17 Comments

1. Jamie Irons:

Roger,

And Obama is shooting for being the first “black ye olde liberal president,” as he has revealed in his recent speech on race. He should take some lessons from Bill on what really is good for African-Americans…

How true. And if Obama is elected, I think those who voted for him will quickly come to realize how silly it is to choose a candidate based on pigmentation. (About as silly as rejecting one on the same criterion.)

I have found it astonishing how many pundits have fallen head over heels about his “historic” speech which was such a “courageous” “conversation” about race, yet still managed to sophistically sweep under the rug every important question about the blessed “Reverend.”

Jamie Irons

Mar 22, 2008 - 8:46 am 2. Lightnin' Hopkins:

Happy Easter, Roger.

When you write “among other things” in parentheses regarding Clinton’s reasons for signing Welfare Reform into law, I certainly hope that some credit is considered for the Republican Congress that pushed it in the first place. Remember that Bubba, sensing the prevailing winds, often governed from the Center out of political expedience. There’s nothing particularly wrong with that – at least when in the service of getting things done – but Garry Trudeau didn’t depict him as a hot-buttered waffle in “Doonesbury” for nothing, mind you.

As to his quote, it may have been a subtle jab and it may not have. Aw, who’s kidding who? Of course it was! This ain’t lawn bowling here, people.

That Obambi’s camp would immediately play the McCarthy card is merely a reflection of what now passes for “liberal” politics – everyone is a victim with a righteous axe to grind. Got a boo-boo? Let’s give you a bigger bureaucratic band-aid and make it all better. Who needs personal responsibility when the government will pick up the tab? All Barry and Hill need is the permanent underclass they perpetuate with each new panacea they cynically propose. “You folks need a ride to the polls or anything? How about some free health care? Just holler if you do. Okay, well, stay poor! Um, I mean *strong* – yeah, stay strong!”

Mar 22, 2008 - 9:31 am 3. Roger:

“Stay poor!”… So true and so tragic, Lightnin’. And what makes it worse is I suspect, in their more lucid moments, Obama and Clinton know exactly what they are doing.

Mar 22, 2008 - 9:58 am 4. Barrett:

Roger,

This the tragedy of it all. It is not about freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It has nothing to do with the Constitution.

All that matters to BHO and HRC is obtaining and consolidating power. The best way is to create dependencies because you won’t bite the hand that feeds you.

I am so disgusted by the Left/Democrats/Socialists who pursue the strategy and dismayed by the Right/Republicans/Capitalists who are quietly letting it happen. BHO, HRC and the rest know EXACTLY what they are doing. You can the arrogance in that they what is best for the citizenry and as they think about the “stupid” American public that abdicates decision-making and personal freedom to the government.

Thomas Jefferson said liberty declines as government grows. We are watching this happen with nary an objection.

It is like watching a frog get cooked as the heat is slowly turned up without making an effort to save itself. How sad!

Mar 22, 2008 - 11:27 am 5. TerryeL:

Isn’t this the Obama adviser that said we should be in Iraq for 100 years? Really. I think it is.

Mar 22, 2008 - 11:42 am 6. Herb:

McPeek has a point but if he’s sensitive about it, nobody will notice if he keeps his hat on.
A case can be made for at least some divided allegiance on O’Bama’s part if he buy’s very much of Revvum Wright’s “theology”.

Mar 22, 2008 - 12:37 pm 7. Pat Patterson:

Thanks for spoiling my first reaction to that charge. I thought Gen. McPeak was comparing Pres. Clinton to Charlie McCarthy.

Mar 22, 2008 - 6:13 pm 8. Lem:

The McPeak charge has the unintended consequence of trowing Obama off message, or keeping Obama off message following the histerical… I mean ‘historical’ speech.

I got to handed to Bill.. McPeack, McCarthy and Jeremiah (by Obama’s own admission) share in common a membership of the old guard. Accusing Bill of McCarthyism could intice Obamas hope drunks to go and look up McCarthy and discover that Obamas politic isn’t really all that new.

When Obama is politically attacked (an inevitable political side effect) he raises the specter of race (or people do it for him) not only to silence people, but to make an example.
Its like you need a military minder to talk about Obama so it wont come back and blow up in your face.

Bill trows a curb and they swing for the fences, just like a regular politician would.

Did McPeak check with Obama’s people before making the charge – a former military man and the Samantha Powers pratfall says McPeack must have.

Mar 22, 2008 - 8:29 pm 9. Charlie (Colorado):

Gee, I wonder who Joe McCarthy’s counsels were?

(Happy Purim btw, Roger.)

Mar 23, 2008 - 8:04 am 10. kingronjo:

Happy Easter all,

He has risen

I am thinking Roger that you forgot that Wily Bill vetoed the welfare reform bill, I think it was twice. Newt and the boys (oops, and girls) pushed it through again and Bill had no choice but to sign it. Reading the political winds did it. So in reality his trademark moment was brought to him, kicking and screaming.

