Politics

Raj Bhakta

The Harvard Islamic Society, representing one of the world’s least tolerant religions, requests Harvard University, perhaps the most prestigious place of higher learning in the world, to ban men from the school gym at certain hours. The request was made so Muslim women might not be seen by a man as they exercise. Harvard University, wishing to demonstrate it tolerance, complies.
In a most stupendous feat of creative reasoning, Harvard University has banned half the student body, based solely on their gender, so as to accommodate a small minority of Muslim women who have had the tradition of cloaking themselves foisted upon them. A tradition, furthermore, that is fundamentally repressive to women, though the victims are sometimes unaware or have been convinced of the opposite.

Bravo Harvard! They can chalk up an A for rationalizing the insane. They get an F, however, in representing the core American values of justice and liberty. This is a consideration more important than the repressive nature of Islam. The United States and the West, though our relative preeminence is on the wane, remain the most successful societies on human record. This is a consequence of our Judeo-Christian heritage. Harvard was founded as a divinity school. The preachers produced by Harvard made it what it is today. Harvard and its distinguished alumni were at the vanguard of those in the North who stood up and declared slavery to be wrong. They did not blunder into perverse reasoning that we should “tolerate” the South’s long-standing “tradition” of human bondage. Harvard preachers and alumni were once taught to prize and, despite any opposition, promote a tradition in Western civilization of seeking justice for all.

Harvard claims a desire respect the Muslim tradition. Islamic tradition holds that a women’s skin should not be defiled by the gaze of the opposite sex. Muslims fear, based on their experience in a highly sexually repressed society, a situation which breeds all manners of perversion and neurosis, that mayhem and rape would occur were women not bundled up like medieval nuns. Were these women at home, I would understand their fears. Forget the men on the streets; they would be arrested by the religious police in many places.

America, thank God, unlike Saudi Arabia, is a civilized nation. Women are generally free from the fear of being groped or raped for wearing shorts and certainly don’t need to worry about being beaten by the religious police if they do chose to wear a T-shirt.
For a storied University of this great country to be pandering to the almost medieval repression and prejudice is flat out sickening. What is Harvard teaching America’s future elite? That we have no values of our own; that we should jettison our own traditions, irrespective of their nobility, if they offend anyone at all? By such logic, Harvard should ban beef so as not to offend Hindus, and pork for the sake of orthodox Jewish students. Certainly any accommodation of Christianity, the religion which provided Harvard University and this country with its foundation, would be out of the question.

Of all the crazy things I have heard, this is among the top. Harvard prides itself with having an open mind. In this case, it is so wide open that their brains have leaked out. The schools agenda, in this case, is being dictated to by a religion that bonds and enslaves women. Growing elements of Islam have declared death to our nation and way of life. Worst of all, Harvard has abandoned the praiseworthy values of freedom and tolerance they too profess and, at least, allegiance.

Harvard forced the resignation of Larry Summers when he commented that men and women think differently. That comment was apparently too outrageous to be tolerated by Harvard. Apparently direct, gender-based discrimination is not. The President of Harvard University, Ms. Drew Gilpin Faust, should resign.

Hugo Chavez, the Britney Spears of geopolitics, is at it again. To mask the increasingly desperate state of internal affairs, he fuels a rush of international media attention through a political stunt. Chavez threatens Colombia, a key US ally, with war. The world ignores that limp Venezuelan military does not have the capacity to attack Colombia in the first place, that Chavez furthermore has nothing to gain even if his defeat were not certain, and rewards him with the shower of attention he so desperately craves.

Our Colombian friends should simply call his bluff. The President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe, a proven and effective leader, should ask Chavez to invade or shut up. This may appear to be a trite way to deal with the prospect of war, but Venezuela has already effectively declared war on Colombia by sending some $300 million in aid to the FARC terrorists. The FARC, fueled with drug money, has waged a ruthless guerilla war against their democratic countrymen for over four decades. At least our Colombian allies will have the opportunity to punch Chavez in the mouth.

