"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." - President Ronald Reagan
Now, here is the unbelievable "rest of the story".
Austin Wood, a senior left hander, had the greatest pitching performance since Harvey Haddix in 1959:
"The Longhorns left-hander entered the game with one out and a runner on second base in the seventh inning and proceeded to pitch 12.1 innings before yielding a hit.
For the game, Wood pitched 13.0 scoreless innings, scattering two hits and four walks while striking out a career-high 14.
He logged 169 pitches on the evening."
I hope that they sent Austin Wood's jersey to the NCAA Hall of Fame and Cooperstown.
Can you believe 169 pitches and 12 innings without giving up a hit?
Congratulations to Austin Wood and the Longhorns!
P.S. In 1959, Harvey Haddix pitched 12 perfect innings against Milwaukee. He lost the game in the 13th inning!
This is going to be a tough post for all of you who voted for change.
You got Obama. You are not getting a lot of change on the national security front. (BO is indeed proposing radical changes at home and that's for another post!)
The US left is going crazy with Pres BO. Why? Because BO is starting to look a lot like Bush III!
"It's one more in a long series of instances in which the Obama administration has backtracked on its campaign promises--fortunately!--by keeping Bush administration anti-terror policies in place.
No doubt the administration was motivated in part by the fact that the Treasury Department has designated the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, the plaintiff in the anti-wiretapping case, "an organization that supports terrorism."
Isn't it about time for Barack Obama to issue an apology to former President Bush?"
On one hand, we are happy that the Obama administration is retaining Pres Bush's anti-terror policies.
Why not? We have not been attacked since 9-11. Would you replace a closer who has not blown a save?
On the other hand, didn't candidate BO run for office saying that the Bush administration was a lawless enterprise? Didn't he promise to reverse all of these policies?
Anybody want to make a bet?
How many national security promises will Pres BO break before Labor Day?
How about all of them?
My liberal friends keep telling me that former VP Cheney is cranky and crazy. So what do they say about Pres BO keeping all of his policies intact?
TROUT IN O'S MILK By JONAH GOLDBERG makes the point that Cheney is talking and BO is taking notes.
Professor VD Hanson calls it: Bush Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (Obama continues to trash Bush in words — but his actions speak louder)
I guess that it's easier to blame Bush 24/7.
It's easier to blame Bush than to admit that BO just took his supporters for a bunch of suckers!
Who is going to stand up and tell "the yes we can" screamers that their guy took them on a magic carpet ride of promises he never meant to keep?
"Born in Honduras, Estrada came to the United States at 17, not knowing a word of English.
He learned the language almost instantly, and within a few years was graduating with honors from Columbia University and heading off to Harvard Law School.
He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, was a prosecutor in New York, and worked at the Justice Department in Washington before entering private practice."
Did you ever hear anything about this man's incredible upbringing?
What did "the party of diversity" do to Mr. Estrada?
They attacked him, in much the same way that they tried to lynch Clarence Thomas.
Justice Thomas had an amazing story, too. It was a great story until he decided to escape the liberal plantation and refused to kiss Jesse Jackson's ring:
"Thomas who lost his father, and was raised by his mother in a rural Georgia town, in a shack without running water, until he was sent to his grandfather.
The same Justice Thomas who had to work every day after school, though he was not allowed to study at the Savannah Public Library because he was black.
The same Justice Thomas who became the first in his family to go to college and receive a law degree from Yale."(The Sotomayor Rules )
Let's hope that the Spanish-speaking media remembers how Mr. Estrada was treated. Let's hope that the rest of the media remembers how Clarence Thomas was treated, too!
We have a double standard.
The Dems have a message for Hispanics and blacks who escape the liberal plantation.
We will hunt you down and threw our dogs at you.
Worst of all, the media will play along with the Dems! The media doesn't like blacks or Hispanics who want to sit on the other side! They don't fit the template!
Just ask Mr. Estrada and Mr. Thomas! They can tell you a thing or two about "the party of diversity"!
Let's see how Dems in Virginia, Arkansas and Montana react to her position that the states do not have to obey the second amendment.
Second, let's hear her views on business and capitalism in general. IBD has a great editorial about one of her decisions:
"In a 2007 2nd Circuit decision, Sotomayor ruled the Clean Water Act required power companies that operate water-cooled power plants to use the "best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact" to prevent fish and other aquatic life from being sucked into vents and killed.
Third, let her explain the Ricci v. DeStefano decision.
John C. Eastman is the dean at Chapman University School of Law in Orange, Calif., and holds the Donald P. Kennedy chair in law. He is also the founding director of The Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.
"This case involved a serious constitutional challenge to a decision by the New Haven fire department to decertify a promotion exam after its results, which had been properly validated and carefully vetted by civil rights groups, did not yield an adequate racial mix of candidates.
The Supreme Court took the rare step of granting review despite the fact that the Second Circuit's decision was unpublished.
Under the Second Circuit's rules, unpublished summary orders are supposed to be issued only "in those cases in which decision is unanimous and each judge of the panel believes that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by an opinion (i.e. a ruling having precedential effect)."
