The Respectfully Republican Conversation

I think Morton Kondracke just talked to Powell and he says its hogwash about him speaking at the convention and that he has not decided who he is endorsing.

Shirley --that youtube video would make the best McCain commercial---

 Rosemary-Wasn't he campaigning in Fla last week by saying he'd bring jobs to NASA-

Kerry and Obama? You have got to be kidding me! I cannot even imagine that one!

I can see the democrats problem with finding a running mate.  Who hasn't run for President out of their group?  And who isn't too far left?  Who is sleeping in their own bed?  It's troubling.  Pelosi's available.  She has 2 out of the 3.

I'm reading Corsi's book, The Obama Nation. It's a page turner.  Kerry was flailing around about it yesterday, so that should keep it on the best seller list for quite some time.  No one is coming out to say it isn't true either. 

New kind of politician alright.

New way of harvesting personal information. Suprising that people wanting to be the first to find out who Obama picks for VP don't realise their personal info will be used.

Now this stunt during the Olympics advertising -Time reports:

The campaign launches a 15-second TV spot asking voters to “support change,” and text the campaign to receive a free sticker. Read script here.

The text campaign is one way to harvest phone numbers from potential supporters.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Yep they need all those phone numbers for the most massive phone banking in history that will occur for Obama at mile high stadium with the 75,000 supportors that have to volunteer for six hours to get in.

Well the line is that his friends and associations have nothing to do with his judgement............

My overwhelming problem with Obama has been his choice of foreign advisors which I know reflects his judgement.

Take for example Susan Rice his top foreign policy advisor--who has been bashing McCain all over the airways saying

"John McCain shot from the hip, [with a] very aggressive, very belligerent statement …He may or may not have complicated the situation."

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/13/team-obama-blames-georgia-on-mccain/

Here is what Bull Dog Pundit writes

http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/content/index.php?p=3001

---------------------------------

February 20, 2008
Obama’s “Foreign Policy Advisor’s” Disgraceful Record On Terrorism

by Bull Dog Pundit @ 6:12 pm. Filed under Politics, 2008, War On Terror, Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, News

When I was reading this article about the Obama campaign’s response to Hillary’s claim that she would be the better “commander in chief”, I ran across a name that sounded familiar. The name is “Susan Rice” and she is named is a “foreign policy advisor” to Barack Obama.

And then I remembered why I knew her name. She also held that position in John “Crushed” Kerry’s campaign.  And I’m not too old that I don’t remember why she deserved mention. And while we still have no access to all the great content from the “Crush Kerry” days, one of our old posts about Ms. Rice and her background, was copied onto Free Republic.

So let’s take a trip down memory lane shall we and reacquaint ourselves with Ms. Rice and her history. From August 10, 2004:

    In a move made almost as quietly as a man sneaking classified documents out in his socks, John Kerry has a new “Senior Advisor for National Security Affairs”. Her name is Dr. Susan E. Rice, and she takes over that position from Sandy “Inadvertently” Berger whose idea of covert action is grabbing sensitive national security documents and stuffing them in his Fruit of the Loom’s. Make sure you “cache” the above link about Ms. Rice’s position with the Kerry campaign, as those descriptions tend to disappear once the person proves to be and embarrassing disgrace, like Sandy Burglar.

    We think this decision by Kerry is important, because if Dr. Rice’s name isn’t familiar to you, it should be. Along with Sandy Berger and Madeline Albright’s she was a key partner in the Clinton administration’s appeasement of Osama Bin Laden and played a major role in the decision to refuse Sudan’s offer to hand over Bin Laden in 1996-1997.

    Any president’s most important decisions are those he makes when appointing individuals to fill key national security positions. In a post 9/11 world, those appointments offer a window into the president’s strategy and approach to fighting the war on terror. Before getting caught like a kid with his hand in the cookie jar, Sandy Burglar was thought of as a potential Secretary of State in a Kerry administration. Since that is now politically untenable (even for Democrats), Kerry chose Susan Rice to take over Berger’s position in the campaign, leading to speculation that she would be Kerry’s National Security Advisor.

    If Ms. Rice is in line for such a promotion, be very afraid. Why? Because according to multiple sources, including former Clinton official Mansoor Ijaz and Richard Miniter, author of the bestseller Losing Bin Laden, it was she who was a major opponent of accepting Sudan’s offer to turn over the world’s most wanted mass murderer. At the time, Rice was the Clinton Administration’s Secretary of State for African Affairs and a former assistant National Security Advisor under Sandy Berger.

