Straight Talk is not the same as Straight Walk

I seek the nomination of our Party because I am as confident today as I was when I first entered public life as a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution that the principles of the Republican Party – our confidence in the good sense and resourcefulness of free people – are always in America’s best interests. In war and peace, in good times and challenging ones, we have always known that the first responsibility of government is to keep this country safe from its enemies, and the American people free of a heavy-handed government that spends too much of their money, and tries to do for them what they are better able to do for themselves. We want government to do its job, not your job; to do it better and to do it with less of your money; to defend our nation’s security wisely and effectively, because the cost of our defense is so dear to us; to respect our values because they are the true source of our strength; to enforce the rule of law that is the first defense of freedom; to keep the promises it makes to us and not make promises it will not keep. We believe government should do only those things we cannot do individually, and then get out of the way so that the most industrious, ingenious, and enterprising people in the world can do what they have always done: build an even greater country than the one they inherited.

-- John McCain, 1/18/08

[So, given all the "straight talk", how much do past misdeeds -- Keating savings and loan scandal, McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill, McCain-Feingold 1st Amendment sell-out, and judicial nomination side deals -- count towards walking the walk? -- Kirt]

A Good Government

I will venture to assert that no combination of designing men under heaven will be capable of making a government unpopular which is in its principles a wise and good one, and vigorous in its operations. -- Alexander Hamilton (speech to the New York Ratifying Convention, June 1788)

[I think it is only in "its operations" that our government has earned our dismay. -- Kirt ]

The Jihadist War in Review

After the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, the United States realized it lacked the military wherewithal to simultaneously deal with the four powers that made al Qaeda possible: Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran and Pakistan. The first phase of the Bush solution was to procure an anchor against Afghanistan by forcing Pakistan into an alliance. The second was to invade the state that bordered the other three-- Iraq -- in order to intimidate the remaining trio into cooperating against al Qaeda. The final stage was to press both wars until al Qaeda -- the core organization that launched the 9/11 attack and sought the creation of a pan-Islamic caliphate, not the myriad local extremists who later adopted its name -- broke.

As 2008 dawns, it has become apparent that though this strategy engendered many unforeseen costs, it has proven successful at grinding al Qaeda into nonfunctionality. Put simply, the jihadist war is all but over; the United States not only is winning but also has an alliance with the entire constellation of Sunni powers that made al Qaeda possible in the first place. The United States will attempt to use this alliance to pressure the remnants of al Qaeda and its allies, as well as those in the region who are not in the alliance.

This leaves Iran, the region's only non-Sunni power, in the uncomfortable position of needing to seek an arrangement with the United States.

-- George Friedman, stratfor.com, 1/8/08

Government needs a short leash

Freedom was given to humanity by God. But, governments, if they can help it, never give freedom. They just hand out slavery with slogans. -- Taylor Caldwell