Hi there, !
Today Wed 11/20/2013 Tue 11/19/2013 Mon 11/18/2013 Sun 11/17/2013 Sat 11/16/2013 Fri 11/15/2013 Thu 11/14/2013 Archives
Rantburg
531702 articles and 1855989 comments are archived on Rantburg.

Today: 69 articles and 180 comments as of 14:40.
Post a news link    Post your own article   
Area: WoT Operations    WoT Background    Non-WoT        Politix   
Hezbollah commander killed in Syria
Today's Headlines
Headline Comments [Views]
Page 4: Opinion
2 19:16 JosephMendiola [] 
18 16:20 g(r)omgoru [] 
0 [] 
0 [] 
1 22:30 JosephMendiola [1] 
Page 1: WoT Operations
11 22:54 CrazyFool []
0 []
14 22:12 JosephMendiola [2]
0 [1]
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 [1]
0 [1]
0 []
3 14:02 g(r)omgoru []
0 []
0 []
0 [1]
2 09:16 Pappy []
0 []
0 []
0 []
Page 2: WoT Background
5 21:18 Bill Clinton [1]
5 19:55 Redneck Jim []
4 11:26 swksvolFF []
0 []
0 []
0 []
5 11:56 Uncle Phester [1]
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 [1]
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 []
6 12:26 Pappy []
0 []
2 16:19 g(r)omgoru []
0 []
0 []
1 22:16 JosephMendiola [1]
0 []
0 []
0 []
0 [1]
0 []
Page 3: Non-WoT
8 16:56 Anguper Hupomosing9418 []
16 21:21 Alaska Paul []
0 []
2 10:56 Frank G []
8 19:12 Airandee [1]
8 19:04 Pappy []
7 14:02 OldSpook []
5 15:00 James []
3 12:48 Shipman []
0 []
3 11:34 Redneck Jim []
1 02:27 Au Auric []
4 16:58 Abu Uluque [1]
Page 6: Politix
10 19:46 Secret Asian Man []
11 21:23 Secret Asian Man []
6 19:40 Chuckles Slutch9020 []
3 16:17 Bobby [1]
6 14:20 Bright Pebbles []
India-Pakistan
The extent of Munawar Hasan's mischief -- Dr Haider Shah
[Pak Daily Times] I am not a fan of Mr Munawar Hasan's views but somehow I like him as a person. His propensity to share his views without any embellishments of verbosity or coverings of sugarcoated hypocrisy is worth appreciating. Through him we get an opportunity to showcase the logical conclusion of the way of thinking that our religious groups utilise to interpret the world around us. Sometime ago, he stated in an interview that it is better for rape victims to hush up instead of publicising their ordeal. Outrageously shocking it might be but in all honesty this is the logical outcome of the so-called Islamic sharia relating to rape crime. Rape, despite its severity as a crime, does not get mentioned in the scripture even once, though crimes like theft and consensual sex are repeatedly discussed. The requirement of four witnesses to prove rape would automatically lead us to the conclusion that we are all too afraid to admit but not Hasan who is bold enough to state it bluntly.

The Jamaat chief again proved true to his reputation when he answered Mr Salim Safi's question about martyrdom of Pak military personnel at the hands of myrmidon Death Eaters. The massive confusion that our national discourse suffers from was brought to the fore by the crispy clear answer of Hasan. I can appreciate the intensity of dismay and pain caused by his remarks, but the military establishment is also a contributor to the confusion that has today led to the sleazy debate on martyrdom. Without withholding fullest credit to all those who sacrifice their lives in the line of duty, I also find the hands of the military as an institution not fully clean.