    According the both Ijaz and Miniter, Rice’s personal beliefs on the Sudan’s credibility led to her convincing Berger to reject their offer to turn over Bin Laden, overruling the advice of Tim Carney, then ambassador to Sudan. Her partner in this colossal error in judgment? Bush hater Richard Clarke. Sadly, a little more than a year later, Bin Laden’s murderers blew up the African embassies, killing US soldiers and citizens. And while we all know it, the Kerry people need to keep in mind the event known as 9/11. We say that because nobody who remembers that awful day could possibly call for “neighborhood watches” to fight terror.

    Further, it appears that Ms. Rice’s judgment has not gotten any better over the years. Before jumping on the “Anybody But Bush” bandwagon, er, the Kerry campaign, Ms. Rice was a key advisor for none other than anti-war conspiracy nut, Howard Dean. Just a year ago, she was backing the Dean claim that the capture of Saddam has not made America safer.

    In a further example of Ms. Rice’s poor judgment, and her inability to see things staring her smack dab in the face, she is one of the few people still vouching for Joe Wilson’s credibility long after everyone else realized that not even vultures could find any shred of credibility on the Wilson carcass.

    One absolutely shudders with the thought of this woman being in charge of our national security. She has been behind the curve and wrong on just about every issue on which she’s gone on record. The fact that she has the Osama cloud hanging over her head, and her shilling for Howard Dean should automatically disqualify her from being anywhere near a position of influence in national security affairs. Yet, John Kerry, in another episode of poor and unexplainable judgment chooses to put Ms. Rice front and center to the public as his national security mouthpiece.

    President Bush has assembled perhaps the strongest foreign policy team ever. Think about it. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Powell (though we disagree w/ him on numerous issues) are all people who know that in a post 9-11 world the fight must be taken to the terrorists and clearly see the danger of doing nothing in the face of a grave threat. On the other side, you have the John Kerry model of a “law enforcement” type strategy to fight terror, being carried out by the likes of previous appeasers and retreads like Sandy Berger, John Edwards, Susan Rice, Madeline Albright and Richard Clarke. Let’s hope the adults stay in charge.

None of this should surprise you.  Obama is as far-left as they come, so it’s no surprise that he surrounds himself with birds of the same feather.  And if, God Forbid, he wins, it won’t be as if we can’t say we didn’t know what was coming.  The last thing we need is a President with a September 10th mentality listening to people who think that 9/11 was just a one-off.

Paging John McCain…..

-------------------------------

PS: Paul at Powerline writes:

As Bulldog Pundit reminds us, during Bill Clinton's second term, Rice played a major role in the decision to refuse Sudan's offer to hand over Bin Laden. According to Richard Miniter, author of Losing bin Laden, Rice persuaded Sandy Berger to turn Sudan down because she doubted its credibility and was offended by its human rights violations. But our ambassador to Sudan argued far more sensibly for calling Khartoum's "bluff." Mansoor Ijaz, who was involved in the negotiations with Sudan provides the same account 

Linda,

As I read along about their association I see it went deeper.  Obama worked at the law firm where Rezko was one of the clients.  Obama did do some legal work for Rezko.  Then we skip a few years later, and now Obama is a State Senator (with the help of Rezko's campaign funding), and Rezko did half-assed work on the repairs that he received millions for from the State, and never once did Obama call him to task, never once asked for an official inquiry as to why the repairs aren't being done while he was a sitting Senator. 

 A lot of those buildings Rezko was to work on were in Obama's voting district.  He let those people living in those buildings... freeze, among other things that they had to endure.  I'm sure you know all this, but I didn't know Obama worked in the law firm where Rezko was a client.  Talk about conflict of interest.  Then comes the house deal, and rest is history. 

Shirley,

Yes, it's worth it.  I'll be happy to do a book swap deal with you.  I'll mail you mine and you do the same and we'll return.  There's quite a lot in there with fuller explanations.  An example is, who is Saul Alinsky?, and once we know his teachings that Obama is a student of, then we see his entire campaign of CHANGE.  And what it actually means.  If you don't mind having your brains boil over while you read this book, then it's definately worth reading. 

Very good article from the Times of London considering all the kvelling at the thought that with an Obama presidency all of Europe will be in love with us...................

Also--a little about Putin---It will make you cringe!

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/barry_the_unready_and_putin_th.html 

from The Times of London

Georgia: Europe wins a gold medal for defeatism
Sarkozy's ‘peace in our time' deal is a reminder of what could happen if the EU wins more clout
Gerard Baker

To some, China's muscular domination of the Olympic medal table is a powerful allegory of the shifting balance of global power. A far better and more literal testimony to the collapse of the West may be seen in the distinctly weak-kneed response to Russian aggression in Georgia by what is still amusingly called the transatlantic alliance.

