Ryan Mauro
So, 2012 presidential candidate Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (dude, why are you even trying to pretend that you haven’t decided to run?) was on The Daily Show last night. If you watch the whole extended interview, you’ll see that he understands why he won’t get the nomination: “I don’t have a big shtick”—which sounded more like he was denigrating his performance in bed.
But, moving past the funny way that statement sounded, he’s right. He doesn’t have a niche. He doesn’t “own” a certain piece of the pie. To break out, you need to really define yourself and own a quality or issue. Newt Gingrich is the brain and ideas guy, Mitt Romney is the economics dude, Mike Huckabee is the religious conservative and Flat Tax advocate, Gary Johnson is next cycle’s Ron Paul who wants to legalize pot, and Sarah Palin is Sarah Palin. I used to say Romney was the guy that owned the health care issue, but that went up in smoke with ObamaCare, which is so similar to his plan, so that may be Pawlenty’s opening.
Last night, Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren went on The Colbert Report. This was a risky move—Colbert’s wit is unmatched and his ability to pose a tough question in the form of a joke is enough to make anyone sweat. But, Ambassador Oren came out on top, introduced facts about the flotilla controversy that I’m sure many members of Colbert’s audience weren’t aware of.
No one is out there defending Helen Thomas’ remarks, but I’ve heard some people cut her some slack because of her age. I think that’s completely unwarranted. For one, as a reporter, she is capable of clear thought. She hasn’t “lost it”—well, not anymore than she had already. Actually, Helen Thomas’ old age actually makes what she said worse.
Last night, Jon Stewart laid into her for her comments, including comparing her to Racist Elmo. read more…
I can always count on David Swindle to make me think deeply. His response makes numerous well-put points about my blog on modern-day “feel good” philosophies about God (now a “Higher Power”) and a heaven where everyone or almost everyone goes, designed to remove the uncomfortable aspects of religion involving accountability, judgment and insecurity.
David first says that:
(Of course, the idea that you get to go to heaven because you have it right and others have it wrong can also be considered a “comforting belief” — either you’re smarter or better than other people or God loves you more that he opens your mind to his Truth. But there’s something else I’d rather focus on in this discussion.)
This is hardly a comforting belief. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. I am full of heartache, as are most Christians, over the prospect that some or all non-believers may not go to heaven. Even if I was told that the non-believers I care about will go to heaven, I’d still be sad over knowing how much more their lives could be if they had a personal relationship with God. I can’t enjoy it for a minute without immediately thinking about how blessed I am and how I wish those around me could be likewise blessed. read more…
Ryan Mauro’s latest article at Pajamas Media.
Ha’aretz has revived the mystery surrounding the inability to find weapons of mass destruction stockpiles in Iraq, the most commonly cited justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom and one of the most embarrassing episodes for the United States. Satellite photos of a suspicious site in Syria are providing new support for the reporting of a Syrian journalist who briefly rocked the world with his reporting that Iraq’s WMD had been sent to three sites in Syria just before the invasion commenced. read more…
Lisa Miller, author of Heaven, appeared on The Colbert Report last night and touched on something I’ve wanted to write about for awhile. I am a committed Christian, one who believes it is possible to have a personal relationship with God. My friends and I frequently discuss this (there’s nothing funnier to them than a guy performing abstinence), and there’s a few concepts that are being embraced widely.
The first is that everyone or almost everyone goes to heaven, and there is no God. Those that believe in a God prefer to call it a “higher power.” But, no religion has it right on morals, heaven, or anything—moral, cultural and religious relativism to the max. Basically, the most comforting aspects of religion are embraced, while anything involving responsibility, judgment or insecurity is deleted.
Last night, Jon Stewart, who I view as honorable, joined the chorus of people criticizing the justified-as-much-as-something-can-be-justified raid by the Israelis on the flotilla carrying “aid” to Gaza, the home of Hamas. First, he referred to the people involved in the shipment as “activists” and then showed video of some of the ship’s contents—the non-violent aid.
Although Stewart deserves credit for showing the video of the “activists” attacking Israeli soldiers as they landed on the vessel, he mocked the notion that elite soldiers were used against a ship that wasn’t carrying anything dangerous.
Say what you will about Jon Stewart—his interviews, especially the extended ones hosted on the Daily Show website, are a gift to the country. For the most part, he allows his guests time to explain their thoughts, and the discussion goes far beyond the typical, predictable partisan blood sport that Stewart once famously criticized Crossfire for when he appeared on that show.
Last night, Stewart had on Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute. Stewart did some research on Brooks’ sources used in his latest book, armed with a copy of one of the Pew polls he cites. Although the discussion was wide-ranging, the main point Stewart tried to make was that Brooks and others shouting “Socialism!”are wrong for making it seem like those calling for greater government intervention are part of an “insidious ideology.” Instead, Stewart says, the debate is within the same ideology and is focused on fine-tuning regulation of free market system.
If you’ve been to a bar or club in the past two years, chances are that you’ve heard a song by M.I.A., a hip-hop artist with a cool African beat to her addictive songs that are politically provocative. Her biggest song, “Paper Planes,” was upbeat and catchy even while vividly describing acts of robbery and murder. Musically, she’s just plain cool and most importantly—different, a commodity becoming rarer and rarer.
So, it’s with great regret that I have to go after her moral equivalence and terrorism apologist baloney.
Israel’s three nuclear weapons-armed German submarines are going to be sent to the Gulf as an act of deterrence to Iran. In fact, they aren’t even hiding that objective. The Times Online report about this is obviously the result of a calculated leak. The hint is here:
The flotilla’s commander, identified only as “Colonel O”, told an Israeli newspaper: “We are an underwater assault force. We’re operating deep and far, very far, from our borders.”
Did you catch that? The newspaper didn’t identify the source, but they gave the necessary information away that would allow the Israeli government to identify the leaker within a few minutes or even seconds. The reporter would not have cited a source as “the flotilla’s commander” without his permission, and he wouldn’t have given permission if he wasn’t ordered to talk by the highest levels.
Leftistl journalist Helen Thomas is giving it to President Obama over the war in Afghanistan, opposing the most justified war since Pearl Harbor. In her question to him, she said not to use any “Bushisms” like that if we leave Afghanistan, the terrorists will come here.
Watch the video below:
In a far-too-late attempt to shore up his conservative base ahead of the 2006 massacre, President Bush sent 6,000 National Guard troops to the Mexican border, but placed major limits on what they could do. Now, with the immigration debate hot again because of the Arizona bill, President Obama is making a similar move and is sending 1,200 National Guard troops.
Even The Associated Press is reporting on the similarities:
“The 6,000 troops who were sent by President George W. Bush to the border from June 2006 to July 2008 were generally credited within law enforcement circles as having helped improve border security, but restrictions placed on the soldiers were denounced by advocates for tougher enforcement who are now leveling similar objections at Obama’s plan.
Some law enforcement officials along the border said they worry that Obama will repeat Bush’s mistake by limiting the troops to support roles, such as conducting surveillance and installing lighting, rather than letting them make arrests and confront smugglers.”