The Pakistain military was painstakingly carved out of the British Indian Army by Iskander Mirza in his role as the first defence secretary. The pre-1947 Indian army, the mother organization of the Pakistain army, was a secular institution that drew inspiration and motivation from institutional ethos and discipline. Despite varying religious beliefs, Hindu, Sikh, Mohammedan and Christian soldiers laid down their lives in the line of duty. The insurgencies of the rustics of the present day FATA were crushed by deploying units that mostly comprised Sikh and Gurkha sepoys. The Pakistain army also inherited that secular outlook in the beginning, but while our obsession with Kashmire has stunted our growth as an economic power, it has also radicalised our military establishment. The Afghan jihad under Zia ul Haq
...the creepy-looking former dictator of Pakistain. Zia was an Islamic nutball who imposed his nutballery on the rest of the country with the enthusiastic assistance of the nation's religious parties, which are populated by other nutballs. He was appointed Chief of Army Staff in 1976 by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, whom he hanged when he seized power. His time in office was a period of repression, with hundreds of thousands of political rivals, minorities, and journalists executed or tortured, including senior general officers convicted in coup-d'état plots, who would normally be above the law. As part of his alliance with the religious parties, his government helped run the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, providing safe havens, American equipiment, Saudi money, and Pak handlers to selected mujaheddin. Zia died along with several of his top generals and admirals and the then United States Ambassador to Pakistain Arnold Lewis Raphel when he was assassinated in a suspicious air crash near Bahawalpur in 1988...
destroyed the soul of the army and turned it into a jihadi groups generating outfit. Whenever I have had a chance to speak to officers of the army I found most of them confused souls who remained suspended between a western lifestyle and fundamentalist beliefs. There is little evidence that the situation has since then changed much.

No doubt, some recent speeches of the army chief General Pervez Kiyani were encouraging in terms of their clarity on the nature of the war that the Pak nation is confronted with. Unlike our mainstream politicians, he was very clear in declaring the war as our own war of survival against some determined enemies. I have been stating in my earlier pieces that nations do make new choices when they are faced with a changed world. Japan and Germany befriended the US in 1946 even though the armies of both countries were destroyed to a great extent by the US. We are also faced with choices in the changed world of today. Hamid Gul
The nutty former head of Pakistain's ISI, now Godfather to Mullah Omar's Talibs and good buddy and consultant to al-Qaeda's high command...
represents a stream of thought that characterised the army establishment's worldview in the 1980s. But the world has changed since the heyday of the Afghan jihad of Gul's golden era. Today, both Pakistain and its army leadership need a new doctrine after shelving the jihadist identity. The Pakistain army has to return to the ethos that characterised its parent institution.

The demon of Death Eater jihadi identity has to be fully exorcised from its body. 'Pakistain first' was the correct slogan of Pervez Perv Musharraf
... former dictator of Pakistain, who was less dictatorial and corrupt than any Pak civilian government to date ...
, however much I may loathe his person. I will join the army in condemning Hasan as a traitor after the army severs its links completely with the jihadi outfits. Handling the fires of extremism, our army not only burnt its own fingers but also exposed the country to the risks of extremism. Merely a few declarations are not enough. It must join hands with the prime minister in repairing relations with the neighbours so that we can focus on radical groups.

No de-radicalisation can happen in Pakistain unless the military as an institution fully de-radicalises itself after purging all overly fundamentalist tendencies in its rank and file. Martyrdom in its religious sense is a contested notion ever since the outbreak of civil wars that characterised the periods since the third Caliph. In its secular sense a martyr is a hero who sacrifices his life for defending his country. In that sense there is no debate that the law enforcement personnel who laid down their lives for our country are our heroes and deaders. But if the religious sense of martyrdom is claimed, I am afraid we then run the risk of handing over control from our hands to the religious establishment and are then at the mercy of obscurantist minds. With clearer identification of religious discourse, and living like their imagined heroes from the Arab world, the Pak Taliban are better poised to win any match of martyrdom. Put this way, Munawar Hasan's dictum rings like a painful and bitter truth.
Posted by: Fred || 11/17/2013 00:52 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under: Jamaat-e-Islami


Drone attacks, a convenient explanation
[The Hindu] The killing of Hakimullah Mehsud, the head of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistain (TTP), in a recent drone attack in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas has once again brought the debate back centre stage -- within Pakistain at the national level, and between the United States and Pakistain at the bilateral level. While "illusory sovereignty" and "spoiling the internal dialogue with the TTP" seem to be the primary slogans within Pakistain, "come what may, we will go after the Death Eaters" seems to sum up the American attitude. But are the drone attacks simply about these slogans and attitudes? Or, are there more serious and complicated issues than what is generally discussed at the populist level?

