About Me

Name: Ben Amis
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Arms Deal With The Enemy?

Recently, President Bush has publicly announced a new plan to halt the growing Iranian threat - arm other Middle East countries to counter the arms build-up by Iran. Now, most nations that would receive parts of the multi-billion dollar arms deal are our allies and would probably not be a problem. Such nations include Israel, Qatar, and Kuwait. However, these countries also include Egypt and Saudi Arabia, nation known for having substantial radical Islamic factions within their borders. So, the question is, would we be arming the enemy?

I'm not even going to beat around the "Bush", as the case may be, and am going to outright condemn this action. We must NOT arm these foreign nations, namely Egypt and Saudi. Why? These countries are known for radicals...especially the Saudis, and we could potentially be arming the same enemy we're trying to stop. Simply put, these nations aren't as evolved as the United States, and I question their ability to responsibly handle advanced technology.

This is not racism or Islamophobia, this is simply truth. There are nations which I absoluely love, but would never want to give these weapons to, at least not without conditions. An example would be fellow the democratic state and former U.S. terroritory of the Philippines. I have many friends that live there/come from there, and absolutely love the nation, but their government is struggling to sustain itself right now, so I know they couldn't handle having these weapons. If we couldn't trust this democracy to be responsible with these weapons, why should award them to a nation like Saudi Arabia, which is a dictatorship?

I don't like dealing with any non-democratic state. I've been very outspoken against our dealings with nations like Saudi, and our trading relationship with nations like China...yes, China! I look forward to the day we break ties with them and bring all of that revenue and work back to our own shores. As if that will ever happen...sigh...

I've been a supporter of the President, but I have to question his logic on this move. I don't think it would be wise, and I can't see how we could justify making an arms deal with dictators and--potentially--terrorists.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Levin/Reed Cloture Fails

 

ClotureResult-allnighter.jpgThe vote on the motion to invoke cloture to the Levin/Reed amendment failed this morning after the democratic majority forced an all-night session to debate the amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill. Sponsored by two democrats, the amendment would have forced a reduction in troop numbers in Iraq within 120 days of enactment.

Graham3-Allnighter.jpgI believe the two best speeches I heard this morning both came from Republicans, which combated the speeches given by the various Democrats through the night. The first would have to be Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, who challenged the Senate that the right course of action is and should be to reinforce our troops, rather than reduce them. He argued how bringing the fight to the enemy has turned around groups, having them join the Coalition when before they had been fighting with Al Qaeda. He carried a poster of his own to the floor, no doubt to counter the “Let Us Vote” sign displayed by the Democrats. The Senator’s poster quoted the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group report, stating out a retreat would be seen as a historic victory by the terrorists. He claimed that the real reason for Al Qaeda being in Iraq, instead of because of the U.S. like many of the Democrats claimed, was to stop the swift to democracy in the Middle East. Graham contested that if we were to withdraw, the terrorists would use Iraq as a type of springboard to reach the rest of the Middle East, especially Iran, who is actively supplying terrorists in Iraq with IEDs and the like.

Craig-Allnighter.jpgThe other best speech would have to go to Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, who was visually frustrated as he told the Senate that Congress cannot act as 535 generals and infringe upon the Constitutional right of the President as the sole Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces. He had no qualms about openly declaring that Levin/Reed is nothing short of “cutting and running” and that a pull-out would allow the terrorists to exploit the ensuing civil war between the Iraqi sects. Co-sponsor of the amendment, Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, also was able to speak.

Reed-allnighter.jpgNot soon after these speeches, the remaining time prior to the scheduled cloture vote was quickly winding down, and several senators made a dash to the floor to speak for only a minute or two and ask to insert the rest of their official statements into the record. This is a usual practice in the Senate, but this particular rush included a large number of senior senators and presidential candidates including Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Barack Obama, and Mel Martinez.

  Biden-allnighter.jpg Obama-allnighter.jpg Martinez-allnighter.jpgAfter these rushed speeches and inserts into the records, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee and the Majority and Minority Leaders spoke on the legislation. After the last speech, made by Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Navada, a guest chaplain led prayer to start a new legislative day and the motion to invoke cloture was read and the vote began. After the vote, the numbers fell 52-47, falling eight votes short of the 60 votes needed to advance the bill to a vote for final passage.

