What started as a conversation on Facebook between two St.Louisans, Craig Schneider and Tom Appelbaum, sparked into the first “Welcome Home” Parade for U.S. troops after leaving operations in Iraq. Veterans and those supporting them traveled from all over the country to show their thanks and welcome them home.

(more…)

“Why Are Obama’ Critics So Dumb?” That’s the question posed by Andrew Sullivan in the cover story of this week’s Newsweek.

But you’d have to be stupid, fanatical, and dishonest to argue–as Trig Truther Sullivan does–that Barack Obama’s failures are part of an ingenious “long game” that is destined to succeed.

If this is the best Obama’s supporters can do, Obama’s only hope for re-election is the weak Republican field.

Sullivan, who claims to care about national debt, begins by arguing, contrary to reality, that Obama’s massive $787 billion stimulus (actually, $862 billion) turned the economy around. He offers no proof other than the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy familiar from basic economics. Sullivan also ignores the composition of the stimulus, which shoveled cash to cronies and bloated big states with their massive public sector obligations.

In addition, Sullivan claims that Obama’s auto bailout succeeded–when in fact it pushed aside property rights and subsidized failed “green” cars, rather than allowing car makers to rebuild through normal bankruptcy. He also commends Obama for continuing George W. Bush’s bank bailouts–but does not mention the Dodd-Frank financial “reforms” that enshrine “too big to fail,” hurt small businesses and fail to address Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Next, Sullivan tries to defend Obama on taxes, pointing out that the president passed tax cuts as part of the stimulus. He ignores the numerous new taxes and tax increases that Obama signed into law–from higher cigarette taxes to the many ObamaCare taxes–as well as the glaring fact that Obama has been campaigning for the past several years on the promise to raise taxes on the rich, and would have done so if not for Congress. (more…)

WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama on Friday declared an end to the Iraq war, one of the longest and most divisive conflicts in U.S. history, announcing that all U.S. troops would be withdrawn from the country by year’s end.

Obama’s statement put an end to months of wrangling over whether the U.S. would maintain a force in Iraq beyond 2011.

“After nearly nine years,” the president, “America’s war in Iraq will be over.”

He spoke at the White House after a private video conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and he offered assurances that the two leaders agreed on the decision. (more…)

First, let me say that I respect Ron Paul a great deal. More often than not, he’s fundamentally right on the pressing issues of today and I believe that the modern political landscape is a better place because of him. Over the current president, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat.

That being said, regarding his online clan of “libertarian” followers… eeesh. Here’s a recent tweet that I received from one of his followers after I so much as barely criticized Dr. Paul’s foreign policy ideas;

“Hey neocon, how the h*** can you justify our costly empire overseas? Only Ron Paul will stop this!!”

Come again, dummy?

Listen, their heart is in the right place but here’s the concept that many of the younger, supposedly anti-establishment, self-professed “libertarians” can’t seem to grasp; by it’s very definition and historical precedent, an empire isn’t a costly endeavor. It’s a profitable one. Be it the Roman, Ottoman or English, all of these tyrannical government’s built their empire in order to expand their territory and reap the bountiful spoils of war.

The reason the United States supposed “empire” expanding abroad is so costly would be because it in fact is no empire at all. The United States boldly walks in through the front door of these countries, provides unprecedented aid and/or overthrows their evil governments in an attempt to rightfully give power back to its citizens, after which we ask for nothing more than the land needed to bury the bodies of those who died to provide them with that privilege.

Now is that a legitimate role of government? Should we really be playing “hero” to the world? Say! Now that’s a meaningful dialogue that deserves a spirited discussion!

(more…)

From The Washington Post:

The latest Obama plan “doesn’t produce any more in realistic savings than the plan they offered in April,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “They’ve filled in details, repackaged it and replaced one gimmick with another. They don’t even stabilize the debt. This is just not enough.”

The most disheartening development, MacGuineas and others said, is Obama’s decision to count $1.1 trillion in savings from the drawdown of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan toward his debt-reduction total. Because Obama has no intention of continuing war spending at last year’s elevated levels, that $1.1 trillion would never have been spent.

(more…)

Terrible news surfaced Wednesday: The U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the appeal of Michael C. Behenna of Edmond, Okla., and upheld his murder conviction and 15-year prison sentence at the U.S. Military Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth.

1st Lt. Michael Behenna

Who is Michael Behenna? He is the Army Ranger first lieutenant who, on July 31, 2008, was charged with the premeditated murder of Ali Mansur, a known Al-Qaeda agent operating near Albu Toma, an area north of Baghdad. He is the one-time leader of the 18-member Delta Company, 5th Platoon of the Army’s 101st Airborne Infantry Division who, seven months later, was convicted of unpremeditated murder and sentenced to 25 years confinement — later reduced to 15 — at Fort Leavenworth.

Why do I staunchly support Lieutenant Behenna? Because even the government’s top witness, Dr. Herb MacDonell — a man who wasn’t allowed to testify after new evidence was shared with him and he told prosecutors he believed the young officer was innocent.