Sharif's four assertions

During his visit to the U.S. in October, Pakistain Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif
... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf...
put forward four primary theses against the American-led drones programme, forcefully arguing that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) should cease using them. First, there was the general Pak perception that the drone attacks have increased extremism within Pakistain, resulting in further Death Eater attacks within the country. Second, it impinged on Pakistain's illusory sovereignty, as the drones fired from across the Durand Line in Afghanistan fly over Pakistain territory and fire missiles, killing innocent civilians. Even if bully boyz do get killed, the collateral damage is high. Third, as a result of these two, there is a growing anti-American sentiment within Pakistain, affecting Pakistain's cooperation with the U.S., thereby further impinging on the American war against terrorism. Finally, continuing attacks undermine Pakistain's efforts towards initiating a dialogue with the Taliban. How true are these perceptions that are widespread within Pakistain?

Undoubtedly, there is an element of truth in these four assertions. And, ironically, within them lies Pak duplicity. First, are the drones the primary reason for growing extremism within Pakistain? Or for that matter, 9/11 and the follow-up American invasion into Afghanistan? There is a blinkered perception in Pakistain about the extent of extremism pre- and post-9/11 and the drone attacks. Viewed in historical and sociological perspectives, the growth of extremism within Pakistain, with its roots in the 1980s, grew exponentially during the 1990s. Afghanistan and Kashmire became the much-needed ideological excuses for the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to pursue their "strategic depth" and "thousand cuts" vis-à-vis Afghanistan and India respectively.

Radicalism before 9/11

While the political and sociological environment vitiated by the late Pakistain President Zia ul Haq
...the creepy-looking former dictator of Pakistain. Zia was an Islamic nutball who imposed his nutballery on the rest of the country with the enthusiastic assistance of the nation's religious parties, which are populated by other nutballs. He was appointed Chief of Army Staff in 1976 by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, whom he hanged when he seized power. His time in office was a period of repression, with hundreds of thousands of political rivals, minorities, and journalists executed or tortured, including senior general officers convicted in coup-d'état plots, who would normally be above the law. As part of his alliance with the religious parties, his government helped run the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, providing safe havens, American equipiment, Saudi money, and Pak handlers to selected mujaheddin. Zia died along with several of his top generals and admirals and the then United States Ambassador to Pakistain Arnold Lewis Raphel when he was assassinated in a suspicious air crash near Bahawalpur in 1988...
and the failure of governance have already given birth to krazed killer groups (of the sectarian and jihadi kind) -- of the Lashkar-e-Taiba
...the Army of the Pure, an Ahl-e-Hadith terror organization founded by Hafiz Saeed. LeT masquerades behind the Jamaat-ud-Dawa facade within Pakistain and periodically blows things up and kills people in India. Despite the fact that it is banned, always an interesting concept in Pakistain, the organization remains an blatant tool and perhaps an arm of the ISI...
(LeT), Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM), Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistain
...a Sunni Deobandi organization, a formerly registered Pak political party, established in the early 1980s in Jhang by Maulana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi. Its stated goal is to oppose Shia influence in Pakistain. They're not too big on Brelvis, either. Or Christians. Or anybody else who's not them. The organization was banned in 2002 as a terrorist organization, but somehow it keeps ticking along, piling up the corpse counts...
(SSP) and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi
... a 'more violent' offshoot of Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistain. LeJ's purpose in life is to murder anyone who's not of utmost religious purity, starting with Shiites but including Brelvis, Ahmadis, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Rosicrucians, and just about anyone else you can think of. They are currently a wholly-owned subsidiary of al-Qaeda ...
(LJ) varieties -- the abuse of these actors by the military and the ISI created an ugly internal situation for Pakistain from the 1990s. Extremism and radicalism were well entrenched at the national and provincial levels well before drone attacks and even 9/11.

Any historical analysis of sectarian violence in Punjab, Malakand and the tribal regions will reveal the scope of radical tumult by the late 1990s. Had it not been for this churning within Pakistain, neither would the Taliban have been born, nor the al-Qaeda found the region an ideal refuge and base to prepare for 9/11. Linking extremism within Pakistain only to drones and 9/11 reflects an ostrich-like attitude. It perhaps provides a convenient explanation, worse, an excuse for both the State and society to externalise an internal issue. The radical onslaught today in Pakistain is a direct result of what happened in the 1980-90s, both internally and externally; irrespective of 9/11, the American invasion and the drones, Pakistain would have gone through what it is going through now.

