Obama and Romney are apples and oranges...

Given the strong displeasure that I expressed about Mike Huckabee's playing to religious bigotry to derail the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney, it may open me up to charges of hypocrisy to discuss the Obama-Wright matter. Indeed, Obama has also been the subject of some nasty rumors that he is really a Muslim, rumors, which appear to have no basis in truth.

But it's a case of apples and oranges when discussing Wright and TUCC/Mormonism.

Frankly, the issue has now shifted from Wright's comments, particularly with his departure from Obama's campaign. Now,the issue is how forthcoming Barack Obama has been, and if Powerline and Rich Lowry have gotten it right, then Barack Obama appears to have tried to BS the American people.

Contrast that to Mitt Romney's handling of the Mormon question. He did not drag his religion into the campaign. Romney never tried to dissemble about it, either.

Obama's now in a lot of trouble - there is no sugar-coating this. He had projected an aura of being genuine, of respecting those who disagreed with him, and of trying to bring people together as Americans. Now, though, this image is tarnished, if not in tatters.

Barack Obama may win the Democratic nomination, but if he wins, America will be just as divided as it was before.

Jeremiah Wright, meet Fred Phelps . . .

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

The only discernable difference seems to be that Freddie says "God Hates Fags" and Jerry says "God Hates Whitey."

Now, a little discussion of the relationship between pastor and his flock . . .

Once upon a time at my parish, the visiting priest started giving a homily that absolutely nothing to do with the Scripture readings. He quickly stepped into a general attack on the United States in general and the U. S. military in particular, using the typical leftist ideological cant.

I walked out of that homily--as did others. I had to really carefully examine my conscience before I went up to receive Eucharist; even then, I subsequently sought out spiritual counsel from another priest whose guidance I'd come to trust.

That incident led me to quit serving as a Eucharistic Minister at the next opportunity to do so, because I felt that I could not stand in the sanctuary before Communion--a very visible sign of unity with the priest--should that priest turn up again on a day when I had the duty. Were it to become a pervasive attitude in that parish, I would probably have started attending Mass at another parish. (I've done that before due to other issues.)

There comes a point where silently sitting in the pew becomes assent. There comes another point where sitting silently in the pew moves from assent to agreement.

If Barack Obama finds these beliefs to be worthy of associating himself with, that's bad. If he actually believes it, it's worse.

We keep hearing about "hope" and "change." Obama's pastor doesn't seem to offer either one.

The type of change I want to see...

AJ-Strata has an excellent post on the changes we need in this country.

1. I want to see the country get behind our troops fully - that means supporting them until the victory is won.

2. I want to see an end to a lot of this bickering. Get some forward progress - start trying to solve the problems instead of insisting upon ideologically pure solutions.

3. I want the ugliness gone - that includes the shit Mike Huckabee pulled in Iowa (the politics of religious identity), and will probably pull in South Carolina as well.

4. I want terrorists to get their asses kicked. Hard. I want Gitmo running, and I want those terrorists talking. And I really don't care if some al-Qaeda thug gets roughed up.

5. Oh, and cutting tax rates would be nice, too.

6. Oh... and let's make sure our troops get the new gear they need, as well.

Does the GOP wish to kiss off another voting block?

In the last two elections, the Hispanic vote has been about 8% of the electorate.

That is why I find this Steven Malanga article to be disingenuous.

Why?

Look at the African-American voting share. In the least two elections, it has been at 11 and 10 percent, respectively.

In both elections, it is a 89-10 split, or 9 to 1. In essence, the GOP is down by a net of 8 percentage points in a good year. In a bad year, it is close to 9.

Now, take the 8% Hispanic vote and give the Dems a 70-30 split. That is 5.6 to 2.4, or a net loss of 3.2 percent in the national popular vote.

And we are to believe that Hispanic voting clout is a myth.

I think I'm gonna say this myth has NOT been busted.

They feel entitled...

Eve Fairbanks has hit on something interesting from a string of congressional scandals. Now, I think Larry Craig did get a bum rap - and his arrest was definitely mishandled and arguably unconstitutional.

But the worst are not people like Larry Craig, or Duke Cunningham, or John Doolittle, or Ted Stevens, or William Jefferson. It's folks who skate on things far worse than getting extra income on the side, to wit, Patrick Leahy and Robert Torricelli - politicians who leak secrets and continue to serve. Leahy still serves in the Senate twenty years after he was responsbile for the worst breach in security of the Senate Intelligence Committee (at the time, he still ranks as second-worst). Torricelli blew a source - and led to a purge of CIA assets - largely at the behest of his girlfriend at the time. He later went on to the U.S. Senate, where he served until some financial sleaze put him in a bad spot for re-election, and the Democrats had to pull a switcheroo.

But the double standard persists. Somehow, those who blow secrets and endanger national security are given a pass, particularly if they are Democrats, while a Republican who gets pinched in a very low-grade sting, and arguably should NOT have been arrested under the Constitution is now to be run out of town on a rail.

When you hold all the aces...

Standing pat is a good thing to do.

At this point, the strategy is working - and it's time to keep it moving forward.

Furthermore, this is a defensible position. With the military objectives being achieved, and the progress on the political side, the President's position is comparable to that of Raymond Spruance on June 18, 1944.

What I learned from Ray Spruance...

The more I think about what Eve Fairbanks wrote on Monday, the more I really appreciate what she is saying.

My historical teacher in the need for compromise though, is probably far less illustrious than Abe Lincoln. In fact, he's probably the least-known, yet most brilliant admiral of World War II, Raymond Ames Spruance.

Spruance was first thrust into history at the Battle of Midway - and that was the first place one should look to for lessons. Specifically, it was after the day's exchnge of airstrikes, which left Japan with four carriers sunk or in need of scuttling, while the Americans were trying to salvage USS Yorktown.