Once again, the Europeans, and their friends in the pusillanimous wing of the US Left, have demonstrated that, when it come to those postmodern Olympian sports of synchronized self-loathing, team hand-wringing and lightweight posturing, they know how to sweep gold, silver and bronze.

There's a routine now whenever some unspeakable act of aggression is visited upon us or our allies by murderous fanatics or authoritarian regimes. While the enemy takes a victory lap, we compete in a shameful medley relay of apologetics, defeatism and surrender.

The initial reaction is almost always self-blame and an expression of sympathetic explanation for the aggressor's actions. In the Russian case this week, the conventional wisdom is that Moscow was provoked by the hot-headed President Saakashvili of Georgia. It was really all his fault, we are told.
Vladimir Putin's mastery checkmates the West

Michael Binyon says Russia has been biding its time - but its victory in Georgia has been brutal and brilliant


What's more, the argument goes, the US and Europe had already laid the moral framework for Russia's invasion by our own acts of aggression in the past decade. Vladimir Putin was simply following the example of illegal intervention by the US and its allies in Kosovo and Iraq.

It ought not to be necessary to point out the differences between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Mr Saakashvili's Georgia, but for those blinded by moral relativism, here goes - Georgia did not invade its neighbours or use chemical weapons on their people. Georgia did not torture and murder hundreds of thousands of its own citizens. Georgia did not defy international demands for a decade and ignore 18 UN Security Council resolutions to come clean about its weapons programmes.

And unlike Iraq under Saddam, Georgia is led by a democratically elected president who has pushed this once dank backwater of the Soviet Union, birthplace of Stalin and Beria, towards liberal democracy and international engagement.

The Kosovo analogy has a more resonant ring of plausibility to it and has been heavily exploited by the Russians in defence of their actions. But it too is specious. It is true that South Ossetia and Abkhazia, like Kosovo within Serbia, are ethnic-minority-majority regions within a state that they dislike. But that's where the parallel ends.

Unlike Serbia, Georgia has not been conducting a campaign of “ethnic cleansing” against the people of these provinces. In the 1990s Serbia had firmly established its aggressive intentions towards its minorities with ugly genocidal wars against Croatia and Bosnia. And in any case the two Georgian enclaves have been patrolled by Russian “peacekeepers” for the past 15 years.

We need to be morally clear about what is going on in Georgia. Perhaps Mr Saakashvili was a little reckless in seeking to stamp out the separatist guerrillas. But to suggest that he somehow got what he deserved is tantamount to saying that a woman who dresses in a miniskirt and high heels and gets drunk in a bar one night is asking to be raped.

If shifting moral blame won't relieve us of our responsibilities then surely defeatism will. Whoever is right or wrong, the critics say, we can't do anything about it. In the past week, the familiar parade of clichés has been rolled out to explain why it is all hopeless. The Russian bear, pumped up by all that oil wealth, is reasserting power in its own backyard. The US and Europe, their energy sapped by endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, can only stand by and watch.

There's something odd about listening to European governments speak about the futility of diplomacy. They are the ones who usually insist that military force alone can achieve little and who say that diplomacy must be given a chance. But now they seem to say that, since we can't stop Russia militarily, there is nothing else we can do.

But we can make life very uncomfortable for Mr Putin. Russia is not the Soviet Union. Its recent (relative) prosperity depends on its continuing integration into the global economy. It sets great store by the recognition that it gains from a seat at the high table with the great powers in the G8. It wants to elevate that status farther by joining the World Trade Organisation and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Punitive measures will hurt us too, of course: Russia could cause trouble over Iran and holds an alarmingly large quantity of US official debt. It could play havoc with the West's energy supplies.

The Europeans don't much like the idea of any of this. So this week they demonstrated the same sort of resolve that they showed in the Balkans in the early 1990s, when they stood by as genocide unfolded on their own continent.

Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President, in his capacity as head pro tempore of the EU, came back from a trip to Moscow and Tbilisi, waving a piece of paper and acclaiming peace in our time.

But the one-sided ceasefire that he negotiated was more or less dictated to him by Mr Putin. It not only left the Russian military in place in the disputed enclaves. It allowed them free rein to continue operations inside the rest of Georgia.

That disastrous piece of European diplomacy finally seems to have stirred the US into tougher action. Goaded by John McCain, who has been brilliantly resolute in his measure of Russian intentions over the past few years, the Bush Administration at last dropped its credulous embrace of Mr Putin and upped the ante with direct military assistance to Georgia and threats of tougher diplomatic action.

But we should never forget what Mr Sarkozy and his EU officials got up to this week. There can be no clearer indication of the perils that threaten the West if the EU gets its way and wins more clout in the world.

This, remember, is the same EU that wants to take over foreign and security policy from member states, an institution that is always eager to pump itself up at the expense of democratic institutions in those member states, but which crumbles into puny submission when faced with authoritarian bullying overseas.

It was a great Frenchman, Baron Pierre de Coubertin, who founded the modern Olympic movement on the famous principle that “the important thing is not winning but taking part”.

The EU today seems to have adapted that slogan to fit its own desired global role - the important thing is taking part and not winning.
 --------------------------------------------------

I'm wondering how people can compare going into Iraq with Russia's invasion.  When we went into Iraq it wasn't to occupy their country.  I do believe Russia knows our hands are tied so they, with their big armor, tampled on this small country.  They purposely went in and distroyed the infrastructure.

I was listening to the president of Georgia talking about how they had built pools, kindergartens, parks, etc., and how they purposely targeted those facilities.  It was sad. 

But, of course, the libs are saying how can Bush tell Russia NO when Bush bullied his way into Iraq.  Apples and Oranges again.

Shirley

There's only one name I can think of for Dean right now....IDIOT!  Oops, that is name calling.

All I can remember when he was running for prez was his shrieking yell!  That's when the idiot lost it.  His party should be embarrassed by him.  I am. LOL

Shirley

SJaddleback answers the question///  why am I a republican.  BO believes the hope of the American Dream is that the Government owes everyone a higer education, freedom from poverty, and freedom from want.   JMc believes the real American Dream, any body has the freedom to become all that they can be.  The difference between the touchy feely yoga and  a latte will fix the world, vs take responsibility and do what is right.   

I think McCain did a marvelous job.  However, I am partial.  LOL

You know there's gonna be an ad made about his rich $5,000,000 remark.  For Pete's sake he was just kidding, but I can see it coming.  He was just grabbing a number out of the air.

He was smart to mention his first marital failure as a moral issue.  Especially after Edwards' little UH-OH.  McCain's first marriage and it's failure has been brought up many times comparing him to Edwards and are we to trust McCain as prez since he cheated 30 YEARS AGO!  I honestly believe that McCain with all of his experience probably does understand exactly what he did those many years ago. 

Tomorrow and Tuesday night on Fox at 8 PM ET they are going to have an in depth look into Obama and McCain's background.  Should be interesting.  I believe they'll be showing Obama first.

That just irks me.  I heard this on Fox this morning.  I think McCain did an outstanding job and Obama's "bunch" just can't stand it.  That's why he WILL NOT MEET McCain in the townhall meeting arena.  His positions change just like his campaign slogan .. CHANGE, HOPE, YES WE CAN!

Wanna hear something funny?  No?  Well, you're going to anyway.  My dh does not keep up with this stuff.  He watches TV upstairs and I watch downstairs.  Sad?  Nope.  I don't want to watch sports and reruns all day long...LOL  Anyway, he was cooking (yes he cooks) and I was leisurely watching the Civil Forum.  My dh came into the den and said, WHO IS THAT TALKING?  I said, Obama.  He said, and remember he does NOT watch this stuff, He can't speak worth a  (EXPLETIVE)..damn.  He (Obama) says, uh, uh...you get the idea. 

I would have LOVED to see a townhall meeting between the two of them....JUST ONE!

Shirley

I read something really funny.  I rarely read this particular site unless someone points it out to me. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-nickolas/did-mccain-steal-his-cros_b_119471.html  

What is going on here? Did McCain lie to Pastor Rick Warren in a church this weekend about his POW experience in an attempt to kiss-up to Evangelicals who are already very concerned about his bona fides on faith and religion? Could there have been a worse venue and context for such a lie?

But the big question is whether our feckless national media will even bother following-up on this troubling development as they did with by promoting the GOP-pushed meme of exaggerations by Al Gore in 2000 or John Kerry's Vietnam War experiences in 2004 as the Swift Boat liars peddled?

I suspect American journalism is in such a sorry state these days that they won't bother devoting equal time and resources to something so potentially explosive in 2008. I hope I'm wrong...

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story was from his original post, "Did McCain Steal His "Cross in the Dirt" Story At Last Night's Forum From Solzhenitsyn? "

Can you believe that these people are really accusing the media is not treating "someone" fairly.  I believe this person has listened to Sean Hannity about journalism.  Of course, there's more to read, IF YOU CARE TO. LOL

Shirley

I was watching H&C tonight and the pastor said McCain was late..the secret service was with him..he was in a different building...the TV in the room was disconnected so he couldn't have watched it.  Wow!  A bunch of whiners for sure.

I wasn't impressed with the "Obama" special tonight.  I doubt I'll learn anything from McCain's tomorrow night.  But I'll watch it anyway.

Shirley