Posts Tagged ‘civil war’

Q: Why is the House pushing health care this week?

Posted: November 6, 2009 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

A: This is their best chance to get it passed. Once 2010 starts congressmen and women will be under siege. Apparently Nancy Pelosi has studied her Civil War history:

At successive battles at the Wilderness, Spotsylvania Court House, the North Anna River and Cold Harbor, the casualty lists would grow, for both armies. However, Lee knew in this war of attrition, Grant had the edge – more available troops, and the ability to bring in new recruits. He had warned Jefferson Davis that if the war turned to a siege, in front of Richmond, it would be a matter of time, before the Confederacy would be beaten. It would become a siege, in front of Richmond, and Petersburg, during the summer of 1864 – a siege that would last ten months

The Tea Party Marches yesterday and the continuing pressure put on means that Pelosi and the administration will have more strength now then at any time in the future. To wit:

“The thing that Pelosi has going for her right now is that a lot of her members are more afraid of her than they are of their constituents,” says the GOP insider. He notes that Pelosi has plenty of weapons to make life miserable for members who cross her — “any benefits the member can have for the remainder of this Congress, the kind of support they’ll have going into next year’s election, and if they lose, what kind of post-Congress opportunities they will have.” All could be endangered by a vote against the health care bill.

It is a desperate attack (although it shouldn’t be with an 80 seat majority. The fact that it IS desperate shows what a lemon this stuff is) but it is the right political move. As York concludes:

No doubt a number of Democrats looked outside and saw the crowd. But they’re in a tough place: fearful of their constituents’ anger, on one side, and of their speaker’s anger on the other.

It’s a bad choice. But in the end, Pelosi can’t fire them. The voters can. “As the old saying goes, cross thin ice at your own peril,” said 77-year-old Herbert Rosser, who came to the rally from Raleigh, N.C. “The American people are going to make them pay a price for it.”

The closer you get to that election date the more real that cost is. Once we get to the first quarter of next year it’s all over. Pelosi has to strike NOW.

A Good Conservative according to LGF these days

Posted: September 19, 2009 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

…is apparently a dead conservative. It’s kind of Sheridanesque.

In all seriousness Irving Krystal was an important man who was right on many things and the fact that Charles recognizes that is a good thing. It adds points to the Prince Alphonso index and keeps that slight hope alive that things will change for the better over there. After all if Robert Stacy and Charles can agree on this all is not yet lost.

BTW, once I find the video clip I need in English I will explain exactly what the index means.

Hang on a minute. Sheridanesque… Phil Sheridan. UNION general, BURNED the Shenandoah valley. That’s in the SOUTH. Hmmmm….

Pat Buchanan is right when he says Hitler didn’t want war per se…

Posted: September 16, 2009 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

…I’m sure he would have been perfectly happy if Poland and the rest of Europe submitted to his every whim and territorial demand every time without dispute. What else was he to do when they refused? (Sarcasm off)

Buchanan has two huge unhealthy obsessions (his anti-communism is a good obsession) the first is the middle east where I suspect he has never forgiven Israel for the USS Liberty incident during the six day war. (The best book on the subject of the 6 day war is Michael Oren’s bar NONE, my review here).

Now I can’t say I blame guys who were on the ship and attacks for being sore and suspicious, I might be the same after that experience, but when it comes to the fog of war you’d be surprised what is possible. One interesting example:

Polk rode across the intersection and found the colonel of the mysterious regiment. Polk, “in angry tones,” asked the colonel why he was firing upon “his friends.” The colonel replied, “I don’t think there can be any mistake about it. I am sure they are the enemy.” “Enemy?” Polk huffed. “Why I have only just left them myself – cease firing, sir; what is your name, sir?” “My name is Colonel [Keith], of the [22nd Indiana], and pray sir, who are you?” Polk now realized the startling fact that he was in the rear of the Federal line.

Polk decided that “there was no hope but to brazen it out,” with his “dark blouse” and the darkening night concealing his true identity. Polk rode up to Keith, shook his fist in the colonel’s face and said, “I’ll soon show you who I am. Cease firing at once.” Polk then rode down the Union line, shouting for the men to cease fire. As he trotted through the enemy regiment, he wrote, he “experienced a disagreeable sensation . . .calculating how many bullets would lie between my shoulders every moment.” When Polk reached a grove of trees he spurred his horse back to Liddell’s line.

If someone asked you what was more improbable; a Jet flying at high speed misidentifying a flag and a ship during strafing runs or An OPPOSING GENERAL in uniform literally riding up to a colonel, admonish him in person and ride up and down the battle line of enemy troops without them figuring out that he is not on their side? Cripes the guy is right next to you. That regiment paid for that error in blood and only propriety forbids their Commanding Officer from being nominated for a Darwin Award.

His second is his obsession with Churchill’s “culpability” for World War II from his book Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War” (full disclosure I haven’t read it) and a recent debate where he argued the proposition that Winston Churchill was a liability to the free world.

To call this historical revisionism or even interpretive revisionism is an understatement and a half, I love a good debate but C’mon, the fact that he and his partners in debate managed to persuade 10% of the crowd doesn’t say much for the crowd, the good part:

Roberts said the debate was an overwhelming success, adding: “You have to be 76 years old to have voted for Winston Churchill in a general election. This was a very special night which enabled a lot of people who previously couldn’t to vote for Churchill.”

Earth to Pat; The statements: “The Polish government on 1939 was corrupt” and “England should defend a free Poland against a German Invasion in 1939” are not mutually exclusive.

Now the Liberty you might give some slack, mistake or no Israel was culpable (and apologized and paid an indemnity over it), The Churchill thing, a historian might have an odd view on an accepted subject.

However now we go to Pat’s web site today and what is on the front page. A full blown truther article by Paul Craig Roberts (no relation to the Roberts in the debate who defended Sir Winston above) which I won’t bother to quote.

Now in fairness Pat didn’t write this article but he chooses or whoever works for him choose to put this on his front page without a disclaimer such as “an opposing view”. This article is posted under his name. That’s just crazy.

Other disagreements not withstanding Charles is right about this one. I can’t see how MSNBC can or should ignore this. If I was on the left I’d be all over em, but then again the left might like an easily discredited conservative on MSNBC.

I would point out however there is a big difference in the standard for an administration czar, in charge of taxpayer money and a pundit on TV, for me if I was in charge at MSNBC I might decide this was a good time to put him out to pasture.

Newer Entries