The Naive Obama Doctrine

Egypt and Saudi Arabia are two of the biggest recipients of U.S. aid as is, and that’s where a lot of the ululating fanatics who have been doing their best to kill us came from. Somehow, I don’t think throwing more money at them will help.
Plus, let us consider that our nation is already deeply in debt, and has plenty of poor people within its own borders. Given that it’ll be American tax dollars, it seems appropriate that American citizens benefit from them. By the way, don’t even start about the cost of our military ventures; those serve their own purpose in maintaining our national, and global, security.

Bush’s best approval ratings can be found in Africa.  You don’t get much poorer than Africa.
As far as helping the poor, that can be done with free trade and micro loans.  Both have been proven to work.  If this $845 billion was used on a massive micro loan program, the U.S. probably would not loose much.  Any loss from defaults could partially be made up from intrest gained.  Mexicans have started whole businesses with $500 or less so I know others around the world can do the same.  I doubt this is what Barack has in mind.  He is one of those give a person a fish kind of guys.  As far as free trade, Barack would have to attack his own party on government business/farm subsides which have been viewed as illegal by the WTO (an organization the U.S. joined).  Barack is to lazy for that.  He can’t even get up early in the morning to help hash out a major immigration bill. 

Dignity promotion?  How many people wanted the New England Patriots to go 19-0?  Well it wasn’t all of them and it might not have been half of them.  Some people naturally side with the underdog.  That’s why some villians such as a thiefs and murderers such as Robin Hood and Billy the Kid get or almost get hero like status.

I do think al-Qaeda will cease to exist as a group known as al-Qaeda when the top leaders die.  Part of being a terrorist is trying to become famous and what better way to become famous is to name your own terrorist group.  The whole terrorist funding and supply network used by all the terrorists have to be taken out.  Corruption throught the world would make that difficult.  For instance, during the Battle of the Bulge it was said that 20% of the equipment and supplies on both sides ended up on the black market.  When the U.S. was first funding the Columbians, the soldiers would sell their equipment and then complain that they lost their gear.  I read the Hells Angeles even stole gear from some armory in California. Then there are all those millions of old land mines laying around which are used to make IEDs throughout the world.   That’s just the tip of the type of corruption and I doubt that will ever be cleaned up.  Greed is too strong of an incentive.

 What A Black Columnist Has To Say About Obama
 
                                                                    Ken Blackwell – Columnist for the New York Sun
 
            It’s an amazing time to be alive in America. We’re in a year of firsts in this presidential election: the first viable woman candidate; the first viable African-American candidate; and, a candidate who is the first front running freedom fighter over 70. The next president of America  will be a first.
We won’t truly be in an election of firsts, however, until we judge every candidate by where they stand. We won’t arrive where we should be until we no longer talk about skin color or gender. Now that Barack Obama steps to the front of the Democratic field, we need to stop talking about his race, and start talking about his policies and his politics.
 
The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the front runner, and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him. Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He’s not. He’s the next George McGovern. And it’s time people learned the facts.
 
Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton. Never in my life have I seen a presidential front runner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he lost .
 
Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he’s not behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant. Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red and blue, to lead the United States of America. But let’s look at the more defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."
 
Start with national security, since the president’s most important duties are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong II, who is murdering and starving his people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists – something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear weapons in the 1940s. Even Democrats who have worked in national security condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign-policy novice who would put our national security at risk.
 
Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable so that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a generation ago. Yet Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich." How to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.
 
Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but He says that Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have "hijacked" – "hijacked – Christianity". He is pro-partial birth abortion, and promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one of the early advocates of racial cleansing.
His spiritual leaders endorse homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. In Illinois, he refused to vote against a statewide ban – on all handguns in the state. These are radical left, Hollywood, and San Francisco values, not Middle America values.
 
The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs. Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win if people don’t start looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda for America are hijackers or war-mongers. Uniting the country means adopting his liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicting beliefs.
 
But right now everyone is talking about how eloquent of a speaker he is and – yes – they’re talking about his race. Those should never be the factors on which we base our choice for president. Mr. Obama’s radical agenda sets him far outside the American mainstream, to the left of Mrs. Clinton.
 
It’s time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts, let’s first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our president in a nuclear age during a global civilizational war.
 
NOTE the following:
Subject: Kind of scary, you think, at least from a Biblical perspective.
Remember–God is good, and is in time, on time–every time.
According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ is:
 
The anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal….the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is it OBAMA? maybe, maybe-not. I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to send this as many times as you can! Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media outlet…do it!
If you think I am crazy..I’m sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the "unknown."

Yes, suek, It also reminds me that "self-esteem" was supposed to fix the academic under-achievement problem among our minority children… without all that icky discipline and studying.  Yes, it has worked so well!

When are people going to see that feeding victimhood to someone is really poisoning them?  What do they think leads to dysfunctional behavior if not a sense of automatic entitlement to what others have achieved, because you are a victim?

There is a whole class of people called "Democrats" who claim they want to solve the problems of minorities and the third-world by discouraging the very behaviors that have created the wealthiest and most productive societies on Earth.

I frankly doubt that their motivations are what they say they are.  I think they find the existence of victim classes politically convenient, and the success of capitalism in overcoming victimhood to be politically embarrassing.  I think they know what will work… they just don’t want it to.  Their priorities are first being seen to be better that others, and actually being as helpful as they constantly boast about is a distant runner-up.

I have to agree with some pieces of this policy. I’ve long held that there are relatively few healthy, well-fed terrorists. (Think about it – a $1000 "martyr’s payment" and guarantees of "caring for the surviving family" have been huge incentives to suicide bombers in the past, yes?) The folks who fall under the sway of radical Islam are largely poor and often less than literate, with no real shot at personal stability, much less personal achievement. If we were to build/support secular schools (to compete with the madrassas) and do more toward public health (as Bush has done in Africa with his HIV/AIDS funding – have to give him credit for that one), we can go a long way toward heading off the NEXT generation of terrorists. It’s a small thing, but I believe that it should be part of our efforts, and it has been sorely lacking to date.

One might compare such efforts to those of Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe during the Cold War. The simple act of showing the “typical people” on the other side that we might not be the monsters described to them by the radical imams could have a major impact in years to come.

Chris, I’m referring to efforts elsewhere in the Islamic world.  Of course our enemies in Iraq are going to target anything we build; of that there is no doubt.  We need to be increasing our efforts in other Islamic countries (including, of course, Wahabbi Saudi Arabia, despite the direct government support that sect enjoys), but I don’t hear much about our efforts in those locations.

Since it seems that a large chunk of our opponents in Iraq–a majority, if some reports are to be believed–are recruits from outside the country, I think we should be doing more outside Iraq ourselves.  It is that focus which seems lacking to me.