The Colombian army, equipped largely by the US, is a well-oiled fighting force that has in recent years been inflicting severe setbacks on the well-funded and equipped FARC guerilla terrorists. It would quickly make short work of Venezuela’s impotent ground forces.

Venezuela’s air force is marginally more formidable, however, with barely two dozen modern attack aircraft in service (10 F-16’s and 14 Russian Sukhoi’s); its capacity to project power is nevertheless limited. Furthermore, a delivery of Stinger missiles would greatly increase Colombia’s ability to neutralize the threat.

Mr. Chavez is causing real trouble by supporting of terrorists in Colombia. His power is, however, magnified by global attention. Just as our fascination with the bizarre and surreal actually fueled the Britney Spears phenomenon, so too does international reaction to her political equivalent.

We do not reward a puppy for soiling the rug with a biscuit, so why reward Senior Chavez with the attention he’s seeking?

In any event, a Venezuelan attack would be a strategic and tactical gift to Colombia and the United States. Chavez would be exposed as the threat to world peace. His military would be smashed if they actually succeeded in making it into Colombia. He would find himself a marginalized internationally and unpopular at home.

Though quite a joker, Mr. Chavez is not stupid. His most recent publicity stunt is designed to divert the attention of Venezuelans from the fact Chavez’s communist policies have been wrecking their economy to the point where basic foodstuffs are in short supply. (One wonders when people will learn that communism doesn’t work.)

Let’s not give him the attention Chavez lusts after. The United States should ignore him and not repeat the errors we made in turning Fidel Castro into a hero by dignifying him with our attention. He is, albeit a dangerous one, a Clown. Mongering a fundamentally flawed socioeconomic model, he will self-implode in his quest to be relevant.

Barack Obama will be President of the United States. Whether he succeeds now, as it appears he will, it matters not. Time is on the side of this remarkable man. The proof is in the pudding. One year ago, most regarded his campaign as an entertaining, if inspirational, sideshow to the battle-hardened Clinton juggernaut. Today, the vaunted Clinton war machine is seizing up. Stunned, like a deer in the headlights, by their inability to win the party faithful or to take down the freshman Senator from Illinois, the Clintons, formerly such prohibitive favorites, don’t know what hit them.

The truth is nothing really “hit” them. Like the landline in a wireless age, they are simply being overtaken by the broader forces of change. Barack Obama has channeled the emotional core of Ronald Reagan’s message of hope and optimism. He will win as a result. Despite a sustained barrage of doom and gloom, Americans are still the most hopeful and optimistic people on earth. We prefer to be guided by the hope of a brighter future than the fears of Armageddon. In this regard, Barack Obama has proven his mettle. Obama represents hope, and he is consequently the political locomotive of our time.

As much as I like John McCain, Republicans don’t have anyone remotely capable of beating Obama. So let’s not put our heads down, draw our swords and mount a cavalry charge the great iron horse. Rather, let us grasp this opportunity to get on board the Obama Express. Let us bring our message of individual responsibility and freedom, not government subsidies, as the best way to keep the America Dream alive.

It’s not as if our own Republican Party, despite our best hopes and protests, acts on our core values of a prudent foreign policy, responsible fiscal policy, and individual responsibility and freedom anymore. So what’s the point of loyalty? Loyalty in the face of consistent betrayal is called stupidity.

We’ve got a new political force in America. Barack Obama has taken American Dream as his platform. We believe in the American Dream. This is truly the platform of the Republican Party. We know that the America Dream is achieved through hard work and individual responsibility, not entitlement spending or corporate welfare of any kind. But Barack Obama has proven that he is a smart and thoughtful man, and I suspect he knows as much as well. Let’s give this man an opportunity. Let’s take all of the energy and recourses that we would pour into defeating an agent of government expansion and use it to becoming part of an integral component of Obama’s team. He is sincere about the American Dream. He wants the same things we want: upward mobility, a safe, strong prosperous America we can be proud of, affordable healthcare, and a better education system.

Barack Obama believes that government is responsible to achieve the goals. He’s right, government is responsible. Now we must hold our government responsible for handing power back to the American people where it rightfully resides.

I know the circumstances under which disgruntled and libertarian-minded Republicans should seriously consider a Democrat, but we’ve lost our own party, let’s see if we can gain a great American leader.
Raj Peter Bhakta is a successful entrepreneur, former contestant on the second season of the reality show The Apprentice. He won the Republican Party’s endorsement for the United States House of Representatives in Pennsylvania’s 13th congressional district, but lost to incumbent Democrat Allyson Schwartz.

About: At 31, Raj Peter Bhakta has gained experience as a historian, businessman, TV personality, and politician. His upbringing, as a first generation American in an entrepreneurial Indian-Irish family, engendered a great love of country and interest in business, while his schooling cultivated a commitment to the study and application of the lessons of history.

Consistent with his historical interests, Raj wrote a 150 page thesis on the Austro-Hungarian Empire during WWI.

Armed with a B.S. in Economics and a B.A. in History from Boston College, Raj gained exposure to Wall Street by working for the boutique M&A firm, Violy & Co.

The purge continues for Republicans. Kentucky Governor Ernie Fletcher was defeated in a landslide. He unprofessionally tried to appeal to Kentucky voters with a ploy to display the Ten Commandments in a last ditch effort. The good news for Republicans is that most of the easy targets have now been defeated by Democrats. The better news for Republicans is that Hillary Clinton is still in the lead for the Democrat nomination.

Democrats are even dismissing Bill Clinton’s best attempts to defend his wife. Time will tell if Democrat voters rally around the Clintons or start to seriously question her electability. Barack Obama has taken the gloves off of his “positive” campaign and is fighting like a normal politician. He finally recognized that being nice does not get one very far in a campaign against colleagues. Maybe he finally realized that unlike the Republican Party, it is hard to remember a Democrat who got a second chance to run for the presidency.

Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers have dropped some and her performance in the last debate was highly suspect. She clearly does not think well on her feet. It is hard to imagine that she could outperform Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney in a debate. Clinton is much more comfortable talking to preselected audiences that do not challenge her. She is comfortable with a script. She is well rehearsed. She has an awkward laugh at inappropriate times. She has a famous last name. Does this sound familiar? Do not blink, but she reminds me of none other than George W. Bush.

Bush and Clinton both have Ivy League educations but present themselves like graduates who bought degrees instead of earned them. It is as if they did not learn much from the best institutions in the world. Of course, the smartest candidate does not always win. On the other hand, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama sound and act like two people who earned and benefited from their respective Harvard educations. And after eight years of war and homeland security, America is clamoring for a highly intelligent leader with a more expansive vision of our greatness. Next year’s presidential election may be the best chance for the smart candidate.

GSBJ

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Louisiana has a new governor after Bobby Jindal won Louisiana’s “jungle primary” outright. A jungle primary is a non-partisan primary in which all candidates for office run in the same primary regardless of party. Jindal won an estimated 53% of the total vote, thus avoiding a December runoff.

Jindal’s victory is significant for Louisianans, Republicans, and Americans of Indian descent. It is inspiring and a wonderful reinforcement of the American dream. At 36 years old, Jindal could have two terms in the governor’s office, and one term in the U.S. Senate or one term in the White House before he turns 50. Not a bad possibility, indeed.

Jindal offers hope to a state that needs it. On his campaign website, he offered the slogan, “A Fresh Start for Louisiana.” This is a great slogan because it creates a vision for the state. One trait of a good leader is inspiring a shared vision and acting in various roles to execute that vision. Voters responded to Jindal’s simple message that offers hope to those recovering from hurricane damage, and those yearning for ethical leadership, better education, and a better local economy.

