The Hawkeye Cauci
Yeah, I know. I stole that from Rush Limbaugh. I thought it was one of the cleverer things that have emanated from him, and I have a rental for a few days, so I’m stuck listening exclusively to terrestrial radio. Which sucks, incidentally.
The Iowa Caucuses are tonight, and the Presidential race starts in earnest.
No one seems quite sure who will prevail on either the Republican or Democratic side, the races are so close and so in flux – especially under the unique Iowa system. So, no prediction from me on this race – I’ll save that for New Hampshire. I will say, however, that for the good of the country and the Democratic party, I hope that Hillary Clinton is neither the winner tonight, nor the ultimate nominee. Not because I’m a right-wing hater, but because she doesn’t have the chops. Sure, she’s brilliant and driven, but frankly so are other candidates. I want someone who knows what he / she is (edit: thanks BBD) talking about. I want someone who has experience or knowledge to tackle head-on the myriad problems that face this country. Inflation. Iraq. Terrorism. Energy dependence and prices. Credit crisis.
Also, to paraphrase another conservative republican, I want the US to again become that shining city on the hill. It’s very difficult for the US to be the conscience of the world when it comes to freedom and liberty when we behave like a cheap dictatorship. Rendition & torture. Mistreating tourists. Surveillance on letters, phone calls, and electronic communications. Fumbling foreign policy until it comes time to build some semblance of a legacy. I think that Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are all much worse off politically by our mishandling of Iraq since 2003 – a military action that was sold to us and the world as being justified by international law (it wasn’t), self-funding through oil revenue (we could have implemented the richest national health care scheme in the world for what we pay to keep the Iraqi pot from boiling over), and that it would be a stabilizing force for the Middle East in general, and Israel in particular. (Israel built a wall to keep out the suicide bombers, and the Middle East is as unstable a tinderbox as ever).
So, when Hillary Clinton sells you on her “experience” as Bill’s First Lady, don’t buy it. Just days before the Caucuses, she opined on the Pakistan crisis, and got the details all wrong. Those are the kinds of details that candidates should either know, or shut up about altogether. Bill Richardson or Joe Biden wouldn’t have messed that up.
So, we’ll see what happens tonight in Iowa, and New Hampshire follows fast on its heels.
Oh, and that Ron Paul guy? Here’s his latest ad:
I saw that via Craig, who gained some respect for Paul after seeing it. I lost a lot after seeing it. Xenophobia doesn’t play too well in the Pundit household. End birthright citizenship? That means that I wouldn’t have been born a citizen because my parents were legal resident immigrants at that time, and didn’t earn their citizenship for another couple of years. So, fuck you, Ron Paul. You can’t even use punctuation properly, you little ass:
I want a President who can proofread.
40 Comments
-
Advertisement
-
Latest
-
Alan Bedenko
Latest: Astroturf -
Sports Road Trip
Latest: Profiling OKC’s Ford Center – USRT roadie Day 2 -
Chris Smith
Latest: Economic Development 2.0 -
Brian Castner
Latest: Al Gore as Skeptic -
Tom Schuh
Latest: Hometown News at Noon: Fri 11/20/09 -
The Goose's Roost
Latest: I Blame the Spotlight Guy -
Christina Abt
Latest: Question of the Day.....Jim Kelly for Coach??? -
BfloBlog
Latest: Kevin Maguire Open Thread: Bruins as Sabres -
Marc Odien
Latest: Calls for Parks Usage Input from Community Groups -
Eric Saldanha
Latest: Friday YouTube Nugget
-
Advertisement
You need to log in to vote
The blog owner requires users to be logged in to be able to vote for this post.
Alternatively, if you do not have an account yet you can create one here.
Powered by Vote It Up
“I want a President who can proofread.”
…And it’s with great unintended irony that you wrote “their” instead of “they’re” near the end of your third paragraph. And in yet another unintended irony, “they’re” should be “he is” or “she is”.
Besides the faux pas de deux, it’s a nice article.
BBD
I’m sure you would have been traumatized for life, not having citizenship in years 0-2, right?
@BBD: thanks for the catch. That’s what happens when you’re running late and rushing through a post.
@Derek J. Punaro: I don’t think trauma is the issue. This isn’t some historically homogeneous society that judges one’s worthiness for citizenship on birthright (I am eligible for Croatian citizenship based on my parents’ nationality. Possibly even Austrian based on my Dad’s side of the family).
So, let me turn the question around – what is the societal benefit for a heterogeneous society of immigrants like the US to require persons born in, say, Flushing, Queens to parents with legal residency status to acquire, for instance, Yugoslav citizenship?