Link with illusory sovereignty

The second major instance of Pak duplicity is over linking drones with illusory sovereignty. There has been a tacit understanding between the political and military leadership vis-à-vis the U.S. on the use of drones. Starting from Gen. Musharraf to Gen. Kayani
... four star general, current Chief of Army Staff of the Mighty Pak Army. Kayani is the former Director General of ISI...
, were they not kept in the picture on the drone programme? Perhaps the CIA may not have shared the operational details, but it certainly should have explained to them the target and focus.

Drones, by nature, are not supersonic and stealth creatures; they fly at low altitude and are visible. If Pakistain had not agreed to their use, what stopped Gen. Musharraf and Gen. Kayani from issuing orders to fire at them? How many times has Pakistain fired at these drones, or its air force chased these drones away from Pak airspace? Is Pakistain incapable of firing at the drones, thereby allowing its airspace to be violated?

It is difficult to accept that Pakistain does not have the capacity to fire at drones using missiles, or chase them using fighter aircraft. Hypothetically speaking, if India were to use similar drones in Pakistain Occupied Kashmire, will Islamabad and Rawalpindi keep complaining only about violation of airspace? Pakistain's illusory sovereignty argument does not make any sense.

The illusory sovereignty argument over the use of drones also contradicts Pakistain's earlier understanding with the U.S. Before the CIA took the drone programme into Afghanistan, across the Durand Line, were not drones being used from the Shamsi base in Balochistan
...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it...
? What was the understanding between the CIA and Pakistain's military at that time, when the latter allowed the former to use the Shamsi airbase by the U.S.?

These are hard questions that Pakistain should ask its political and military leadership. Unfortunately for the U.S., the anti-American sentiment has greatly clouded the judgment of Pakistain's civil society on this issue. Perhaps Mr. Nawaz Sharif is correct; drone attacks have increased anti-American sentiments, but the politicianship has allowed this purposefully to happen -- to let the Americans take the full blame.

On dialogue

Finally, the issue of drones preventing Pakistain from initiating a dialogue with the Taliban, especially the TTP. True, the killing of Nek Mohammad, a former Taliban fighter, in 2004 did affect the dialogue then between the bully boyz and Pakistain; however, after that, there were multiple dialogues between the military, the ISI and the TTP. Perhaps the drone attacks and the killing of Hakimullah Mehsud is a good omen for Pakistain. The TTP may get destabilised and will provide a better opportunity for Pakistain to negotiate with them -- from a position of strength.
Posted by: Fred || 11/17/2013 00:00 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan


Israel-Palestine-Jordan
Jed Babbin: Game of Fools - Rejection of Israel will bring loud results.
Posted by: Uncle Phester || 11/17/2013 00:00 || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Iran knows the score - iff the US allows any or all of its smaller overseas allies to dev Nukes, espec in East Asia e.g. JAPAN, SOKOR, etal. vee Rising China, THEN THE US ARGUMENT THAT IRAN OR OTHER IN THE MUSLIM WORLD CAN'T HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS FINALLY-N-FOREVER DESTROYED.

To be "Gangsta", THE PROMISE OF OWG + "GLOBALISM" = "WHITEY" + JUDEOCHRISTIAN WORLD MUST GIVE UP + SHARE HISTORICAL DOMINANT POWER-N-AUTHORITY WID NON-WHITEYS + NON-JUDEOCHRISTIAN WORLD.

Iff Israel + Hindu India + perennially troubled Pakistan can have nuclear arsenals, then there is no valid reason for Iran + other to NOT be allowed the same.
Posted by: JosephMendiola || 11/17/2013 22:30 Comments || Top||


Olde Tyme Religion
Putin Gets It and We Don’t
Middle East politics amounts to managing the decline of a failed culture. Nothing expresses Arab failure more vividly than Egypt, a banana republic without the bananas, now living on a $14 billion or so annual subsidy from Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States. With 70% of its population living in agricultural areas, it imports half its food, and would starve if not for the Saudi check. ‘

Egypt is beyond the point of no return economically, and American foreign policy is beyond the point of no return intellectually. Americans of both parties–Obama and Kerry on one side, and Sens. McCain and Graham along with the Weekly Standard on the other–believed that by waving the magic wand of democracy over this cataclysmically failed state, all would be well. I characterized this consensus as “Dumb and Dumber” earlier this year.