The brief, two-paragraph order Sotomayor joined (and perhaps wrote) makes no mention whatsoever of the constitutional challenge.
The firefighters – and anyone who's been discriminated against on the basis of race – deserved better."
The Ricci decision is a potential embarrassment. It may be reversed by the The Supreme Court a few days before the hearings.
Can you remember a Supreme Court nominee having a major opinion reversed during the confirmation hearings? I can't think of one!
For now, be nice to Sotomayor and give her the microphone.
This is a win-win situation for our side.
First, her confirmation does not change the ideological balance.
Second, Republicans have a wonderful opportunity to win a debate about judicial activism.
In politics, things don't always turn out as planned.
Remember how The Obama White House couldn't wait to get into a debate with former VP Cheney?
Who is reversing campaign promises about military tribunals and detaining terrorists indefinitely?
It's not Cheney!
Let Sotomayor talk! Why don't we start the hearings next week? The sooner the better! Put this lady behind a microphone!
I have a funny feeling that Dems, not Republicans, will have a bad case of indigestion when Sotomayor has to explain some of these decisions and quotes. (It looks like The White House is concerned: White House Damage Control on Sotomayor)
P.S. Cheers to Townhall for this funny but provocative video:
Some of us are old enough to remember the 1991 Clarence Thomas confirmation.
We don't recall much interest in Mr. Thomas' childhood.
No one spoke about his grandfather, a great man who taught him about life.
For 24 hours, the media has been on high gear about Sotomayor's background and story.
When can we finally have a discussion about the judge's opinions or record?
I am looking forward to that!
As I posted before, let Sonia Sotomayor have her day and explain her positions.
P.S. I am concerned about this:
""Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's pick to become the newest Supreme Court justice, is on the record with some controversial remarks about 'diversity,' 'judicial activism' and female judges vs. male judges.
For example, the New York Times reported that in 2001, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture, Sotomayor had this to say:
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said later, regarding non-white, female judges, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”" (Newsmax)
"Dear President Obama, Like most Canadians I rooted for you madly and cried when you were elected President-of-The-World.
So far, I think you've been a great leader, reaching out to the whole planet.
But you've forgotten one nation - Canada."
I spoke with Josh Freed today. He is a nice man. We had a nice chat. We even discussed the possibility of trading PM Harper for Pres BO!
Ideology aside, I did ask a couple of questions:
What did Josh see in BO's resume or life to conclude that he could change the world or heal the planet?
I don't get it. What did BO accomplish in his career to inspire all of this devotion from someone in Montreal?
A little too much wishful thinking?
What legislative achievements did Josh find in BO's career as a State Senator or first term US Senator?
Frankly, all we know about his Illinois days is that he voted present 100 times! Wonder what "the thoughtful people of Canada" think about the "thoughtful BO" sitting in Rev Wright's church for 20 years?
All we know about his US Senate days is the spent half of his term promoting a book and running for president.
Beyond "sugar coated" speeches, telling people what they wanted to hear about Iraq and Guantanamo, and writing two books about himself, what else did Josh, and so many Canadians, find in BO?
What previous presidential candidate ever wrote two books about himself before he had an executive job?
Josh is disappointed that BO is reaching out to other countries except Canada.
Is that so?
What countries has BO been reaching out too?
Mexico is mad about a provision that violates NAFTA. We are in the middle of a trade war with our southern neighbor.
Colombia is still waiting for the Dems to approve a free trade deal.
Israel is not exactly saying "yes we can"!
Canada is mad about "Buy America". There is talk of a trade war with Canada too. By the way, most countries are balking at the "Buy America" clause, too!
However, BO is not having much impact on any one's policies.
Just check out his trip to Europe where he got lots of praise but came home with nothing tangible.
Josh: What happens when you fall for someone just because he is not Bush?
You get surprises....don't you?
You get an incompetent Homeland Security Director who has already lost control of her department. By the way, Canadians are not the only ones who are furious with this lady!
You get "buy American" provisions in budgets or stimulus bills. Worse than that, they are "hidden" in the same earmarks that BO ran against!
You learn that the Euros won't send troops to Afghanistan: No Bush and still no troops!
It will be the US, UK and Canada in the battlefield. Everybody else is doing a lot of talking but no fighting.
You may get The Byrd Amendment again, specially now that "protectionists" have their guy in The Oval Office.
We remind everyone that The Byrd Amendment was signed into law by Pres Clinton in 2000 and repealed by Pres Bush in 2006!
You get someone who kept much of the Bush anti-terror policies intact. (Obama's Deeds Vindicate Bush - Charles Krauthammer)
You get someone who has implemented the Bush-McCain policy in Iraq.
Bush may have lost Canadians by invading Iraq or opposing same sex marriage. However, he did support "free trade" and understood just how important exports are to Canada. (Also, what exactly were we supposed to do with Saddam Hussein, a man who had used WMDs twice and violated every UN resolution!)
After 9-11, Bush decided that protecting the US was more important than being popular overseas.
We are very happy that he did.
After all, what's the point of being popular if nobody is sending troops to Afghanistan? What's the benefit of having a "loved president" if the UN can't issue a North Korean resolution with teeth?
