Thursday, April 26, 2007
With Whom Will You Stand?
In South Texas near San Antonio there stands a crumbling Spanish mission where 189 volunteers gave their lives so that Texas could win her independence and eventually become part of the United States. The legend of the Alamo has been told and retold for well over a century.
As a child, Father Cordeiro told me endless stories about Davy Crockett and his band of Tennessee volunteers at the Alamo. I’ve watched John Wayne’s epic Alamo movie more times than I care to admit. If the Duke had only hired a decent editor, the film might be bearable. But I digress.
In all the Alamo legends you’ll find the story of Colonel Travis drawing a line in the sand “with his Army saber” and declaring to his troops they could cross the line and leave, or stay with him and fight. As the Ballad of the Alamo says, not a soldier crossed the line.
Those of you regular SOTR readers will understand there is no love lost between myself and Senator Dusty Harry Reid (D-Circus Circus). He has taken the unprecedented step of declaring the Iraq War to be “lost”. I’ve done some historical research and I cannot find another political leader (minority or majority party) who was bold – or stupid – enough to undercut troops in combat by telling them their cause is lost while they’re still fighting it.
I’m not sure of Dusty Harry’s qualifications to pass judgment on the Iraq War. His biography mentions no hint of military service or anything relating to military strategy. He does make very colorful illusions to his Searchlight roots and service as a Capitol Hill policeman. Dusty Harry is, and has been since age 28, an ambitious politician. Somewhere along his life’s course he somehow got the delusion he was qualified to act as a military expert.
On the other side of the proverbial line in the sand stands General David Petraeus. His military qualifications and biography are unparalleled. He was tapped by the Commander-in-Chief to lead the Iraq effort because he was the best man for the job – bar none. Petraeus has forgotten more about military strategy than Dusty Harry will ever learn. He literally wrote the book on counter insurgent operations. Add to that the fact all the medals on his dress uniform can set off metal detectors in Washington even though he’s in Iraq and it kind of makes you wonder why Dusty Harry and The Pelosi put so little faith in this man and his abilities.
Dusty Harry, The Pelosi and the rest of the Congressional Jackasses simply aren’t interested in seeing the Petraeus Surge succeeding in any way, shape, manner, or form. Dusty Harry himself indicated he would not believe any reports of success coming from Iraq – even if they came from Petraeus himself. Ask yourself, dear reader, given what I’ve already shown you about the biographies of both men, who do you believe has the better perspective on Iraq?
It shouldn’t even be a question.
As for me, I’ll stand on the Petraeus side of the line in the sand. Dusty Harry is a disgrace to the US Senate, the State of Nevada, and the United States. If you don’t believe me, go read David Broder’s latest Washington Post column. Even people on the left are starting to throw bricks at Dusty Harry.
There is a Proverb which states the following:
He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind…Memo to Dusty Harry: The wind is coming.
Here endeth the lesson.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Dusty Harry Rolls The Dice
Current Senate Majority Leader Dusty Harry (D-Circus Circus) likes to talk a big game. He loves to get in front of the camera and draw himself up to his full height (whatever that may be) and loom large before his audience as he wags his bony fingers and lectures ad nauseum.
And yesterday nausea is exactly what he caused.
Dusty Harry yesterday took to the cameras and microphones to declare the War in Iraq to be a lost cause. He tried to back track on the floor of the US Senate and “clarify” his statement to mean that Iraq is a lost cause as long as W doesn’t listen to democratic luminaries such as himself and The Pelosi. In case you didn’t know, they have all the answers even though what they know about victory can be written on the head of a pin with room left over for the World Book Encyclopedia.
Dusty Harry isn’t interested in victory. He isn’t interested in winning the War in Iraq, the War in Afghanistan or the War on Terror. Dusty Harry cares only for defeat because a US defeat is in the best interests of his party. Yes, dear reader, I’m stating unequivocally and for the record that Dusty Harry is cheering for his own country to lose by going before the public and claiming the cause is already lost.
Dusty Harry made his declaration from the safe comfortable confines of Washington, DC surrounded by people who believe him to be a leader. The beltway echo chamber rejoices in Harry’s pontifications because it confirms their world view. You’ll note Dusty Harry did not say this within earshot of any soldier, sailor, airman or Marine who answered their country’s call (with Dusty Harry’s vote by the way) and put themselves in harm’s way.