Below is an excerpt from a Dec. 12, 2009, post at BigG, one of the more than four dozen posts I’ve written about Lieutenant Behenna’s case, that outlines the forensics expert’s position:

(more…)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson and Ben Domenech are joined by New York Times’ best selling author Brad Thor to discuss his newest thriller Full Black, how he develops material for his books, the importance of highlighting the work of the fearless patriots in America’s Special Forces, and the upcoming Warner Bros. film adaptations of his blockbuster novels.

We’re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Well, here we go again. Republicans scratching their heads, watching the Democrats run circles around them. It seems The Grand Old Party is always waiting for the chance to turn tables on the Democrats, and, it just never works out. When Democrats were in the Majority, the Press Loved the Democrats, so it was assumed when Republicans took over in 1994, that they would have the same close relationship. (Whoops.) Such naive trust is the kind, that loses great fortunes to Nigerian Princes.

When Republicans held the majority, they were civil with Democrats. They would give them important seats, seek their council on policies, and pass through every Democrat judicial nominee with respect; hoping that when they were in the minority again, they will be shown the same respect. (Whoops again.) No wonder Conservative ideas never gain any traction. They are as helpless as red-coated soldiers marching into the forest with pipes and drums blaring.

Now that Republicans have the majority back, and the President has initiated force in Libya, there was a futile hope that a Democrat President will respect the War Powers Resolution. (Whoops cubed. Fool me one time, shame on you; fool me twice, let’s go for three!) It was a mistake of perception. Despite the antiquated notion of equal treatment under the law, the War Powers Resolution wasn’t written for Democrat Presidents –it only applies to Republicans.

It all boils down to our differing views of law. While we see the Constitution as an inflexible document that outlines the sole authority under which the Federal Government can legally exist, the Democrats see it as six pages of enormous loopholes. To us, laws are inflexible orders that apply to everyone, regardless of their position in society; to Democrats they are nothing more than handy tools for leveraging a campaign donation out of a stingy donor. The Health Care waivers are good examples of this double standard; another is Al Gore’s private jet.

(more…)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson is joined by Pejman Yousefzadeh and Elizabeth Blackney to discuss the GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire, and John Mearsheimer’s new book, “Why Leaders Lie: The Truth About Lying in International Politics.”

We’re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Related Links:

Bachmann, Gingrich, and Romney. Oh My! And Then There’s Rick Perry.
Exciting Things About Tim Pawlenty
The Awful, No Good, Very Bad Republican Presidential Debate
A tweet from Ben Domenech about the debate
CATO Speech: Why Leaders Lie: The Truth about Lying in International Politics
Why leaders lie
The Case of Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer

Follow Brad on Twitter
Follow Pej on Twitter
Follow Elizabeth on Twitter

He doesn’t really stand out in a crowd – in fact, he looks like a regular guy, the kind of guy who would own a construction business.  What Gary Johnson doesn’t look like is the great green hope, the stoner white knight coming to make America safe for the herbally inclined.  Yet legalizing pot seems to be about 80% of what everyone thinks of when the former New Mexico governor’s name comes up.  That’s too bad, in that a good chunk of what he says – the best thought-out parts – are the reddest of red meat for the kind of Republicans who wouldn’t know a bong from a bongo drum.

Johnson is a friendly guy, with an easy smile and a welcome normality that distinguishes him from the typical Stepford Spouse politician who is focus-tested and consultant-approved right down to the dead trout handshake.  But you can see in his eyes, as he starts talking to the small crowds of Republicans at party meetings across the country, that he likes to shake things up.  He starts out with straight-up Republican porn – talking about his 750 vetoes as governor and how he never, ever, raised taxes, and how he never will once he becomes President.

The crowd, initially polite but reserved, leans in, rapt – it likes what it hears.  And there’s more.  Now he’s doling out big slabs of GOP prime beef, hot and fresh from the grill.  He moves on to the Johnson Plan for cutting the deficit that makes up 43% of the federal budget , which is essentially employing the simple expedient of cutting the federal budget by 43% tomorrow.  Mainstream Republican candidates take note – these are California conservatives, which pretty much means borderline Marxists compared to our Midwestern and Southern allies, and they ate it up.  There’s a huge appetite out there in conservative-land for a guy who will not only talk about shuttering the Departments of Education and Commerce but has a crazy glint in his eyes that say he’s just nuts enough to actually do it.

And he would too – Johnson is clearly absolutely dedicated to doing what he thinks is right.

(more…)

From The National Journal:

But one expert on the region is warning against broad predictions today in assessing the impact of bin Laden’s death. “We need to be very cautious… in assuming it will now damage al Qaida and other Islamist extremist networks, or that we can predict the political and strategic consequences,” said Anthony H. Cordesman, in a commentary for the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Strategically, he said bin Laden’s death “might have been a decisive blow in 2001 or 2002” but “may have far less effect today” on al Qaeda’s ability to attack targets. He said nobody today can possibly know how the killing of bin Laden will play with potential terrorists or in Pakistan. “We need to be very careful about what bin Laden’s death will mean for relations with Pakistan and for the war in Afghanistan,” he said.