There were two options. The conventional wisdom held that he needed to continue heading west all night, so as to be in position to follow up his success on the first day. Spruance didn't do that, though. Instead, he headed east until midnight. Now, some might call that over-cautious, but it was the right thing to do. The Japanese attempts to force a night battle failed, and the battle had been won.

Fast forward two years. This time Raymond Spruance was commanding perhaps the most powerful task force in history as the United States was planning to liberate the Marianas. As the amphibious attacks started, the Japanese fleet came out to challenge the Americans.

In a sense, this is what was always wanted - a chance to attack and destroy the Japanese fleet. But at the same time, the landings needed to be protected. Spruance came up with a brilliant plan. The American carriers went on the defensive, and let the Japanese come to them - the result was a turkey shoot. The only American offensive push came from submarines, which bagged two carriers. The next day, the Americans pursued and attacked, sinking a third carrier.

The landings succeeded. The Marianas became bases from which the B-29s could operate - and ultimately, the places from which we launched the two airstrikes that ended World War II.

Spruance took a lot of heat - especially when his caution was compared to William F. Halsey's willingness to mix it up. Spruance was even denied the chance at a fifth star by a Congressman. But looking at what Spruance knew at the time, the compromises he made were the right decisions. Especially when the Japanese were able to take advantage of Halsey's agressiveness later in 1944.

I also get the sense that Spruance didn't really care about getting a fifth star. When Samuel Eliot Morison wrote the seventh volume of his History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, he described Spruance as the "victor of Midway". Morison would later note that Spruance, in commenting on the first draft of that book, requested that Morison change that to "who commanded a carrier task force at Midway". Morison let his original phrasing stand, and in a footnote, explained that those who read volume four would understand why he could not accomodate that request.

Ray Spruance was brilliant, he had a sharp eye, and he never cared who got the credit for getting things done. He was not perfect - and in fact, he was, in a sense, a product of his times. But his example is one I wish more people would follow.

The consequences of declining civility...

AJ-Strata discusses his observations in the light of the decline in civility that seems to have accellerated in recent years.

It is hard to discuss issues when the name-calling begins almost immediately.

This ought to be a lot of fun on a stick...

It seems Segolene Royal, the MILF who ran for President of France, booted her not-quite-husband for infidelity, now wants his job.

See what happens when you cheat?

No scandal here...

Or, there shouldn't be about the FBI director using a Gulfstream to fly around the country.

Folks, some people need to be able to stay in touch at all times. The Director of the FBI is one of them. It's worth the $3.6 million per year - and the initial purchase of that plane.

Because, when it comes right down to it, senior members of the agencies and departments responsible for our national defense, including the intelligence community and law-enforcement agencies (particualrly federal, but also state and those of major cities) are never on vacation. Oh, Director Mueller may decide to go deep-sea fishing off the Florida Keys for a week, but if a crisis happens, heis back on the job.

Don't believe me? Well, look at 9/11. That day, Secretary of State Colin Powell was in Latin America for a summit. CINCCENT, General Tommy Franks, was also out of the country.

Tell me again why someone like the FBI Director shouldn't be using jets with communications gear that will let then stay in touch whereever they are.

What Happens When You Let the Inmates Run the Asylum

The 9/11 Truth Movement has glommed onto Masschusetts Governor Deval Patrick's website.

Right now, it's in twelfth place in terms of support votes. It's been there since the 24th of March. Governor Patrick's staff has not removed it. So, a major politician's website is tacitly endorsing thoroughly debunked conspiracy theories.

"Radioastronomer," a poster at Darwin Central (the home of The Conspiracy That Cares^®) notes:

I sent an email to the Gov's office with a link pointing this out and asking if he wanted his name dragged thru the mud like this. Nothing - nada- zip.

Looks like he does support the idea.

America is not and (hopefully) never will be a pure democracy. If the Founders viewed pure democracy as dangerous in an era where mass communications were nonexistent, how would they view it in an era that is absolutely saturated with mass communications, many designed to appeal to emotional impulse instead of rational thought (i.e., advertising)? I have commented to friends, with tongue only half in cheek, that given a big enough budget and slick enough advertising, Hitler could have sold the idea of the "Final Solution" to the prospective victims themselves.

Governor Patrick meant well with the "My Issues" website. However, the road to Hell is usually paved with good intentions. (Cliches tend to become cliches for very good reason.) In our system of government, politicians are not intended to be mere sock puppets of whoever has the loudest bullhorn. Politicians are expected to lead. And that may mean annoying "the base" from time to time (depending on how crazy "the base" is, maybe a lot of the time. (It's worth noting that the Arabic translation of "the base" is "al-Qaeda.") Someone at Deval Patrick's campaign should have reviewed this posting and deleted it long before it got spotted by a bored blogger.

Do the right thing, Governor, and tell this part of your base "yob' tvoyu maht'!"

Have I become a cynic?

Eve Fairbanks has done an excellent comparison of American and Israeli politics during and after wars that have not gone well.

I have to quibble with her on one detail. We found WMD, to the tune of at least 500 shells with sarin and mustard gas. Before anyone complains about the age, keep in mind that World War I chemical weapons have caused injuries in France and Belgium.

That quibble aside, Eve has a good point. It would be nice to see politicians admit that they have screwed up, or that they don't have any alternative solutions. Or to admit that things have not gone as well as hoped. That said, humility is a critically endangered species once one gets inside the Beltway. Not only that, but there is the fact that those who do show any - or who try to be open - often get torn apart by people who look for the slightets hint of weakness. The DC press corps tends to act like a bunch of piranha at that point. See Rumsfeld's explanation of going to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had as a classic case.

I guess I'm becoming a bit of a cynic about that sort of thing.