Bronze Star recipient Pete Hegseth, Executive Director and co-founder of Vets for Freedom joined me tonight, along with Bruce McQuain from QandO.
Vets for Freedom mission is to educate the American public about the importance of achieving success in these conflicts by applying our first-hand knowledge to issues of American strategy and tactics—namely “the surge” in Iraq. We support policymakers from both sides of the aisle who have stood behind our great generation of American warriors on the battlefield, and who have put long-term national security before short-term partisan political gain.
All of our interviews are also available for download at iTunes and Podcast Alley via the Pundit Review Radio Podcast.
What is Pundit Review Radio?
Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin and Gregg give voice to the work of the most influential leaders in the new media/citizen journalist revolution. Called “groundbreaking†by Talkers Magazine, this unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening from 7-10 pm EST on AM680 WRKO, Boston’s Talk Station.
Bruce McQuain from QandO joined us for another edition of Someone You Should Know, the untold, inspirations true stories of the men and women fighting for us around the world. The Someone You Should Know radio collaboration began as an extension of Matt Burden’s series at Blackfive. Thanks to Matt, Bruce is now on board and we are lucky to have him as part of the show.
From Bruce’s Project Hero series,
The story of Cpl. Dale A. Burger Jr is a story of duty, honor and sacrifice. A young leader so concerned with his men he refused to stay out of combat even though wounded, and ended up making the ultimate sacrifice in support of other Marines.
All of our interviews are also available for download at iTunes and Podcast Alley via the Pundit Review Radio Podcast.
What is Pundit Review Radio?
Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin and Gregg give voice to the work of the most influential leaders in the new media/citizen journalist revolution. Called “groundbreaking†by Talkers Magazine, this unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening from 7-10 pm EST on AM680 WRKO, Boston’s Talk Station.
Rowan Scarborough, national security correspondent for the Washington Examiner, and author of the excellent new book Sabotage: America’s Enemies Within the CIA joined us for a full hour tonight and we took some really good calls.
Using his first-rate sources in all levels of national security-from field officers to high-ranking analysts to former intelligence heads-bestselling author Rowan Scarborough reveals how CIA bureaucrats are undermining President Bush and the War on Terror through disinformation, incompetence and outright sabotage.
I read the book cover-to-cover and thought it was excellent. It provides insight into our surveillance capabilities, the infighting on important Senate committees and especially the turf war fought by elements within the CIA. Of particular interest to me was the Clinton’s treatment of the intelligence community while in office. As George Tenant said, the CIA was “in chapter 11” by the late 1990s. Hillary wants credit for The Clinton Years, she must also answer for them.
All of our interviews are also available for download at iTunes and Podcast Alley via the Pundit Review Radio Podcast.
What is Pundit Review Radio?
Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin and Gregg give voice to the work of the most influential leaders in the new media/citizen journalist revolution. Called “groundbreaking†by Talkers Magazine, this unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening from 7-10 pm EST on AM680 WRKO, Boston’s Talk Station.
I say well done to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. No, I’m not talking about today’s indefinite suspension and tough statement on the Michael Vick plea.
Your admitted conduct was not only illegal, but also cruel and reprehensible. Your team, the NFL, and NFL fans have all been hurt by your actions.
Your plea agreement and the plea agreements of your co-defendants also demonstrate your significant involvement in illegal gambling. Even if you personally did not place bets, as you contend, your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL Player Contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player.
I’m talking about the fact that he is married to Jane Skinner, the very attractive Fox News babe.
Haditha Marine Cleared
Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum is the third Haditha Marine cleared so far.
“What occurred in house 1 and house 2 are tragedies,†Lt. Col. Paul J. Ware wrote. “The photographs of the victims are heart wrenching, and the desire to explain this tragedy as criminal act and not the result of training and fighting an enemy that hides among innocents is great. However, in the end, my opinion is that there is insufficient evidence for trial. LCpl Tatum shot and killed people in houses 1 and 2, but the reason he did so was because of his training and the circumstances he was placed in, not to exact revenge and commit murder.â€
Curt at Flopping Aces has the report, and a flashback.
Speaking of flashback, here’s our interview with Darryl Sharratt, the father of exonerated Haditha Marine Justin Sharratt. He talked about the impact this has had on his family and the conduct of John Murtha, who is the Sharratt’s congressman. It took fifty-three attempts before Murtha returned his call.
Murtha recently crawled out from underneath his rock to blog at the Huffington Post saying the American people will not accept victory, or something.
The media is, what’s the word…IGNORING these exonerations with the same vigor and energy they trumpeted Murtha’s “massacre” charges. In fact, some in the media continue to refer to this episode as the “Haditha massacre”. This is something that infuriates Darryl Sharratt and who could blame him. Words have meaning and a massacre it was not.
Our friend and past guest on Pundit Review Radio Tom Blumer of Bizzyblog got in a little dust up with a certain NY Times Reporter this past week named David Cay Johnston who wrote a very questionable and suspect piece entitled: “Average Incomes Fell for Most of 2000-2005.” Our friend Tom looked a little deeper into the numbers and came up with a very different conclusion. Seems as though Mr. Johnston conveniently omitted some fairly significant pieces of information from his calculations.