Mar 23, 2008 - 11:53 am 11. Larry J:

McPeak? That idiot is still around? I remember that fool from my time in the Air Force when he was the Chief of Staff. In late 1991, the Bush (41) Administration announced that since the Berlin Wall, the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union no longer existed, the US military was going to draw down by 25%. Suddenly, several hundred thousand of us were facing the involuntary early end of our careers. To illustrate how bad it was, at the start of 1992, there were approximately 2000 Air Force officers in my year group/rating. At the end of the year, there were about 110. That works out to a kill ratio of approximately 94%. It’s hard to take it personally when faced with those numbers but it still hurt to have to separate after 13 years of service.

What was McPeak’s primary interest at the time? He had a case of target fixation on redesigning the uniform. His uniform design was an abomination that was dropped the minute he retired.

In October 1990, Gen. Merrill McPeak took over as chief of staff. A hard-charging fighter pilot, McPeak wanted the Air Force to become the dominant military service branch.

In pursuit of that vision, McPeak wanted the Air Force organized around, and run by, fighter pilots like him. For those who flew bombers and cargo aircraft, this was a bitter pill to swallow.

McPeak thought changes in appearance were needed, so he ordered a redesign of the blue dress uniform. Among the most significant changes, epaulets were removed and rank insignia was put on the sleeve.

If McPeak’s goal was to be distinctive, he scored. The result was a cross between what a bus driver and an airline pilot would wear. One officer privately complained he looked like Ralph Kramden.

Perhaps McPeak’s most controversial move, however, was to ban the wearing of crew neck T-shirts under the open-necked, light-blue uniform blouse. McPeak thought the combination was unkempt. V- neck tees were acceptable.

For rank-and-file airmen, however, this was more of McPeak’s machismo run amok.

A series of underground “brown papers” began circulating inside the Pentagon poking fun at the general. In them, his reforms were mocked as “The Emergence of the Manly Man.”

“What this type of undershirt hides is the amount of chest hair of the USAF member,” one paper says of the crew-neck decision. “The implication, of course, is that the more chest hair, the better.”

McPeak retired in November 1994. His replacement, Gen. Ronald Fogleman, wasted little time in reversing many fashion decisions.

The fact that anyone would take McPeak seriously is an indicator of poor judgment, IMO. If Obama considers McPeak as one of his advisors, well, caulk that up as another strike against him.

Mar 23, 2008 - 2:34 pm 12. Old Rip:

I’m pretty sure, in your last line, the ‘close bracket (]} should follow “ed.”, not “Easter”.
Otherwise, Obama is the Easter Bunny.

Mar 23, 2008 - 5:38 pm 13. Old Rip:

I’m pretty sure, in your last line, the ‘close bracket (]}’ should follow “ed.”, not “Easter”.
Otherwise, Obama is the Easter Bunny.

Mar 23, 2008 - 5:39 pm 14. Pat Patterson:

O/T-Larry J, I was curious so tried to find pictures of the uniforms you described but I found something even better. The new prototype uniforms, which I found are being uncharitably being described as being issued by Star Fleet. Any truth?

Mar 23, 2008 - 5:46 pm 15. exguru:

After studying the matter for 60 years, I have come to the conclusion that virtually all of those lives “ruined” by Sen. Joe McCarthy got precisely what they deserved.

The new book by M. Stanton Evans, “Blacklisted by History,” will tell you a lot of good things about McCarthy you didn’t know, from a hard-right perspective, of course. But the 2003 biography of Elizabeth Bentley by academic Lauren Kessler, “Clever Girl,” will greatly enhance the picture, and Ms. Kessler writes from a hard-left perspective, giving reds the benefit of a doubt, always, and still concluding about the same as Evans does. Both books are fully levened by the Venona transcripts, the sine qua non for research in this area.

Mar 23, 2008 - 6:41 pm 16. scott:

And of course the Kennedys were as thick as thieves with Joe…Robert wanted to be Joe’s majority counsel,but was passed over in favor of Roy Cohn.A monumental blunder on Joe’s part.

Mar 24, 2008 - 6:31 am 17. submandave:

ditto what exguru said. Like how “Swift Boating,” a term that came from openly expressing valid opinions that are supported by witnesses and documtation came to mean an unfounded political smear, lost to the ages is the fact that Tail Gunner Joe was pretty damn accurate in what he claimed. I won’t argue that he pushed it for personal politialc gain, and that was really the fault, but after the USSR went bust the evidence of how deep Communist penetration went was incontravertable. (any unseemly metaphoric visions are solely the fault of the reader)

Mar 24, 2008 - 1:16 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: