Then & Now: What has Changed?

In Afghanistan, what has changed since July? To Secretary Clinton, apparently a great deal has changed.

I believe her political mantra is being transposed into her cabinet post: If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

Understandably so by taking the post with Barry, but oh so dangerous in the modern world of diplomacy.

July '08 –

"Our goal is to disrupt, dismantle, defeat Al Qaeda and its extremist allies," she said. "But not every Taliban is an extremist ally."

October '09 –

So that in order to really go after al-Qaeda, to uproot it and destroy it, we had to take on those who were giving the al-Qaeda leadership safe haven.

(Hat Tip – The Campaign Spot)

Presumptions Lead to the Same as Assumptions

This statement caught my eye for it encapsulates the essence of my own personal aggravation with the entire controversy:

On what basis do they make such preposterous statements? Purely and simply for the reason that Rush is an unabashed conservative and unabashed conservatives are presumptively racist.

Anecdotally, I have not yet come across any individual who can point towards the racism that apparently emanates Rush Limbaugh's being….nothing. Most, if not all, point towards the statements made by Rush during his short stint on ESPN, but lest anyone forget, this was not a "racist" statement, it was a "racial" statement.

For you see, Rush Limbaugh has the courage to speak about the issues, and analyze those issues whereas others seek the path of least resistance when it comes to race. An accepted orthodox of the left has been thrust on America, but this orthodox is merely the opinion of the left, and their ilk, it does not represent fact.

And, therein lies my own personal aggravation. I am Rush. I am Rush for I am a conservative, and therefore I am presumptively racist. I am not.

Condescending Capitulation

Anecdotal? I doubt it.

But, there seems to be a steady stream of stories such as these in the news. It was my understanding that the election of PBO meant an end to the aggressive nature of Russia since we would engage them in a civil discourse.

Anecdotal? I hope so.

The Acknowledgement of What is to Come

If you can't beat them, join them…?

Really, in the short time it takes for Barry to win the Nobel Peace Prize, we are already capitulating in Afghanistan.

President Obama is prepared to accept some Taleban involvement in Afghanistan's political future and is unlikely to favour a large influx of new American troops being demanded by his ground commander, a senior official said last night.

Mr Obama appears to have been swayed in recent days by arguments from some advisers, led by Vice-President Joe Biden, that the Taleban do not pose a direct threat to the US and that there should be greater focus on tackling al-Qaeda inside Pakistan.

What Happens Here….

On its face, this story is amusing.

Yet, when one considers what these diplomats represent, and what their countrymen must endure back home, it is sickening.

Prospective of the Perspective

What concerns your humble pundit has to do not so much with what the current discussion means, but where the discussion will inevitably lead in its natural progression.

As someone with a legal background, I tend to agree with Mr. Krauthammer's analysis regarding his perspective:

My own living will, which I have always considered more a literary than a legal document, basically says: "I've had some good innings, thank you. If I have anything so much as a hangnail, pull the plug." I've never taken it terribly seriously because unless I'm comatose or demented, they're going to ask me at the time whether or not I want to be resuscitated if I go into cardiac arrest. The paper I signed years ago will mean nothing.

And if I'm totally out of it, my family will decide, with little or no reference to my living will. Why? I'll give you an example. When my father was dying, my mother and brother and I had to decide how much treatment to pursue. What was a better way to ascertain my father's wishes: What he checked off on a form one fine summer's day years before being stricken; or what we, who had known him intimately for decades, thought he would want? The answer is obvious.

But, where does the discussion naturally tend, and where will it end up in its natural progression:

What do you think such a chat would be like? Do you think the doctor will go on and on about the fantastic new million-dollar high-tech gizmo that can prolong the patient's otherwise hopeless condition for another six months? Or do you think he's going to talk about -- as the bill specifically spells out -- hospice care and palliative care and other ways of letting go of life?

My concern correlates with that what President Obama has participated with in the past, and how that will move forward with its natural progression. Meaning, precisely, that the lack of sanctity of life has as much to do with where that conversation will follow as anything else. It is document. It is not innocuous, and its applicability will be nothing more than poignant.

I think this is what is lost in the pro-life debate as much as anything. Abortionists consistently aargue that the correlation of advocacy of the death penalty should weigh in a pro-lifers….shouldn't the same be said here?

Full Term?

I tend to agree with Allah.

It has been odd, and is odd that Barry insists that the Republicans, and the Blue Dogs come on board, and toe the line on this issue. Blue Dogs, he made them, or at least he made need some of them, but why the insistence on Republicans on this.

If this no-brainer for the American People, and everyone opposing is un-American, and the zombie-like-notions of the vast Right Wing Conspiracy are coming forth….why does he want everyone on board?