An Arab Ambassador

In his new book, Palestine, Peace Not Apartheid, former President Jimmy Carter lays most of the blame for the current state of violence in the Middle East on the shoulders of Israel. The conflict is caused, according to Carter, by the "occupation of Arab land". Such direct and inflamatory statements are not usually made by Presidents, men who are not known for their candor. In fact, Carter's book has come under fire from just as many liberals as conservatives.

Alan M. Dershowitz is an author, attorney, and Harvard Law professor who is disgusted by former President Carter's new book. Ironically enough, Dershowitz is also a liberal. Dershowitz claims that Carter has been "bought, paid for and delivered by Arab money". Dershowitz cites the fact that the Carter Center has received over $10 million dollars "directly from the king of Saudi Arabia. (World Magazine)" In addition, Carter has accepted money and an award from an anti-semitic Arab thinktank based in Dubai, leading to a conjecture that Carter himself is an anti-semite.

Dershowitz isn't the only individual upset by Carter's book. In fact, 14 members of the Carter Foundation recently resigned claiming that Carter's book was not written by the Jimmy Carter they came to respect and support. One of these members, who had been with the organization for over 23 years, resigned because Carter's book is "replete with factual errors [and] copied materials not cited." Furthermore, former Mideast envoy Dennis Ross who served under Presidents Carter, Bush, and Clinton claims that Carter used some maps he created and twisted their meaning.

Sadly, President Carter's newest literary masterpiece is more akin to fiction than fact. Palestine, Peace Not Apartheid may cause Jimmy Carter to lose any shred of legitimacy he has left as a world leader and peace activist.

LWS

McCain Attempts to Bridge Gap with Religious Right

After alienating many conservatives with his past comments regarding the religious right, Arizona Senator John McCain is attempting to bridge the gap between himself and a significant group of his constituents. These attempts have met with a cold response from Focus on the Family's Dr. James Dobson. Dr. Dobson said in no uncertain terms that he would never support Senator McCain's Presidential ambitions.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/16/mccain.conservatives.ap/index.html

LWS

Please, No More Senators!

If the past 5 decades have told us anything, it is that sitting United States Senators have an extremely difficult time achieving the nation's highest office. So when I read the news (with a look of chagrine, I might add) that Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd and Delaware Senator Joseph Biden entered the 2008 Presidential race I was somewhat surprised. For some reason or another, Northeastern liberal Senators still insist that they have broad appeal with the electorate. Together, Dodd and Biden have spent over half of a century in the Senate, and both of them are clearly Washington insiders.

Dodd and Biden will have to overcome the exact same hurdles Senator Kerry unsuccessfully jumped. According to Time Magazine, Biden (who has spent over half of his life in the Senate) is "Very much a creature of Washington and often sounds like it when he's delivering long-winded answers on Sunday talk shows." Sound familiar? The other Kerry clone, Senator Chris Dodd, brings his fiery nature to the table, something the voters will assuredly find repugnant.

Needless to say, both of these men must overcome the stigma of being Washington insiders if they are going to make it past Iowa. All things considered, I believe both Dodd’s and Biden’s Presidential bids will meet with the same success as those of Senator Kerry.

LWS

Schwarzenegger Proposes Healthcare for All

Earlier today, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled a comprehensive plan to fix the growing healthcare problems faced by many Americans. With up to 20% of Californians uninsured, there is reason for swift action. However, Governor Schwarzenegger's response to California's healthcare conundrum is also a reason for alarm.

For most of his political career, California's governor has been an outspoken critic of communism and authoritarian governmental power. Growing up in Austria during the zenith of Communism in Europe had a profound impact upon his life...or so he claims. Arnold Schwarzenegger's healthcare plan should make every American question his resolve to fight overarching federal power. Though the goals of his plan - halting the rise of medical and insurance costs while expanding insurance coverage - are noble, his plan to achieve them is nothing short of .

First off, the governor wants to ban insurance companies from refusing to cover certain individuals, taking away the principle of free enterprise and non-intervention which has allowed America's economy to remain, in the governor's own words at the 2004 Republican National Convention, "the envy of the world".

Second, children whose parents live in abject poverty would receive free health insurance provided by the state. Surprisingly, this would include the children of illegal aliens living in the state of California, giving many poor Mexican workers an added incentive to cross the border illegally. The governor went on to say to the Los Angeles Times that every person in California must have health insurance, even if the state must purchase it for them.

Thankfully, the Republican leader of the California Assembly joined the cacophony of voices raised from business leaders who correctly see their rights being abridged. The answer to rising healthcare costs is not an increase in governmental power and involvement, but an end to the excessive government regulation of the healthcare industry. When government violates the sanctity of the private sector, it only hurts the very causes it claims to champion. Allowing people to control more of their own money instead of losing it to an expanding federal behemoth is the only way to ensure that every person has the capital to purchase health insurance.

LWS

Football and Politics

On Monday Night Football, the Indianapolis Colts were leading the Cincinnati Bengals by 18 points going in to the fourth quarter. The Bengals marched the football down to Indianapolis's 11 yard line. It was fourth down, and considering the vast point differential, Cincinnati was undoubtedly going to go for the Touchdown. But no. Instead of taking the risk, the Bengals brought out the field goal kicker, who nailed the kick throuh the uprights. Yippee! 3 points! Nevermind that any chance the Bengals had of winning the game went down the drain. At least it looked better on the stat sheet than a failed fourth down conversion.

I could not help but see the parallel between the Cincinnati Bengals and the Republican Party. For instance, days before the 2006 midterm elections, the Senate was able to pass a bill which authorized the construction of a border fence over 700 miles of the 2000 mile border between the United States and Mexico. However, it gradually leaked out that while the bill passed the Senate by a wide margin, it had NO funding. In other words, nearly 80 Senators passed a bill to construct a border fence for the sole purpose of political expediency. Republicans wanted to inflate the stat sheet while doing nothing to solve America's nagging problems.

The federal budget deficit is yet another area where half measures have been put into place. Our Senators and Congressmen have decided to "trim" the budget, instead of drastically reducing spending and cutting government waste.

In recent years, politicians have kicked field goals instead of taking the risk and going for the win. While failure is a definite possibility, half-measures will never fix our problems or ensure that America wins the future.

LWS

Okay, I Guess I'm not that Important

I'll admit it, I think TIME's choice for Person of the Year is cop-out. Though the ongoing media revolution may be important now, I am hard pressed to see any great significance to the growing prominence of such media. Those of us who write blogs and utilize YouTube and MySpace may be generating a new medium of communication, but these accomplishments are deserving of very little acclaim.

When we examine previous winners of this coveted award, we see names such as Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Stalin, Winston Churchill, and Richard Nixon. The Person of the Year award should go to the individual (or individuals) who merit special recognition and who are charting a new path in the course of human history.

Most commentators thought that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would receive the award. Over the past year, Ahmadinejad has made headlines for his country's unwavering pursuit of nuclear power. His anti-Israeli comments and support for terrorist activity makes him the foremost power-player in the Middle East.

TIME's snub of Ahmadinejad is yet another example of how the media is downplaying the danger Iran poses to the West. Though Iran's leaders have called for America's demise, media outlets have continually turned a deaf ear to Ahmadinejad's regime. Our inability to fully assess the threat posed by Iran and radical Islam bears a startling parallel to our country's actions and attitudes toward Adolph Hitler in the months before World War II.

So ten years from now, will we see a transformed world through the use of MySpace or as a result of the firebrand, belligerent President of Iran. Both Pat Buchanan and I think the latter.

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53426

LWS

I Finally Won Something!!!

According to the Drudge Report and Fox News, YOU (or Me, I suppose) were named TIME Person of the Year. Due to the rise of user generated media such as blogs, YouTube, and MySpace, TIME Magazine has decided to bestow their coveted honor upon all of us. I feel so proud!

http://drudgereport.com/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236978,00.html

LWS