Showing posts with label All politics is local. Show all posts
Showing posts with label All politics is local. Show all posts

Saturday, May 11, 2013

How far we have fallen.... Recalling JFK's "City Upon A Hill" Speech JAN 9th, 1961

We as a nation have allowed people who are highly unqualified to take control of our governments on the Federal, State and Local levels.  The people who are in charge are a mere shadow of those who were elected in the past..... Think about people like Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Truman, IKE and JFK....Compare them to the faux leaders who are in our halls of government now....

There is no comparison.  We do not have the quality leaders we need. There is no comparison and we need better leaders now more than ever.


Take a listen to the enclosed link and read the words that JFK spoke just before he was to be inaugurated.  This speech sums up in 8 minutes what we need from our leaders.  You don't have to agree with JFK's political views but you can't argue with his principles of what we should be getting from our leaders on all levels of the government we elect and who should serve the people, not the other way around.


http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/OYhUZE2Qo0-ogdV7ok900A.aspx

City Upon A Hill
President Elect John F. Kennedy
Massachusetts General Court,
January 9, 1961


I have welcomed this opportunity to address this historic body, and, through you, the people of Massachusetts to whom I am so deeply indebted for a lifetime of friendship and trust.

For fourteen years I have placed my confidence in the citizens of Massachusetts--and they have generously responded by placing their confidence in me.
 
Now, on the Friday after next, I am to assume new and broader responsibilities. But I am not here to bid farewell to Massachusetts.

For forty-three years--whether I was in London, Washington, the South Pacific, or elsewhere--this has been my home; and, God willing, wherever I serve this shall remain my home

It was here my grandparents were born--it is here I hope my grandchildren will be born.

I speak neither from false provincial pride nor artful political flattery. For no man about to enter high office in this country can ever be unmindful of the contribution this state has made to our national greatness.

Its leaders have shaped our destiny long before the great republic was born. Its principles have guided our footsteps in times of crisis as well as in times of calm. Its democratic institutions--including this historic body--have served as beacon lights for other nations as well as our sister states.

For what Pericles said to the Athenians has long been true of this commonwealth: "We do not imitate--for we are a model to others."
 
And so it is that I carry with me from this state to that high and lonely office to which I now succeed more than fond memories of firm friendships. The enduring qualities of Massachusetts--the common threads woven by the Pilgrim and the Puritan, the fisherman and the farmer, the Yankee and the immigrant--will not be and could not be forgotten in this nation's executive mansion.

They are an indelible part of my life, my convictions, my view of the past, and my hopes for the future.

Allow me to illustrate: During the last sixty days, I have been at the task of constructing an administration. It has been a long and deliberate process. Some have counseled greater speed. Others have counseled more expedient tests.
 
But I have been guided by the standard John Winthrop set before his shipmates on the flagship Arbella three hundred and thirty-one years ago, as they, too, faced the task of building a new government on a perilous frontier.

"We must always consider," he said, "that we shall be as a city upon a hill--the eyes of all people are upon us."
 
Today the eyes of all people are truly upon us--and our governments, in every branch, at every level, national, state and local, must be as a city upon a hill--constructed and inhabited by men aware of their great trust and their great responsibilities.

For we are setting out upon a voyage in 1961 no less hazardous than that undertaken by the Arabella in 1630. We are committing ourselves to tasks of statecraft no less awesome than that of governing the Massachusetts Bay Colony, beset as it was then by terror without and disorder within.

History will not judge our endeavors--and a government cannot be selected--merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these.

For of those to whom much is given, much is required. And when at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment on each one of us--recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state--our success or failure, in whatever office we may hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions:

First, were we truly men of courage--with the courage to stand up to one's enemies--and the courage to stand up, when necessary, to one's associates--the courage to resist public pressure, as well as private greed

Secondly, were we truly men of judgment--with perceptive judgment of the future as well as the past--of our own mistakes as well as the mistakes of others--with enough wisdom to know that we did not know, and enough candor to admit it?
 
Third, were we truly men of integrity--men who never ran out on either the principles in which they believed or the people who believed in them--men who believed in us--men whom neither financial gain nor political ambition could ever divert from the fulfillment of our sacred trust?

Finally, were we truly men of dedication--with an honor mortgaged to no single individual or group, and compromised by no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest.

Courage--judgment--integrity--dedication--these are the historic qualities of the Bay Colony and the Bay State--the qualities which this state has consistently sent to this chamber on Beacon Hill here in Boston and to Capitol Hill back in Washington.

And these are the qualities which, with God's help, this son of Massachusetts hopes will characterize our government's conduct in the four stormy years that lie ahead.

Humbly I ask His help in that undertaking--but aware that on earth His will is worked by men. I ask for your help and your prayers, as I embark on this new and solemn journey.

Monday, April 22, 2013

Boston and Benghazi - We deserve answers from our government

I have a unique point of view when it comes to the terror attacks that have occurred over the last dozen years.