So, Harry, go and tell this to the soldiers. Tell them they have lost the war on your say so. Tell that to the sailors in the Gulf. Tell it to the airmen who rule the skies over Iraq. Most importantly, go tell it to the Marines. I’m not so sure they’ll take very kindly to someone of your ilk telling them they’ve been beaten by a bunch of rag tag Islamofacist Murdering Thugs. You accuse W of only listening to those who tell him what he wants to hear. That, Senator, is the pot calling the kettle black. Who are you surrounded by? Who puts the words in your mouth? You’re little more than a Moveon.org puppet parroting the Daily Kos. Don’t give me that shocked look. You spoke at the Yearly Kos Convention, not me.
You’ve really blown this one Harry. Check your email box and I’m pretty sure you’ll find some very frank denunciations from those brave men and women whose coats you’re unfit to hold. They believe in their mission, Harry. The believe in the immortal words of General George S. Patton
Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.Americans don’t like to lose, Harry. And, no matter how hard you try and pass your version of Iraq off as truth, you’ll be unsuccessful. That’s because Patreus and Company are doing a fantastic job despite your best efforts to hamstring him.
You’ve invested a lot of time and energy in the effort to defeat America, Harry. Yes, that is what you’re trying to do, and I wish you’d just come out and say that. After such a large investment, I’m pretty sure you own it now Harry.
Congratulations, Harry. You own defeat.
You’re a pathetic, small, little man and a rotten Senator, Harry. There is still such a thing as shame in this world. You own that now, too.
Here endeth the lesson.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
What Are We Prepared To Do With The Next "Cho"?
There are two separate courses of study which make up the foundations of any MBA program. On one side you have the heavy duty accounting, statistics, and economics courses. Some people really love that part of the program. Those people are in serious need of heavy-duty counseling.
On the other side you have the leadership, organization, and marketing classes. The hard-core numbers people refer to these classes as “fluff” because said coursework focuses on issues which are, more often than not, non-quantifiable. That said, neither the heavy-duty numbers nor the “fluff” classes can be avoided. You take one, you take ‘em all.
As a part of one of my “fluff” classes, I was required to take several “personality” tests. The most well known of this test battery is the Myers-Briggs. Some corporations use these tests during the hiring process to get more information about the candidate than is provided by his/her resume.
The most interesting of all the “personality” tests – the exact name of which escapes me at present – was a 500 question behemoth of a test where you are required to answer yes or no to each one of the questions. About one-quarter of the way through the test, people in the classroom started laughing. By the end of the test, the whole class was almost on the floor in hysterical laughter. This laughter was caused by the following types of questions:
Sometimes I think about things too terrible to contemplate.
I’d be a lot better off today if everyone wasn’t out to get me.
I feel like everybody hates me.
I don’t think I can survive much longer in this terrible world.
Without exception, everyone in the classroom wondered who would answer “yes” to such nutball questions. Until this Tuesday, I had yet to find anyone who would fit the profile those questions were seeking.
Cho Seung-Hui would have answered “yes” to those questions.
MSNBC was brave enough – or stupid enough – to give Cho a soap box from which to broadcast his vitriol from the grave. I haven’t seen or read much of it, and I don’t intend to. I’ve seen enough to draw my own conclusions about this sick deranged sorry excuse for a human being.
Cho was a product of an anti-social counter-culture whose fundamental principles are hard for most functionally normal people to understand. He hated pretty much everybody and believed the entire world had committed heinous crimes against him simply because other people existed. Look hard enough and you’ll find he was laughed at in school. I’m sure the grade school bully probably took his lunch money too. He idolized the Columbine killers and considered them “martyrs”. I have little doubt the media will find his high-school classmates and ask them if they feel guilty for driving Cho to murder.
There were those who saw the danger signals. Virginia-Tech authorities referred him to the university’s disciplinary system in 2005 after he harassed a female student. Citing “privacy” laws, the university was unable to provide any information to anyone – including Cho’s parents. He was also briefly hospitalized for psychiatric evaluation in 2005. How much of that information was given, or even available to, Virginia Tech is not know, but my guess is not much. Yes, dear reader, the days have come when we are more concerned with privacy of dangerously violent nut-cases than we are of the innocents upon whom they inflict their insanity.
