A Second Look Rotating Header Image

April 9th, 2009:

A Second Look: Rush Limbaugh Picks His GOP Favorites: Palin, Sanford

via Rush Limbaugh Picks His GOP Favorites: Palin, Sanford.

For Democrats, it doesn’t get much better than this: three of its favorite targets brought together during one Fox television segment.

During an interview Wednesday with Neil Cavuto, conservative radio king and

Governor Mark Sanford

Governor Mark Sanford

prime partisan target Rush Limbaugh was asked to name his favorite “up-and-coming

Republicans.” Limbaugh’s answer: two leading potential Republican presidential candidates in 2010 and also prime Democratic targets.

“I — I like the kind of things I am hearing out of Governor [Mark] Sanford from South Carolina,” Rush said. “I have always admired Governor [Sarah] Palin. I don’t think people have any idea what it’s like to walk in her shoes, after what she has been through with the media coverage. But she doesn’t back down.”

Presidential candidates in 2010? You mean 2012.

He likes the kind of things he hears from Governor Sanford. Sanford spoke today at Fort Mill, SC and held a Q&A session with Rotary members. (Here come the softballs) Here are some of the things that Rush likes to hear from Sanford:

Sanford spoke for about 20 minutes and took questions for nearly a half hour. Before taking questions, he laid out his position using a series of charts and graphs that he said illustrates South Carolina’s bleak financial situation. He said the state continues to rack up debt while trying to keep up with the cost of funding schools and paying retirement benefits to S.C. employees at a time when the state’s revenues are in steep decline.

Ooooooh! Charts and graphs! He should show on his graphs how the state’s revenues are in sharp decline. Republicans have never met a tax cut they didn’t like – then complain as if shocked when the revenues decline! Is Sanford really that thick, or is he playing the populace for fools?

Using the stimulus money to pay the bills instead of reducing debt and spending just defers the problem, the governor said.

Two things. Firstly, paying the bills as they come in is the same thing as reducing debt. If you do nothing, debt accumulates. If you pay down debt, then more bills arrive there is stability of a sort that’s difficult to track. But if you pay bills as they come then the debt stabilizes at a known amount.

The second thing is every dollar invested in early education comes back at rates as high as $17 per every $1. If the Governor of South Carolina handed me a dollar and for every dollar he handed me I gave him back a five or a ten, would that not be a great way to invest the state’s money?

Wait a minute! The questions pitched at Sanford may not be so soft after all.

One terse question came from Guynn Savage, a local real estate consultant and former Fort Mill Town Council member. She noted that Fort Mill’s growth and prosperity were a product of having the highest-rated schools in the state and wondered what would happen “if we don’t take [the stimulus] money and invest it in the education of our children and bring jobs to South Carolina. I would like to keep them here.”

Sanford said, “I hear where you’re coming from,” he replied “but I don’t think these stimulus checks are the key to South Carolina’s recovery.”

In other words: More money isn’t the answer to our money problems.

Rush Limbaugh likes this stupid crap he hears from Governor Sanford.

Share

A Second Look: Taliban Using U.S. Firms to Host Web Sites – washingtonpost.com

via Taliban Using U.S. Firms to Host Web Sites – washingtonpost.com.

On March 25, a Taliban Web site claiming to be the voice of the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan” boasted of a deadly new attack on coalition forces in that country. Four soldiers were killed in an ambush, the site claimed, and the “mujahideen took the weapons and ammunition as booty.”

Taliban

Most remarkable about the message was how it was delivered. The words were the Taliban’s, but they were flashed around the globe by an American-owned firm located in a leafy corner of downtown Houston.

The Texas company, a Web-hosting outfit called ThePlanet, says it simply rented cyberspace to the group and had no clue about its Taliban connections. For more than a year, the militant group used the site to rally its followers and keep a running tally of suicide bombings, rocket attacks and raids against U.S. and allied troops. The cost of the service: roughly $70 a month, payable by credit card.

The Taliban’s account was pulled last week when a blogger noticed the connection and called attention to it…

I knew bloggers were good for something!

This activity does not surprise anyone, right? I  mean, we have given the Bush, and now Obama, White House more power than they deserve to eavesdrop, record, and store all our internet and telephone traffic without warrants and they still let the Taliban operate a web site untouched for years. When the “Web-hosting outfit called ThePlanet” pulled the web site, it opened again soon after.

The government says to leave them running.

Militants’ use of U.S. Web hosts has sparked occasional spats between the United States and its allies, as well as endless debates over whether it is better to shut down the Web sites when they’re discovered or to let them continue to operate. By allowing them to remain online, intelligence analysts can sometimes discover clues about the leadership and structure of terrorist groups, some analysts say.

I know this is full of weasel words, but it sort of makes some kind of sense. I don’t really know what intelligence value they get from reading about the baseless bragging, exaggerations and propaganda of the Taliban. Which is better, letting the Taliban rent cyberspace right here in the U.S. in order to keep track of them and keeping our enemies closer, or shutting down these sites every time they pop up to stop their hate spewing and propaganda?

“You can learn a lot from the enemy by watching them chat online,” said Martin Libicki, a senior policy analyst at the Rand Corp., a nonprofit research organization. Libicki said the bloggers rarely spill secrets, and most are “probably using this more for public affairs rather than recruitment.”

“Public affairs,” in many cases, means blatantly anti-Western invective and propaganda.

For instance, the Afghan group that rented Web space from ThePlanet offered daily updates on skirmishes between Taliban fighters and U.S. “invaders” and Afghan “puppet army” troops. The Web site, http://www.alemarah1.com, frequently claimed that the group’s forces had killed coalition troops and even destroyed warplanes and tanks — accounts that bear little resemblance to coalition field reports on those dates.

I vote we shut them down – stomp them and ground them beneath our feet like bugs. During World War II what would we have done to with Nazi propaganda if it popped up in a newspaper or on the radio? We would have jumped on it with both feet and the host would have been jerked out into the street and shot.

Well, maybe not shot, since Americans have rights and all. But my point is, if we are going to fight these guys, let’s fight them. Is there not value in tracking down these sites and killing them? I just don’t see how much real intelligence is being gathered from letting them continue.

Share
You are protected by wp-dephorm: