Bush Overlooks Ultimate Middle East Peacemaker

In his quest to continue and enhance Middle East Peace, President Bush may have made a critical oversight:

The Bush administration is laying the groundwork for an announcement of Tony Blair as special Middle East envoy for Palestinian governance and economic issues after he steps down as Britain's prime minister, following two months of behind-the-scenes negotiations, according to U.S. officials.

Blair would report to the so-called Quartet overseeing Middle East peace efforts--the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia--and work on issues limited to the internal workings of a future Palestinian state. Political negotiations involving Palestinians, Israelis and the Arab states would be left to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the officials said.

The idea, first proposed by Rice, was embraced by the Israeli government during talks between President Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this week. The Palestinians have yet to be approached, but U.S. officials believe they would welcome a Blair appointment.

When you think of the words "Middle East Peace," there is one man whose name is synonymous with the concept. And that name is Dick Cheney. Cheney has worked tirelessly for Middle East peace since the Gulf War, and as recent democratic elections in Iraq and the Palestinian territories show, the dividends are already becoming readily apparent. We saw Cheney's leadership proven once again on his recent Middle-East tour.

It is true that at one time, Tony Blair might have seemed a promising candidate for the role of Middle East Peacemaker (to his credit, Blair made possible the liberation of Iraq), and I suppose it is a good omen for Blair that Israel is backing him for his prospective new job, as it means that some Middle Eastern countries are already lining up behind him. But more than anything else, Blair should be disqualified for this role by his recent failure to nuke Iran and his speaking of French.

Can It, Newty!

Looks like Newt Gingrich has sold out and joined Hugo Chavez and Nancy Pelosi in their slanders on our leaders.

Newt Gingrich is one of those who fear that Republicans have been branded with the label of incompetence. He says that the Bush Administration has become a Republican version of the Jimmy Carter Presidency, when nothing seemed to go right. “It’s just gotten steadily worse,” he said. “There was some point during the Iranian hostage crisis, the gasoline rationing, the malaise speech, the sweater, the rabbit”—Gingrich was referring to Carter’s suggestion that Americans wear sweaters rather than turn up their thermostats, and to the “attack” on Carter by what cartoonists quickly portrayed as a “killer rabbit” during a fishing trip—“that there was a morning where the average American went, ‘You know, this really worries me.’ ” He added, “You hire Presidents, at a minimum, to run the country well enough that you don’t have to think about it, and, at a maximum, to draw the country together to meet great challenges you can’t avoid thinking about.” Gingrich continued, “When you have the collapse of the Republican Party, you have an immediate turn toward the Democrats, not because the Democrats are offering anything better, but on a ‘not them’ basis. And if you end up in a 2008 campaign between ‘them’ and ‘not them,’ ‘not them’ is going to win.”

I didn't see you complaining the last six years as Bush and Cheney implemented parts of your agenda. And you only shut down the federal government for a few days before you became best friends with Clinton. George Bush and Dick Cheney have shut much of it down for six years.

Besides, your comparison of this administration to Jimmy Carter is simply not born out by the facts:

Despite President Bush's low popularity, he is still getting better marks than the weakest ratings for Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter, according to a new analysis from Harris Interactive.

And it looks like Newty has decided not only to turn his back on the Republican party, but has pulled a Tony Blair, and turned his back on the English language itself as well:

Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, aims to soon be able to give interviews in Spanish, according to an article in The Politico, based on an interview with his private Spanish tutor.

How do you say traitor in Spanish?

Note to Republicans: You Don't Win by Appeasing the Left

It's really quite sad. I've mentioned before how Tony Blair, after many courageous actions as Prime Minister (such as bringing Democracy to Iraq) lost his nerve, and tried to appease left-wing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, when he captured British troops who were merely working on spreading Democracy. He could have taken a tough line like he did with Iraq (48 hours for Ahmadinejad to leave the country, or perhaps the threat of nuclear strikes), but instead he opted for Jimmy Carter style "negotiations." Having made a disgrace of himself, Blair was forced to resign. So he announced his resignation ---in French.





Let's see, Jimmy Carter-style "negotiations", announcing your resignation in French-if there was one man who would be impressed with Blair's behavior, you'd think it would have been Jimmy Carter himself. Not so.

Tony Blair's lack of leadership and timid subservience to George W Bush lie behind the ongoing crisis in Iraq and the worldwide threat of terrorism, according to the former American president Jimmy Carter.

"I have been surprised and extremely disappointed by Tony Blair's behaviour," he told The Sunday Telegraph.

You see, unless you are willing to pull out all the stops and advocate Chavez/Pelosi/Carter style "21st Century Fascism," there's no point in even trying to appease the left. Tony Blair might have learnt the lesson too late but it is something that Dick Cheney takes to heart. You're never going to see Cheney "negotiating" with Ahmadinejad, or announcing his resignation in French-or any other language.

Winning the War in Iraq: The India Lesson

A lot of people think this should be an easy war, that if we haven't already won, perhaps we should throw in the towel. Those people, disappointly, now include Mitch McConnell and Tony Blair. But a good example from history, and one with which Blair at least should be well acquainted, is the British experience in India.

How long did it take for the British to impart Democracy to India? Three hundred years. And look how prosperous and successful India is today! I think that is a good estimate of how long we should be prepared to fight the Iraq war. Because while with the British occupation of India, only access to tea and spices was at stake, in the current battle, the whole future of civilization itself is what is at stake. If we are smart in how we go about this war, there is even a possibility that we could shave off a hundred years from this estimate. Most importantly, I think that this war could be succesfully waged without any tax increases. Who would be the best man to head this effort? One name comes to mind.

President Bush also seems to get this idea:

"From our own history, we know the path to democracy is long and it's hard," Bush said in a ceremony honoring the 400th anniversary of Jamestown, America's first permanent English colony.

"There are many challenges, and there are setbacks along the way," Bush said. "Yet we can have confidence in the outcome because we've seen freedom's power to transform societies."
[...]"Today, Democratic institutions are taking root in places where liberty was unimaginable not long ago," the president said.

He specifically cited Iraq and Afghanistan.

Perhaps on the 700th anniversary of Jamestown, we will also witness the first celebrations of a peaceful, Democratic Iraq.

The World Craves Cheney's Leadership

Do you live in Europe or another overseas country? Crazy about Cheney? Send us an email telling us what you admire about Dick Cheney.

Not long ago, British Prime minister Tony Blair was considered one of the most popular politicians anywhere. And he seemed to have the courage to match his popularity, helping the US to free Iraq. But somewhere along the way, he lost his nerve. When British soldiers were captured by the Iranians, there was no threat of nuclear warfare, no 48 hour deadline for the President of Iran to leave the country. Instead, all Tony Blair had to offer was Jimmy Carter-style "negotiations". Is it any wonder that just a few weeks later, he is going to resign?.

These are serious times, and the Brits are smart enough to see that. So are the French, apparently! More and more around the world, people are beginning to recognize that we need real leadership like Dick Cheney's.