Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

So, what's the story on Aleppo?



Listening to the radio and reading the news lately there has been a lot about the Russian-backed advance of the Syrian army on the city of Aleppo. To read it, the city of Aleppo is in jeopardy of being attacked by the Syrians, putting the (reduced) population of 300,000 in danger of being killed. These people are menaced not just by indiscriminate Russian bombing, but also by the perfidious Syrian forces who will cut their water and electricity, and will probably also starve them.

Read beyond the main news sources and you find that the Syrian government actually already controls (and has always controlled) quite a large part of the city, that the majority of the people in Aleppo live on the government-controlled side; and thus it seems that they are unlikely to be carpet-bombed by the Russians. Additionally, the main water source for Aleppo has historically been Lake Assad and a major source for their electricity has been the hydroelectric dam there. A quick check reveals that both the lake and the dam are controlled by ISIS forces (e.g. see here, here, here, and here) and as a result there have been multiple sustained periods without water and electricity over the past years for both the government-held and rebel-held sides of the city. A mistake or so one can understand, but overall there is such misreporting that it is hard to believe that it is just the result of incompetence!



Further, looking at maps of the military situation in Aleppo we see that every one of them shows four zones of control - the Syrian government, ISIS, the Kurds, and "the opposition" (or occasionally "rebels."):










So, who is "the opposition," or "rebels," or "moderate rebels" (pace President Obama...). Googling, one gets Liwa al-Tawhid ("one of the largest in a group of opposition forces to seize portions of Aleppo in the July 2012 uprising... By joining the Islamic Front in 2013, the group tied itself to more hardline Islamist organizations like Ahrar al-Sham, along with their more hardline Islamic state aspirations."); Jaish al-Mujahideen ("... a coalition force established on 3 January 2014 with fighters deployed in Aleppo's western sectors. The coalition force presence in the western rural areas of Aleppo allows them to control some of the supply routes from Turkey to Aleppo. The coalition force is fighting both Syrian government forces and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS) in Aleppo. According to a statement by the Jaish al-Mujahideen it is comprised of the following factions: The Noureddin al-Zengi Battalions, The Ansar Brigade, The Fastaqim Kama Umirta Gathering, The Islamic Freedom Brigade The Amjad al-Islam Brigade, The Ansar al-Khilafa Brigade, and The Jund al-Haramain Brigade "); the Ansar al-Deen Front ("... group is comprised of the Green Brigade, Jaish al-Muhajrin, Sham al-Islam, and Harakat Fajr al-Sham. The alliance group diverse membership is seen in Harakat Fajr Sham al-Islamiya representing mostly Syrians from the Aleppo area, Harakat Sham al-Islam comprised of Moroccan fighters, the Green Battalion comprised of Saudi Arabia fighters and Jaish al-Mujahireen wal-Ansar comprised of Chechen and other Russian-speaking fighters."); The al-Nusra Front (Jabhat al-Nusra) ("... mostly based in Aleppo and Deir Ez-Zor..."); Ahrar al-Sham ("... also present in Hamah and Aleppo."). And many others...

It is very difficult to keep track of all the groups and sub-groups as they merge into a myriad of 'fronts' and 'armies' of various sorts (e.g. Army of Conquest, Army of Islam, etc.), even assuming that one wants to distinguish between them... not always the case! For example: "... The U.S. army spent almost a decade refusing to distinguish between al-Qaeda in Iraq and other armed Sunni groups, labeling them all “terrorists” and bombing them with little concern for their differences. But in Syria, the White House has suddenly become a scrupulous advocate of nuance..  The United States has therefore preferred to describe these groups as problematic albeit legitimate members of the Syrian opposition and it has resisted their inclusion on a terrorist list.." 

And the various groups work together as allies when it suits them. Thus, for example, per a 2014 interview with Abu Omar, a fighter in the Islamic Front’s Liwa al-Tawhid, about the insurgent offensive in southwestern Aleppo: "... There are a lot of factions like the Islamic Front which includes Liwa al-Tawhid, Ahrar a-Sham, Suqur a-Sham, Jaish al-Islam, and Jaish al-Mujahideen. Jubhat a-Nusra is obviously a large faction and is very active on the ground. Some of the small brigades are coordinating and have created the Ahl a-Sham Joint Operations Room, which includes the biggest factions. The Islamic Front controls the largest part of Aleppo..." 

Most recently a group of "the opposition" announced that  Hisham al-Sheikh, aka Abu Jaber, Emir of Arar al-Sham will be the leader of the rebels in Aleppo.