We hope that Josh in Montreal reconsiders his devotion!
Or we fear that Josh's disillusionment will only get worse!
He is the Denton County Republican Party Vice Chairman for Outreach, President of the Legacy Republican Club, and the GOP Precinct Chair for Denton County Precinct #117.
He was appointed By Governor Rick Perry in 2007 to serve on the Texas Medical Board District #2 Review Committee and is currently the Recruitment & Selection Manager at Texas Woman's University.
Bahukutumbi Raman is a retired officer of the Indian intelligence service and director of the Institute For Topical Studies, in Chennai, India. He is also associated with the Chennai Centre For China Studies.
"After Obama assumed office in January, whatever hesitation that existed in North Korea's policy-making circles regarding the likely response of U.S. administration has disappeared, and its leadership now feels it can defy the U.S. and the international community with impunity.
A series of actions taken by the Obama administration have created an impression in Iran, the "Af-Pak" region, China and North Korea that Obama does not have the political will to retaliate decisively to acts that are detrimental to U.S. interests, and to international peace and security."
In other words, he is talking weakness.
What happens when your president goes around apologizing to everybody?
Or, what about when he sits for 50 minutes and allows Daniel Ortega to take cheap shots at the US?
Or, what happens when the Israeli president goes home wondering if the US is ready to accept a nuclear Iran?
It adds up. It doesn't take long for the world to conclude that BO won't fight for anything, except a woman's right to have an abortion.
I hope that Mr. Raman is wrong about this:
"There will be more surprises for the U.S. and the international community to follow if Obama and his aides do not embark on corrective actions before it is too late."
I fear that Mr. Raman is right.
"Hope and change" is going to look a lot like "weakness" and "appeasement".
The Yankees are in for a 3 game series. (Game 1 is all New York so far. It's 11-0 after 7 innings!)
Nevertheless, it's a great chance to watch Derek Jeter, one of the all time great Yankees.
I remember watching a NY-Texas game back in 1996. I watched Jeter make a great play. I had a feeling that we would be watching Jeter for a long time.
Jeter is a .315 career hitter. He should finish this season with 2700 hits, i.e. he needs another 114! He should be close to cracking the 3,000 mark sometime in 2011 or 2012.
Will Jeter win his 5th World Series ring? The Yankees have a good team but I'm not sure that their pitching is deep enough to go that far.
No matter what, Jeter will be in the Hall of Fame.
For now, it's a lot of fun to watch one of the best Yankees ever!
"It is hard to ignore how passive he sounds — ever the victim of circumstances. That darn Bush left a mess on national security.
And what’s a guy to do with such a deficit left on his doorstep?
But the facts tell a different story, as this chart illustrates. To a greater degree than any predecessor, Obama has run up the deficit — with little to show for it."
How can BO get away with blaming his deficits on Bush? Not long!
"Hope and change" said a lot about "outsourcing". Remember the speeches about giving US companies "tax breaks" for taking their plants overseas? Now, we read this about "Hope and Change": "The U.S. government is pouring billions into General Motors in hopes of reviving the domestic economy, but when the automaker completes its restructuring plan, many of the company's new jobs will be filled by workers overseas. " (WashPost) The UAW is not pleased: "The complaints about GM's operations portend a potentially larger argument, a political dispute led in part by the United Auto Workers. "The bottom line is GM would rather pay $2 an hour -- and it's a slippery slope downward," said Alan Reuther, the UAW's legislative director. "If GM is going to be getting government assistance, they ought to be maintaining their manufacturing footprint in the U.S. rather than going off to China, Mexico and South Korea." No kidding. The UAW should be furious. First, candidate BO tells them that he is going to renegotiate NAFTA. Second, candidate BO beats up everybody for jobs going overseas. Now, we read that GM will move manufacturing operations overseas How long can this fairy tale go on? Not much longer!
"Human rights advocates say that relying on foreign governments to hold and question terrorist suspects could carry significant risks.
It could increase the potential for abuse at the hands of foreign interrogators and could also yield bad intelligence, they say. "
No kidding.
Where would you rather be? GITMO or Egypt?
There is more:
"How the United States is dealing with terrorism suspects beyond those already in the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, was a question Mr. Obama did not address in the speech he gave Thursday about his antiterrorism policies."
Wonder why he didn't?
Pres BO does not want to confirm that he will keep the Clinton-Bush jails overseas.
It may be too much for the "yes we can" screamers to learn that their guy is a first class hypocrite.
Wonder how much "terrorist recruiting" comes from Pres BO's rendition prisons? We never hear about that....do we?
Don't get me wrong.
I like rendition prisons. I supported Pres. Clinton's rendition prisons.
Why? Because I want to kill terrorists. I want to make their lives miserable. I want to get information from them.
Bottom line: I understand the threat. I understand that we must stop people who want to blow up a US city.
This is not a game. We are not in an argument with with poets and songwriters.
Therefore, I'm OK with Pres BO relying on rendition prisons.
I just don't like hypocrisy!
We are seeing a lot of hypocrisy and selective indignation from this White House.
P.S. On national security and prisons, someone at The White House should listen to Newt Gingrich discuss the threats that we face:
