Petraeus may be a soldier-scholar, but he has always responded to the call of duty. If he indeed becomes the victorious mastermind behind America’s two longest wars, and his countrymen told him they need him to lead the nation as president, it would be hard for him to turn a deaf ear to the call.

via David Petraeus for president in 2012? / The Christian Science Monitor – CSMonitor.com.

This is pretty convincing argument that fits right in line with the Generals’ personality.

“Fight? Against that? No! We will run. And we will live.”

“Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you’ll live… at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin’ to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take… OUR FREEDOM!”  ~William Wallace, Braveheart.

Oh but were that it was so William.  You see, with the advent of taxes they CAN take your freedom by sucking the very marrow out of your labor and thus you live on, bleeding by a thousand cuts, but alive.  The lesson?  Be careful for what you wish for, cuz some politician will make you pay for it.

Happy Freaking Tax Day,

UK

‘Canada is now a land that prosecutes comedians for their jokes.’

via True North strong not free – Mark Steyn, Opinion – Macleans.ca.

This is a great article!  If you want to imagine what it is like to live in Western society with a growing limit on free speech then look no further then to Canada.

It makes me wonder if the reason so many Canadian comics migrate down here to work is that not only is there more opportunity for exposure but also that you don’t end up on some prosecutors list for subversion or whatever they call it.

The most juicy part of this story for me was the 26 year old Conflict Studies and Human Rights college major who was protesting (read as: rioting) before the speech by Ann Coulter.  Oh the irony!  I love it.

“It therefore seemed only logical that the thoroughgoing rejection of the Right was pretty much the same thing as an endorsement of the ideas and policies of the anti-Right. After all, liberals had had to concede as much when things had gone against them, hadn’t they?” John Podhoretz

via The Purposes of Political Combat.

This is great article that actually analyzes Obama’s thought process and by extentsion liberal thinking.  It presents a logical argument without vitriol and I can appreciate that.

~UK

“Five hundred years ago, there weren’t rich countries in the world. There are rich countries now because part of the world is following basically libertarian rules: private property, free markets, individualism. ” David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute

via RealClearPolitics – What Am I?.

Great article on defining Libertarianism vs Liberal & Conservative by John Stossel.  Short, informative, historical and relevant.

“There are not going to be IRS agents having discussions with the American people about the intimate details of their health insurance,” ~ IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman

via IRS could tap refunds for health insurance penalties | Reuters.

I don’t see why not, if they call you in for an audit then they pretty much have carte blanche to ask about every penny you earn, how you earn it, who paid it to you, where you store it and how much of it you still have.  They have their own IRS courts where you are guilty until proven innocent for crying out loud.  And as far as I can tell there is no real oversight of the IRS.  I surmise that is because that might expose politicians who use it as a way to punish and intimidate others.  It is just a short skip and a jump to inquiring about the ‘intimate details’ of your health care.   Besides, in 6 months to 3 years will you remember the quote above from the current IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman?

Yeah, they don’t thinks so either.
~UK

PS: Also note from the quote above that Shulman said “…intimate details of your health insurance”, he didn’t say anthing about your health care, health status, or health habits.

Women march topless in Portland without incident

http://www.pressherald.com/news/Women-march-topless-in-Portland-without-incident.html

Four female astronauts rendezvous 50 years after first woman in space

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/space/article7087600.ece

“Within those ranks, no one stands out like General David Petraeus, head of United States Central Command, leader of 230,000 troops and commander of United States forces in two wars. Having masterminded the Iraq surge, the stunning military gambit that seized victory from the jaws of defeat, he is now directing an equally daunting undertaking in Afghanistan.”

via David Petraeus for President: Run General, run – Telegraph.

This article from the UK Telegraph comes after a longer insider story  just came out from Vanity Fair last week (which I read).   It will be interesting to see how this is handled from both parties but really this is a Team Obama problem.

Now, Petraeus has iterated time and again that he’s not interested, but with this possibility hanging out there (put out there by a UK paper no less) I wonder how this will play out.  If Petraeus tells us that Obama is hyper-competitive then we can be sure to believe it, and Rahm will have to protect his boss (and his own hide)… so I will expect to see the knives come out and for Petraeus to be transferred or promoted out of his position and onto other things that are well away from the spot light.

The Kicker:  Politicians will have to wait for a pretext before they touch him as he is much to popular and much to smart to show his hand.  If he has any political ambitions he knows that he must play it close to the vest.  Ultimately, the bitter reality is that currently Petraeus is the bane of Al Qaeda and with this soon to be grass root pull into politics he will be an unwelcome party crasher (pun intended) and thus a bane unto politicians.  So now all of Al Qaeda in his sphere of influence will have added incentive to go after troops and create havoc to specifically make Petreus look bad and in turn politicians will have added incentive to take advantage of that.

Good luck General, Keep your Kevlar on.

Commonly we are told that the Left is defined by Marxist, Socialists and Communists while the Right is held by Dictators, Oligarchs, and Fascist.  But could it be more simplistic?  Could we simply define the Left as ‘More Government Needed’ and the Right as ‘Less Government Wanted’?  Dictators, Oligarchs, and Fascist are essentially control freaks who impose government for their own benefit which puts them in league with Communists who cannot survive in the real world without heavy handed bureaucracies.  Obviously the end goals of their governments are very different but the reality is the amount of imposed government restriction on personal and economic freedoms is similar.

~SK