Hint: “That’s how [insert country here] does it” is not a satisfactory answer.
Also, the wait for citizenship is 5 years. Not 0-2. Except in extraordinary circumstances. Like, for instance, my Dad being drafted into the US Army after 3 years’ worth of residency in the US.
TFD.
Says Iowa to New Hampshire: “my caucus… bigger than yours”.
Yeah, that’s why I’ll never be a spin doctor…
Another centrist for American exceptionalism… get over it. We’re clearly not the ‘worst’ country, and we’re surely not the ‘best.’ As much as you seem to agree with the sentiment that
Substitute any number of countries for cities and the logic—as well as the point—remains valid.
“We’re clearly not the ‘worst’ country, and we’re surely not the ‘best.’”
Which country is the best, and if you can’t choose one, which one is better than ours?
Xenophobia? What’s your definition? Not favoring subsidized immigration? Regarding the spelling, I prefer a Presidential candidate who doesn’t micromanage every facet of his campaign, including the oversight of the plethora of campaign materials.
As you know I’m no RonPaulista.
Alan you forget that your parents emigrated to the US LEGALLY.
They didn’t sneak in here, have your mother deliver you into this country AND THEN USE YOU AND YOUR US CITIZENSHIP TO Cicumvent the Immigration Laws.
As for your father being drafted into the Army after 3 years, his adopted country called, and apparently, to his credit, he answered the call.
For many years, Filipinos voluntarily enlisted in the Navy, knowing they would be segregated and allowed to serve ONLY as Stewards (Valets and waiters/servants to officers) in order to obtain immediate US citizenship upon enlistment.
This practice is no longer in effect as I met several Filipinos who have a US Armed Forces ID AND an Alien Resident Card.
I am no fan of Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants. However, I would have no problem if there was a program where Illegal Immigrants who can speak English enlisted in the military for 6 years, and went to the sandbox with a M-16 to prove their desire to become an American Citizen. And after 6 years of honorable service, they could be sworn in as a citizen and be pardoned for their violation of Federal Law that they comitted coming here in the first place.
As far as the Cauci are concerned (Rush has called them that for about 10 years now) I agree with your opinion of both still in flux and too close to call. I also agree that Hillary Clinton should NOT be the nominee.
It would be like Bret Farve’s wife trying out for QB of the Green Bay Packers. Why not? She’s been intimately involved with both her Husband’s career and the Green Bay Packers for 16 years! She has probably read the playbook every season, and been used by her husband as a sounding board for decision making.
PUT SOME PADS AND A HELMET ON MRS FAVRE–THE Packers should win the Super Bowl, no?
Somehow, however I doubt Mrs Favre is as blind with ambition and addicted to power as Mrs Clinton is.
I’m not talking about our perception of ourselves being the “best” country. I’m talking about that America that had the moral authority to, e.g., criticize oppression and torture committed by foreign regimes. I know it’s happened forever, but at least before we knew it was wrong and had the good sense to hide it. Now, we do it openly and try to legally justify it. I’m talking about others’ perception of us as being the “good” superpower.
The societal benefit is the addressing of a growing national issue regarding illegal immigration. Our historically heterogeneous society was also one where those immigrants largely played by the rules, your own example included. Children born to legal immigrants isn’t a concern of mine, or of Ron Paul’s campaign, so your example does nothing but malign his position.
I don’t personally believe that fences and physical borders will make one bit of difference in addressing this issue. You solve the illegal immigration problem by taking away the benefits of being an illegal immigrant in this country.
His position speaks for itself. It maligns all children of immigrants as being unworthy of birthright citizenship – something that has existed in this country for its entire existence, with the sole exception of slaves.
I don’t think people enter this country illegally to get the sweet, sweet welfare. They come to this country to work, and pretty much every study I’ve seen shows that immigrants – legal or otherwise – are a net benefit to our economy.
xen·o·pho·bi·a
an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.
Interesting that you appear to paint U.S. citizens that want things done legally as ‘xenophobic’.
For example, if I buy tickets to a play and expect that all people that want to see the same play pay the same price as myself, and some of them happen to be ‘different’ (legal or non, with perhaps differently colored skin), does that make me ‘xenophobic’??? I hardly think so. Whats the difference? We are talking about access to the same economy, in essence. In order for me or you to participate, there is a certain criteria that has to be met. Illegals (put your origin/race of choice that will drive you nuts HERE) should not be afforded rights above and beyond ordinary citizens. Thats not xenophobia. Thats fairness, something all good liberals worship.
