A Larger War.
Friday, 02 October 2009 15:30
Chistian J. Riehle
Afghanistan, Iraq, Poland, The Czech Republic and Israel are all part of the same war.40,000 more troops. That is what General McChrystal, President Obama’s hand picked General, has asked for to change the momentum in the war. I predict that if more troops are sent it will be a number at least half the number requested. Remember that President Obama ran on a platform of placing greater priority on Afghanistan. Now we wait to see what greater priority means. The President is in a place where he must decide to appeal to the ant-war left or listen to his generals. Both choices could anger important branches of the U.S. population. More troops angers the left (as well as the libertarian right); and, not increasing the troop levels could mean a myriad of potential problems. Deciding how to handle such things requires a real leader. What seems to be misunderstood is that Afghanistan is part of a larger war, of which too often the administration is on the wrong side. Afghanistan is one of the countries that is clamoring for freedom and liberty. Yes, many in Afghanistan do want freedom, as do people in Iraq, Poland, The Czech Republic, Georgia and Honduras. Honduras is on the verge of civil war because their socialist President Zelaya wanted to change their constitution so he could stay in power beyond term limits. Once he was removed from power, by their supreme court, he sat outside the country suggesting that his supporters help him fight his way back to power, yes he means a war to regain his power. To stand by the constitution and republic of this country should seem to be common sense. However, the U.S. Administration chose to be on the side against freedom, by standing with the deposed Honduras President. Eastern Europe is one of the most exciting regions for freedom in the developing world. However , Ukraine, Czech Republic, Poland and Georgia are constantly being harassed by Russia. In fact, the bully of Eastern Europe invaded Georgia occupying one third of the country. To show real leadership and solidarity with each other, the leaders of the other harassed Eastern European countries stood together in defiance of Russia. The U.S leadership (from a year ago) continued plans to put a missile shield in Poland and The Czech Republic in defiance of Russia. Contrarily, the current administration has announced recently that the missile shield plan would be scrapped. Why? Is Russia no longer harassing the other Eastern European countries? Has Russia left Georgia alone? No on all accounts. In fact, it seems that the administration is “working” with the Russians at the cost of solidarity with our allies in the region. As one Polish paper read “America has betrayed us.”
Last Updated on Friday, 06 November 2009 14:30
Read more...
A Winning Stadegy 2010
Wednesday, 02 September 2009 10:29
Rhant
With so much gloom and doom in the news and amongst political observers, I have had an experience that gave me some hope.
This week, I attended a meeting for Republican municipal caucus members in Salt Lake County. This was an opportunity to meet State Senate and State House Representatives, as well as people running for Federal Senate. One of the most impressive parts of this meeting were the members of the party who take on responsibilities of leadership unpaid. I was filled with a sense of hope which came at the hands of so many people who love individual liberty, limited government and giving decision making rights back to enterprise and to individuals. There were some minor differences of opinion, which is the sign of a healthy party, but in general there was overwhelming concern for this great country.
Because this was a meeting for Salt Lake County Republicans, we discussed the state of the party seats in the county. The verdict, as it now stands, is the Republicans have about one third of the legislative seats in both the State House and Senate. Now the reasons for this depressing number are many; but, I personally see that the largest culprit is that Utah Republicans too often don't act like Republicans. Utah Republicans create new taxes, institute nanny-state laws and oversee a steady growth in the size of State and County bureaucracy; none of these things are Republican values. Too often these missteps come at the Republicans playing along to "work" across the aisle.
Last Updated on Friday, 06 November 2009 14:30
Read more...
|
The Relationship of Governing
Tuesday, 08 September 2009 13:19
Christian J. Riehle
When discussing how those in elected position can govern best, we should look at functional interpersonal relationships and apply those important principles. These functional relationships are best applied to and from acquaintances, not marriage. Too often, politicians think they have to act as married couples in elected office. In a marriage, your new relationship is a top priority and you sacrifice some things to make your marriage work. In political office, making sacrifices rather than maintaining your moral and political beliefs is why the Federal and State Governments grow.
We need elected officials to act within the constraints and precepts that are generally understood to apply to acquaintances and distant friendships. Let's look at the basics of these relationships. When we meet a person we have within us our local culture, such as an accent, the way we carry ourselves, our religion (or lack of religion) and accepted etiquette. For a friend, when we see these differences in those around us we may admire them, even if we don't understand these differences. We might debate with our friends to highlight these differences; but, we make little attempt to pull our acquaintances to our side of things except in very rare circumstances, such as a business deal that would benefit all involved. The important part of the relationship that we have with acquaintances and friends is that we needn't sacrifice any of our distinguishing characteristics or values.
How does this apply to the relationship in governing? When someone is elected, this person is elected to represent a certain ideology, locality and (or) movement. If this elected official has been honest in the way they presented themselves during their campaign; then, it is their duty to ensure that they continue to represent these view and principles while in office. The problem is that often when an elected official gets to their office, they lose their connection to those core personality traits that may have encouraged voters. It is almost as if the nerdy kid, who had friends support him in friendship, gets popular and forgets the friends who stood by him during the early times. What would be better, and more honest, is if those in elected office took the self disciplined road of remembering where they came from, who they represent and who they were before they were swept up in the magic of governing. In that same spirit, they should accept their new friends (in whichever place they govern) as they are. These new friends should make no attempt to sacrifice their view, culture or inherent values. Again, too often elected officials seem to become part of the culture of the governing rather than the governed. These people forget the precious values that made them who they are and made them acceptable to the electorate.