Far from helping Obama politically, the latest development could increase the pressure on him to get American troops out of Afghanistan. It will, said Cordesman, “raise new questions about whether the Afghan war can really put an end to al Qaida and other terrorist sanctuaries and lead some of those who oppose the war to state that the U.S. and its allies should now withdraw.”

Cordesman said “it will take weeks and possibly months” to assess the strategic impact.

So that new “Mission Accomplished” banner that Democrats would love to unfurl at the next Obama campaign event? Probably best to keep it in George Bush’s attic. Less than 48 hours after such an historic event is a little too early for declarations of victory.

Read the whole thing here.

When Donald Trump began testing the presidential waters in late February, it was easy to discard his efforts as nothing more than a public relations ploy. It seemed “The Don” was just looking for one more way to get the Trump name up in lights. Thus, like so many others, I was not impressed.

Yet since that time, Trump has carved out a niche for himself politically and has not only proven his sincerity in considering a presidential run, but has also risen to the point of being the 2^nd most popular candidate among possible GOP primary contestants.  He has done this not only by saying what conservatives in America have long wanted a politician to say, but also by doing so with the kind of unapologetic tone that marks the words of a man who’s confident in the justness of his cause.

To my point: Trump is angry over what Obama has done to America and he’s not afraid to express this indignation via various radio, television, and print outlets. (It’s been a long time since a potential presidential candidate loved America enough to verbalize his disdain over the harm a sitting president has done to this country.)

He believes Obama has given us “a terrible presidency” and he wants to see America return to being “the greatest place in the world.”

And although some of Trump’s statements have been maligned by the MSM (and Glenn Beck) to date, his words communicate convictions that resonate with everyday Americans throughout the land.

(more…)

This story might slip right past you. It’s understandable, considering most Americans have no idea of the context or how it happened that the state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) is now set for 20 years in Iraq, thanks to a deal just inked between the Iraqi government and Communist China. The Iraqis originally selected America’s Exxon-Mobil. I’ll wager you probably didn’t know that. You’ll want to read on. But brace yourself.

It’s the classic American political tale of self-loathing crafted by the usual suspects. With its government firm and its security at its post-surge best, the Iraqi government needed to quickly bring its oilfields online. It desperately needed the revenues. The summer of 2008 saw oil prices above $100 per barrel and Americans were paying $4 per gallon at the pump.

The best in the business – the best in the world – is Exxon-Mobil. And the government of Iraq turned to America’s Exxon-Mobil to bring undeveloped and underdeveloped fields online to rejuvenate its own revenue sources and ween itself and its people off of American aid.

But three American Senators would have none of it. Senators John Kerry (D-MA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) sent a public letter to the Bush administration’s Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, imploring her to derail the Iraqi deal. (See: ‘In China We Trust’: Senators Closed Door to US Oil Investment In Iraq.) As the Senate troika stated, “It is our fear that this action by the Iraqi government could further deepen political tensions in Iraq and put our service members in even great danger.”

You see, these three American Senators insisted that Iraq shall have no revenues until it passed an oil revenue sharing law that met their distant standards. Or at least, Iraq should have certainly had no additional revenue. Their letter was dismissed out of hand in Washington. But in Iraq, the desired consequences of the letter took hold. The Iraqi government became spooked as the reportage of the letter turned, as one would expect, into wrangling and infighting by those seeking to leverage it to their advantage in the hotly contested revenue sharing process.

(more…)

On Thursday, the Army Clemency and Parole Board reduced the sentence of Army Ranger 1st Lt. Michael Behenna from 20 to 15 years, according to a news release from Rep. Mary Fallin (R-Okla.).

Lieutenant Behenna, who is currently serving his sentence at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., was convicted of unpremeditated murder in the shooting death of Ali Mansur, a known Al-Qaeda operative, while serving in Iraq.

Previous cases of similar or more aggravating circumstances, where the defendants were found guilty of premeditated murder, have resulted in less severe sentences, which prompted the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation to appeal to the board for a careful review of this case and relevant precedent.

(more…)

Over at Examiner, Byron York asks the fairly obvious question:

What does a hate crimes bill have to do with money for U.S. troops fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Nothing, except that the National Defense Authorization Act, which will win final passage in Congress and be sent to the president’s desk this week, also contains the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which Democrats placed inside the defense measure over Republican objections.

The crime bill — which would broaden the protected classes for hate crimes to include sexual orientation and “gender identity,” which the bill defines as a victim’s “actual or perceived gender-related characteristics” — passed the House earlier this year as a stand-alone measure. But it’s never had the votes to succeed by itself in the Senate. So over the summer Democrats, with the power of their 60-vote majority, attached it to the defense bill.

(more…)

Open thread here.

From the AP:

OSLO (AP) – President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday in a stunning decision designed to encourage his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism. (more…)