I lost a high school friend on 09/11/01.  He was on the 104th Fl of Tower Two at World Trade. I was on duty with the US Navy serving on an exercise in Egypt when it all went down.  I was unable to come home for over a month. It was a terrible time and we were unable to help our people at home.

I lost a shipmate of mine when he was killed on the USS Cole in Yemen in October 12th 2000.  He was a shipmate of mine from the USS Constitution when we were on the Under Sail Operation in July 1997 in Boston.  I was home this time and unable to help those on the USS Cole which is what any Sailor would want to do.

Now, the attack was in my home city of Boston, killing 4 people (including the MIT Police officer gunned down by the terrorists) and injuring almost 200 others.  Once again, I found myself overseas, this time in Kandahar, Afghanistan.  I was only able to follow the story, send out messages via twitter and pray they got the Bastards.  Prayers answered.

In the last 7 months, we also suffered the loss of 4 of our people in Benghazi, Libya including 2 US Navy SEALS who are my Navy Brothers. Once again, I was in Kandahar when this happened and unable to do anything to help. The way this terrorism incident was handled was so poorly done, it defies logic.  The way the President and Hillary Clinton acted was shameful and without honor.  We were lied to about what happened, plain and simple.

I take all of this very seriously and find the response from the White House on both attacks to be highly unsatisfactory.  The White House is an impediment to finding the truth and stonewall more than the Nixon White House, which is no small feat.

We, the American people, need answers on what happened in Boston and Benghazi.  What is most unsettling is we have the most inexperienced President in the history of our nation and his administration has done nothing but pump a pile of BS out to the people he serves.  I don't expect every last piece of info but we need more reliable info than we are being given.

They hit my city and my people.  The terrorists have done this before and now done it again.  At the same time, a BS artist and his half-arsed administration told the world they have this covered and that the terrorists are done.

What is "done" is the confidence that the American people have in those in Washington DC as they have proven to be as incompetent as they come.  They are worse than incompetent as they continue to brag about how well they are doing when they are failing miserably.

The people of Boston and our local Police are the ones who got it done in Boston.  Seven months after Benghazi, we have no answers and no one has been held responsible. 
I would say under any measure of things, BOSTON gets it done while the Obama Administration, not at all.  The people of Boston got it done as they stepped up to help our local law enforcement.  The FBI and ATF was in support but the credit goes to the local law enforcement.

Some people smarter than me write about what to do with the captured terrorist in the WSJ.  I leave it to you.  I feel we deserve much better response and answers than a bunch of BS artists slapping themselves on the back in Washington telling us to trust them when they have proven to be totally untrustworthy.

We need answers on Boston and Benghazi.  Period. Now.

Enemy Combatants in Boston

Was there a FISA order issued for Tamerlan Tsarnaev?

Wall Street Journal - 04/22/13
A row has broken out over whether the Obama Administration is violating the legal due process of Boston terror suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev by not reading him his Miranda rights before questioning. The more relevant question for the safety of the U.S. homeland is why the Administration has declined to designate him as a terrorist enemy combatant.

With Dzhokhar wounded and in custody and his brother Tamerlan dead, the focus is shifting to how the brothers became radicalized and whether they had links to foreign or domestic terror networks. It's becoming clearer by the day that elder brother Tamerlan had become increasingly religious and that his motive last week was Islamic jihad against America.
 
U.S. officials say he spent months overseas in 2012, including time in Chechnya. Media reports say the FBI questioned him after a warning from a foreign intelligence service (presumably Russia's). Yet the FBI appears not to have kept an eye on him, though media reports now say that within a month of returning from Russia he was posting jihadist videos on websites.

The FBI has some explaining to do, and more than merely claiming that it can't track everyone who pops up on a foreign intelligence list. One question is whether anyone in government requested that the federal FISA court issue a warrant so Tamerlan could have his Web postings or phone calls surveilled electronically. This doesn't mean G-men in a car following him 24-7. It means putting him into a National Security Agency program so that pro-jihad postings would be noticed.

FBI officials were clearly major sources for the Associated Press stories in 2011 that attacked the New York Police Department for its antiterror surveillance program, in part for reasons of bureaucratic competition. But in the Boston case, we only wish the NYPD had been in charge. Instead the FBI interviewed Tamerlan, then apparently lost interest or focus even as he was showing signs of radicalization, so the homegrown jihadist was able to engineer the most successful terror attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.

Which brings us to interrogating 19-year-old Dzhokhar if he recovers from his wounds. The flap over reading his Miranda rights is a largely irrelevant distraction. Under a 1984 Supreme Court decision (New York v. Quarles), police can invoke a "public-safety exception" to Miranda for a short period of time. Attorney General Eric Holder has embraced this exception as a way to show that the criminal-justice system can handle terrorists as well as the law-of-war paradigm favored by the Bush Administration.

