Category: Politics-US

best UN ambassador in recent memory for the US has been forced to resign due to partisan politics:

Unable to win Senate confirmation, U.N. Ambassador John Bolton will step down when his temporary appointment expires within weeks, the White House said Monday. Bolton’s nomination has languished in the Senate’s Foreign Relation’s Committee or more than a year, blocked by Democrats and several Republicans. Sen. Lincoln Chafee a moderate Republican who lost in the midterm elections Nov. 7 that swept Democrats to power in both houses of Congress, was adamantly opposed to Bolton.

Critics have questioned Bolton’s brusque style and whether he could be an effective public servant who could help bring reform to the U.N.

Bolton has been critical in getting North Korea related resolutions passed through the United Nations. Kim Jong-il can now sleep a little bit better at night because the walrus is gone simply because of partisan politics in the US. Bolton’s political critics won’t give him an up or down vote in the Senate simply because he would probably win the vote, so they have buried him in the committee.

OFK has more and I like his idea on who the next nominee for UN ambassador should be.

So now not only am I stupid, but I also have no career options:

I want to make it abundantly clear: if there’s anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment. If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.

Let me guess, it was a botched joke.

What started his tirade you ask? It was this commend and question from Chris Wallace:

Congressman Rangel, you caused quite a stir this week when you said that you’re going to introduce a bill to reinstate the draft. Here’s what you said this week in a newspaper article. Let’s take a look. “The great majority of people bearing arms in this country, for this country in Iraq, are from the poorer communities in our inner cities and rural areas.”
But a recent and very detailed study by the Heritage Foundation, Congressman, found the following and I’m going to put that up: 13 percent of recruits are from the poorest neighborhoods. That’s less than the national average of people living in those neighborhoods. Ninety-seven percent of recruits have high school diplomas. Among all Americans, the graduation rate is under 80 percent. And blacks make up 14.5 percent of recruits for the military; the national average is 12 percent.
Congressman, in fact, contrary to what you’ve been saying, isn’t the volunteer army better educated and more well-to-do than the general population?

Rangel is an idiot and like many of the Democrats he can’t come to grips that this is not a 1968 military anymore. His demographic stereotypes of the US military do not match reality. White males are over represented in combat arms branches (slightly) while blacks are over represented in combat support elements. Not that there is anything wrong with that because everyone volunteers for the job they do in the army. Hispanics are the demographic most widely over represented in combat arms branches and I don’t hear hispanics complaining. Maybe because once again they volunteered for the positions. Rangel’s claims that blacks are some how over represent in combat arms branches while the white males are hiding in college like in 1968 are groundless and borderline race baiting just like his claims that people join the military because they have no other options.

The military is an all volunteer force, highly educated, and very professional. I for one like what I do and will go back to Iraq again if needed. It is a shame that some in the US government are determined to slur it and tear down those of us committed to defending this country.

HT: Milblogs

Maybe Kerry was right:

Maybe we are unedumucated?

Senator John Kerry was just had a press conference and he blames the controversy over his comments on (drum roll please) a Republican conspiracy against him!  Karl Rove must of drug and hypnotized him before he gave his speech.  He said his comments about stupid people going to Iraq was a “botched joke” against how stupid the president is.  Let me take this time to remind everyone, courtesy of B5 that Kerry wasn’t any genius at Yale either.

Kerry does say he supports the troops, and once again let me show everyone how he supports the troops:

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command….

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

Here is his more recent comments about US troops “terrorizing” Iraqis:

In accusations about American troops reminiscent of what the young John Kerry said to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971, the senator and 2004 Democratic presidential nominee told CBS “Face the Nation” host Bob Schieffer there was no reason for U.S. soldiers to continue “terrorizing” Iraqi children.

“And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the – of – the historical customs, religious customs,” Kerry said Sunday

Oh yeah, he doesn’t like obese people either as he called Rush Limbaugh doughy.

Kerry refused to apologize for his remarks and I’ll take him at his word as this being a “botched joke” however, I think it is more offensive that he won’t apologize for his “botched joke” and just shows that his liberal politics are more important to him than apologizing for his bad joke and letting this thing blow over.  He is actually feeding the controversy now in order to bash President Bush as leading some kind of conspiracy against him.

Yes, that’s right, anti-Americanism in Korea is all President Bush’s fault because a Yale professor said so.  The Joong Ang has an interview with Korean-American Harold Hongju Koh, the Dean of the Yale Law School.  Most of the article is pretty much what you would expect from someone who served in the Clinton Administration and is now at Yale.  Lot’s of Bush sucks, neo-cans are bad, and Christians are even worse which he is entitled to his opinion on, however at the very end of the interview he said something caught my eye because it has no basis in fact:

How do you see the current state of U.S.-Korea relations?

From our vantage point, from a journalist’s vantage point, the U.S.-Korea alliance is very shaky and Korea-U.S. relations are very tense.  I have many objections to how U.S. foreign policy has been conducted, and I can understand why allies have objections. I also am very struck by the amount of anti-Americanism here. Korea is a country that has always been affectionate toward America. They were partners in the Korean War and many Koreans emigrated to the United States, like myself. I think that most Koreans have real affection toward Americans. It’s American policies that bother them and draw attention. Policies change from administration to administration.

Why a say this has no basis in fact is because the key issues of anti-Americanism in Korea have nothing to do with US governmental policy.  What does the protesting of an US Air Force bombing range have to do with US governmental policy?  What does the 2000 water dumping incident have to do with governmental policy?  What does the 2002 armored vehicle accident have to do with US government policy?  Or my favorite the “polluted” USFK base issue.  The list goes on and on.

The fact is that these people are not protesting and spreading anti-Americanism due to current US policies because you don’t see masses of people protesting over the US stance on North Korea compared to a traffic accident or the water dumping incident.  The reason for anti-Americanism in Korea are much more complex than that and aided by Korean politicians looking for short term political gain.  So just to simplify anti-Americanism in Korea as solely Bush’s fault is intellectually dishonest at best, but I guess it is to be expected from someone looking to blame their own failed North Korea policies with the former Clinton Administration on someone else.