nation.

Afghanistan: There is no Substitute for Victory

From the time Allied boots set foot in Afghanistan, pundits have been eager to draw comparisons between the wars ins Afghanistan and Vietnam. The most common refrain is that just like Vietnam, Afghanistan is an unwinnable war. In reality, that is the wrong conclusion. In fact, Vietnam was absolutely a winnable war, and in fact was won, for a time. Likewise, Afghanistan is also a winnable war. However, the two wars do share some commonalities.  The most striking similarity between Afghanistan and Vietnam is the criminal incompetence of the Democratic Party.

One of the most often used quotes about war comes from William Tecumseh Sherman, who said “war is hell.” Going to war is always a difficult decision, yet sometimes it is a necessary one. In his farewell address before the Congress, General Douglas MacArthur explained:

I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting.

But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end.

War’s very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.

In war there is no substitute for victory.

General MacArthur made those remarks after he was relieved of duty for expressing his frustration that the President would not allow him to win the Korean War in 1951. Sadly, his remarks fell upon deaf ears. America’s next major military confrontation came in the jungles of Vietnam. There, under President’s Kennedy and Johnson, the United States military was severely shackled, once again not allowed to win.

Under President Johnson, most famously, the United States subscribed to the idea of ‘limited war.’ The ‘whiz kids,’  a group of highly educated liberals with no military experience, who ran the Defense Department, did not believe in ‘victory.’ Instead, the Johnson administration sought to ‘communicate’ with the Vietnamese through a series of contracted military engagements, with no intention of obtaining outright military victory. While this view may seem enlightened in the West, it was seen as weakness in the East. The Vietnamese communists knew all they had to do was out-wait the Americans and they would win. Until Nixon took over, the American military was forced to fight a war that was only unwinnable because of the constraints put upon them by an incompetent president.

Picture that – a group of over-educated liberals ignoring military advice, refusing to state that victory is the objective, turning a war into a quagmire. Hard to believe.

There are two real lessons people should take from Vietnam. First, let the military win. The United States military could win, if only politicians would allow them too. It is entirely unacceptable for politicians to declare wars, then constrain the military. The Lemay doctrine should always be employed:

“a nation should think long and hard before it goes to war. But once that decision is made, then that nation should be willing to hit the enemy with every conceivable weapon at its disposal to end the conflict as quickly as possible. If a nation is not willing to do that, it should not go to war in the first place.”

(Lemay: The Life and Wars of General Curtis Lemay, p.96-97)

Any time this doctrine is not used, the result is a disaster. It was not used in Korea, it was not used in Vietnam and it has not been used in Afghanistan. It is time for President Obama and his whiz kids to get out of the way. If Afghanistan is the “good war,” as Obama and the Democrats said throughout the 2008 election season, than the only acceptable conclusion to the war is victory. However, when asked, President Obama said, “victory” is not necessarily the goal in Afghanistan.

Over the weekend, Peggy Noonan wrote in the Wall Street Journal that the McChrystal controversy has forced us to focus on Afghanistan. With his renewed focus, President Obama should examine what General MacArthur said, that, “in war there is no substitute for victory,” and allow General Petraeus to craft his strategy around that principle.
The second lesson is much simpler – Democrats should never be put in a position of public trust. They are weak, arrogant, and incompetent – a lethal combination.

G20 Photoblog

I’ll continue to update you on news from the Toronto G20 summit as I get it. My initial post is here. I’ve decided to post some pictures that I think accuratley depict the state of affairs outside the security fence. Courtesy for these photos goes to reader Vardit F., author Tarek Fatah, the Toronto Sun, and several random Facebook profiles.

N.B.: If you can’t read the text on some of the signs, click on the photo for a full-size version.

Update: The National Post has an incredible photo gallery here.

Anatomy of a "peaceful" protest.

All around the world, people are tuned into the events of the G8 summit in Huntsville, Ontario this past weekend as well as the G20 summit in Toronto taking place right now. Over the past few weeks, much controversy has arisen from people skeptical of the amount of money being spent on making sure this event goes on. The exact price tag is unknown at this point. However, the highest figure has been the $1 billion dollars invested in security.

Of all the costs Canada has had to ante to host this, the security tab is the least concerning. I think that the whole thing will be a waste of time, but the fact of the matter is that Canada is given the opportunity to be a leader in world issues, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper has the opportunity to show to Canadians what he stands for, and put forth some conservative initiatives in Canada and around the world. What he does with that opportunity is out of my ballpark.

I’ve been watching one of Canada’s two 24-hour news networks for the last couple of days to get a grasp on what’s actually going on in Toronto. Unfortunately, both of them are crap (not for long though!) As it stands, the best place to get up-to-date information on what’s going on seems to be the Toronto Sun’s G20 LiveBlog.

To date, there have been 6 police cars set on fire, over 500 arrests, 3 failed bombings, crates of weapons seized, Molotov Cocktails defused, rubber bullets used, tear gas emitted, and hundreds of 20-somethings with hemp purses, Che Guevera shirts and a cloud of marijuana smoke following them. Do I have an issue with spending money on security if it prevents world leaders and innocent tourists from being killed on Canadian soil? Not at all.

Amnesty International has already come out in opposition to Toronto police, apparently upset that violent anarchists may be being mistreated. Oh no!

Interestingly, there had been 412 arrests made before the summit even started this morning. One of the detainees was complaining on camera to the fact that there weren’t enough bathroom facilities at the makeshift detention center to ensure the comfort of the prisoners (apparently the Hilton was over-booked.)

If you plan on smashing in police car windows with a baseball bat, and knocking down elderly visitors, women with children, and law enforcement while attempting to hide in a mob for anonymity, I don’t care what happens to you. Strictly Right fully supports the actions of police and tactical units to ensure the safety of the summit.

Newsflash: Democrats are Stupid

Peggy West is your average Democrat. She is a Milwaukee County Supervisor. Her county, like many in the United States, voted on boycotting Arizona over SB1070, the border enforcement law. In debating the proposed boycott, West made the following point:

If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding their borders, I would have to look twice at this. But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border.

Where does the Democratic Party find people this stupid? My favorite part of the video is when Jim Rice, who opposes the boycott, said, “I just want to assure my colleague that Arizona is a state that does in fact share a border with Mexico.” West later claimed that she misspoke. I guess “but this is a state (Arizona) that is a ways removed from the border (with Mexico)” can be misinterpreted.

In this story we have yet another example of a Democrat not understanding the situation in Arizona, yet still willing to make a sweeping judgment. Barack Obama, Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano  all could not be bothered reading the 10 page bill from Arizona, yet they felt free to condemn the law. In fact, despite their willful ignorance, the Obama administration has made it clear that they intend to sue Arizona for defending its border. In the above example, Peggy West doesn’t even know where Arizona is, yet she feels fully comfortable voting for a boycott. Maybe she’s angling for a post in the Obama administration – she clearly has the right disposition and the requisite intelligence.

Strictly Right Radio episode 35

A lighter edition of Strictly Right, featuring discussions on: fast food, Democratic deviants, gambling welfare recipients, a great letter to the President from Jon Voight, Obama’s never ending war on the producing class and much more.

You can listen to this episode online here or subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.