But this is mainly for political show. The only real issue in letting Dzhokhar lawyer-up under Miranda is whether evidence gathered during interrogation can be used in court. There's already plenty of video and other evidence linking him to the bombings.

The important security issue isn't convicting Dzhokhar but finding out what he knows that might prevent a future attack or break up a terror network. This is where naming him an enemy combatant would be useful. Such a designation allows for extensive, long-term interrogation without a lawyer. Especially because President Obama has barred enhanced-interrogation techniques, such long-term psychological pressure can be crucial to learning if the brothers worked with anyone else, if they received terrorist training, and more.

This is why Senators Kelly Ayotte, John McCain and Lindsey Graham are urging the Administration to label Dkhokhar an enemy combatant. The Supreme Court has ruled that even American citizens—Dkhokhar is one—can be held indefinitely as enemy combatants. If he cooperates, the combatant designation can be revoked and he can always be transferred to the criminal-justice system for prosecution.

The Boston bombing also ought to chasten Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee and other libertarians who keep insisting that the U.S. homeland is not part of the terror battlefield.

"It's different overseas than it will be here. It's different in the battlefield than it will be here," Mr. Paul told Fox News earlier this year. "Which gets precisely to the argument I have with some other Republicans who say, well, 'the battlefield is everywhere, there is no limitation.' President Obama says this. Some members of my party say the battle has no geographic limitations and the laws of war apply. It's important to know that the law of war that they're talking about means no due process."
Boylston Street sure looked like a battlefield on Monday, and so did Watertown on Thursday night. The artificial distinction is Mr. Paul's focus on geography. The vital distinction for public safety is between common criminals, who deserve due process protections, and enemy combatants at war with the U.S., wherever they are.

As for due process, the greatest danger to liberty would be to allow more such attacks that would inspire an even greater public backlash against Muslims or free speech or worse. The anti-antiterror types on the left and GOP Senators who agree that the U.S. isn't part of the battlefield are making the U.S. more vulnerable.

Americans erupted in understandable relief and gratitude on Friday with the rapid capture of the terrorist brothers. But we shouldn't forget that their attack succeeded, with horrific consequences for the dead, the wounded and their loved ones. The main goal now is to prevent the next attack.

Correction: The FBI says it interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2011. An earlier version of this story cited erroneous media reports saying he was interviewed in 2012.
A version of this article appeared April 22, 2013, on page A14 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Enemy Combatants in Boston

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

The Scott Brown effect & " All Politics is local "

Things are moving in the right direction politically here in the bluest of blue states. Voters are finally seeing that having one party dominate the political landscape is NOT best for the taxpayers or citizens.

Case in point, US Senator Scott Brown from Massachusetts. He was known in his district as a State Rep. and a State Senator but not much well known statewide. He put his message out to the voters and was elected to the Senate seat that Ted Kennedy had held for over 48 years. The voters were starting to see that they needed someone who would speak for them and not just lock step to what the Democratic majority wanted.

2nd case in point is much more local, as there was an election to fill a vacant state rep's seat in my home district. The seat had been held by a democrat for over 30 years. A son of a well known political family ran with backing from the Unions.

HE LOST even though he out spent his opponent, a not as well known citizen who decided that we needed someone who could make a difference. The Unions bet heavy that they would get their candidate in but lost as voters saw that having another rubber stamp in place for the Unions was not in the best interest of the district.

IF we can get the voters to see this with the nationwide elections next November, there is a better chance for our country to move forward. If we stay as it is now, with an ineffective President and a do-nothing Senate controlled by the Democrats, we will be stuck in place. We need to elect people who will work to really make a change, not just lecture us and call us "lazy" like the President does.

It can happen and it did happen here in Massachusetts. Let's make it happen for the rest of the country too. Former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil said, " All Politics is local." He was right.

Lakeville Republican Keiko Orrall won after being outspent
State House News Service
Posted Nov 22, 2011



LAKEVILLE Lakeville Republican Keiko Orrall bucked a campaign finance trend by defeating an opponent who outspent her during the run up to a special election in September.

Orrall’s win flipped the 12th Bristol seat from Democratic control for the first time in more than 30 years. In addition to New Bedford and Lakeville, the district includes parts Taunton, Middleboro and Freetown.

Campaign finance statistics released Monday show Middleboro Democrat Roger Brunelle, a commercial and industrial painter and 19-year member of a painters union, outspent Orrall, $39,727 to $26,179 and also benefited from $11,475 in independent expenditures from the Massachusetts Teachers Association and $6,301 from 1199 SEIU. Brunelle also received support from Lt. Gov. Tim Murray.

Orrall’s campaign contributions included $8,636 from the Marlborough Republican City Committee and $3,241 from the Republican State Committee.

Orrall won the seat given up by Stephen Canessa, a New Bedford Democrat who left to take a post at Southcoast Health Systems. Voters in Lakeville turned out in greater numbers than nearby New Bedford precincts, choosing Orrall by a three-to-one margin.