McCain2-finalstretch-allnighter.jpg Levin-finalstretch-allnighter.jpgMy personal opinion is very much like that of Senators Graham and Craig. We can’t have Congress micromanage the war. The commanders on the ground must be the ones to make the decisions, and Congress can’t critique them, especially after it unanimously agreed to the confirmation of General Petraeus, 81-0, on the Senate floor and have officially requested a report from him in September. This order for a report went out in May, meaning we have only been waiting for this report a few months, and decided to have it completed in September. By jumping the gun, Congress is not only overriding the authority of the commanders, but they are cutting themselves short as well! They confirmed Petraeus and ordered this report and the time it would be delivered, not the Bush administration, and so Congress must shoulder the burden with the executive branch instead of blaming them for it.

Reid1-finalstretch-allnighter.jpg McConnell1-finalstretch-allnighter.jpgCongress has to just cool its jets and wait a little while. The report, as requested, will be in shortly, and then if they feel it is necessary, Congress may legislate. They have shown us time and time again, at the majority party has, that they have grown impatient with the war as a whole and are ready to pull out. Yet, if they don't want to respect the disgression of the military commands on the ground, they should at least respect their own decisions and policies and let this report be compiled and reviewed before the decide to take any further posthaste action at all concerning the war.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

All Nighter 2.0

Well, we've made it through the night  and continue on through the morning, just three hours away from the cloture vote for this amendment, at which time I will give yet another post to you, right here. However, as the rays of sunlight penetrate the clouds of Washington and shine upon the dome of the Capitol, I have to believe that this amendment is doomed to never receive the up-or-down vote so passionately called for by the Majority.

McCain-Allnight3.jpg McCain-Allnight2.jpgAfter my last post, debate hit an all-time low. The Senate grew tired, as did I, but it still trudged on through the night. After Sen. Sessions, John McCain, R-Arizona, took the floor to speak for a time. He displayed true leadership, examining in-depth the situation in Iraq, complete with an analysis of the Middle East region, and what would happen to the various nations there. A surge of Iraqi refugees to little Jordan, and a rising threat to Israel as countries like Syria and Iran send in their terrorists to Iraq.

Then, another presidential candiate took the floor, Ms. Hilary Clinton, D-New York. She began by praising the troops that had done such a fine job in Iraq, such as those in Anbar, but then also repeatedly called Iraq a civil Hillary2-Allnighter.jpg Hillary1-Allnighter.jpgwar, and that Al Qaeda is not the primary cause of instability of Iraq. She, rightfully so, criticized the Iraqi police force, some of who looked the other way as members of their sect operated illegally, and sometimes even turned on coalition forces and their national government in favor of their sect. She ended by calling to move our troops out of the way of the Iraqi civil war.

This was most of what we heard throughout the night, through Norm Coleman, R-Minn., Bob Casey, D-Penn., and others. The Senate floor began to get lively again as the ever-interesting Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, got the floor, stating that he'd love to see an end to Iraq, and would also love to "balance the budget" and "cure AIDS". He warned that we have to be cautious and do things carefully.

Later on, Ken Salazar, D-Colorado, got up and criticized the "partisan bickering" that he had seen throughout the night, and urged passage of the amendment.

Inhofe-Allnighter.jpgCurrently, James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, is speaking. He has discussed his opposition, and reminded the Senate of the positive effects of the war this far. He's said how amazed he is at the volunteermanship of the military as opposed to a draft, which he was caught in once, and stated how he was glad that Fox News was over there for them now, and not just CNN International, so that they know the people at home are behind them.

Klobuchar-Allnighter.jpgIt's been announced that the Senate will adjourn for one minute at 10 AM in order to officially start a new legislative day. Then after 11 AM, the cloture vote will occur, and you will hear from me at least one more time concerning this session. So, as Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., takes the floor, I ask you one last time: stay tuned.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Senate All-Nighter

I've been awake all night, and will remain awake, watching the all-night session currently ongoing in the U.S. Senate, as they debate the Levin/Reed Amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill, which would call for the reduction of troop levels in Iraq one hundred twenty days after passage of the bill. This is my first post over this topic of at least three. I plan to post again at 8:00 AM and again after the cloture vote, which could end around 11:30 AM. This way, I can give an accurate summary of the speakers I've seen since midnight, when I began watching.

Stabenow-LetUsVote.jpgThe Democrats have been spilling their rhetoric down the center aisle of the Senate, reading letters of those in opposition and criticizing the minority for their filibustering. They also criticize Bush for blindly going into Iraq and helping Al Qaeda to regroup under pressure. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, the current speaker, as we're just about at twenty minutes after three in the morning, has been the most insane and outspoke, even topping the manure laid out by Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, just a couple hours ago. Both speak with a large "Let Us Vote" poster, advocating for an up-or-down vote on final passage, and criticizing their opponents instead of support their own unique ideas to fix this problem.

As far as the Republicans go, I say as Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, is just now taking the floor, most have done a fair job of defending our reasons to be in Iraq. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., hoped that those who say Iraq will calm down if we leave are right if the legislation passes, although he stated that he doesn't believe they are. John Thune, R-South Dakota, reminded the Senate that the greater task at hand is the Defense Appropriations Bill, which also is increasing military pay, and is appropriating billions of dollars for training and equipment to make our troops safer. He urged we wait for September, seeing as the Senate only asks for this report in May.

To counter the outspoken Sen. Stabenow, Sen. Sessions, who is still speaking, criticized the body for blaming the President when the Senate has been the one to authorize the war, confirm the military leadership, and appropriated it. He asserted that they share the burden with the President, and that we wishes we could leave Iraq, but that we must do so "safely" and "smartly" and that we must listen to the commander, who the Senate recently confirmed unanimously, in a vote of 81-0.

More subtle speakers so far have included Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, one of the three Republicans supporting the amendment, who criticized the Iraqi Parliament for their lack of activity (and rightly so), and said that this amendment waits one-hundred twenty days after enactment before taking effect, reminding the Senate that the earliest a Defense Appropriations Bill has ever been signed into law was in mid-October. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, who displayed her mastery over saying very little in a long amount of time tonight, stated that we must continually and openly assure the world that we don't want to benefit from Iraq's oil and that we have no plans to have permanent bases in the country.

This is just the first summary, you'll have another one in about four hours, and then another. Don't worry, my in-depth opinion is coming! Stay tuned.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Christianity Being Silenced

I was going to use to this entry to talk about Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, however there is another more pressing issue I feel compelled to write about, especially since I've already written an article on the Mid-East PM. You can read it here.

This pressing issue is an assault upon the freedom of religion in the United Kingdom. Our background story starts at the Millais School in Horsham (about forty miles south of London), where sixteen-year-old student Lydia Playfoot has been banned from wearing her chastity ring to express her Christian faith. The school banned the ring because they say its against their uniform policy, although they have religious exemptions for Islamic head scarves and Sikhism's steel bracelets.

However, the story gets worse. When Playfoot appealed to a court for a decision, they actually sided with the school and upheld their decision! This ruling "will mean that slowly, over time, people such as school governors, employers, political organizations and others will be allowed to stop Christians from publicly expressing and practicing their faith," said Playfoot, and I have to agree!

Paul Diamond, Playfoot's lawyer, remarked that secular authorities "lack capacity to rule on the correct manifestation of religious belief.", and again, duh!

If the government starts telling us as Christians what is and is not correct or neccesary for our religious faith, they can control every facet of our faith and effectively squelch the freedom that western democracy is supposed to give its citizens. Many teenagers wear these chastity rings, ever since a movement to do so began in the United States over ten years ago.

I personally wore one all throughout my high school career, going to a public school, and am still wearing it. I will be wearing my ring until the day I get married. I haven't taken it off in four years, and would fight tooth-and-nail to keep it on. Whether Playfoot still wears hers to school, I don't know, but I know that I would. This is a gross enfringement upon religious freedom.

I'll be praying for Playfoot and Diamond as they continue this fight, as Playfoot intends to appeal. I will also pray for those misguided officials that have enforced and upheld this totalitarian policy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Holsinger Goes Before Senate Committee

 
Dr. Holsinger, President Bush's nominee to the office of Surgeon General, went before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee today for confirmation hearings. Holsinger was immediately drilled by the Democrats, especially Chairman Teddy Kennedy, D-Mass., concerning a paper he wrote for the Methodist Church in 1991 that discusses the health risks and unnatural origins of homosexuality.

The Doctor backed away from this paper, saying that it doesn't represent what he believes and who he is today - I hope he's not serious. This is a man of morals, I hope, that we desperately need in this nation. He is heavily opposed by gay rights groups and most ulta-left liberals, and probably will be despite his backpeddling from this paper.

I hope that Dr. Holsinger does still believe what he wrote in his paper, and I hope that this committee, and then the whole Senate, confirms him as our eighteenth Surgeon General.

Dr. Holsinger has served as the Chancellor of the University of Kentucky's Chandler Medical Center, The Secretary of Kentucky's Cabinet of Health and Family Services, and is currently the holder of the Wethington Chair at the University of Kentucky.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »