|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Enterprise_Institute AEI has emerged as one of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy.[2] More than twenty AEI alumni have served either in a Bush administration policy post or on one of the government's many panels and commissions.[3] Lynne Cheney, wife of Vice President Richard Cheney, is an AEI Senior Fellow.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration:_Project_for_the_New_American_Century The following are Project for the New American Century (PNAC) personnel who are either members of or close to the Bush administration:
Elliot Abrams is a senior member of the National Security Council, who pled guilty to the charge of lying to Congress in the Iran/Contra scandal. He is an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles.
Kenneth Adelman is a member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. He is not an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles, but has signed one of its position papers sent as a letter to president George W. Bush in 2002.
Richard V. Allen is a member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board and the National Security Advisory Group.
John R. Bolton, currently Bush's nominee as ambassador to the United Nations, served as Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs. He is not an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles, but has signed at least five PNAC position papers sent as letters to presidents and members of congress advocating military aggression abroad.
Stephen Cambone is Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.
Dick Cheney is Vice President and an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles.
Seth Cropsey is Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau.
Devon Gaffney Cross is a member of the Defense Policy Board and Donors Forum on International Affairs.
Paula Dobriansky is Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs.
Aaron Friedberg is the Vice President's Deputy National Security Advisor and the Vice President's Director of Policy Planning.
Francis [bleep] is a member of the Cloning Panel, President's Council on Bioethics.
Daniel Goure is a member of the 2001 DoD Transition Team.
Fred C. Ikle is a member of the Defense Policy Board.
Zalmay Khalilzad was appointed in December 2002 as the president's "special envoy and ambassador at large for free Iraqis." According to the White House announcement, Khalilzad would "serve as the focal point for contacts and coordination among free Iraqis for the U.S. government and for preparations for a post-Saddam Iraq." Khalilzad's qualifications include not only advocating Saddam's ouster since the 1980s, but also his proven prowess in orchestrating the installation of the Hamid Karzai regime in Afghanistan after being appointed special U.S. envoy to Afghanistan in December 2001. He is an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles.
Jeane J. Kirkpatrick is the U.S. Representative to the United Nations Human Rights Commission.
John F. Lehman is a member of the National Commission to Investigate Attacks on the U.S. (9-11 Commission).
I. Lewis Scooter Libby is Chief of Staff and the Vice President's Assistant for National Security Affairs to Dick Cheney and an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles.
Richard N. Perle became chairman of the 30-member Defense Policy Board in July 2001, which meets regularly with Rumsfeld. The board's meetings are classified and members are allowed access to top-secret intelligence reports. He resigned in early 2003 upon allegations that he was essentially profiting from insider trading with classified defense intelligence. Perle is not an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles, but has signed at least eight PNAC position papers sent as letters to presidents and members of congress advocating military aggression abroad.
J. Danforth Quayle is a member of the Defense Policy Board.
Peter W. Rodman is Asst. Defense Secretary for International Security Affairs.
Henry S. Rowen is a member of the Defense Policy Board.
Donald Rumsfeld is US Secretary of Defense and an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles in 1997.
William Schneider, Jr. is Chairman of the Defense Science Board.
Abram Shulsky is Director of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans.
Chris Williams is a member of the Defense Policy Board and Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, as well as Special Assistant to Rumsfeld on Policy, 2001.
Paul Dundes Wolfowitz is Deputy Secretary of Defense and an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles.
R. James Woolsey, Jr. served as director of Central Intelligence for the CIA from 1993-95, and was ambassador to the negotiation on conventional armed forces in Europe from 1989-91. Woolsey went to Geneva as delegate at large to the U.S.-Soviet Strategic Arms Reduction Talks and Nuclear and Space Arms Talks from 1983-86. He was also Under Secretary of the Navy and advised the U.S. delegation to the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. Woolsey, one of the most high-profile hawks in the war against Iraq and a key member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, is a director of the Washington-based private equity firm Paladin Capital. The company was set up three months after the terrorist attacks on New York and sees the events and aftermath of September 11, 2001 as a business opportunity which 'offer[s] substantial promise for homeland security investment'. He is not an original signer of the PNAC statement of principles, but has signed at least seven of its position papers sent as letters to presidents and members of congress advocating military aggression abroad. According to RightWeb, Woolsey is a member of the Defense Policy Board, the Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, and a special envoy of Rumsfeld to investigate the Czech-al Qaeda connection.
Dov S. Zakheim is DoD Comptroller.
Robert Bruce Zoellick was appointed United States Trade Representative.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
And,.. as to my original point, Fred Thompson has become a member of the American Enterprise Institute,.. which means if you have problems with the Bush administration, you'll have problems with a Thompson administration.
They both will be following the same agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 40,179
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 40,179 |
WHO NEEDS BIN LADEN?
When his ilk have Ron Paul,Pelosi and Murtha to rally them:
"I think the president's policy is going to begin to unravel now," said
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
"I feel a direction change in the air," said Rep John Murtha, chairman of
the House panel that oversees military funding"
"I do think there were cover-ups, and I think it was mainly to cover up who was blamed, who's inept. See, they had the information." Ron Paul
Son of a liberal: " What did you do in the War On Terror, Daddy?"
Liberal father: " I fought the Americans, along with all the other liberals."
MOLON LABE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 355
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 355 |
The best thing Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Tommy Thompson can hope to be is good market research for the Republican Party. Ron Paul is, as has been stated, the closest thing to a strict constructionist in national politics. Tom Tancredo is well known for his stance on illegal immigration. And Tommy Thompson was a very successful Republican governor of a primarily rural yet almost socialist state.
None of the 3 have a chance of winning anything, but all 3 are markedly better for the base constituency of the Republican Party than "staying the course" of Compassionate Conservatism. If the republicans have a hope of maintaining the party past it's 200th birthday they will have to return to the republicans of the early 20th Century, or they will see their constituents splinter. Which by the way would be the best thing to happen to America (especially if it also happened to the democrats). Gridlock in a truly limited government would be great for a change.
Bob
"This country, this world, the [human] race of which you and I are a part, is great at having consensuses that are in great error." Rep. John Dingell (D-MI)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,629
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,629 |
Ron Paul is the best of the Republican candidates because:
1. He's not one of the "anointed". In other words, he's not one of the Ivy League elitists that have built the political machine that makes it nearly impossible for outsiders to gain a position of power.
When Reagan was nominated and then elected, the movers and shakers from New England soiled their depends. He was not supposed to be nominated, nor was he supposed to win. Reagan beat all of the odds and, rightly or wrongly, has become the standard by which all other Republicans since have been judged.
2. He has abilities beyond politics. He was an Air Force officer and is a physician. His ambitions have been realized, so he serves as a Representative as a SERVICE. Yes, as President, he may be seduced by power and position, but since he is already being savaged by the press, and is under scrutiny by his own party, he'll at least be used to being scorned and berated for his actions.
3. He is smarter than most of the rest of the candidates. His credentials indicate that he can think independently, and knows when to consult others.
However, he is not:
1. The answer to our prayers. Most likely, if he DOES get nominated, the Republican Party will only half-heartedly support him and he will be outspent.
2. Going to be very effective. If some miracle happens and he is elected because of grassroots efforts, he will be facing hostility from both sides of the aisle. He may do us some favors with the Executive Order tool, but I suspect that when he eliminates the IRS, BATFE, DEA, and NEA, the press will crucify him as a radical, the right will see him as some kind of anarchist, and the left will see him as, well, some kind of anarchist.
3.Going to last more than 1 term. All of the IRS agents, Drug Thugs, F-Troopers and artsy fartsy whiners that get kicked out of government service will be deafening with their wailing and gnashing of teeth.They will work to impugn and impeach him. They will work for his opponents, whomever they may be. The press will paint him as a heartless tyrant that caused the children of government employees to starve. Regardless, if he is elected, and he does serve 2 terms, the Republicans will force him to choose a running mate to their liking. If Paul lasts 2 terms, the running mate will promise to continue on tha path that Paul set before him and then do the opposite. It happened with Reagan/Bush the Elder, it would happen with Paul/Neocon.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. --H. L. Mencken www.oregonfirearms.org
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
they will have to return to the republicans of the early 20th Century, or they will see their constituents splinter. That much has already happened,.... but the neocons have no attachment to the GOP. If they destroy it's viability, you'll see them working to become influential in the Democrat party,... in fact, that's where they originate from.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,629
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,629 |
Bush does. Without a bogeyman, he can't beat the war drums and stir up the rabble...
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. --H. L. Mencken www.oregonfirearms.org
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
Here's how Irving Kristol, the ideological father of the neocon movement describes their goals. http://amnation.com/vfr/archives/001679.html Viewed in this way, one can say that the historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to be this: to convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411 |
Of course various members or fellows or board members of AEI serve in various positions in the Bush Administration, as they would in any republican administration. The tenets of the AEI could not be more typically republican....free enterprise, low taxes, small government and strong defense. That's, uh, kind of what Republicans are supposed to be about. What's your beef with the AEI?
I guess its...you hate the Bush admin., so anybody who serves in it is an evil neo-con, and many of them have some connection to the AEI (as would any collection of conservative intellectuals), and therefore the AEI is also an evil neo-con organization, which is further proved by the fact that its alumni serve in the US government in various capacities.
It seems kind of circular. The papers coming out of the American Enterprise Institute are pretty much boilerplate pro-capitlist stuff...what's threatening to you?
Proudly representing oil companies, defense contractors, and firearms manufacturers since 1980. Because merchants of death need lawyers, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411 |
from you own source, B:
"The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is a conservative think tank, founded in 1943, whose stated mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism � limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate."
Yeah, I can see why you and the other Ron Paul groupies would worry about an organization like that.
Proudly representing oil companies, defense contractors, and firearms manufacturers since 1980. Because merchants of death need lawyers, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
from you own source, B:
"The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is a conservative think tank, founded in 1943, whose stated mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism � limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate."
Yeah, I can see why you and the other Ron Paul groupies would worry about an organization like that. Don't cherry pick,.. read the rest of it. You're not nearly as ignorant as you want people to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
Of course various members or fellows or board members of AEI serve in various positions in the Bush Administration, as they would in any republican administration. The tenets of the AEI could not be more typically republican....free enterprise, low taxes, small government and strong defense. That's, uh, kind of what Republicans are supposed to be about. That's what they used to be about,... then they were co-opted by the leftist neocons and we have an explosion in the size of government,... enormous deficit spending (which is nothing but hidden taxation) increased spending for social programs,.. wide open borders with amnesty for illegals, and entangling alliances with foreign nations which keep us mired in war. The Republican party as it needs to be has one representative in the GOP primaries,.. Ron Paul,... and the neocons are determined to snuff out any viability that he may develop. ,... and you're cheering them on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411 |
I read it, and I 'm still trying to understand why anybody to the right of Ted Kennedy would be so appalled by the AEI....do you also fear and loathe the Heritage Foundation? What think tanks' work DO you approve of?
In fact, other than Ron Paul, what the hell are you in favor of? All I ever hear is what is so terrible, and about those dreaded neo-cons. I mean somebody or some organization that exists today....everybody says they're a Reagan man now...even a lot who weren't back when it counted. Bitching and moaning is really easy to do....like hindsight.
While it is true that, as Buckley said, the role of conservative is to stand in the path of history shouting "Stop", as a governing philosophy we have to have a little more of a platform. That's the function of Heritage and AEI...to think and write about policy alternatives. So, what are your preferences?
Proudly representing oil companies, defense contractors, and firearms manufacturers since 1980. Because merchants of death need lawyers, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 40,179
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 40,179 |
Bush does. Without a bogeyman, he can't beat the war drums and stir up the rabble... Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to murder Christians in Turkey? Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to murder Buddhist monks in Thailand? Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to murder Catholic villagers in the Phillipines? Does American foreign policy cause Hamas and Fatah terrorists to kill each other in Palestine? Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to kill tourists in a nightclub in Indonesia? Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to bomb trains in Spain? Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to bomb subways in Great Britain? Does American foreign policy cause Muslim terrorists to kill Afghani girls if they go to school? Does American foreign policy cause the Shiites and Sunnis to murder each other in Iraq? Ron Paul has a simple answer to ending Muslim terrorism. Unfortunately, he's totally wrong. Muslim terrorism isn't caused by anything OUR government does. There is NOTHING we can do to make the terrorists STOP other than fighting them, capturing them, and killing them. Muslim terrorism caused by Muslim terrorists, motivated by belief in a God who wants them to kill people in order to forcibly convert the world to Islam. Ron Paul believes America should pursue an isolationist foreign policy. He is creating a false model of the terrorist enemy in order to justify his own agenda. The terrorists do not think like Ron Paul. They come from a culture totally alien to our own. We can not be naive and believe they think as we do, because they don't. The terrorist's motivations are alien to liberals and libertarians, who don't believe anyone can really believe in God, and anyone who says so must be a faker or a charlatan. The terrorists boldly proclaim they want to convert the world to Islam and the liberal assumes he must be lying and what he really wants is for the US to pursue an isolationist foreign policy.
Son of a liberal: " What did you do in the War On Terror, Daddy?"
Liberal father: " I fought the Americans, along with all the other liberals."
MOLON LABE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 48,411 |
RP is as wrong now as Lindbergh and the America First crowd were in 1940. At least they're wrong for what could be argued are the right reasons, as opposed to the democrats, who are wrong for the wrong reasons, i.e. hoping for a American defeat for political gain or because they see America as deserving to lose. More like the German-American Bund.