In my state of Utah, Senator Bennett, ran for office in 92' and he promised that he would only serve two terms...(senate seats are served for six years). Now, he is running again in 2010. Bennett has also been ranked the tenth most liberal Republican member of the Senate...oh,..ninth since since Arlen Specter rejoined the the Democrats. Bennett has been criticized for supporting a bill that is uncomfortably close to the liberal health care bills. Why does all of this about Senator Bennett matter? Because he was elected to represent Utah, which is one of the most Republican states in the union. We are also a state that believes in people keeping their word and in utilizing free market principles to address problems. Rather, Bennett has adopted the culture of his friends in D.C., and he has forgotten the culture of the people who elected him. He forgot where he came from.
In a recent debate on whether Cass Sunstein should be appointed to an executive regulatory position, there was a vote to end debate. Bennett voted to end it. Cass Sunstein has no background in regulation, in fact most of his life has been spent in academia. He writes a lot and has wacky ideas about the legal status of animals being equal to human status. Bennett voted to end debate on confirmation of Sunstein. How dos this pertain to a relationship? Bennett was elected to represent a state that still has a large farming industry. By voting to end debate on Sunstein, Bennett knew that Sunstein would be appointed to an office to implement new regulation where he will, most likely, view regulation through the prism of his extreme views on animal rights. This is not good news for farming, for Utah or for anyone who might like to see regulation decreased in general. Senator Bennett sacrificed his principles to play nice with his new Washington friends while forgetting about the friends who need him as an advocate back home.
Last Updated on Friday, 06 November 2009 14:32
Read more...
Be Thankful For Dick Cheney
Sunday, 30 August 2009 08:45
Rhant
Attorney General, Eric Holder last week announced that he would investigate the enhanced interrogation techniques used by the Bush Administration. This is the second time this has been discussed and once again former Vice President, Dick Cheney has boisterously defended the Bush Administration tactics.
As the Obama Administration continues to make it policy to demonize the Bush Administration, we can only be grateful that former VP Cheney is out there defending those patriots who keep our country safe. What the Obama Administration seems to forget is that national safety is the first priority of the President. It is sad to think that the former V.P. is the one who has to remind us all of the responsibilities of the executive branch. As Cheney said, the investigation will make the job of intelligence agencies harder, by making agencies always feel that they have to watch their back when they do work they have been specifically directed by their superiors to perform. It will also set a new dangerous precedent where one administration attempts to criminalize the previous one. These measures that Attorney General Holder intends to do, really serve little to help us stay safe as Americans. The new investigations will however placate the anti-war, wacky left that funded the Obama Presidential campaign. Cheney addressed, in his interview Sunday, that Holder is acting alone, while Obama opposes the investigation of Bush administration policies. I'm convinced that Cheney doesn't actually believes this assertion, because Cheney knows that Obama is pushing for Holder to take these actions while the President remains "post-political" and saintly. (B.S. alarm anyone?) Obama is driving this whole loony-left idea of rebuilding the U.S. image by bashing the last eight years. Cheney playing Holder as renegade, makes Obama look weak. Cheney has defined the arguments so the burden of responsibility is in the Obama Administration's hands. The arguments can be stated as follows: - Holder is acting as a renegade; pushing policy while the innocent President is on vacation. If this truly were the case, then Obama would be cast as a weak President attempting to appear "above it all." If this were the case, then the administration looks fragmented and the President looks like a poor executive. Obama is a weak President but he is not a weak executive.
- Obama is pushing for this investigation to appear more Euro-Friendly. This means that the pressure from the American Loony-Left and the Euro-Elites are driving the policies of the administration. Taking actions that play to the sensibilities of the Europeans, the world will come together, eat organically grown tofu, sing non-religious songs and at last the world will be at peace. In this argument, the President looks naive.
In either of these cases the argument favors the position of the Bush Administration. If a country waits to prevent an attack, the attacks will come. In preventing attacks, a country must do harsh things to those who intend to do that country harm. Especially when it come to those who were caught in the act of planning terrorism (remember that word) against the U.S. The people in question like Khaled Sheikh Mohamed and Abu Zubayda are not uniformed soldiers, U.S. citizens or diplomats. These men do not fall under International Law or more importantly the U.S. Constitution, so they do not have the rights of those who fall under those protections. In the end, Former V.P. Cheney is a voice of reason in an unreasoble time. He sits in Wyoming and still worries about the well being of his country. His arguments are lucid and reasonable. The great Deamon Cheney, who the media loves to hate is questioning "The One." Cheney only does this because our star struck media will not do their job. Thank You Mr. Cheney.
Last Updated on Monday, 31 August 2009 08:56
|
