Who’s fault will it be when we learn Al Qaida was smarter than we thought.

It has been relatively peacefull over the last couple years. The war is thousands of miles away. The spooks seem to be catching bad guys before they can do bad things here at home.
The only violence seems to be in Europe lately. Is our attitude, better them than us?

What if the current silence ends up being the proverbail calm before the storm? What if domestic Al Qaida terror cells have not been flushed out as efficiently as possible and are just waiting for the right moment to start?

What if they’re even smarter than that? What if they see that their biggest road block happens to be the guy sitting in the White House right now. If that is their concern, then they should be happily waiting around for 2008. President Bush’s polls are the lowest ever, which could will most assuredly impact the subject matter during the election.

Bush’s hardline stance on terrorism doesn’t seem to be mirrored by many of those who care to replace his seat. In fact, most currently sound soft on the matter. They all want the troops home now. Well, who wouldn’t like that to happen? And now, one side of the Congress is demanding that the troops return home in 2008 — come hell or high water. So I added a bit at the end but the attitude shows.

The point is, if we were still being attacked here at home, then President Bush’s ratings would be sky high for his no tollerance stance on terrorism. Granted, depending on what he would do in the case of additional domestic attacks, his ratings might be different. But we would be chearing him for what most seem to be critical of now.

Could it be that Al Qaida is putting up such a fight in Iraq because they too know it is a critical front to being able to implement their war on everybody else.

Prove It — Part 2

Listening to the knee-jerk comments from all sides of the isle of last weeks elections, there are plenty more tidbits to call out.
I found it funny listening to comments from both winners and losers from the races.

“We ran a good race” — said:

– the challenger for the Republican Wisconsin congressional seat of Paul R. Nelson throughing morality accusations
– the new Democratic House Representative Chris Carney after running ads slamming the “family values” of Rep. Don Sherwood

What planet were these people on during the campaign? Didn’t those guys “approve” of those messages? This was a disgusting campaign year.

As soon as the election is won, everyone likes to pretend they took the high road from the beginning and will continue on that road by saying:

“We need to come together and unite” — said the DNC chairman (Dean) who also said “I hate Republicans and everything they stand for“

Prove It!

Adding to the mix is the free press. Free press is great and one of the greatest gifts any nation has to offer. Though it can be abused. If nobody else is going to call out the media for being The Media, it will have to happen here. Calling the media suckers for a good smear campaign to lead the next day with seems appropriate enough. But the following quote would be more “PC”.

“When the news is bad, the ads tend to be negative,” said Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford professor who studies political advertising. “And the more negative the ad, the more likely it is to get free media coverage. So there’s a big incentive to go to the extremes.”

Prove it

The 2006 campaign season was full of the same promise… change will bring improvement. While no one bothered to mention WHAT changes will bring improvement or HOW things will be improved… none of that matters now because things have changed. Democrats now have the control desired. The promises were said, they are documented nowhere, but every tax paying American is watching, waiting, and saying “prove it.”

Will it be too much to hope that U.S. Congress will be able to put aside differences and work together for the common good of the country rather than the exclusive benefit of partisanship?

Democrats have been able to pull a proverbial “fast one” over the Republicans in taking control over both houses. Without any experience in the Senate, I wonder just how much impact a one person majority has outside realigning committee leadership.

I’m leery of the “tit-for-tat” virus which seems to have infected Congress over the last 3 decades.

You said this about me… well you did this to him… well he blocked our vote on… well he didn’t really win the election… and on and on.

As for one lowly tax payer, I’d like to see the score set to zero, and everyone start to play nice.

I would love to through my support around someone who publicly sticks it to the lobbyists and doesn’t play puppet, who doesn’t vote except for what his constituents want.

I’m a tax payer, and I approve this message. I think I just threw up a little bit.