Result of those policies would be the same....ultimately, more American deaths
Proudly representing oil companies, defense contractors, and firearms manufacturers since 1980. Because merchants of death need lawyers, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
RP is as wrong now as Lindbergh and the America First crowd were in 1940. At least they're wrong for what could be argued are the right reasons, as opposed to the democrats, who are wrong for the wrong reasons, i.e. hoping for a American defeat for political gain or because they see America as deserving to lose. More like the German-American Bund.
Result of those policies would be the same....ultimately, more American deaths Ron Paul's ideology goes far beyond the war that the neocons have cooked up to keep their subjects all focused away from the important matters at hand. Ron Paul wants to give the nation back to the people. Everyone else currently involved in national politics are doing everything they can to transfer more and more power to the government.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261 |
My conservatism is based on what I call constitutional libertarianism. That is the same term I have used to describe myself......
I would not vote for Ron Paul because although he might be a wonderful person he would make a lousy president. Being president would be beyond his pay grade.
The president isn't the king--we have two (OK one and half) other branches of government. A president that stands up to Congress and stands for something (even if it's "out there") will serve to move the politics in a different direction. To make a significant change may require some significantly different views in some portions of government. Casey The only job for President truely outlined in the Constitution and for which the Presidency has the only Constitutional mandated oath is Commander-in-Chief. Based on what Ron Paul has said that job is above his pay grade.
Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous
"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 Likes: 2 |
Believe it or not, many people would prefer a better future for this nation than never ending war.
I'm confident that they right accumulation of individuals in our government could ward off that curse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261 |
Believe it or not, many people would prefer a better future for this nation than never ending war.
I'm confident that they right accumulation of individuals in our government could ward off that curse. War is permanent with peace breaking out occasional to give everyone R & R and to reload the brass. An unfortunate state of affairs but human nature. Hence, the most important aspect of the job as President is Commander-in Chief. Ron Paul don't cut it.
Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous
"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,283 Likes: 4
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,283 Likes: 4 |
Ron Paul is the best of the Republican candidates because:
1. He's not one of the "anointed". In other words, he's not one of the Ivy League elitists that have built the political machine that makes it nearly impossible for outsiders to gain a position of power.
When Reagan was nominated and then elected, the movers and shakers from New England soiled their depends. He was not supposed to be nominated, nor was he supposed to win. Reagan beat all of the odds and, rightly or wrongly, has become the standard by which all other Republicans since have been judged.
2. He has abilities beyond politics. He was an Air Force officer and is a physician. His ambitions have been realized, so he serves as a Representative as a SERVICE. Yes, as President, he may be seduced by power and position, but since he is already being savaged by the press, and is under scrutiny by his own party, he'll at least be used to being scorned and berated for his actions.
3. He is smarter than most of the rest of the candidates. His credentials indicate that he can think independently, and knows when to consult others.
However, he is not:
1. The answer to our prayers. Most likely, if he DOES get nominated, the Republican Party will only half-heartedly support him and he will be outspent.
2. Going to be very effective. If some miracle happens and he is elected because of grassroots efforts, he will be facing hostility from both sides of the aisle. He may do us some favors with the Executive Order tool, but I suspect that when he eliminates the IRS, BATFE, DEA, and NEA, the press will crucify him as a radical, the right will see him as some kind of anarchist, and the left will see him as, well, some kind of anarchist.
3.Going to last more than 1 term. All of the IRS agents, Drug Thugs, F-Troopers and artsy fartsy whiners that get kicked out of government service will be deafening with their wailing and gnashing of teeth.They will work to impugn and impeach him. They will work for his opponents, whomever they may be. The press will paint him as a heartless tyrant that caused the children of government employees to starve. Regardless, if he is elected, and he does serve 2 terms, the Republicans will force him to choose a running mate to their liking. If Paul lasts 2 terms, the running mate will promise to continue on tha path that Paul set before him and then do the opposite. It happened with Reagan/Bush the Elder, it would happen with Paul/Neocon. Dang! Ve-ry perceptive. Which is why I continue to hammer on the subject of the most significant--and useful--change can, for the most part, only come from a change in state legislatures. Casey
Casey
Not being married to any particular political party sure makes it a lot easier to look at the world more objectively...
Having said that, MAGA.
|
|
|
|
|
593 members (1eyedmule, 160user, 1234, 1badf350, 1beaver_shooter, 16penny, 76 invisible),
2,022
guests, and
1,190
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,831
Posts18,496,650
Members73,979
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
