Michael J. Totten has explained very well what I see wrong with the current embodiment of the Democratic Party. The real concept of “liberalism” is basic to our nation, and the founding tenet. Yet the Democrats of today have forgotten.
Michael sees that liberalism in Dubya, and makes the point quite well.
Dubya has made it clear he isn’t interested in pursuing his legacy. He knows that the history of his Administration won’t be written until long after he is gone. What is written today and in the next four years will be little more than opinion with facts thrown in as necessary. Real history requires separation in time from the events in order to better assess them.
I’ve done a fair amount of historical research, and understand a bit about how things look from afar. Using archival information and piecing thoughts together regarding personalities to weave a coherent text can be daunting. And in writing real history, biases can intrude and either be reinforced or discounted. A good historian will have the integrity to overcome bias, even though the topic may be a pet project. I doubt my text here meets those standards. But I wanted to really show how what looks really important today actually fades once the future plays out.
*****************
Earlier in this century, George W. Bush’s Presidency was on the road to being a weak reiteration of the Reagan years. He had taken some steps toward reapplying Reaganomics, but had succumbed to the desire to work with the opposition in creating more socialistic programs. Under his watch, the Federal government increased Medicare spending to provide prescription drug benefits to the elderly, and Bush pushed the Congress to increase education spending. In the latter, he teamed with Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts in an attempt to heal some of the wounds remaining from the contentious 2000 election.
On September 11, 2001, Bush’s focus changed dramatically with the attack by nineteen Islamic terrorists which destroyed New York City’s twin World Trade Center towers and the southern face of the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
After first eliminating the Taliban government in Afghanistan, American forces deposed Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Within four years, both countries held free elections for the first time in history, and American forces withdrew. This was followed soon after by the withdrawl of Syrian forces from Lebanon, a country which had been occupied for more than 30 years. Internal strife in Syria led to a repudiation of the Assad Baathist government and open elections in 2007.
While turmoil reigned in Syria, the Iranian government saw an opportunity to attack Israel and launched two missiles toward Tel Aviv and a third at Jerusalem. All three were intercepted by Patriot batteries and their pieces fell into Jordanian territory. The relatively crude nuclear warheads failed to detonate, but the political reverberations gave Israel cover for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. Dissidents in Iran managed to overthrow the government, and requested assistance from the UN in setting up elections. In the last official act of that organization, the UN declined. A coalition of delegates from the US and twelve other nations established offices in Teheran and free elections took place in 2008, concurrent with the election in the US.
President Hillary Clinton moved into the White House in 2009, and the Islamicists made their last-ditch effort to change the dynamics of the overall war by setting off a small nuclear explosion under the Golden Gate Bridge. The low-yield weapon took down the south tower, but the city was spared extensive damage due to the surface explosion rather than an air-burst. President Clinton suffered a nervous breakdown from which she never recovered, and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, informally served out the remainder of her term, much to the chagrin of Vice President John Edwards. With no strong commitment to continuing the fight, Edwards was defeated handily in 2012.
President Condoleezza Rice took the oath of office in 2013, and immediately called for a new international organization made up of representative governments from around the world. Membership was restricted to nations which had held free and open elections for at least 50 years, and associate membership for those which allowed for member nations to monitor elections for at least four cycles. Countries like Saudi Arabia, excluded from membership, began the slow movement toward open elections and representative government, and by the end of Rice’s second term the Organization of Republics boasted 87 member nations with 23 more in application.
The changes in the world dynamic were a direct result of America’s decision to end Islamofascism. Beirut is once again a thriving international city. Iraq has become the economic center of the Middle East with oil and food exports supporting the entire region. Jordan’s agreement with Israel to build a pipeline and desalination plant promises to turn the desert area east of Amman into a green zone. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are now having to make some tough decisions, and are moving more toward the model in Turkey. Iran has redirected its nuclear efforts toward energy generation, and now exports more oil than any country in the region while still providing adequate electricity for its own consumption and sale across borders to both Iraq and Afghanistan. Syria still struggles with no oil and little farm land, but is considering water importation through a pipeline to mimic Jordanian efforts.
The last thirty years have seen tremendous changes in the Middle East, and they can all be traced back to the decision by a much-maligned Bush Administration’s decision to take the battle to the enemy.
Bill Whittle is an internet favorite. If you’ve only recently begun browsing blogs, his writing may not be familiar. It should be.