The excitement that surrounds Jindal comes from his past record of providing solutions and from a belief that he will be able to ignite positive change on a range of issues. This, unfortunately, is lacking in the current presidential campaign. What is the shared vision being offered by Clinton, Obama, Giuliani, Thompson, or Romney? Is it not clear at this point. All of these candidates should be able to inspire a vision but instead we keep hearing the same recycled answers at debates. Either a candidate wants non-interventionist foreign policy, protectionist trade policies, and more domestic programs or a candidate wants tough interventionist foreign policy, more trade, and less domestic spending. That is the vision our candidates are offering. Hopefully this will change as we near the first primaries and caucuses.

George Bush long ago ceased to offer any new ideas and turned into a one issue president- preventing any further attacks on Americans. An extraordinarily important issue on which he has succeeded, but it is now time for the most powerful nation on earth to expand its horizons and inspire the rest of the world again. The lack of an incumbent has affected the longest campaign ever- it has been predictable and a little boring. Jindal’s election victory at least added a little excitement and inspiration for voters.

GSBJ

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

In a bizarre turn last night Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama all waffled on previous declarations to bring the troops home now. When asked directly at the Democrat debate last night, none of three would commit to having all combat troops removed by 2013. 2013! These are the same candidates who said the Bush tricked them and the country into war or that we should never have entered. Suddenly now they do not want to leave? I am confused.

I am not confused about the low approval ratings for the President and the Congress though. Americans want illegal immigration stopped or war to end, or perhaps both. Neither party’s leadership has delivered what its base wants.

—-

John McCain has revived his lagging campaign because of some recent successes in Iraq. He has long been a champion of a bigger footprint in Iraq to achieve victory. He still has little money and a decimated campaign staff. His positions on immigration and campaign-finance reform will not go away. McCain will not get back to the top tier but his principled stand on Iraq has not gone unnoticed.

GSBJ

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Barack Obama and company have not proven capable of gaining on Hillary Clinton. Their only hope is that voters will reject her latest attempt at universal health care and that her sky-high negative ratings will increase. Clinton recently announced that she will push for universal health care.

She did learn something from her failed attempt at Hillary-Care early in her husband’s first term. Immediately she proclaimed that this version is not government-run health care. Unfortunately for her, there is no other way to describe a program whose initial cost estimate per year is $110 billion dollars. That amount is roughly the same size as the Departments of Education, Energy, and Veterans Affairs combined. If that is not government-run health care, how much more wealth needs to be redistributed for it to qualify as such?

Of the X million citizens without health care, how many are illegal immigrants? Do you know any illegal immigrants with health care? Unfortunately we cannot send ER bills to George Bush, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham.

Other than a vague vision, Clinton has offered few details. All that is apparent is that taxes will go up for many Americans and the costs will soar. As a Tennessean, I have seen and heard all I ever want to when it comes to government-run care; do a little reading into TennCare.

Health care is either inadequate or nonexistent for many Americans but this is not the federal government’s problem. Mitt Romney has an opportunity to seize the debate and offer his thoughts based on his experience in Massachusetts. If he is unable to explain federalism, federal mandates, and the difference between his plan and Hillary’s, Republicans are in deep trouble. Calling Mitt Romney……

John Edwards is pushing his version of universal health care. He seems to be the big loser on the Democrat side now that Hillary has announced her plan. Edwards cannot differentiate his platform even with his highest cost plan. The scariest part of Hillary-Care is the press coverage. Somehow her plan which costs $110 billion per year to Edwards’ $120 billion per year is viewed as moderate, reasoned, and from a voice of experience.

After George Bush, I guess Republicans deserve Hillary Clinton. Republicans will have to swallow many bitter pills over the next four or eight years, but Hillary-Care is not palatable for America.

GSBJ

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Democrat candidates for president took part in a debate in which the questions were asked in Spanish and the candidates wore special earpieces that translated the questions into English. Democrats are giddy and ready to oust more Republicans in next year’s elections, but this pandering to Hispanic voters is insulting and embarrassing. What is so wrong with our culture, history, and language that Democrats are willing to flush it away and appease a new immigrant group?

