Monday, July 6, 2009

Robert McNamara: June 9, 1916 - July 6, 2009





Robert S. McNamara died today at the age of 93. McNamara was the first non-Ford to ever be named president of the Ford Motor Company when he took the post in November of 1960. But he did not hold that post long. JFK offered McNamara his choice of heading treasury and defense and after some initial deliberation, McNamara accepted the role of Secretary of Defense.


McNamara served in the Air Force under Maj. Gen. Curtis LeMay, who headed the B-29 program in WWII. McNamara was integral in revising American bombing tactics, being a big proponent of the statistical analysis approach which led to the carpet bombing of numerous cities during the war. Basically, they moved from high-altitude precision bombing, to low-altitude, nighttime incendiary raids. The effects on Japanese cities, largely constructed of wood, were devastating. Estimates have Japanese casualties during LeMay's bombing campaign at over one million dead. As McNamara said in Errol Morris' superb, Oscar-winning documentary, "Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara," that bombing was far more deadly than either of the atomic bombs. In fact, McNamara relays LeMay telling them that if they lost, they would all be tried as war criminals. When asked by Morris, "The choice of incendiary bombs, where did that come from? McNamara answered:
I think the issue is not so much incendiary bombs. I think the issue is: in
order to win a war should you kill 100,000 people in one night, by firebombing
or any other way? LeMay's answer would be clearly "Yes."

"McNamara, do you mean to say that instead of killing 100,000, burning to
death 100,000 Japanese civilians in that one night, we should have burned to
death a lesser number or none? And then had our soldiers cross the beaches in
Tokyo and been slaughtered in the tens of thousands? Is that what you're
proposing? Is that moral? Is that wise?

"Why was it necessary to drop the nuclear bomb if LeMay was burning up
Japan? And he went on from Tokyo to firebomb other cities. 58% of Yokohama.
Yokohama is roughly the size of Cleveland. 58% of Cleveland destroyed. Tokyo is
roughly the size of New York. 51% percent of New York destroyed. 99% of the
equivalent of Chattanooga, which was Toyama. 40% of the equivalent of Los
Angeles, which was Nagoya. This was all done before the dropping of the nuclear
bomb, which by the way was dropped by LeMay's command.

Proportionality should be a guideline in war. Killing 50% to 90% of the
people of 67 Japanese cities and then bombing them with two nuclear bombs is not
proportional, in the minds of some people, to the objectives we were trying to
achieve.

I don't fault Truman for dropping the nuclear bomb. The U.S.—Japanese War
was one of the most brutal wars in all of human history ? kamikaze pilots,
suicide, unbelievable. What one can criticize is that the human race prior to
that time ? and today ? has not really grappled with what are, I'll call it,
"the rules of war." Was there a rule then that said you shouldn't bomb,
shouldn't kill, shouldn't burn to death 100,000 civilians in one night?

LeMay said, "If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war
criminals." And I think he's right. He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war
criminals. LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if
his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you
win?


McNamara is probably most associated with the Vietnam War, which was often referred to as "McNamara's War." By all accounts, while a proponent of the war to start with, McNamara eventually grew to realize the war was unwinnable. It was that change in thinking that led McNamara to fall out with then-President LBJ, leading to McNamara resigning or being asked to resign (depending on who you ask).


Regardless of your opinion on McNamara, and there ain't a soul who lived through the Sixties without an opinion of the man, his passing marks the end of a life that greatly affected the course of this country.

Does anyone want the GOP 2012 nomination? Anyone? Anyone...

















And so another 2012 contender falls by the wayside. Believe what you may, but we feel pretty sure that Sarah Palin's "unconventional" move Friday of resigning from office spells doom to her presidential aspirations. (Not to pundits: stupid is not "unconventional," you would have thought she had learned that from John McCain). And like John Ensign and Mark Sanford before her, yet another GOP 2012 hopeful refuses to answer the call (Yeah...we see you there, Mitt. Take a hint...they don't want you, brother).

Of course, now...everyone is asking why? Theories abound from scandal (she is under federal investigation, a claim the FBI has taken the unusual route of publicly denying), to preparation (she's going to go ahead and start cramming for the Presidency, as if being the Chief Executive of the United States is like a geography exam), to straight up CREAM (Wu-tang in the house!).

Let's address #1 first, according to the FBI, there is no ongoing federal investigation. But it's not like there needs to be. Palin is still under a state ethics investigation, which reportedly is costing an arm and a leg. Now...first off, by all accounts, these ethics complaints are merely chickens coming home to roost. All accounts of Palin the politician concern a woman who surrounds herself with unqualified sycophants and who spends more time paying people back for perceived slights, than moving any policy or agenda forward. I'm sure being under investigation sucks. But for someone who has thrown more than her fair share of public barbs and accusations, what the fuck does she expect? It's a big world there, Hockey Mom. Man up.

Second, the "prepping" theory. I completely think this is horseshit. If you have not yet read Todd Purdum's Vanity Fair article on Palin, "It Came from Wasilla," you should. Sorry...but Palin is just not interested in learning what she does not know. Simply look at her track since November. She eschewed sound advice from the majority of pundits following the November loss: hunker down, make some real achievements in Alaska, and bone up on some major policy issues. She did none of that. Why?

Because I think it is all about #3: CREAM. I think cash rules everything around Palin. Remember those ridiculous shopping bills when she accepted the nomination? I think that is the lady to the core. She wants to cash in and there will be no time like now. She has to strike while the iron is hot and it will only be hot so long as people think she is interested in being the star of the GOP. I believe Palin wants to be a star alright, but not a politician. I particularly love her ridiculous "noble" angle she seemed to be pushing in her resignation. How was doing this for the people of Alaska, not wanting to "milk" her status as a lame duck governor. It's like she went to the Mark Sanford school of hypocritical blindness. Where was that sanctimonious concern for Alaskans while she was cashing all those per diem checks even though she was staying at home instead of in the capital?

No...you won't see Sarah Palin in public office again. But you will see her all over FoxNews. You will see her speaking to high-dollar fundraisers. You will probably see her coming out with her own line of pumps and handbags. I think you will see Sarah Palin in just about any position she can make money on. I mean, any politician who will literally wrap themselves in the flag has no shame, do they?

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Happy 4th of July


To paraphrase the great movie character Clay Shaw/Bertrand from JFK: I wish to extend to each of you and your family's a very happy 4th of July. We're headed out of town for the 4th. We will be taking in the holiday with friends and fellowship down in Charleston. Be safe out there this weekend. Remember...if you're drivin' don't drink. And if you do, don't drive.

Because love means never having to say you're resigning...

You knew it would not take long before Sanford moved from being a scandal, to being a pop culture joke. First came the t-shirts (a pic of Sanford with the phrase "Wanna cross the Ultimate line" underneath). Now...we have the youtube parody: Mark Sanford the Movie.

I understand it's a real tear-jerker.

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Sanford begs "look into your heart..."









Is Mark Sanford about to be led into the woods to do his best Bernie Bernbaum impersonation, with his own fellow Republican constitutional officers playing the Tom Reagan ("reagan"...coincidence?) role?


The Luv Guv keeps making news and after another bizarre press event the other day (the AP interview Sanford gave), there is even more buzz around the Capital City today. And it ain't good for South Carolina's #1 star-crossed lover.


We've heard from some folks on the ground in Columbia and word has it that there is a phrase that is getting kicked around the Midlands Wet Sauna known as Columbia. That phrase is "Article Four, Section Twelve." What is that?



ARTICLE IV.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
SECTION 12. Disability of Governor.
(1) Whenever the Governor transmits
to the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written
declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the
Lieutenant Governor as acting Governor.

(2) Whenever a majority of the Attorney General, the Secretary of
State, the Comptroller General and the State Treasurer, or of such other body as
the General Assembly may provide, transmits to the President Pro Tempore of the
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives a written declaration
that the Governor is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,
the Lieutenant Governor shall forthwith assume the powers and duties of the
office as acting Governor.

Thereafter, if the Governor transmits to the President Pro Tempore of
the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written
declaration that no such inability exists he shall forthwith resume the powers
and duties of his office unless a majority of the above members or of such other
body, whichever the case may be, transmits within four days to the President Pro
Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their
written declaration that the Governor is unable to discharge the powers and
duties of his office. Thereupon, the General Assembly shall forthwith consider
and decide the issue, and if not in session it shall assemble within forty-eight
hours for the sole purpose of deciding such issue. If the General Assembly,
within twenty-one days, excluding Sundays, after the first day it meets to
decide the issue, determines by two-thirds vote of each House that the Governor
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Lieutenant
Governor shall continue to discharge the same as acting Governor; otherwise, the
Governor shall resume the powers and duties of his office. (1972 (57) 3171; 1973
(58) 48.)



As it has been pointed out to us, the State article from today that seemed to report the resignation crowd is close to having a majority in the State Senate. Add in the McMaster-Bauer deal that appears to have been struck regarding resignation and the 2010 Governor's race and the deck is starting to look pretty damn stacked against our very own Bob the Builder.


Personally, we don't think it would come to actual removal. If it gets to that point, you gotta believe they take this to Sanford and say, bubba...we got the votes. We can either do this the easy way or the hard way and anyone in his right mind would step down. But the more and more our Governor speaks publicly, I think that's the issue. People are wondering exactly where his mind is at.


Late update: and so it begins ...

Sometimes pictures are worth a thousand words...

From the Mighty Mark Quinn...this picture pretty much says it all, no? By the way, if you don't listen to South Carolina ETV's tv and radio show "The Big Picture" hosted by Quinn, you should. His show last week with Warthen was very good.

Hattip to Quinn.

When two elephants fight...















Two quote the old Setswana proverb: "When two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers." There's another maxim that holds true, when two self-righteous blowhards come to blows, it makes for one hell of a show. It looks like Bill Kristol and Steve Schmidt are determined to trample the grass and give us all a good show in the process.

To read a summary of their, now, public bloodfued, read here.

Couldn't happen to two better blokes.