Monthly Archives: December 2010

Posted on by

any republican senator voting for START should get a primary challenger

Senator Jon Kyl

There are some issues that are too important to overlook on Election Day.  Defending our national security is one of them.  Voting to implement the new START treaty in its current form is not only dangerous for Americans’ security but will send a strong signal to President Obama that he can continue to dilute U.S. defense capabilities.  Make no mistake about it, Senators voting for the new START treaty give their support and acquiescence to President Obama’s weak national security policies.  Obama has shown a willingness to dismantle missile defense programs, weaken American consequences for rogue nations’ non compliances with international demands, decrease naval readiness and neglect developing international threats.  Republican Senators who vote to approve of President Obama’s weak negotiation strategies deserve to be challenged in a primary election and defend their inattentive national security votes.  Democratic Senators, too, should think long and hard about supporting a new START Treaty with Russia that is riddled with red-flags:

  1. With Iran and North Korea testing and building offensive capabilities, should the U.S. be limiting ours’?
  2. The U.S. and Russia already disagree about what the Treaty says about U.S. missile defense development.
  3. The Treaty’s pre-amble guarantees Russia a strong missile defense program.
  4. Russia seldom abides by its international commitments, see Iran sanctions, and so solid verification systems are crucial.
  5. Internal State Department memos highlight Obama’s proclivity for ending strong missile defense shields altogether.
  6. Russia’s Georgia example.
  7. No Treaty has ever been ratified in a lame duck session.
  8. Russia is financially broke; it can’t afford to build up its capabilities like it once could.
  9. Putin is already threatening the U.S.  if the treaty is not ratified – is this a “partner” we should deal with on nuclear issues?
  10. Obama failed to negotiate real verification methods to understand and ensure Russia’s compliance with the Treaty.

It is ironic that the same week that the Obama Administration has launched a public education program to instruct Americans to get indoors in the event of a nuclear weapons attack; they are also trying to push through a major reduction in American military capabilities.  Is the Obama Administration’s new emphasis on surviving a weapons attack a natural extension of his naïve and trusting nature? Senators voting to “rush and not verify” U.S. national security issues in a lame duck session of Congress during the week of Christmas should face harsh judgment from voters.  Democratic Senators will be defined by their Republican challengers as weak on national security and Republican Senators should be prepared to face a primary challenge from a more responsible and thoughtful candidate.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Posted on by

gay leaders need a tea party shakeup; 111th congress a total failure

The entrenched gay leaders in Washington, DC, have spent the last two years blaming Republicans for the fact that they themselves have struck out on Capitol Hill and will end the 111th Congress with nothing to show for their multimillion-dollar fundraising efforts.  If this were a public company, the Board or the shareholders would have run these leaders out of town a long time ago. 

Despite campaigning for decades to put Democrats in control of all of Washington, their dream ticket of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama failed to deliver what the gay leaders themselves promised the movement.  Led by Joe Solmonese of Human Right Campaign and Aubrey Sarvis of the Servicemen’s Legal Defense Network, gay leaders have been tripping over themselves to protect President Obama from blame for not making the promised progress on gay equality.  Solmonese and Sarvis are the faces of the most expensive failed gay campaign in history.  Other gay leaders in Washington also have turned their comfortable and high-paying perches into a safe haven free from the consequences of job performance evaluations. 

Gay Americans from outside Washington should demand that they stop sacrificing progress to further their personal political careers.  It’s time we found some young gay leaders who will work for equality and not be concerned about pleasing the Democratic Party.  

Gay politics are not black and white.  It isn’t true that all Democrats are good on gay issues and all Republicans bad.  The outcome of the Prop 8 vote in California, where the traditionally Democratic state also overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama for President, proves that Democrats have a lot of work to do in their own party.  Republicans have failed us, too.  I am not suggesting we dismiss the GOP sins of advocating for small government policies while practicing intrusive, big government tactics.  But Republicans who advocate laissez-faire principles can be great allies, just as liberal Southern Democrats can be strong opponents working against us.  But Somonese and Sarvis have never seen it this way.  For them, it’s all a process to help the Democratic Party win more seats.  And for this failed strategy, they should be judged harshly.

The partisan leaders of the gay and lesbian movement in Washington have spent endless political capital telling us that we would be better off if all of our elected officials were Democrats.  They have spent millions of dollars trying to convince us that we will be taken care of by a partisan Democratic America.  At the same time, they have also secured their positions of prominence within the Democratic Party by being able to deliver the gay vote.  Sadly, we have become tokens for their careers.  In early 2009, Sarvis sent a strong message to his Democratic friends that it wasn’t the right time for the Democratic Party to take up gay issues yet.  He told the Washington Times that waiting until at least 2010 for some LGBT victories made sense.  “Where does ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ fall in all this?,” Sarvis asked.  “I would say it is not in the top five priorities of national issues.”  His Board should have fired him on the spot.