It is true that speaking two languages is extraordinarily beneficial in today’s global economy. Many in the U.S. would benefit from learning Spanish as we do more business with more countries in the Western Hemisphere. Learning English first and Spanish second is a great idea.

On the other hand, we do a lot of business with countries in Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia that do not speak Spanish. English is spoken by well over 1 billion people across the globe. Democrats are performing a disservice to America by participating in this type of debate.

Appeasement does not work with terrorists or totalitarians.  It will not work for immigrants who want to change our culture to suit them rather than changing themselves and assimilating to English speaking America.

I do not agree with Representative Tom Tancredo’s (R-Colorado) abrasive rhetoric and think he hurts the Republican Party significantly. The fact that he is running for president tells one how important Tom thinks Tom is. But he is right that elevating the Spanish language is divisive and unnecessary. He correctly points to Canada as an example of what happens when a country has two languages equally recognized.

Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for allowing a debate to happen in a Spanish language format. They are inciting an unnecessary culture war via appeasement.

—

Fred Thompson officially entered the Republican race and is only down one point according to a recent Rasmussen poll. Fred had a bumpy exploration period but none of that matters if he has a good kickoff tour as a candidate.

While Hillary Clinton holds a commanding lead in many states on the Democrat side, no Republican is distancing himself from the pack in many states. In fact, Republican candidates are doing well in their respective regions but the race is still wide open. Rudy Giuliani is strong in the Mid-Atlantic and Florida. Fred Thompson is strong in the South. Romney is strong in Western states with large Mormon populations, in Michigan where his dad served as governor, and in New England. Giuliani is also doing quite well in South Carolina but that may change as Fred Thompson gets his campaign rolling.

It remains to be seen what will happen to McCain supporters as McCain has stalled out at around 10 percent in most national polls. Eventually McCain, Huckabee, and other Republican voters will probably break for one of the top three candidates.

Romney has increased his support and visibility with robust personal financing and hard work in Iowa and New Hampshire. He may not win but his personality, intelligence, and work ethic indicate why he was a successful businessman and governor in Massachusetts.

Fred Thompson’s entrance is exciting and will breathe new life into the long march to January and February primaries. His ideas will hopefully bring out the best in Giuliani and Romney as well. For Republicans and political junkies, a good race just got better.

GSBJ

—

Rasmussen Poll- Republican Candidates 

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

President Bush marked the two year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina’s devastation of the Gulf Coast. Unfortunately for Bush, federal money and moral support have not quieted his critics much. New Orleans’ deficient levees were bound to fail at some point and that time occurred when President Bush, Governor Kathleen Blanco, and Mayor Ray Nagin were in power. Hurricane Katrina punished Bush and Blanco severely. President Bush is a lame duck with a low approval rating. Governor Blanco announced that she is not running for reelection. Mayor Nagin survived but is not thriving.

Out of the mess in Louisiana some good is emerging. Some of the worst areas of the city were damaged beyond repair and have been razed. An opportunity exists to abandon parts of the city that should not be rebuilt based on their location below sea level. Greater opportunity exists to rebuild smarter with mixed income neighborhoods instead of row after row of dilapidated and crime ridden neighborhoods. Better still would be to rebuild neighborhoods in Baton Rouge and Memphis and other cities that are less susceptible to natural disasters.

On the political front, consensus is building around Louisiana gubernatorial candidate and U.S. Representative Bobby Jindal (R). Jindal may be the lone bright spot for the Republican Party in 2007 or 2008. He has high name recognition after barely losing the governor’s race in 2003 and is widely popular across the state. His campaign is centered on traditional Republican principles of fiscal responsibility, crime reduction, and increasing economic development. Additionally, he has served as secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals and as president of the University of Louisiana System. These positions lend him great experience and credibility for two issues that are usually Democrat strengths, education and health care. Finally, he is proposing sound ethics reforms that have a better chance of being implemented if he is elected.