It will take a few minutes to get through but is well worth it if you want to see why the mainstream media- who have gotten away with its distinct brand of agenda driven journalism for so long- loathes many in the New Media Blogsphere who meticulously check their work- and often expose their innacuracies and outright lies.
Writers at the Times and elsewhere could get away with fudging the numbers and skewing the data to advance their leftist political agenda, but subject matter experts like our friend Tom Blumer and Patrick Frey of Patterico’s Pontifications who has made a carreer out of forcing the LA Times to issue retractions have been very successful exposing their intellectual laziness, shoddy work, and biased coverage.
Tom has also informed me that he is trying to get the Times to issue another retraction/correction from the Public Editor and the Standards Editor demanding a correction to the Times’ six-month old claim, never retracted, that we were (and I suppose, since never retracted, still are) in a manufacturing recession which you can read here
The comment section is very interesting as well. Great job Tom. Way to go!
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — Hillary Clinton is pro-abortion and the only female candidate pursuing a bid for the White House in either party. If abortion advocates are correct, Clinton has the women’s vote locked up — yet a new poll shows that women don’t necessarily support her and that her pro-abortion views are a turnoff.
The respected Polling Company firm conducted a survey with 600 women voters of both parties from August 15-20.The poll revealed that Hillary’s positions on abortion were at odds with a majority of American women.
Some 64 percent of women voters would be less likely to vote for a presidential candidate who voted against the partial-birth abortion ban — a measure Clinton voted against on four occasions.
Sixty-eight percent of women voters are less likely to vote for a presidential candidate who supports taxpayer-funded abortion — something Hillary Clinton adamantly supports.
And 73 percent of those polled said they would be less likely to vote for a presidential candidate who voted against a law that would have made it a criminal act for an adult to take a girl younger than 18 years of age across state lines to get an abortion without her parents’ knowledge.
Clinton twice voted against a Congressional bill to do just that.
Although she is portrayed by the media sychophants as “mainstream” there is very little if anything “mainstream” about Hillary Clinton. She looks as though she will be the Democrat presidential nominee. In order for the GOP to leverage the “mainstream” vote (i.e. somebody representative of the majority of American voters) they will need to run a candidate who represents the core values and beliefs of “mainstream” voters. And this is why I have been arguing that if the Republicans run somebody who essentially shares Hillary’s extreme social positions that they will lose a huge opportunity to distinguish themselves and give voters (values voters) a reason to vote them. And values voters (i.e. Evangelical Christian Conservatives) are the heart and soul of the Republican Party. Rudy’s social positions are virtually identical to Hillary’s- way out of the mainstream and his recent opposition to partial birth abortion seems a tad disingenuous and self-serving. And so even though he may attract some potential Hillary voters who care more about national security than social issues such as abortion, preserving traditional marriage and the 2nd amendment, I believe that on balance Rudy (or Mitt for that matter who most don’t buy his recent conservative conversion) would lose significant support from values voters who would not vote for somebody as far out of the mainstream socially as Rudy.
Republicans already know what the recipe for success is in presidential elections. When across the board conservatives (pro-life, pro-family, pro-military, and pro-limited govt) run they win every time (unless they act like Democrats and raise taxes (Bush 41) or unless a third party candidate siphons votes from them (Perot in 92 and 96). Again, if Rudy or Mitt somehow ends up being the nominee (and I doubt either of them will by the way) but if they are, I would hold my nose and vote for them over the overt Marxist Hillary. But in the end, I still believe that there is nothing more than Hillary and the Dems would like to see more than a northeastern checkered pants Rockefeller RINO like Mitt or Rudy. They know that on election day, that they will end up doing what they could never do on their own- supress the vote of millions of values voters (yup- those evangelicals who represented almost 40% of Bush’s vote in 2004). Republicans can’t win without them. And if Republicans lose 20% of them- a very likely conservaitve scenario-on election day, this could very well hand the presidency to Hillary (and Bill).
Now if Hillary moderated her social positions especially on abortion, she would pose a significantly greater threat in my opinion which I think is why she will end up picking a more “centrist” Democrat like Warner or Bayh for VP. But in the end, voters vote for presidential candidates by and large so her VP choice will be of little importance. Since she is clearly outside the mainstream on virtually every issue (favors socialist healthcare, opposes school choice, opposes individual voluntary retirement accounts, opposes the Patriot Act, favors raising taxes, voted with the minority to appease her wingnut base for retreat and defeat in Iraq, supported McCain-Kennedy amnesty etc…) the Republicans in my humble opinion would be making a huge mistake not to run an across the board conservative. This is what the American voter time and time again has demonstrated a preference for. If the GOP is smart they will give the voters what they want. And clearly the voters are not very enthusiastic about the top 3 front-runners (Rudy, Mitt, or John). In the end I think that the GOP will nominate either Thompson, Huckabee, or Gingrich with perhaps Rudy or Condi as VP. And that would give them the best chance of maintaining the White House in 08- which I believe will happen.