Thursday, December 31, 2009
Susan is the Director of Communications at the Harry S. Truman Library Institute and Harry S. Truman Library and Museum.
Bill is an author and blogger of Urgent Agenda, one of the most popular political blogs. Here is the show:
Adryana Boyne and I spoke with Cathie Adams, Chairman Republican Party of Texas. We discussed the future of the party in Texas!
Click here for the show:
Back in July, Adryana Boyne and I spoke with Roger Williams, Republican candidate for the US Senate!
Here is the show:
Back in September, Adryana Boyne and I spoke with Trayton Oakes, a twenty-year-old political science and economics double-major.
He is the current chairman of the North Texas College Republicans at The University of North Texas in Denton, TX.
Click here for the show:
Back in July, Adryana Boyne and I spoke with Fernando Trevino and Danielle Chavez, a couple of young conservatives.
Click here for the show:
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
On Tuesday, we spoke with Rick Johnson, author and founder of Better Dads:
"Rick is the founder of Better Dads, a fathering skills program designed to inspire and equip men to be more engaged in the lives of their children.
He develops and delivers inspirational training workshops and presentations such as, Raising Kids of Character and Dynamic Dads—A Challenge of Significance, across the country for organizations including businesses, churches, civic groups, social service agencies, hospitals, prisons, and schools.
Rick is a graduate and certified trainer of the National Center for Fathering’s Train the Trainer program.
He attended the Luis Palau Evangelistic Association’s Next Generation Alliance Evangelist’s Conference; a by invitation-only, three-day training program for evangelists.
At the request of a local school district, Rick also developed a popular seminar for single mothers and other women raising boys entitled "Courageous Moms - Raising Boys to Become Good Men," that he presents throughout the United States."
We spoke about the state of the American family.
Here is the show:
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Once again, we make life miserable for those of us who fly for business or leisure.
We are forcing innocent people to go thought long lines, and often very uncomfortable machines, because we don't want to face the truth.
Why should innocent people remove their shoes?
or have us put lotions and toothpaste in clear bags?
or have no bathroom breaks?
no pillows? no blankets? no books?
Let me say it: Grandmothers don't blow up airplanes!
We know who blows up airplanes or buildings!
They are young men of a certain religion who hang around in places of faith that preach hatred against those who love freedom and Western culture!
We know who they are but our political correctness is making us vulnerable.
Let's profile terrorists and keep them off the planes!
Christopher Hitchens has a good message for all of us:
"What nobody in authority thinks us grown-up enough to be told is this:
We had better get used to being the civilians who are under a relentless and planned assault from the pledged supporters of a wicked theocratic ideology.
These people will kill themselves to attack hotels, weddings, buses, subways, cinemas, and trains.
They consider Jews, Christians, Hindus, women, homosexuals, and dissident Muslims (to give only the main instances) to be divinely mandated slaughter victims.
Our civil aviation is only the most psychologically frightening symbol of a plethora of potential targets.
The future murderers will generally not be from refugee camps or slums (though they are being indoctrinated every day in our prisons); they will frequently be from educated backgrounds, and they will often not be from overseas at all.
They are already in our suburbs and even in our military.
We can expect to take casualties.
The battle will go on for the rest of our lives.
Those who plan our destruction know what they want, and they are prepared to kill and die for it.
Those who don't get the point prefer to whine about "endless war," accidentally speaking the truth about something of which the attempted Christmas bombing over Michigan was only a foretaste.
While we fumble with bureaucracy and euphemism, they are flying high."
And we better start "profiling them" at the airport, and everywhere else!
Or, innocent people will be killed!
Over the last few days, we've learned one thing for sure: "Whatever his name" is did try to blow up the plane landing in Detroit!
Just listen to the passengers!
Wonder how many passengers agree with Pres BO that this terrorist "allegedly" tried to kill 250 people over Michigan?
Nevertheless, Pres BO said yesterday that the terrorist 'allegedly" try to blow up the plane.
Shouldn't we hear something more definite from Pres BO?
Pres BO's leadership style is starting to come under severe scrutiny, specially now that he has to make decisions rather than just give "healing the planet" speeches in front of adoring crowds.
Handling problems the Obama way is the latest article that questions Pres BO's style:
"There is a sense of déjà vu in the Obama administration’s response to the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day.
A by-now familiar pattern has been established for dealing with unexpected problems.
First, White House aides downplay the notion that something may have gone wrong on their part.
While staying out of the spotlight, the president conveys his efforts to address the situation and his feelings about it through administration officials.
After a few days, the White House concedes on the issue, and perhaps Obama even steps out to address it.
That same scenario unfolded over the summer when Obama said Sgt. James Crowley, a white Cambridge, Mass., police officer, “acted stupidly” when he arrested Henry Louis Gates Jr., a black Harvard professor, in his own home.
It happened in March when the public was outraged over AIG dishing out hefty bonuses.
More recently the public witnessed the dynamic after a security breach at President Barack Obama’s first state dinner."
A little too much dithering?
We are not saying that Pres BO should have declared war on Nigeria or Holland.
At the same time, it would have been nice to have seen a more engaged presidency saying something like this:
First, this is unacceptable. How did this guy get on the plane?
Second, the terrorist is a terrorist who did try to blow up an aircraft and kill innocent people.
Instead, we got "legalisms" and "we need more reviews"!
Yes, we need a review but we also need a president who showed some passion about the fact that a terrorist tried to kill US citizens.
Are the Norwegian judges, and/or the "yes we can" screamers, ready to see the Nobel Peace Prize winner start a war in Yemen?
"“Yemen now becomes one of the centers of that fight,” said Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut and chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, who visited the country in August.
“We have a growing presence there, and we have to, of Special Operations, Green Berets, intelligence,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”" (NYT)
Today, we read this: U.S. Widens Terror War to Yemen, a Qaeda Bastion
"In the midst of two unfinished major wars, the United States has quietly opened a third, largely covert front against Al Qaeda in Yemen."
Frankly, I'm not opposed to attacks on Al Qaeda sites in Yemen.
At the same time, shouldn't Pres BO go to Congress and get some kind of resolution?
Is the Obama administration using the Afghanistan resolution from Oct 2001 to drop bombs in Pakistan and send special raids into Yemen?
The anti-war candidate has just sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, changed nothing in Iraq and now plans to escalate Yemen.
Again, I'm OK with these actions. I believe in preemptive and blunt attacks on terrorists and their sites.
However, what are the "yes we can" screamers who voted for hope and change thinking?
We said it over and over that Pres Bush did an amazing job keeping this country safe after 9-11.
Why? Because the Bush-Cheney administration took terrorism very seriously.
They treated terrorism like a war rather than just a law enforcement matter.
Since Pres BO took office, we have:
a) apologized to the world for past US mistakes;
b) promised to close GITMO;
c) projected a softer approach toward Iran;
d) moved the KSM trial to NY City; and
e) changed our language, from the more direct "war on terror" to the more politically correct "global contingency operation".
Where are we?
Last week, before Detroit, we saw this: Domestic Terror Incidents Hit a Peak in 2009
"You may not have noticed because most of the plots were foiled, but 2009 saw an unprecedented surge in terror "events" on U.S. soil." Let's read today's WSJ editorial: The Terror This Time
"A U.S. government that has barred the phrase "war on terror" has nonetheless acknowledged that a failed Christmas day bomb attack on an airliner was a terrorist attempt.
Can we all now drop the pretense that we stopped fighting a war once Dick Cheney and George W. Bush left the White House?
The attempt by 23-year-old Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab follows the alleged murders in Ft. Hood, Texas by Islamist-inspired Major Nidal Hasan in November.
Brian Jenkins, who studies terrorism for the Rand Corporation, says there were more terror incidents (12), including thwarted plots, on U.S. soil in 2009 than in any year since 2001.
The jihadists don't seem to like Americans any better because we're closing down Guantanamo."
How is that "global contingency operation" going?
Unfortunately, not well!
Let's ask the passengers: Should we call it a "war on terror" or is "global contingency operation" a better description of what happened in that plane?
We discussed the KSM trial in New York City.
Here is the show:
In October, we had a great interview with Humberto Fontova, author and commentator on Latin American affairs. Here is the show:
Monday, December 28, 2009
In October, we spoke with Kevin Martin, Advisor to the National Center for Public Policy Research AKA Project 21, Former Director of Political and Government Affairs at the African American Republican Leadership Council and Former Host of Lunchtime with the Maryland GOP.
Click here for the show.
We are very happy that Dallas beat Washington:
Dallas Cowboys wrap up playoff spot with 17-0 winWe are still recovering from that awful Sunday afternoon in January 1983.
Washington beat Dallas and went to the Super Bowl!
We still remember that awful moment in Dallas! It was a freaky play late in the game that kept the Cowboys from a trip to the Super Bowl.
Grown men cried that Sunday afternoon! It was awful to watch on TV.
I felt bad for starting QB Danny White who was injured in the second half. White was replaced by Gary Hogenboon, who had not played much in the 1982-83 season.
It still hurts so many years later:
Over the weekend, we've been following the Detroit airplane incident.
Here is the bottom line: We are very lucky that 250 people were not killed landing in Detroit.
Again, we got lucky.
I mean no disrespect to the courageous passengers who stopped the terrorist.
However, we should not expect that passengers should protect us from terrorists.
Isn't that what we have security agencies for?
Now, we hear this from Sec Napolitano:
"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Christmas Day demonstrated that "the system worked."
Asked by CNN's Candy Crowley on "State of the Union" how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who has been charged with trying to set off the bomb was able to smuggle explosive liquid onto the jet, Napolitano responded:
"We're asking the same questions."
Napolitano added that there was "no suggestion that [the suspect] was improperly screened.""
Are you kidding me?
The system did not work!
How did this guy get on a plane in the first place?
Why wasn't he on a list?
I agree with Power Line:
"So the "system" consists of hoping there is an alert Dutch filmmaker on board, and that the terrorist's detonator fails?"
I like this from Sean Rayment, Security Correspondent in the UK:
"Tough questions need to be asked of not just the US security agencies – such as the CIA and the FBI – but also of Britain's MI6, MI5 and the Metropolitan Police's counter-terrorist unit.
How can a Muslim student, whose name appears on a US law enforcement database, be granted a visa to travel to America, allegedly acquire an explosive device from Yemen, a country awash with al-Qaeda terrorists, and avoid detection from the world's most sophisticated spy agencies?"
This is a huge failure and we are very lucky that the terrorist did not blow up a plane landing in Detroit!
By the way, Ed-M is running a poll: “The system worked”?
I just voted no!
This is not a scientidic poll or survey. However, the "no" is about 99%, which is probably where most of the country is on this issue!
Let me recommend another poll: Is Sec Napolitano going to keep her job?
My vote is a big NO!
Sunday, December 27, 2009
We salute Bill Katz again. We learn so much from reading Bill's blog every day.
Bill and URGENT AGENDA was one of the best political analysts of 2009.
We congratulate Bill for talking about Iran and terrorism, such as the incident in Detroit.
P.S. This is our last interview with Bill. He discussed Pres BO's challenges:
Have you spoken with a "yes we can screamer" lately?
Better question: Is anybody admitting these days that they used to be a "yes we can" screamer?
Let's check out some articles on the front pages:
"Obama can write—and he can speak—but if he can't fight, he'll find it hard to achieve his goals.
If he can't fight, he isn't scary."
What's the point of being popular for the sake of being popular?
Secondly, The Obama Way By ROSS DOUTHAT:
"If Obama’s presidency succeeds, it will be a testament to what ideology tempered by institutionalism can accomplish.
But his political approach leaves him in constant danger of losing center and left alike — of being dismissed by independents as another tax-and-spender, and disdained by liberals as a sellout."
So here we are!
A year after people cried in Chicago on election night, there is great disappointment and confusion over BO.
I ask again: Where is that "yes we can screamer" who devoted his life to the cause of Obama-mania?
It looks like he is now making TV ads against the man he once worshipped.
They call it Yeswestillcan.org:
"The YesWeStillCan.org petition has been signed by over 600 Obama campaign staffers, 40,000 Obama volunteers, and 60,000 Obama donors"
Here is the video that they are running around the country:
My guess is that the feud between "the yes we can screamers" and BO will get worse.
It will get really bad, specially when Pres BO has to break his promise of starting to bring the troops home from Afghanistan in 2011!
Saturday, December 26, 2009
On one hand, you see Senate Dems cheering their "historic" vote.
P.S. Today's WSJ editorial gets it right:
"And it may get worse before it becomes law.
The left has thrown a faux tantrum over the Senate bill, hoping to leverage changes toward even higher costs and taxes as it now goes to House-Senate conference.
Democratic leaders are already saying this won't be the usual conference, with public votes, but will be negotiated by a few barons plus White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel in a backroom.
Whatever changes they make to appease the left will be sprung on everyone else and once again rushed through both houses, a la the Senate bill.
Every Democrat in the Senate cast the deciding vote for this spectacle, which will soon give them ownership of the U.S. health-care system." (WSJ)
The Dems were all for closing GITMO until they won the election and had to govern in the real world!
Thursday, December 24, 2009
By now, you've heard Dems bash insurance companies.
However, this new proposal that cleared the Senate is "Santa Claus" to the insurance industry.
Karl Rove has a good summary:
"Ben Nelson also won an exemption from the tax being levied on other Medigap insurance providers for Mutual of Omaha.
There's also the "Nebraska-Michigan Compromise" in which Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies in both states get a carve-out on the insurance tax while the rest of the country's Blues get socked with it.
How long that lasts may depend on how honest Democrats were in estimating costs.
The pricier their bill is, the more likely this deal is upended."
Here is the bad news: The US Senate passed this proposal loaded with something for everybody.
Here is the good news: It has to go to the House for reconciliation!
In other words, we are light years away from having this monstrosity turn into law.
What should we watch?
Keep an eye on the US public! Every poll confirms that the public is against this travesty. (Majority of Public Opposes Plan)
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Our "historic" president is bent on making "history".
A move by a group of states to challenge the constitutionality of Obamacare could reinvigorate the efficacy of the 10th Amendment, which reserves to the states or the people all rights not specifically granted to the federal government."
Many of us have argued that the 10th amendment has been buried by an avalanche of BO initiatives intended to expand federal powers.
We may finally have a fight about the constitutionality of BO-Care, White House Czars not confirmed by the US Senate and a few others.
Our "historic" president is making history.
Unfortunately, this is not the kid of "history" that people cried about on election night 2008. (By His Own Words, Obama Has Failed by Jonah Goldberg)
Question: How can "hope and change" watch this?
"Hope and change"? It looks more and more like buyer's remorse!