Current reports indicate Cho’s violent leanings were reported by a professor and at least two women. Several current and former roommates were less than surprised when Cho was identified as the shooter. These facts are troubling. Should more have been done to take Cho out of the college environment? Probably.
The question which remains is what – if anything – could have been done to pre-empt Cho’s murderous rampage. To that question there is no easy answer. Our society has become one in which the worst thing someone can do to another is to offend them, their cultural group, or their “community”. The fear of offense paralyzes those whose responsibility it is to pass judgment on others. Had Cho’s mental state been called into question and used as a tool with which to remove him from Virginia Tech, he would have most likely had his choice of civil-rights and other such lawyers at his beck and call.
There are no doubt more people similar to Cho among us. No amount of hand-gun or ammunition limiting legislation will prevent them from planning – and sometimes executing – their violence on innocent people. If anything good comes from the senseless acts of April 17th, I would hope it would be willingness to recognize people like Cho before they snap. More importantly, I would hope that after having found them, steps could be taken to remove them from an environment where they can take so many lives and forever impact countless others.
Here endeth the lesson.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Trying to Make Sense of the Senseless
The weather around Virginia is bleak. Dark grey clouds fill the sky and the wind howls through the trees like some possessed banshee. All is not right with the world and all you need do is turn on the television to find out why.
Yesterday’s events on the campus of Virginia Tech will long be remembered as part of one of America’s darkest days. One deranged man inflicted his insanity on 32 fellow Hokies in a dark, expressionless mechanical manner. 32 families have been given great cause to mourn today, and every single one of them will be asking one unanswerable question.
There is no single answer to that question. No one person will be able to get inside the head of the shooter and know what truly drove him to such a murderous rage. Yes, there will be those who will claim to have what those who grieve seek – but in truth those words will ring very hollow.
As human beings, we seek to make sense of senseless acts. Investigations – both those official and those from other sources – will be conducted. They will claim to be focused only on the events in question, but all they’re really interested in is assigning blame.
There will be those who blame America’s gun culture on both sides of the issue. Some will use this tragedy as a springboard from which to launch anti-gun campaigns. They believe the only way to prevent similar tragedy is to rid the landscape of all firearms. There will also be those who will claim the answer to this tragedy is for more guns to be in the hands of responsible people.
Personally, I’m wary of anyone who would attempt to place the foundation of any argument atop the coffins of 32 college students and teachers.
There is, as the Preacher says, a time to every purpose under heaven. This is a time to weep, and a time to mourn those whose lives were taken just as they had begun. With time, however, perhaps we can remember them for how they lived rather than how they died. Then this time to weep and mourn may turn itself into a time to heal, laugh, and yes maybe even dance.
It is difficult now to look upon life as a transitory state. That said, I take comfort (and hope others will as well) in the poetic words of W. W. Phelps:
There is no end to glory.A few weeks ago the world celebrated Easter. Easter is a celebration of life beyond this mortal sphere and at times like these I take comfort in knowing the tomb is empty.
There is no end to love.
There is no end to union.
There is no death above.
Here endeth the lesson.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Look What Happens When People Believe The MSM
I have purposefully neglected commenting on Don Imus. I didn’t listen to his syndicated radio program. The only time I ever watched his MSNBC simulcast was when it was shown on the TV screens in front of the elliptical trainers at the gym where I torture myself most every morning. So incredibly boring was the Imus show the channel had to be changed because gym patrons were falling off the elliptical trainers after having been put into a comatose like state by Imus’ mutterings.
Ok, maybe I exaggerate – but only a tad.
If you want the truth behind the forced exit of the I-Man, you need look no further than Sorcha Faal of the venerable Russian propaganda outlet commonly known as Pravda. Yes, dear reader, the same people who for sixty years touted the unmitigated communist party PR have gone behind the scenes to bring you the untold story of Imus’ demise.
It wasn’t the fact that advertisers not only didn’t want their commercials on the Imus show, they went so far as to forcibly enter Imus’ several residences and strip every single one of their products from the very walls and closets – stopping only at Imus’ clothing because – well, there are some things even lawyers won’t do. Neither was it the fact even comatose nursing home patients demanded his show be pulled from the airwaves.