Ben McD- that’s precisely why I had those words in single-quotes. There is no overall metric. Depending on which you choose, we rank at the top, the bottom, or in the middle. We’re not the ‘best’ in infant mortality rate (that honor goes to Singapore), but we are number one, or damn close to it, in incarceration rate per caita!
BP:
So what you’re saying is that the perception of moral authority is better than the fact of it- that hypocrisy is a virtue? I beg to differ. And I think really, you do to. Did you prefer extraordinary renditions and our very own Gulag Archipelago when you didn’t know about them? I imagine you find them repugnant either way. Secrecy in government, by the way, is hardly a merit to demonstrate to the world. If we’re going to go ahead and torture people, let’s just be up front about it, absolutely.
Pick any era of American history and you can point to some things that were not exactly a shiny beacon to the rest of the world. This doesn’t mean “America Sucks;” it simply reflects the fact that we struggle, as does the rest of the world, in attempting to be as good as we can be. Mythologizing our past does not in any way help us avoid the same mistakes in the future.
Alan–We’re not the “good Superpower” WE’RE THE ONLY SUPERPOWER.
That Good and Bad stuff ended when the CCCP went belly up.
And when your’re the only big guy on the block, you stand as the one everyone’s looking to knock off.
Next time you watch Magnum Force (Dirty Harry Movie), there’s a Catholic Priest in it who’s known as a “radical” who’s helping some homegrown terrorists. He tells Insp. Callahan “SACRIFICES HAVE TO BE MADE, MISTER”. And when you’re fighting something as insidious as Global Terrorism, unfortunately, he’s correct.
When it comes to your upset over ” Rendition & torture. Mistreating tourists. Surveillance on letters, phone calls, and electronic communications.” Just my opinion, but I think thou protesteth too much.
Here you are, 1st Generation off the boat from Croatia. Is there not still a war going on over there? (If not, we better get those troops who’ve been there for 12 years the hell out of the region, no?)
And since you’re still Fresh Off The Boat, you still have relatives over there that you likely correspond with by letter,electronic communication and/or letters, correct? Has the security of any of these been compromised by the government? I would doubt it.
I happen to think that illegal immigrants should go back to the end of the line, apply properly, and get things started out on the right foot.
However, one thing I can say for the illegals who I have met, who risked everything to sneak into America, is that they expressed a greater appreciation for the contributions and benevolence of America then many “ex-officio” USA citizens (citizens by virtue of the lucky sperm club) that I hear expressing themselves.
And, why is it that when so many of us “confess” that we voluntarily listened to Rush, or an NPR segment, that we feel compelled to make a religious offering to the gods of collective-independent-group-think and to explain the special circumstances which forced us to be tolerant and listen to another point of view?
I don’t what Ron Paul proposes for ending automatic citizenship for anyone born on US soil but I do support a version of it. I support ending it if the parents are here illegally
In pundit’s case he said his parents were legal resident immigrants, so in that case he’d still be a citizen
But children of illegals should not get citizen status just because their illegal alien mother was lucky and got across the border before giving birth
I had a typo. It should start with “I don’t know what Ron…”
Remember the right-wing talking point about their supposed moral clarity vs. lefty moral relativism? You don’t hear that argument much any more, particularly when torture is being discussed.
It was wrong when the CIA did it in the 80s, and it’s wrong now. And no one can protest too loudly about this, whenever they arrived here – torture is any man’s business that’s around, to paraphrase Henry Fonda in The Ox-Bow Incident.
If a scenario ever occurs where Cleveland is hit by a suitcase nuke, and the perp’s confederates are found in Buffalo with a second empty suitcase, I motion that we ask Tatonka to make the call on how to proceed. Personally, I don’t know anybody on either side of this politicized issue that would be comfortable having to make a tough call like that.
Ah, the always popular “ticking bomb” scenario. Except that we’re torturing prisoners without those circumstances being present. But anything to support Dear Leader, I guess.
Tatonka, I’m glad you finally admitted that it has happened before George W Bush was in office. I just think it’s hilarious that you seem to imply that it has only happened during Republican administrations, though. You make me laugh.
wait a minute. is there really a discussion going on here as to whether america is the best country in the world? i’d rather be a bum here than a king anyplace else but maybe that’s just me. that doesn’t mean there’s not things that are wrong, things that could be better, but for a giant and diverse country such as ours — really only china, india and russia compare to it in terms of challenges posed by governance — i don’t think we do too badly at all. we’ll even survive the eight-year reign of madness that has been the george w. bush administration.