These are the "rebels" ("the opposition") that so many (e.g. Senator John McCain) want to support logistically and even militarily! Quote: "...McCain has long criticized the Obama administration's Syria policy, calling it a strategy "debacle," and had previously said that more arms should be given to Syrian opposition groups, including man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS), to counter any kind of air force targeting them..."


The Institute for The Study of War has a detailed write-up (17-pg PDF) of the various "rebels" in Aleppo, while arguing for their support, arguing that by attacking Aleppo and bombing them, the Syrians and Russians are actually strengthening the Nusrah Front - "...Aleppo Provinceis home to numerous opposition powerbrokers that remain relatively independent from Jabhat al Nusra, and therefore offer a potential cadre of opposition fighters that could help the U.S. achieve American objectives in Syria. A surrender by besieged opposition groups in Aleppo to the Syrian regime would eliminate this potential ground partner in Syria. It is both more likely and more dangerous, however, that the experience of a drawn out siege in Aleppo will radicalize the opposition and cement the leadership of Jabhat al Nusra in northern Syria..." Thus they justify support for "the opposition" on the 'thin reeds' of "relatively independent" and "potential" cadre!

Of course, comparatively they seem like founts of wisdom compared to those who choose to believe claims like these:  a) The rebels (other than the Nusrah Front and ISIS) don't really mean what they say! "... Lister has spent the last ten months meeting with the leaderships of Syria’s most important rebel groups, and found that there is a crucial distinction between “public hyperbole and private attitudes.” While many of Syria’s rebel groups now feel obliged to make some form of Islamist incantation in public—and some of them even mean some of it in private—the rebel groups, which is to say not Nusra or ISIS or the independent gangs of foreign Salafi jihadists who have intruded into Syria’s torment, are willing to resolve differences “through dialogue,” Lister writes..." And b) While the Nusrah Front leaders are hard core al-Qaeda, their fighters are actually closet moderates:  "...But the rank-and-file even of Nusra are not al-Qaeda loyalists; their overwhelming goal is to defeat the regime, the resources for which Nusra seemed to offer, a clear majority of them want a democratic system after Assad, and an even clearer majority have no aspirations beyond Syria’s borders. These fighters could be pulled into the mainstream, leaving Nusra’s core to be forcibly neutralised once it is down to the irreconcilables..."

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Random charts


Source: The Geography of Hate. An article in The Atlantic looks at the distribution of hate groups across the U.S. and says: "... America's racist groups concentrate in certain regions -- and their presence correlates with religion, McCain votes, and poverty..."

Damning? Well... not so much! The following table provides a 'qualitative description of the strength' of the coefficient of correlation. From this we see that the touted 0.35 correlation with religion is a "weak positive", as are those of 'higher poverty rates' (+0.39) and a 'larger blue-collar working class workforce' (+0.41). The correlation with McCain votes is stronger at 0.52, but this still barely makes it into the "moderate positive" range.


Mathematically, the coefficient of determination is actually a better measure to use when comparing the magnitude of the relationship between two measures. Using the numbers quoted in the article, the coefficients of determination between hate groups and religion and McCain voting are 0.1225 and 0.2704 respectively. In other words, only approximately 12.25% of the variation in the hate group variable can be explained by variation in the religion variable; and 27.04% by the variation in the McCain vote variable....

The article took pains to note that "... correlation does not imply causation ..." and that "...we are simply looking at associations between variables...". However, by not providing qualitative context for the numeric correlation coefficient values, and by focusing on the correlation coefficient rather than the coefficient of determination, this exposition is not the most ingenuous or scrupulous...

Correlation Coefficient
Correlation: Interpretations
Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

Monday, November 3, 2008

Last word on the candidates...

Change you can see gets closer to this blogger's opinion of the two candidates than any other article that he has seen, i.e.not very impressed or enthused with either of them (if not necessarily for the same reasons as the writer...). Some extracts:

On McCain:

"...It looks as though the game is almost over for John McCain. Though the two are physically dissimilar I’ve taken to thinking of him as a latterday Flashman ..."

On Obama:

"... In February, seeking a liberal profile in the primaries, Obama stood against warrantless wiretapping. His support for liberty did not survive its second trimester; he aborted it with a vote for warrantless wiretapping. The man who voted to reaffirm the awful Patriot Act declared that ‘the ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counterterrorism tool.’ As a political organizer of his own advancement, Obama is a wonder. But I have yet to identify a single uplifting intention to which he has remained constant if it has presented the slightest risk to his advancement. Summoning all the optimism at my disposal, I suppose we could say he has not yet had occasion to offend two important constituencies and adjust his relatively decent stances on immigration and labor-law reform. Public funding of his campaign? A commitment made becomes a commitment betrayed, just as on warrantless eavesdropping. His campaign treasury is now a vast hogswallow that, if it had been amassed by a Republican, would be the topic of thunderous liberal complaint..."

Monday, October 27, 2008

Last chance...


In a September 9th entry, 'McCain's hope,' this blogger pointed out that short of a game-changing event, Senator McCain's only hope was if the American public deliberately opted for divided government (given that the Democrats will increase their majorities in both houses).

'As expected' from September 21st noted that George Will had made this an explicit argument to vote for McCain.

Now in 'John McCain's last chance' The Economist does the same -"... Second, Mr McCain should hammer away at the dangers of single-party rule in Washington, DC. The Democrats are likely to add at least another ten seats, and perhaps as many as 20, to their majority in the House. There is a real possibility that they may attain a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (Democrats are leading in eight Senate seats currently held by Republicans and are close in a couple of others; they control 51 of the 100 seats already). This will allow them to push through a wish-list of Democratic proposals on everything from “fair trade” to spending. The Republicans have only just started to point this out. But Americans have a strong preference for divided government. America has only had one-party rule (with the same party controlling the White House and both chambers) for six years out of the 28 since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980—two years under Bill Clinton and four and a bit under George Bush. Mr McCain should argue forcefully that, as an experienced legislator who has worked with left-wing Democrats as well as right-wing Republicans, he will be the perfect man to check Congress where necessary and work with it where desirable ..."

Finally, Senator McCain has also taken up this argument, "... Republican presidential nominee John McCain , trailing in the polls, raised the prospect on Saturday of a complete Democratic takeover of Washington as a reason to elect him over Democrat Barack Obama in 10 days... McCain said having Democrats in control of the White House, the U.S. House of Representatives under Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and the Senate under Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, would give Democrats unfettered power ..."

Friday, October 24, 2008

Newspaper endorsements...

Neat interactive map of newspapers across the United States that have editorial endorsements of either Senator Obama or Senator McCain for president, along with their 2004 endorsement and circulations...

Monday, October 20, 2008

Get the facts...

From a Ohio Democratic Party mailed flyer:


McCain claim: "Senator Obama's political career was launched at a fundraiser hosted at Bill Ayer's home."
The fact: 'Barack Obama began his political career at this Ramada Inn (Ed note: next to a picture of a Ramada), not at Bill Ayers's home."

McCain claim: "Obama and 1960s radical Bill Ayers "palled around" and have a meaningful relationship."
The fact: "Multiple, independent fact checkers and investigative reporters have concluded that the link between Obama and Ayers is "tenuous" and that there is no evidence of any relationship."

The first neatly sidesteps the fact that Obama did indeed have a fundraiser at Ayers' home... Some quotes are provided as "proof" of the second, including "There is no indication that Ayers and Obama are now 'palling around,' or that they have had an ongoing relationship in the past three years" [CNN 10/5/08] (note: my emphasis).

Get the facts, heh!

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Repeat posts...

Repeat from September 15th:




Repeat from August 29th, 'Joe, meet Joe'


Apparently although Joe Biden has been picked/nominated as the Democratic VP candidate, he will still run for relection to his Senate seat (D-DE). Shades of another Joe - Lieberman that is, in 2000...

Monday, October 6, 2008

Maverick McCain?

"At Fort McNair, an army base located along the Potomac River in the nation's capital, a chance reunion takes place one day between two former POWs. It's the spring of 1974, and Navy commander John Sidney McCain III has returned home from the experience in Hanoi that, according to legend, transformed him from a callow and reckless youth into a serious man of patriotism and purpose. Walking along the grounds at Fort McNair, McCain runs into John Dramesi, an Air Force lieutenant colonel who was also imprisoned and tortured in Vietnam.

McCain is studying at the National War College, a prestigious graduate program he had to pull strings with the Secretary of the Navy to get into. Dramesi is enrolled, on his own merit, at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces in the building next door.

There's a distance between the two men that belies their shared experience in North Vietnam — call it an honor gap. Like many American POWs, McCain broke down under torture and offered a "confession" to his North Vietnamese captors. Dramesi, in contrast, attempted two daring escapes. For the second he was brutalized for a month with daily torture sessions that nearly killed him. His partner in the escape, Lt. Col. Ed Atterberry, didn't survive the mistreatment. But Dramesi never said a disloyal word, and for his heroism was awarded two Air Force Crosses, one of the service's highest distinctions. McCain would later hail him as "one of the toughest guys I've ever met."

On the grounds between the two brick colleges, the chitchat between the scion of four-star admirals and the son of a prizefighter turns to their academic travels; both colleges sponsor a trip abroad for young officers to network with military and political leaders in a distant corner of the globe.

"I'm going to the Middle East," Dramesi says. "Turkey, Kuwait, Lebanon, Iran."

"Why are you going to the Middle East?" McCain asks, dismissively.

"It's a place we're probably going to have some problems," Dramesi says.

"Why? Where are you going to, John?"

"Oh, I'm going to Rio."

"What the hell are you going to Rio for?"

McCain, a married father of three, shrugs.

"I got a better chance of getting laid."

Dramesi, who went on to serve as chief war planner for U.S. Air Forces in Europe and commander of a wing of the Strategic Air Command, was not surprised. "McCain says his life changed while he was in Vietnam, and he is now a different man," Dramesi says today. "But he's still the undisciplined, spoiled brat that he was when he went in."

Read the rest here: 'Make-Believe Maverick'

Friday, September 26, 2008

McCain, beyond the pale...


OK, so it has only been a little over three weeks since this blogger posted 'No longer...' However, he has to admit that he still drops by the Dish occasionally, for reasons perhaps somewhat similar to those that cause folks to slow down and rubberneck when passing accidents.

September 10th, 2008 Andrew Sullivan professed to have finally seen the light, realizing that John McCain is not "a decent and honest person." Sullivan finally lost all respect for John McCain. What did it? Well apparently the last straw was a) McCain picking Sarah Palin as his running mate, and b) McCain falsely accusing Obama of calling Palin a pig (the whole "lipstick on a pig kerfuffle). Rather weak stuff.

Sullivan then goes on e.g. "On core moral issues, where this man knew what the right thing was, and had to pick between good and evil, he chose evil." However, all of a sudden the bill of particulars (Iraq, torture, etc.) is a list of things that happened years ago - in 2004 (endorsing Bush over Kerry), 2006 (torture), 2007 , etc. Which begs the question, if John McCain showed again and again in 2004, 2006, etc. that he had no honor or integrity, that he put himself before the country, that he chose the path of evil, etc., exactly why did it take until 2008 for Sullivan to finally see the light? The fact of the matter is that even after all those things Sullivan cut McCain slack, and that it was only the Palin pick (for some reason Palin seems to push every one of Sullivan's buttons, and he is a quasi-irrational focus on her) that convinced him that McCain was beyond the pale... Truly bizarre!

Sullivan's maniacal obsession with Palin is confirmed by a post from today, where he says "... I stand by my statement that this Palin decision disqualifies John McCain outright from being president of the United States. Until she is removed from the ticket, no sane conservative can vote for this farce..." So, apparently Palin is the problem - if she is removed, the dishonest, integrity- and honor-free, pro-torture, 'me first and damn the country' person at the top of the ticket is suddenly worthy of votes! Wow!

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Makes the world go round... ($$)


Above - top contributors to each of the presidential campaigns. Imp note: the donations are for the 2008 election cycle, and come from the organization's' PACs, isheirindividual members and/or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families, and NOT from the companies themselves (since that would be illegal...)

Below - the demographic breakdown by sex and size of donation...

Senator Obama from Opensecrets.org
Senator McCain

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Open letter to The Economist

Sirs,
May we please have a retraction and an apology on your part for the horrendous cover caption you subjected us to on your June 5th leader? At that time you said "Voters now have those five months to study them before making up their minds (and The Economist will be doing the same). But, on the face of it, this is the most impressive choice America has had for a very long time." Given that you have now had almost four months to study the candidates, do you still stand by your original estimation? Please redeem yourselves by either retracting your original statement, or by admitting that you were not really serious at the time and were simply indulging in some of that famous "Economist" whimsy!
Respectfully yours.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

McCain and Obama on health


Health Affairs has analyzed the two candidates' respective health care plans, and the verdict is in: each plan has major flaws, best would be a combination of selected features of the two!

