Obama's Midnight Runners

I was thinking how easy it is for Obama to criticize McCain's record, because McCain has a record. The difference here, using the word "record" as the cue, is that McCain has a multi-CD discography, like Led Zeppelin to use an example (or Frank Sinatra if you prefer). Sure, there are going to be songs you don't like on, say, Houses of the Holy, but that's because there's such a large body of work. Obama, on the other hand, is the one-hit wonder. His "Come on Eileen" is "I Want Out of Iraq." That's all he's got, and you either agree or disagree, but beyond that he has no record. His big criticism of McCain is "McCain is the Washington insider." Well, Obama is an insider, too- he's a Senator. You don't get more "Washington insider" than that, but he's touting his lack of experience as being a positive, but it's as thin as a cloud. Everything he is saying in his campaign is improvisation now, he has no history to back him up, and we have no way of knowing how well he leads or works within government. McCain is known as nonpartisan, maverick, and widely respected. What is Obama? Compromiser, stubborn, bull-headed, open-minded, what? We don't know, and that's what makes his criticisms of McCain, a man whose record of service to this country is enormous, not just hollow but flat, 2-dimensional. Obama's campaign is like watching the ocean on a movie screen. It looks realistic and the camera angles can make you feel like you're right there and the whole thing can stir your emotions, but try jumping into it.

Why the Anti-War Crowd is All Wet

This is very easy. The "Bush Lied, People Died" crowd that claims President Bush fabricated reasons for us to go into Iraq are just off the mark. There's no debate. It may seem like I'm being too sure, but I'm not. It's easy.

The onus was never on us to Prove Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction. The onus was on Saddam Hussein to prove he didn't. Why?

Remember the First Gulf War? Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, unprovoked. A coalition of nations got together and supported an Allied invasion of Iraq. Then-President G.H.W. Bush stopped short of toppling Hussein, and was criticized for it, but he did have a coalition to keep together, a coalition which included Arab nations. So instead of defeating Saddam Hussein, we forced him to Surrender. And Surrender always brings with it- Terms of Surrender. And what were some of those Terms of Surrender?

United Nations Resolution 687:

http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm

Read from paragraph 8.

And that's it, really. The rest can be traced from this. No need to list the resolutions. I will, however, point out this highly pertinent article written by Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, which was published in The New York Times 1/23/03:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030123-1.html

Examples of Courage by Leaders of the Free World

I have never been a fan of Jimmy Carter, and his recent meeting with Hamas reinforced my negative opinion. Why, because he dared meet with Hamas? Not necessarily. It's because he got nothing and gave something away, very early on, too. What did he give away? He criticized Israel. He said the Israeli blockade of Gaza was a "crime" and an "atrocity" and "an abomination." What did he get in return? A Hamas promise to accept a peace agreement negotiated with PA leader Mahmoud Abbas IF it was approved by a majority of "Palestinians" in a referendum. IF Hamas would allow a fair referendum. Which is a big IF. What did Hamas get in return? Good public relations with a former president of the United States of America. Solid win for them, hollow empty nothing for us. Thank you, Jimmy Carter, for allowing Iran to hold America hostage for 444 days, and now for continuing to show what a great dhimmi you can be.

But maybe I'm being harsh. He was, after all, willing to criticize Israel in front of Hamas. What guts! Who else shares this extreme intestinal fortitude?

Ban Ki-Moon, at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, who criticized Israeli actions in Gaza as "inappropriate and disproportionate use of force." To be willing to put it all on the line by criticizing Israel in front of its enemies. Wow oh wow.