No, dear reader, Imus was yanked from both radio and television because “US War Leaders” were scared to death Imus would blow the whistle on the “secrets” of 9/11. Says Faal:
Unable to attack such a powerful media figure as Don Imus, directly, the US War Leaders, and as we have seen many times before, resorted to a massive media attack against him using as the reason a racial slur against a US woman's basketball team…
Stop laughing. I’m not making this up.
I already told you. Stop laughing. No, I didn’t misquote Ms. Faal. Yes, she did actually quote Rosie O’Donnell. Faal goes on to paint Charlie Sheen – currently starring in the CBS comedy 2 ½ Men – as a prophet of doom as he allegedly will narrate an upcoming exposé of the US War Leaders’ involvement in 9/11.
But, to the US War Leaders, Don Imus represented the most serious threat, to date, of the growing assault against them by America's media personalities threatening to expose the truths behind the events of September 11, 2001 and the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars; and to such an extent that another American media personality, Rosie O'Donnell, has expressed concern that US Military Leaders could actually imprison Mr. Imus.
Faal laments the state of the “once free nation” of America. There was a time when I would read the communist party manifesto propaganda emanating from Pravda and write it off because I knew the writer had no choice but to put forth such tripe or suffer the permanent consequences of being shipped off to some gulag in Siberia.
Sadly, there is little difference between being influenced by a Party Thug and getting all you know about America from Rosie O’Donnell and the rest of the View Gals.
Here endeth the lesson.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
The Tempest In A Thimble
Talk about grasping at straws. This is what happens when people like Vermont’s Patrick “Leaky” Leahy are put in positions of power and responsibility for which they are wholly unqualified.
Leaky Leahy is upset that some White House emails pertaining to the US Attorney firings may have been deleted. He’s convinced White House staffers who claim email may have been deleted are lying and even if said emails were deleted Leahy is convinced that through the miracle of modern technology no email is ever beyond the reach of a Senate subpoena.
When Pat Leahy became an expert on email technology isn’t exactly clear.
The Washington Post’s Dan Froomkin is hauling more water for Leaky Leahy than the Culligan Man. A cursory reading of his latest “investigative” writing would have you believe the very fabric of the country is unraveling because every single word (spoken, written, or otherwise transmitted) of Karl “Sith Lord” Rove has not been recorded for use during a public flogging unseen in Washington since the days of Oliver North and Iran-Contra hearings.
I’m not going to bore you with the explicit details of who sent which email using which server and whether or not said communication violated the spirit or letter of the Presidential Records Act or the Hatch Act. I’ll leave that to Froomkin and his willing accomplices in the MSM. Froomkin himself is convinced this is “The Next Bush Scandal” – the kind the beltway media types live to cover in wall-to-wall whine TV.
The problem with Leahy, Froomkin, et al is that their argument holds no water. They simply have no case. This tempest would be lost in a teacup and is barely worthy of the thimble in which it currently resides. The bottom line is, there is no standing by which Congress can insert itself into this issue.
US Attorneys are appointed by the President of the United States. They serve at his pleasure and can be dismissed at any time for any reason. Its what the private sector likes to refer to as “At Will Employment”. Simply put, if W doesn’t like the color of the guy’s tie, or the gal’s skirt, or the way they are or are not pursing the law enforcement goals of the W Administration, he can simply show them the door.
Constitutionally speaking, which I know is hard for Pat Leahy to understand, and in legal terms, Congress simply has no standing from which to investigate the firing of political appointees. That fact in and of itself makes Leahy’s subpoena threats and Froomkin’s rantings pretty much a moot point.
One fact which Froomkin mentioned but did not elaborate on is the fact there are far harsher consequences for violation of the Hatch Act (which prohibits using federal resources for campaign purposes) than there are for violating the Presidential Records Act. People go to jail under the Hatch Act. People get dirty looks for violating the Presidential Records Act. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out which one is worse.
Leahy’s antics and feigned outrage are good for entertainment, but not much more than that. If I had the time and energy to spare, I might research his reaction to the Clinton (Sorry Excuse For) Administration’s tactic of delay and deny when confronted with Congressional demands for internal White House communications. Then again, I’m pretty sure I’d find no hysteria there.
There is no scandal here. There is no story here. This is nothing more than a very obvious effort by the Congressional Jackasses and their ever willing accomplices in the MSM to drum up anti-W sentiment where ever possible.
And people wonder why – outside the beltway echo chamber – few people care what Leahy whines about.
Here endeth the lesson.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Good News On The Stem Cell Front
With all the hype given to the possible medical breakthroughs contained within the Holy Grail of medical research commonly known as Stem Cells, very little if any actual results have come from that final frontier.
Many proponents of embryonic stem cell research claim that, if given access to federal funds, stem cells could unlock the panacea of medicine and lead to cures to everything from cancer to male pattern baldness. All it takes is the federal blessing to take that which many people consider to be a life and sacrifice it on the altar of science so that others may live in a disease free world.
The most recent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association has some fantastic news on the stem cell front, though if you look hard enough you’ll find it has nothing to do with embryos. In a Brazilian study conducted at University of São Paulo in Ribeirão Preto, recently diagnosed Type I (insulin dependant) diabetics were injected with stem cells from their own bodies after undergoing a light round of immune system suppressing therapy. I’ll let you read the details for yourself, but what I’m most interested in is results.
According to the co-author of the study, University of Chicago’s Richard Burt, 93% of the patients in the first trial did not need synthetic insulin after the “autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation” therapy.
Some of you may look at this study and say “So What?” Well, thanks for asking. Let me illustrate.
Diabetes kills more people than AIDS. It is the number one cause of blindness in the United States, in addition to being one of the leading causes of heart disease, kidney failure, and a host of other ailments far too numerous to mention here.
Any person receiving a diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus today is faced with a lifetime of daily pricks, injections, and blood tests which said person must endure on a daily basis. Many great advances have been made in the past decade in diabetes treatment and management, but that’s just another fancy term for life support.
In my opinion, this true breakthrough in diabetes research holds the first real hope to cure this disease which ravages far too many people – millions of whom are children who want nothing more than to be able to eat a piece of birthday cake without having to worry about how much insulin they’ll have to take to function afterwards.
This is where the stem cell research money should go – an effort which shows real promise for real results.
And best of all, the source for the stem cells can be found within the person getting the therapy.
This might just be one of the few times everyone can be happy about something.
Here endeth the lesson.
Memo to the Gente Fina at the University of São Paulo in Ribeirão Preto: Bem feito, gente! Se ainda precisar de sujetios, me liga!
The Pelosi’s “Alternative” Foreign Policy
I took some time last week to poke fun at The Pelosi’s pilgrimage to Damascus where she met with Syria’s Thug-In-Chief Bashar Assad. Never mind that her motorcade had to serpentine its way through the corpse ridden streets just to get to Assad’s office, The Pelosi was bound and determined to make headlines as she wore her Little-Tan-Riding-Hood scarf.
The Pelosi would like the American people and the world to believe she has some power over America’s foreign policy. She would have the world believe there is an alternative to the W Administration and they should come to her as opposed to W and Company. This isn’t the first time the illusion of a shadow administration has been tried – at least if you believed John “Lurch” Kerry when he spoke about the legions of foreign leaders who came to him to bemoan US policies.
There is really only one problem with The Pelosi’s fetish for masquerading as someone with the power to change or otherwise influence US foreign policy – she has no such power. There’s this little document on file at the National Archives which vests all power relating to foreign policy to the Executive Branch of the US Government – that particular document is the United States Constitution. This may come as a surprise to The Pelosi, but she’s not the Chief Executive mentioned in the Constitution.
It turns out this isn’t the first time someone other than the President has sought to go abroad claiming to represent the United States. Last week, Robert Turner wrote a Wall Street Journal piece in which he chronicled the origin of the Logan Act of 1799. This law (which remains on the books) makes it a felony
for any American, "without authority of the United States," to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States."Obviously this law is seldom if ever enforced because many signatories to the 1984 “Dear Commandante” letter still roam the halls of the US Congress.
What brings me to comment on The Pelosi’s foreign affairs is simple. She went to Damascus and succeeded in doing little more than embarrass herself with an attempt at shuttle diplomacy which even the Washington Post deemed to be a pratfall. In so doing she committed a felony for which she probably won’t ever be charged. Fine.