It is painfully obvious that the national gay leaders have promoted their own partisan agendas and careers within the Democratic Party instead of working to ensure passage of civil rights.  Solmonese, a seasoned Democratic Party activist who at first maneuvered for a political appointment in the Obama Administration, couldn’t even move Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who represents the gayest district in the country, to put DADT or gay marriage up for a standalone vote in the House.  And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid easily manipulated gay leaders into supporting him to wait until after November’s elections to put controversial issues up for votes.  Reid wanted this issue to be unresolved going into November’s elections and Solmonese and Sarvis allowed it.  The real tragedy is that gay leaders in Washington don’t have enough moxy to move their own political party – the party that controls the White House, the Senate and the House.  It is a sign that they either don’t have the skills to make political progress or are too close to the Democratic leadership and therefore unwilling to make the necessary push.  We can do better and we should start by demanding for Somonese’s and Sarvis’ resignations.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Posted on by

does dana milbank think its funny to joke about bombing the un?

dana milbank may think its funny but to say that Bolton wanted to blow up the UN is ridiculous and terrorizing – not to mention completely inaccurate.  responsible reporters shouldn’t joke about bombing the un.  to be accurate, bolton said, “The Secretariat Building in New York has 38 stories. If you lost ten stories today, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.”.  bolton was obviously commentating on a bloated bureaucracy and the need for efficiency.  i”ll put dana (don’t let the name fool you , he’s a guy) down for advocating for a waste of u.s. tax dollars and using bomb jokes to be funny.

dana may think it’s just a joke but it’s actually lame and dull writing from a lame and dull writer.  his bomb joke also furthers a lie that liberal pundits like to spread about bolton’s tough diplomacy skills.  i could easily argue that bolton’s work engaging the UN and trying to fix its’ mess means that he cares more about it than susan rice does since she just attends parties and doesn’t actually use the UN to further U.S. interests.

i ask you, who cares more - someone who ignores a problem or someone who tries to fix it?

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

Posted on by

somalia fights back and the un should take notice

America’s involvement in conflicts for the foreseeable future will be determined by Washington’s appetite for nation-building and debated by asking tough questions about whether or not we will be temporary occupiers or outside supporters.  Americans, after all, have spent billions of dollars, and thousands of lives have been lost, fighting al-Qaeda and the Taliban from inside Iraq and Afghanistan.  Building even fragile democracies is expensive and enormous sacrifices must be made by military families and the taxpayers that support them.  The U.S. State Department and the Department of Defense have also spent a great deal of time and money trying to convince Iraqis and Afghans to take responsibility for their country by personally fighting terrorism – and not just relying on Americans to do it.  

One lesson we’ve learned over the last 10 years of fighting Islamic extremists is that fighting terrorism is easier when it’s done from the inside by insiders rather than from the inside by outsiders.  Building a democracy can only be done when those oppressed have finally had enough and push back.  If Americans want to support a group of people willing to make their own personal sacrifices to fight Islamic fundamentalists then more should be done to support the Somalis who are locked in a battle with the pirates that terrorize East Africa. 

Off the coast of Somalia, Islamic bandits and pirates, some claiming to be a part of al-Shabab, a group affiliated with al-Qaeda, have wreaked more than a decade of havoc, violence and death.   With only half-hearted support from the international community, some Somalis are fighting back.  The efforts of the international community have so far been unsuccessful, despite ongoing UN discussions and constant media attention highlighting the pirates’ destruction.  A British couple was released after 388 days of being held captive by Somali pirates only after someone or some government paid a hefty ransom; al-Jazeera reported the total ransom was roughly $1 million.  Word in the region has now spread that the pirates are offering $1.5 million for the next white/western hostage to be used to extort more money and garner greater media attention.  The situation threatens the region’s stability and international peace and security. 

The current western backed and UN approved Transitional Federal Government in Somalia is no longer waiting for additional support from the international community to do something to stop these pirates.  The TFG has also been defending Mogadishu where its’ headquarters is defended by 8000 United Nations’ troops.  The Mogadishu airport is controlled by Ugandan troops supportive of the transitional government but al-Shabab controls half of Mogadishu – and wants to control all of it.  Experts say that the pirates off the coast must be stopped from their safe havens on land in Somalia.  The pirate force off the East African coast has been estimated at 22 ships and a crew of 521.  But the multinational forces patrolling those same waters have been unable to stop them.  This jeopardizes lucrative oil, gas and fishing licenses that the Somalis could use to fund a unified government accountable to its people.

African Union troops, mainly Ugandans, have tried training Somalis willing to help the struggling transitional government defend itself from Islamist militant groups after a bloody civil war that is finally coming to an end.  The EU has also been training some Somalis in Uganda and in Europe but the transitional government wants a more comprehensive approach to deal with the pirates and for the training camps to be set up inside Somalia.  The Associated Press reported this week that the TFG has begun working with outside military trainers to equip and train Somalis to defend the coast and drive the pirates out.  The trainers are reported to be part of Saracen, a private security firm whose track record suggests is well-equipped to train the Somalis.  Estimates say more than 100 have already been trained and more than 1000 will follow soon.  The new training is more aggressive and higher quality than previous training from UN efforts.  America should promote this new strategy and work with the UN, the EU, AU and NATO to act fast with financial assistance before the water terrorists take over all of Somalia. 

The TFG Prime Minister Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed believes the pirates can be defeated and the international community should support his willingness to try.  Many experts believe that since nothing else has worked despite implementing an arms embargo, a monitoring group, travel bans, asset freezes, targeted sanctions, a panel of experts and multiple resolutions that this new effort deserves a try.  So far, UN officials have been cautiously optimistic of the new trainers.  But the UN should be much more vocally supportive of the TRG’s efforts.  After all, in August of 2011 the UN will sit in judgement of the TRG and the progress it has made when the TFG’s mandate expires.  If the UN stands in the way of this new idea then they will be partially to blame for the continued piracy.  

Mogadishu Mayor Mohamoud Ahmed Nur told the BBC of his city, “It’s not the most dangerous. Baghdad and Kabul are worse – but they have lots of money. We have none because here there are no Americans.”

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post