McCain:
Cost and coverage implications of the McCain plan to restructure health insurance

Abstract: "Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) health plan would eliminate the current tax exclusion of employer payments for health coverage, replace the exclusion with a refundable tax credit for those who purchase coverage, and encourage Americans to move to a national market for nongroup insurance. Middle-range estimates suggest that initially this change will have little impact on the number of uninsured people, although within five years this number will likely grow as the value of the tax credit falls relative to rising health care costs. Moving toward a relatively unregulated nongroup market will tend to raise costs, reduce the generosity of benefits, and leave people with fewer consumer protections."

Obama:
The Obama Plan: More Regulation, Unsustainable Spending

Abstract: "The health reform plan put forth by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) focuses on expanding insurance coverage and provides new subsidies to individuals, small businesses, and businesses experiencing catastrophic expenses. It greatly increases the federal regulation of private insurance but does not address the core economic incentives that drive health care spending. This omission along with the very substantial short-term savings claimed raise serious questions about its fiscal sustainability. Heavy regulation coupled with a fallback National Health Plan and a play-or-pay financing choice also raise questions about the future of the employer insurance market."

... and the winner is:
Blending Better Ingredients For Health Reform

Abstract: "This paper argues that a desirable health reform plan should accept some features that the Obama and McCain plans have in common, and combine other features from each of the plans. Useful combinations include the presence of both public and private options and a system of credits that are more generous for lower-income households (Obama) and creation of a system of public subsidies that is incentive-neutral across individual and group insurance, curtailment of the current tax subsidy to high levels of coverage for high-income households, and the use of targeted high-risk pools and guaranteed renewability rather than community rating(McCain)."

As expected...


Back on Independence Day this blogger commented ('The founders' genius' - July 4th) re how voting for divided government was a possible strategy for voters, then later ('McCain's Hope' - September 9th) wondered when an explicit argument would be made that 'divided government' would be a good reason to vote for the McCain-Palin ticket.

Well, George Will just wrote a column, McCain's Closing Argument, that does exactly that!

Thursday, September 18, 2008

Ouch!


Ouch! On September 3rd, U.S. Air Mobility Command General Arthur Lichte urged that a quick decision be made between the Boeing and Northrup Grumman / EADS submissions for the next-generation air tanker, given the recent problems with the decision (see links). The problem is that the KC-135s that make up the USAF refueling fleet are over 40 years old on average, and showing their age. Then on September 10th Defense Secretary Robert Gates canceled the RFP, punting the decision to the next president. “Rather than hand the next Administration an incomplete and possibly contested process, Secretary Gates decided that the best course of action is to provide the next Administration with full flexibility regarding the requirements, evaluation criteria, and the appropriate allocation of defense budget to this mission,” a Pentagon release said...

We'll have to wait until after the election to see what a President Obama or McCain would do - as of now candidate Obama seems to be calibrating his position based on the number of union votes it will bring in, while candidate McCain claims to have no preference as long as the process is fair.

Note: McCain has a history here (in 2003/2004 McCain shot down a sweetheart deal between the airforce and Boeing to lease tankers. In the aftermath the Secretary of the Air Force resigned, Darlene Druyun went to jail for four months, Boeing CFO Michael Sears was fired and also went to jail, and Boeing CEO Phil Condit resigned.), and is also being attacked by the Obama campaign for having former EADS lobbyists working on his campaign.

The USAF’s KC-X Aerial Tanker RFP: Canceled
KC-X articles at Defense Tech
KC-X articles at Danger Room
Air Force Air Refueling: The KC-X Aircraft Acquisition Program Comprehensive CRS report (pdf)
Even Stalled, KC-X Contract Is Still A Political Football

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Finely calibrated reactions..

Politicians, and especially the presidential candidates, have to tread a fine line while trying to use the recent market 'meltdown' (Fannie & Freddie, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, etc.) to make points with the public...

"... Of the 354 lawmakers who received money from Freddie and Fannie between 1989 and 2008, Sen. Chris Dodd received the most. But next was . . . drumroll . . . Barack Obama..."

Whoops!

Both the Republicans and Democrats have given the financial services industry everything it wanted. The finance sector has endless amounts of money to influence politics and can outgun the bank regulators every time.” That was Richard Christopher Whalen, Managing Director of Institutional Risk Analytics..." (2007 interview) and "... It’s the same rough picture over at Lehman Brothers. The firm, says opensecrets.org “has built a strong financial relationship with politicians over the years and coincidentally ranks fourth in the largest contributors in the race for the White House.” Barack Obama has received $395,600 from Lehman and its employees, while John McCain has taken in $117,500...."

A Bipartisan Guide to the Financial Collapse: Who’s not taking money from Merrill and Lehman?