I also have to say BP’s hypocrisy was entertaining as well. eac put it very well.
and attempting to engage in “serious” dialogue with any of the loonies who still support ron paul at this late date seems pretty pointless. the repugs trying to turn themselves into a bunch of history professors in an effort to downplay the crimes of their current president remains pretty amusing, however.
So everyone is amused! Great!
Yep, it takes a history professor. And what is your PhD in Mike?
You’re making a leap there, eac. My point is that would be nice if our government could at least make mouth-noises about torture being bad. Now, the government is torturing and proud of it.
How about we don’t let’s torture people, and at least get back to a situation where we acknowledge that it’s bad and then stop altogether.
Right, and my point was that this country had a reputation as being that shiny beacon, and the Bush Administration has done yeoman’s work of obliterating that.
Like the addict, it would be best if we first admit that we have a problem.
Every policy statement I’ve seen mentioning ending birthright citizenship is done so in the context of illegal immigration. Policy statements are not law, and while enacting them the nuances are played out. I doubt even Ron Paul himself would argue against granting citizenship to the children of legal immigrants.
I don’t think people who talk on cell phones while driving are doing so because have complete disregard for everyone else’s safety, but societally we’ve enacted laws that have to be enforced and followed, otherwise there’s no point in having them at all. To apply the analogy to this discussion would be like saying you can only be ticketed if you’re caught while making the call, but not once you’re talking.
There are lots of things that would have a net benefit to the economy that are illegal. That doesn’t give them a free pass.
But Bush defenders don’t want to take that first step. Hence the hypothetical ticking bomb scenarios and the “yeah but Bush wasn’t the first” excuse. It seems bizarre to me, but they can’t even bring themselves to condemn torture, for God’s sake.
It’s not a “Bush wasn’t the first” excuse. Anyone can go back and read what I’ve said on the subject before. I won’t condemn it because it’s a necessary evil. Our government’s first responsibility is to protect its citizens. Sometimes that means it has to do things that are unseemly and polite society would rather not even know about.
Don’t misrepresent my statements especially when you know better, even if that’s what you need to do to try to feel superior.
I didn’t misrepresent your statement – I referred to “Bush defenders” generally, some of whom definitely do think that this is a sufficient justification. Don’t assume that every post is about you.
No one’s made predictions yet. I’ll guess:
DEM
1. Edwards
2. Obama
3. Clinton
REP
1. Romney
2. Huckabee
3. McCain
I’m sure the timing and subject were just coincedence.
I suppose if torturing prisoners is a necessary evil, it follows logically that covering this up by destroying evidence is also a necessary evil (since it permits the first n.e. to continue unchallenged).
I’ll say one thing for Bushism – it’s not too taxing on the conscience.
Bush Derangement Syndrome—Alive and well, eh Tatonka?
We know that especially in foreign policy,the Sainted Bill Clinton made NO mistakes—perhaps except when he ordered that bombing of the aspirin factory while he was splooging down Monica’s throat.
I don’t agree with Bush on many positions and decisions, but the Bush Hatred thing is carried to an incredible extreme.
Interesting how many of the points made by the left point to an ‘evil Bush’ worldview, as if we now know why certain evils exist or can be explained. Much of the bleating about Bush by the left is a direct result of a historic tin ear, a selectivism of circumstances to fit a given scenario. Hank has correctly identified BDS which is alive and well in many citizens’ myopic psyche. Here is the qualifier; George Bush is a living breathing human with problems, emotions, feelings, etc. just like myself and others. He has biases and beliefs that make him the person he is. He is not a Hollywood-created and controlled movie character (shall we use the Darth Vader example here???) that his detractors would like you to think. Just like the person that writes the myopic drivel for the ‘Snooze, FartVoice, etc., he is driven by personal experiences, concerns unique to their individual path. Psychobabble aside, almost everyone has something to contribute. George Bush happens to have arguably the most stressful/responsible job in the world as head of the lone super power. (Knowitalls, insert here what YOU would have done in a given situation. Hindsight is 20-15) He happened to be in this position when we were attacked (some relativists might say ‘protested against’) on 9-11, a position not too many presidents have dealt with. The constant criticism of this president is an embarrassment as it reveals the very spoiled nature of our citizenry. (see Sarkozy’s comments made recently, a breath of fresh air, and long overdue) So much time to bitch about so many things we really know very little about, so much air time, rag space, and the aggrandization of personal experiences. When will we realize that the world does not revolve around our wants, needs and very often, Utopian worldviews?