Today, however, the (less than) honorable Tom Lantos (D-Ca) announced that he and The Pelosi are interested in making a diplomatic trip to Iran. Said Lantos:
Speaking just for myself, I would be ready to get on a plane tomorrow morning, because however objectionable, unfair and inaccurate many of (Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's) statements are, it is important that we have a dialogue with him. Speaking just for myself, I would be ready to get on a plane tomorrow morning, because however objectionable, unfair and inaccurate many of (Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's) statements are, it is important that we have a dialogue with him.The Pelosi, while not specifically endorsing such a trip, did not dispute Lantos’ statement.
This silliness has gone just about as far as it should be allowed to go. There is one foreign policy issuing forth from the United States. The President of the United States is, by Constitutional definition, the Head of State. Affairs of State are handled by the Department of State – not the Office of the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
The Pelosi and her merry band of Congressional Jackasses may think its fun to get on a plane and take tea with a bunch of thuggish murdering dictators in foreign countries. If they continue to work this web of a shadow administration, then they should have to answer for their actions in the real world where the rest of us have to live.
In the real world, when people break laws they pay the consequences. Should The Pelosi continue with her illegal actions, then W should stand up and enforce the rule of law embodied in the Logan Act.
Here endeth the lesson.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Mrs. Pelosi Goes To Damascus
UPDATE: RightWingNutHouse's Rick Moran uncovers the real reason The Pelosi wore the Head Scarf.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Playing Poker With Dusty Harry
In the insulated echo chamber that is the Washington Beltway, its really easy to start believing your own press – especially if you happen to be Senator “Dusty” Harry Reid (D-Circus Circus). He’s been in that echo chamber so long he’s now convinced the American people want to turn tail, run, and surrender in Iraq.
Unsatisfied with the Surrender Timetable passed by the Senate last week, Dusty Harry has now joined forces with presidential loser John “Lurch” Kerry and Wisconsin’s Surrender Ambassador Russ Feingold in proposing an immediate surrender of “some” combat troops while codifying yet another “non-binding” drop dead date of March 31, 2008 for the rest of the US forces in Iraq.
Author’s note: The author of the afore-linked report – the AP’s Anne Flaherty – makes a point of writing that the legislation “orders” combat troops out of Iraq by a date certain – March 31 or August 31 depending on which version you read. Flaherty would do well to do some research and learn the only person vested with the authority to order the Armed Forces to do anything is the President. Congress funds the military. It does not order it. I’ll wait patiently for her clarification. Maybe she should read Big Time Cheney’s Constitutional Primer.
Though Dusty Harry may hail from America’s Gambling Capitol, I don’t think he plays poker very well. He’s holding a very weak hand that, if played, would cut off funds for the very troops he claims to support. He doesn’t seem to understand that, while Americans may not like this war very much they’re much less interested in purposefully losing it to a bunch of Islamofacist Murdering Thugs. Americans hate Cowards. They hate Losers almost as much. Dusty Harry thinks somehow combining these two virtues will solidify support for his Cut & Run Caucus.
Dusty Harry is playing a high stakes game of Texas Hold ‘Em Poke with W. W shot back at Dusty Harry and his band of Congressional Jackasses today. You see, Dusty Harry & Company have left town (some with destinations more exotic than others) without tending to the obvious needs of the Armed Forces – unless you consider a bill laden with nearly $30 Billion of PORK something troops need in a war zone.
With his latest antics, Dusty Harry has laid all his cards on the table and called what he thinks is W’s bluff. Dusty Harry thinks W will cave and sign Dusty Harry’s Surrender bill so as to avoid a constitutional showdown over the war. He thinks W’s veto threat is a bluff and that, in the end, he’ll come out of this ordeal more powerful than ever.
Dusty Harry has vastly over calculated the strength of his hand. He’s forgotten that W doesn’t do the political nuance inherent to those encased in the Beltway Echo Chamber. W seldom bluffs – and will never sign anything that handcuffs his troops to the whims of spineless politicians more concerned with political victory than they are with victory over America’s enemies.
So, Harry, do you fee lucky?
Here endeth the lesson
Pop Quiz: Can somebody please tell me where in the Constitution is found the authority for the Speaker of the House to conduct American diplomacy? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?