His latest effort comes in two parts. And it is a rip-snorter that will make you remember and think seriously. I’ll tell you no more than he discusses alliances and deterrence. If you sincerely want to understand where we really are in this world, you need to read this.
Welcome back, Bill.
The bill introduced by Charlie Rangel to reinstate the draft was voted on yesterday. There were 15 co-sponsors, one of whom withdrew from sponsorship in June (Eleanor Holmes Norton). The following are the sponsors:
The motion failed by a vote of 402-2. Only one of the sponsors voted for it–Pete Stark. Not even Charlie Rangel could bring himself to do so.
Need I say any more?
James is back, and getting settled in up the road from me at Killeen.
UML Guy has the best description yet of what we are attempting to do in the Middle East–Standing up the dominoes.
For those of you as old as I am, you will remember the opposite which got us involved in Vietnam. In the Middle East, the dominoes have already fallen, and we need to reset them.
Along with real brownshirts, the loonies are proud to offer information to help teenagers and college-age youths convince Mom not to vote for Bush.
I checked the site, and there is some good information. Of course, if you have a broader range of knowledge, these are merely talking points. Here are one each from their categories.
In 2003, despite 16% unemployment among those 18-24, the Bush Administration cut $180 million from youth job training grants.
And how does the government create jobs? Did any of those 18-24 year olds ever avail themselves of any training prior to the cut? And why is the federal government involved in training–I see nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to do anything like that.
In June 2004, the Bush administration proposed eliminating a rule protecting roadless areas of national forest, opting instead to give control over logging and commercial development to state and local officials.
Wow. You mean state and local officials, far more attuned to a local constituency, will have some authority to determine how best to protect the forests?
In 2003, Bush boasted that his tax cuts would provide an average of $2000 for small business owners. However, excluding small-business owners in the top tax bracket (earning over $310,000/year), only 20% will receive this amount. In total, half will receive less than $500 – and the bottom quarter will receive nothing at all.
Why did we exclude that block? Did they not fit the preconceived notion? And doesn’t “average” mean, I don’t know, average?
Since 9/11, the Justice Department under Bush classified significantly more cases (3,500) as terrorism than in the two years prior to the attacks. However, of these cases only 16 defendants were convicted and sentenced to 5 or more years in prison–less than in the two years before the attacks.
Who would have dreamed that law enforcement might be a little more concerned about terrorist activity, and preventing disasters than they were before 9/11? Were any of the others convicted and sentenced to less than 5 years? Were some detained, questioned, and then released? What, exactly, is your point?
In March 2003, lawyers for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld claimed that Bush, and any agents following his orders, were not bound by laws prohibiting torture–including the Geneva Conventions and U.S. Torture Statute–during the duration of the War on Terror.
As far as a “Torture Statute”, I’ve never heard of such a thing. Cite it, please. By the way, the Geneva Conventions apply only to those countries who have mutually signed them. Vietnam didn’t, and the North Vietnamese used that as support in their defense that they tortured Americans. The US has always had a policy of following the Conventions whether the enemy does or not. What Rumsfeld’s lawyers said (if, in fact they said it) is true. That doesn’t mean he advocates torture as implied.
According to a government report, a “pattern of contractor management problems” in the Bush administration has led to cost disputes between the government and Halliburton, which has already been paid $5 billion in taxpayer money.
Funny how no mention is made of the fact that both Halliburton accounting and Pentagon accounting found the problems and did what they were supposed to do: fix them.
In February 2003, the Bush administration demanded that Congress strip $230 million from the budget for vocational/community college education.
Okay, does this $230 million include the $180 million mentioned earlier? Again, education is a local issue. Why is the federal government even involved?
After 2 years of the Bush administration, the percentage of Mexicans holding a “bad” or “very bad” opinion of the U.S. rose from 22% to 58%.
I guess the ones risking death to get from Mexico to the US illegally are part of that 42% that likes us. Or the 36% difference in two years indicates the number of those who like the US who have already crossed the border and no longer show up in the statistics.
As of April 2004, only 10% of Europeans had a positive opinion of George Bush.
He’ll be disappointed to hear that, I’m sure. I wonder if they hate me, too. Yes.
In 2001, the Bush administration disbanded the President’s Interagency Council on Women, as well as the White House Office of Women’s Initiatives and Outreach.
I don’t think Bush has the same concept of Women’s Outreach as Clinton did. Can anyone explain to me why in the world the White House would need such programs?
Powered by WordPress