The outcome, of course, is that Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov turned up in Cairo this week to hear his Egyptian counterpart declare that America’s erstwhile Arab ally wants to restore Russian-Egyptian relations to their level during the Soviet era–when Egypt was an enemy.

...Vladimir Putin gets it, and we don’t. He backs the Assad regime in Syria against Saudi-supported rebels. He is cracking down ruthlessly on Muslim terrorists in the Russian Caucasus, using Stalin-era forms of collective punishment. Nonetheless Riyadh is footing a $4 billion bill for Egypt to buy Russian arms.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru || 11/17/2013 14:50 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Wonder if Putin's going to collect enough American toys from the Gypts to set up his own little NTC in the boondocks? Of course if they have a hard enough time just keeping their own equipment up and running, they're in for an interesting experience with those toys.
Posted by: Procopius2k || 11/17/2013 15:43 Comments || Top||

#2  The Sunni Saudis as Defender of the Islamic Faith will not allow Pretender Shia Iran to go Nuclear widout the Saudis themselves also going Nuclear.

In Riyadh's mind, the burden is on both Mama Russia + US-Allies + UNO to make sure the above scenario never happens.

NO IRAN NUKE DEAL = MIDDLE EAST WAR + SAUDIS GOING NUCLEAR.

Lest we fergit, its PAKISTAN that historically desired to be the World's first Islamic Superpower, iff only to snot on Hindu India, NOT Iran or the KSA. POST-2014, FUTURE TALIBAN, ETAL-CONTROLLED? ISLAMABAD ISN'T GOING TO LIKE BEING UPSTAGED BY TEHRAN OR RIYADH.
Posted by: JosephMendiola || 11/17/2013 19:16 Comments || Top||


Home Front: Culture Wars
How the Pubs Can WIn Again
For the GOP to win big again, it must take ­William F. Buckley's ­ruthlessly pragmatic ­approach to primary ­elections. In Buckley's view "conservatism, except when it is expressed in pure idealism, takes into ­account reality." That means we have to stop electing amateurs who serve as little more than ideological indulgences, who ­exploit resentments that play well enough among the base, but whose positions make them ­nonviable in general elections.
I know, actually electing some Tea Party folks threw a scare into the media-socialists, but control is more important than fun.
Had the party followed Buckley's advice in 2010 and supported the most electable conservatives ­instead of the most ideologically extreme, Republicans would now control the United States Senate and Democratic leader Harry Reid would be in retirement in ­Nevada.
Putting Harry out to pasture is a thought worth investigating, right?
President Reagan lived by the ­belief that "just because I'm your friend 80 percent of the time doesn't make me your enemy 20 percent of the time."
This is a lesson I learned the hard way: I spoke out against the possibility of Colin Powell's presidential candidacy in 1996 ­because his political moderation was so off-putting to me. The thought that he could be the standard-bearer of my Republican Party was offensive. But watching the retired general on Meet the Press in recent years has made me understand why ­Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush drafted him to a be a critical ­player in their administrations. In retrospect I realize how much better the GOP would have fared against Bill Clinton in 1996 if I had not let my hopes for a conservative stalwart get in the way of our best hope to beat Clinton.
If Powell is/was a Rhino, would he have been better than Slick Willie a second time? Maybe.
"If it's just going to represent the far right wing of the political spectrum, I think the party is in difficulty," said Powell this year. "I'm a moderate, but I'm still a Republican." This war hero, should still be one of the leading voices in the party because of, not in spite of, his centrist ­political philosophy. ­Republicans can kick moderates like General Powell out of the party's mainstream every four years, or they can leave their ideological comfort zone, work aggressively to expand their political coalitions, and start stealing swing voters away from Democrats like Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately, the Republican Party of the ­moment bears little resemblance to the party of ­Ronald Reagan, who would have responded to Powell's critiques of the Republican Party with an all-hands-on-deck effort to win the war hero back. That's because President Reagan lived by the ­belief that "just because I'm your friend 80 percent of the time doesn't make me your enemy 20 percent of the time."