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

McCain's hope...


OK, so the McCain/Palin ticket is benefiting from its convention bounce and some polls show them ahead of Obama/Biden. However, for multiple reasons the latter should still win. a) Even given parity in the popular vote, what is important is the state-by-state distribution of that vote and the corresponding effect on the Electoral College vote. At 49-49 in the popular vote Obama/Biden are still winners in the Electoral College if you look at the state-by-state polls and breakdown e.g. see the figure below from 'FiveThirtyeight.com - Electoral Projections done right.'


b) The McCain/Palin convention bounce will wear off, as did that of Obama/Biden. c) What will be dispositive will be the debates, the relative numbers of gaffes made by each side, and economic (and possibly international) conditions between now and the elections. Finally d) the record of President Bush over the last eight years is a lead weight around the necks of McCain/Palin!

What is not receiving much focus at this point is that beyond the presidential choice at the top of the ticket, control of the House and Senate are also up for grabs... All indications are that the Democrats are going to handily increase their majorities in each body, the question only being by how many seats. This blogger is not sure if they will ever make this explicit, but the only hope for McCain/Palin (at this point, and short of a game-changing event) seems to be that the electorate will decide to split their vote and opt for divided government - a President McCain, but with his authority checked by a Democratic party with enhanced majorities in each body who could temper and prevent his worst excesses!

It is true that this split would have the potential to get "ugly' but the electorate has shown a penchant for divided government before. Some of President Clinton's positive legacy occurred in concurrence with a Republican-majority in the House and Senate. True, you do have to put aside some Republican excesses (multiple independent counsel investigations which fizzled; attempted impeachment; etc., etc.) but the Democrats have shown no 'stomach' for similar tactics, and this blogger doubts that the Democrats will have the nerve to do much against an ex-president Bush, given that Democratic Party leaders and stalwarts were complicit in a number of the activities for which he could (in theory) be pursued!

Related blog posts:

Post-electoral scenario - II - September 2nd
Post-electoral scenario - I - September 2nd
The founders' genius - July 4th
Diversify! - May 5th

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Danger! Danger! Fire Alert!


Danger! Danger! Will Robinson! Fire alert! Danger! Danger! Fire alert!



OK, all kidding aside there is a lot of demolishing of straw men going on in our nation's capital:

When McCain suggests opening up the 1002 area of ANWR for drilling... quick, construct a couple of straw men - "Drilling won't reduce the price of today's gas!" & "Even if we start now it wouldn't have any effect for 7 to 10 years..." Boom, knock it down! High fives all around. Psst, don't mention that a big part of our solution, higher CAFE standards for vehicles. also has a pretty long lead time as well.

When Obama suggested that the U.S. should be willing to sit down and talk to the "axis of evil' ("The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them...is ridiculous... One of the first things that I would do in terms of moving a diplomatic effort in the region forward is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria.")... quick, construct a straw man' - "Obama will meet and kow tow to Ahmedin-a-you-know-who..." Boom, knock it down! High fives all around. Psst, don't mention that this is exactly what the current administration has started to do (directly with North Korea, indirectly with Syria...).

The politicians and punditocracy seem to have so much fun demolishing straw men. It's not at all surprising, it 's much easier to do than tackling the difficult issues facing the nation, which are closer to tar babies!

Friday, April 4, 2008

Misc. Updates

1. On March 28th the McCain Too entry bemoaned the fact that Senator McCain seemed to be one with President Bush, who mistakenly believes that his oath of office (and highest priority) is to preserve, protect and defend the United States, when in actuality it is to “.. preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States.” Now the infamous Yoo OLC memos have been released, see Part I & Part II, and it is apparent that the same thought process is involved. In essence it argues that a) since the President’s paramount duty is to protect and defend the US, and b) it’s an armed conflict (war), anything goes in furtherance of these goals. Amazing how dropping just three words so completely changes the focus of what it is all about. Also amazing is thesethree missing words seem to be unrecognized, as opposed to the volumes of ink spilt to decry the President’s extra “sixteen words in his 2003 State of the Union speech.

2. On March 24th the Priorities?!? entry mentioned the government's snooping. Some more information re NSLs here and at the included links: NSLs and the National Surveillance State

3. The January 2nd post, Pakistan & Benazir Bhutto referenced the ninth report of the UNIIIC on Lebanon. On March 28th Daniel Bellemare issued the 10th United Nations International Independent Investigation Commission report on the years-old assassination of Rafik Hariri in Lebanon...