Jindal could assume the governor’s office not only as the first of Indian descent, but also as the rare executive with a broad mandate from Democrats and Republicans alike. Years of corruption and the perception of corruption have hindered the state of Louisiana. Jindal’s experience, competence, values, and intelligence make him the ideal politician to turn things around and lead post-Katrina.

And a term or two in the Louisiana governor’s mansion, if handled as expected, position him as the most attractive Republican candidate for the presidency in 2012 or 2016. The Kingfish would be jealous because the crown lays even heavier on the Louisiana governor’s chair.

GSBJ

—

Bobby Jindal for Governor

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Karl Rove appeared with David Gregory, in for Tim Russert, on Meet the Press yesterday. This was not the first time they shared a stage together. Gregory grilled Rove on polls demonstrating Republicans’ unpopular ratings. Gregory wanted Rove to explore and take responsibility for the party’s demise. Rove sidestepped the suggestion and offered forward looking statements. During his tenure, Rove was a lightning rod for criticism but rarely ever gave interviews or admitted defeat.

Rove was referred to as “Bush’s Brain,” “Boy Genius,” and as “The Architect” for helping win elections in 2000, 2002, and 2004. No matter what his nickname, liberals have longed disdained Rove’s penchant for winning. His calm demeanor and positive outlook further bother his critics who want him to apologize for his tactics and appease them. Rove has neither apologized nor has he strayed from his lifelong commitment of helping Republicans get elected to higher office.

Power swings back and forth in Washington, D.C. between Republicans and Democrats. Rove understood how to slow that shift of power back to Democrats and extended Bush’s influence with the 2002 midterm election gains. That extension of power allowed Bush to aggressively push and prolong his agenda—tax cuts, Medicare prescription drug plan, No Child Left Behind, war on terror, confirmation of two conservative Supreme Court justices, and trade agreements.

As time wore on, parts of this agenda and flimsy execution alienated many Republicans, many Independents, and most Democrats. Rove and company clearly believe that the Bush administration has tried and is trying to remain above partisan politics in order to do what is best for the country. This goal sounds lofty but many Americans are ready for a president who does not have a tin ear when it comes to public sentiment.

Not having Dick Cheney run for president and not replacing Cheney with someone younger to run after Bush have helped Republicans’ chances in 2008. With Bush’s approval rating in the drink and little hope of climbing near 50%, a Republican candidate can run on a platform of change as well.

Rove’s responses yesterday suggested that he truly believes a Republican could win the presidency in 2008. He said that the mood of the country was sour because of corruption, Iraq, and overspending. If those issues were minimized or eliminated, Republicans could hold their base and attract enough Independents to win.

I do not share Rove’s optimism about the Republican Party’s prospects going forward and he and the whole Bush team should have resigned after the 2004 elections. Rove knows how to win but he and other advisors miscalculated the mood of the country after reelection and subsequently lost the 2006 elections. Corruption was not something the White House could anticipate or stop, but the Bush agenda was tired and the administration did nothing to lead in a way that inspired confidence. Bush and Rove may claim to lead without polls, but at some point those bad poll numbers drastically affected Bush’s ability to do his job. Voters hammered the party in 2006 and have hastened the longest campaign season ever.

And since they did nothing to stop illegal immigration, one can only wonder if Rove and the Bush administration helped push Democrats, instead of Republicans, toward a permanent majority. I do not know why Rove is so hated by liberals. He may have been their best friend for the last three years.

Bush’s downward spiral gives 2008 Republican candidates a steep uphill battle. A challenge not as bad as Sisyphus’s, who was cursed to roll a boulder uphill throughout eternity, but perhaps as bad for the next election cycle.

GSBJ

—

Rove on Meet the Press

Video of Karl Rove Rapping

—

Copyright 2007 The Southern Ledger. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.