If the Republican party is big enough to reach out to disaffected moderates like Colin ­Powell, then it will be big enough to win the White House in 2016, even if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee. The ­question is whether the GOP will go the way of Buckley or Glenn Beck.
Nothing wrong with Glenn Beck, but can he lead the Pubs to victory?
Republicans can win again and we will. And we can do it by following the right paths of ­Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower. We can do it by fighting for the core ­principles of conservatism and emphasizing values that most Americans agree with.
Mrs. Bobby is all over the Tea Party's view on smaller government, but can't get past what she sees as their social extremist bellowing. If we could just focus on smaller government, we'd go farther!
There will also be times when we will follow the lead of Reagan and ­Eisenhower by putting principled pragmatism before ideological battles that undermine our ability to win ­elections, elect ­majorities, and take back control of the White House. But time is wasting. Hillary ­Clinton's ­supporters are already preparing for political battle. Next time, we'd better be prepared to win. There is no substitute for ­victory, and I for one am damn tired of my party losing presidential elections.
The Tea Party can influence, but it'll be a long, long time before a "Tea Party" candidate sits in the White House.
Link to Longer Interview

Interview excerpt:
Are there any Republicans today who can carry on Reagan's legacy?
"I think so. If you look at governors who are ideologically conservative but moderate temperamentally--and running state governments and balancing budgets and reforming education and making pension plans sustainable--I think there are many examples across the nation of Republicans who are governing in a Reagan style, whether it's Scott Walker in Wisconsin or John Kasich in Ohio or Chris Christie in New Jersey or Bobby Jindal in Louisiana.
Posted by: Bobby || 11/17/2013 05:16 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Once again from the RINO, "we just need to be like the other party in order to win" - see McCain, Romney non-success with that track record. Special Note - The Permanent Party Propaganda Machine (aka MSM) will never give the support even to a RINO that it gives to Obama et al. As with the old story about the frog and scorpion, it's in their nature.

Had the party followed Buckley’s advice in 2010 and supported the most electable conservatives ­instead of the most ideologically extreme,

The friggin RNC wouldn't support period at all and has continued to avoid if not outright abandon anything other than basically RINOs. So don't talk about supporting anyone when you don't support those who made an effort only to see them stabbed in the back by people holding the purse in the Beltway.
Posted by: Procopius2k || 11/17/2013 7:55 Comments || Top||

#2  Powell has supported people who I consider to be an extremist socialist for President. Someone who did their best to unemploy my entire state. For a long while he was a tabula rasa for other people to project their beliefs upon, but he either has no core or a bad one.

The Republicans, in a fit of 'pragmatism,' put 1/3 the amount of money into the Virginia Gubernatorial Race that they did in 2009. They lost the attorney general's race in the recount in the margin of fraud.

Sacrificing core beliefs in exchange for victory will get you neither victory nor core beliefs.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain || 11/17/2013 8:02 Comments || Top||

#3  Powell is little more than Obama-lite.
Posted by: Besoeker || 11/17/2013 8:24 Comments || Top||

#4  Buckley’s basic premise was there ought not to be a conservative litmus test in the Republican Party. That’s quite different then supporting candidates that subscribe to Progressivism. The party doesn’t need more “Compassionate Conservatives”. Moreover, neither does the country.
Posted by: DepotGuy || 11/17/2013 11:02 Comments || Top||

#5  I recall the media supported McCain in the republican primary but quickly turned him into just another conservative republican ready to throw gran ma into the street in the general election.

Every political consultant tells the republican/democrat to be just 1 smudge to the right/left of the opponent to capture the election. That worked well for guys like Obama if you are willing to lie to the American about your true agenda.
Posted by: Airandee || 11/17/2013 11:02 Comments || Top||

#6  What's with the �
Posted by: Redneck Jim || 11/17/2013 11:13 Comments || Top||

#7  Have a honest elections?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru || 11/17/2013 11:28 Comments || Top||

#8  yeah - we really need advice from Joe Scarborough, MSNBC host. Next? Economic advice from Maxine Waters
Posted by: Frank G || 11/17/2013 11:36 Comments || Top||

#9  Any thing the Pubs could do to improve themselves and the country would be welcome, after all we are on the Road to Perdition with the present set-up.

Posted by: Whaimp Hupart4265 || 11/17/2013 11:55 Comments || Top||

#10  Well, Frank, I thought it was worthwhile. However, there is room for diversity a variety of opinion here, yes?
Posted by: Bobby || 11/17/2013 11:56 Comments || Top||

#11  Control means nothing if elected Republicans are all the tame sort. Recall in 2005 Republicans held both houses of Congress, the presidency and a working majority on the SCT. What did we do? We banned light bulbs.

