Saturday Stuff
Most of our readers and regular posters are enjoying their 4th of July weekend and not spending very much time near their computers, so I don’t expect a lot of posts or comments. For those of you who are like me and are staying home this weekend, here is some stuff that you should see.
First, here is a video of TAH friend Pete Hegseth smacking down Elene Kagan in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee:
If you got some extra cash and want to help elect some real warriors to Congress, donate to Vets for Freedom.
This essay by dead communist historian Howard Zinn is making the rounds on far-left websites. Basically it says we should be ashamed of our country on the 4th of July. Pretty typical, but if you feel like getting pissed off, read it.
Bite Me is in Iraq this weekend in order to help the Iraqis form a new government. Of course, Bite Me is perfect for the job of helping to form a unity government, especially considering he strongly advocated breaking the country into three seperate states… oh wait. Iraqis are tired of the violence. The Sunnis don’t want Al Qaida to come back, the majority of Shiites have turned agains the Sadrists, and the Kurds want a strong Iraqi state to deter Turkish incursions into their autonomous region. Iraq can work, but I don’t think we have the right people going over there to help.
William Kristol slams Michael Steele for talking out of his ass about Afghanistan and states he should resign. Steele should have resigned a long time ago, but he has stubbornly held on to the position of RNC Chairman and has completely marginalized the RNC. Very few Republican candidates and conservative groups work with or get help from the RNC anymore. I hope this is the final straw for Steele, he is completely incompetent.
I hope you all have a great 4th of July weekend.
Category: Military issues, Politics
wasn’t Zinn also a bomber pilot in WW2?
Hegseth was a riot. to sum it up: “Because I think it hurts the military, I oppose Kagan’s opposition to a policy that she thinks hurts the military.” And “even though they say the military requires DADT (and the chiefs say they want it and straight soldiers will leave in droves), we should only hold politicians responsible for it”. Don’t forget “even though Saudi Arabia isn’t a firm and doesn’t come to Harvard to recruit lawyers, Kagan should have banned them from recruiting too.”
Dan,
best to you and yours too. I’m taking a break from the inter-tubes for a couple days. Warm temps and cold beer are calling me. I’ll be back to regular posting on tuesday. Maybe wednesday. 🙂
Happy 4th of July to ALL here @ this ain’t hell!!
We sure appreciate all you guys do.
🙂
God Bless
unfortunately, everything said in opposition is wasted breath, because when it is all said and done, she will be confirmed because she is the community organizer’s pick and the liberals/socialists/marxists in congress are in lock step to destroy this country’s founding principles.
Thank you Pete for speaking the absolute truth. If Kagan becomes a Supreme Court Justice, then it will be a tragedy for our nation. I will have lost all respect for our judiciary system.
While I agree that Kagan is a terrible suitor for the Supreme Court.
I find Pete’s remarks a little too politically charged.
A supreme court justice needs to be picked by their credentials, their willingness to uphold the law, and their respect for the constitution and most abundantly, their ability to interpret the law. A supreme court justice does not need to provide the military everything it wants. Sometimes a Justice may have to pull the reigns on the military if it is in violation of the law and subsequently protect the military against idiots like Fred Phelps Westboro Baptist Church.
Justices are not pawns of the military, thus Pete’s remarks do not come as a academic, rather they are politically charged rhetorical comments to address, VFF’s continued push for the political support of the military.
Again, I think Kagan is a terrible choice!!!
However, I think Pete used terrible rational for his position. I respect him and VFF, but he is dead wrong in his rational.
He’s dead wrong that a justice should uphold written law and not play politics when in positions of power?
I’m afraid I fail to see the rationale in that.
Get some, Mr. Hegseth!!
IMO, Kagan will find “the Law” to be very malleable – in her judicial activist mind. Her position at Harvard is a pretty clear indication of her willingness to ignore “the Law” when it suited her.
elections have consequences. Who is Pete Hegseth? Oh yeah, he belongs to an organization that is as relevant as IVAW.
Oh, sweet irony- the irrelevant speaking on relevancy.
ASH- are you a member of VoteVets or IAVA? I bet you are.
I’m not a member of either since I don’t believe either organization has a membership. I don’t hang with groups that play politics with our troops (VoteVets, VFP, IVAW). IAVA in my view doesn’t play politics with our fighting men and women. Mr. Hegseth belongs and runs an organization called Veterans For Freedom. He thinks it’s more important to run an irrelevant organization than to actually switch over to active duty and support the wars he politically pushes.
@ Amazing Stuff has a point. I have no problems with people taking political sides. Everyone has a view. Left or Right does not matter to me. However, I think the idea that VFF is supporting “American Freedom” is SLIGHTLY misleading. Not purposefully, or outright dishonestly, I think VFF uses language that misleads political debates. Reason: There is LOADS of evidence that says, supporting US troops overseas is putting the US at greater risks. Robert Pape (Dying to Win) and Andrew Bacevich (Limits of Power) take conservative positions and asses “supporting the troops” overseas is more dubious than advertised. 2 time Medal of Honor Winner Smedly Butler wrote a short piece “War is a Racket”, discussing the financial and moral crisis of wars. Yet, I have rarely heard conservatives venerate the prophetic words of these figures. Why? Is it because, the words of the Prophets are too challenging? Or more likely, they are not politically convenient. VFF is an obvious rightwing focused PAC. It is good and fitting to be have right wing conservative beliefs. Having those opinions is apart of the American political discourse. Yet, when Conservatism gets highjacked by military prolificacy, the nation of civilian citizens is put at risk. Thus, we the Veteran community need to provide a wise and shrewd response to those who MAY have good intentions, yet may unintentionally be sending America into an abyss. One Problem with IVAW, largely they have been influenced by leftist’s and thus blame everything on the rightwing. Thus the arguments become divisive and folks like VFF and IVAW are the ones whom capture the political attention because of their political affiliations. I really do not think people want to engage a discussion of American safety, because if Americans did. We would see the gulf crisis, the economic collapse, and the growing threat of terrorism as equal crisis’s. Note: US security is not simply wrapped up in military dominance. There is economic security, cyber security, ecological security, and sustainability security concerns. All of which are not elements which the Military is best fit to tackle. For instance, the military… Read more »