Fact is that being not quite as awful as the other guy isn't enough.
Posted by: Squinty Spawn of the Weak7917 || 11/17/2013 12:15 Comments || Top||

#12  I don't mind you posting it, Bobby, at all. My take is that we can read and disregard any "help" our opponents give us
Posted by: Frank G || 11/17/2013 12:16 Comments || Top||

#13  I thought it was worthwhile. However, there is room for diversity a variety of opinion here, yes?

To twist Voltaire's quote, I agree with your right to say it, but I'll defend to the death my right to not agree with what you have to say.
Posted by: Pappy || 11/17/2013 13:01 Comments || Top||

#14  I say take the advice of an MSNBC morning show host, and do the opposite.
Posted by: Raj || 11/17/2013 13:21 Comments || Top||

#15  Well, I never watched his morning show...
Posted by: Bobby || 11/17/2013 14:12 Comments || Top||

#16  I dont know where this clown got his idea of Reagan, but I voted for him and served during his administration, and knew of him prior to his 1980 run. And the Reagan I know was stalwartly conservative, not this "anything goes, compromise your principles away" that the idiot who wrote this seems to think he was.
Posted by: OldSpook || 11/17/2013 14:54 Comments || Top||

#17  Scarborough's implication that Powell was kept from the Trunk nomination due to opposition from those eeeeville KKKonservatives shows why he fits in so well with the rest of the shitstains at MSDNC - a willingness to lie with a straight face. Powell decided against a candidacy due to the unanimous opposition of his family, apparently including a direct threat from his wife to file for divorce if he decided to run.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) || 11/17/2013 16:19 Comments || Top||

#18  Why can't you run Frank J.?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru || 11/17/2013 16:20 Comments || Top||



Who's in the News
32[untagged]
13Arab Spring
4Govt of Pakistan
3al-Shabaab
3Ansar al-Sharia
2TTP
2Govt of Syria
2Jamaat-e-Islami
1Govt of Sudan
1Taliban
1Hamas
1Hezbollah
1Islamic State of Iraq
1al-Qaeda in Kenya
1Govt of Iran
1al-Qaeda in North Africa

Bookmark
E-Mail Me

The Classics
The O Club
Rantburg Store
The Bloids
The Never-ending Story
Thugburg
Gulf War I
The Way We Were
Bio

Merry-Go-Blog











On Sale now!


A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.

Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.

Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has dominated Mexico for six years.
Click here for more information

Meet the Mods
In no particular order...
Steve White
Seafarious
tu3031
badanov
sherry
ryuge
GolfBravoUSMC
Bright Pebbles
trailing wife
Gloria
Fred
Besoeker
Glenmore
Frank G
3dc
Skidmark

Two weeks of WOT
Sun 2013-11-17
  Hezbollah commander killed in Syria
Sat 2013-11-16
  Militias attack Libyan protesters, killing 31
Fri 2013-11-15
  Iraq Bombers Kill 43 as Millions Mark Shiite Holiday
Thu 2013-11-14
  Bomb blasts outside Karachi imambargahs wound 14
Wed 2013-11-13
  Syria Kurds Announce Transitional Autonomous Government
Tue 2013-11-12
  Gunmen gun down 'chief financier' of Haqqani network in Islamabad
Mon 2013-11-11
  Syria army retakes key base near Aleppo: State TV
Sun 2013-11-10
  Imambargah attacks leave three dead, spark outrage
Sat 2013-11-09
  Zawahiri Disbands Main Qaida Faction in Syria
Fri 2013-11-08
  'Mullah Radio' takes overTTP, terms talks 'waste of time'
Thu 2013-11-07
  Nigeria president seeks state of emergency extension
Wed 2013-11-06
  Mortar round hits Vatican embassy in Damascus
Tue 2013-11-05
  152 soldiers sentenced to die for mutiny in Bangladesh
Mon 2013-11-04
  Blast inside Quetta seminary leaves two injured
Sun 2013-11-03
  Gunmen kill 30 in suspected Islamist attack on Nigerian wedding convoy

Better than the average link...



Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
44.213.65.97
Help keep the Burg running! Paypal:
WoT Operations (19)    WoT Background (27)    Non-WoT (13)    (0)    Politix (5)