About Me

Name: Josh Todd
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Blog Roll

 

Dishonesty About Oil

Posted by Josh Todd on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 10:27:10 PM
And yes, I am talking about Congressional Democrats and the small band of Republicans that joined them.
 
Congressional Democrats, such as Patrick Leahy, argued quite fervently last week in front of oil executives that supply and demand could not explain the spike in oil and gasoline prices. This was not the first time oil executives have been hauled before Congressional committees to explain the situation. Many Democrats have even proposed a "windfall profits tax" on record oil revenues.
 
At the same time, Congressional Democrats were urging President Bush, during his visit to Saudi Arabia, to pressure OPEC for increased oil production. Likewise, Democrats have proposed a measure that will release strategic oil reserves into the market.
 
So, in one breath, Democrats don't believe in the law of supply and demand. In the next breath, they demonstrate their understanding of the role of diminishing oil supplies and increasing demand in today's crisis.
 
I would call this hypocrisy, on the part of an entire political party, but it's more than that. This behavior is blatantly dishonest, political opportunism. It is part of a pattern wherein the party seeks a villain as a target for all its ire. Thus, the party with all of the intellectuals pushes an entirely emitonal, illogical position. Rather than addressing issues on economic merits, the Democrats have chosen to play a political head game with their voters.
 
Meanwhile, no steps have been taken that will increase oil supplies. Instead, they offer mandates designed to bring down demand.
 
Either Democrats understand supply and demand or they don't. I know they do, even if they won't admit it.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Memorial Day Weekend Cookout

Posted by Josh Todd on Sunday, May 25, 2008 7:34:59 PM
Yeah, I’ll take part in at least two cookouts, or “grill outs” if you insist. And yes, I’ll enjoy a rare day off during the week. However, I’ll do so with the shadow of five flags covering my guests and me.

I wrote the opening paragraph the way I did for a reason. Mack Thomas Owens wrote on National Review Online a piece critical of the cookout mentality Americans have taken toward Memorial Day weekend. To most it is simply a 3-day weekend with a convenient excuse to have a party. All of that is well and good, and he encourages Americans to enjoy themselves, but please don’t forget the fallen.

So, Owens begs the question: What will you do to remember our fallen soldiers?

As for me, I’ve already spoken of the five flags that will cast five heavy shadows over my guests. Each flag is a small memorial for a soldier who gave his life in Iraq during 2005.

That year I was the daytime intelligence analyst for a battalion fighting in Karbala and Anbar Provinces. I was often blamed for failing to foresee attacks and their resulting injuries and fatalities. Unfair as those sentiments may have been, I still resolved to honor those five men upon my return.

Those men are:

SSG Tommy Little. He was killed by what we called a pressure-plate IED, an improvised bomb that works like a mine, on a dirt road west of Iskandariyah in Babil Province. Tommy lived for a time, but eventually succumbed to his wounds.

SGT Travis Cooper. This young man was part of my battalion’s B-Battery, an outfit that was attached to another task force, but who was still part of the battalion. Travis was giving out food and candy to Iraqi children in the city of Mussayib, located between Iskandariyah and Karbala, when a suicide bomber killed him.

SGT Jacob Dones. Jacob was walking to a building at his firm base in the city of Hit when 60mm mortar shells began landing all around him. One round detonated and flung shrapnel into his head. He died at Camp Hit with a MEDEVAC chopper waiting to take him to a hospital. I had been working for a few weeks on trying to capture or kill the mortar team. With a little more information, caught up to them within days.

SPC Javier Villenueve. “Doc” was his platoon’s medic and was much loved. He was on a night patrol when a bomb detonated as part of an ambush. Doc was hit. That night I stayed in the office late and I went over to help carry Doc to the medical station. I watched doctors and medics operate on him. When he passed by, he appeared well enough to make it. The next morning I woke up only to see the camp flag at half-mast. That morning was Thanksgiving, and Doc had passed sometime after midnight.

CPL Greg Tull. Tull was another attachment to the battalion (much like me). The day after Thanksgiving 2005, and less than a week before our battalion began going home, Tull woke up during his sleep time to serve as the commander’s gunner on a patrol to show the relieving unit around town. Near the Hit City Hall, an IED detonated, wounding our battalion commander and his driver, taking off the foot of a Marine colonel, and killing Greg Tull. A few days before stepping on a helicopter to go home, the battalion held another memorial service.

So as I grill good food in the comfort of my backyard, in the warmth of the sun, and with the blessed presence of my friends and family, five flags will cast long shadows over the yard. We will see them and we will remember five brave men whose families cook out without them, hoping that they are in Heaven with our Father.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thoughts on the Menace of Iran

Posted by Josh Todd on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:26:09 PM
Admiral Michael Mullen claimed today that Iranian actions are jeopardizing any potential peace in Iraq. Any thought otherwise is both irresponsible and irrational.
 
In short, Iran has close ties to Shi'a Iraq--that is, the southern portions of the country--and they have used those ties to create mayhem for US troops attempting to create peace.
 
First and foremost is the political party once known as SCIRI, or the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, now the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. SCIRI, or SIIC if you prefer, was, and is, sponsored by Iran, originally as a Shi'ite opposition group during the Saddam Hussein regime.
 
SCIRI--again, a political party--has a militia, the Badr Org (known previously as the Badr Brigade and the Badr Corps). They are well-funded, also by Iran. Together, the groups promote Iranian interests in Iraq.
 
Likewise, there is the problem of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), an elite Iranian military outfit. The IRGC has mounted and support insurgent actions against US troops in Iraq for most of the war.
 
Additionally, Madhi Army leader Muqtada al-Sadr has visited Iran and received Iranian aid for insurgent operations in the past. Numerous Shi'a political leaders have visited Iran on diplomatic missions, including high government officials from Karbala Province.
 
Furthermore, Iranian intelligence operations have set up shop in certain protected areas in Iraq, including in the cities of Baghdad, Najaf, and Karbala. There they collect intelligence on US forces and assist other Iranian elements within the country.
 
Among the most dubious and well-known Iranian activities in Iraq involves the supply of the explosively formed projectile, or EFP. My unit, operating in an around Karbala Province, was among the first to be attacked with, and was among the first to find undetonated, EFP roadside bombs. (An EFP is a concave cylinder that, when detonated, creates a pointed shell capable piercing the thickest US armor.) These bombs have proven especially deadly to US forces.
 
Recently, the British-based International Institute for Strategic Studies released reporting indicating that the Iranian pursuit of nuclear weapons will likely spur an arms race in the region. Again, this is an indicator of the threat Iran poses not only to the United States but to its neighbors.
 
Iran seeks to expand its hegemony in the region. Currently the regime feels the pressure of a US presence on either side--a sandwich, if you will--in both Iraq and Afghanistan. While Iraq, if left to its own devices, would likely be Shi'a-ruled anyway, Iran still seeks to 1) ensure its influence in such a Shi'ite regime and 2) bring harm to its rival, the United States. Should weak or naive leaders in the US prevail, Iran will be allowed to do so unopposed.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Something About a Bed

Posted by Josh Todd on Monday, May 12, 2008 9:31:20 PM
I work for a credit union. Previously, I had worked for one of the three biggest banks in the country, and part of my duties involved investments. I was hired at the credit union for non-investment-related duties; however, a broker change precipitated my return to the role of the registered representative.
 
Part of my role is contacting the credit union's clients to see if they will remain loyal to the credit union or go with the old broker (improper, to be sure, as the old broker was supposed to leave the credit union's member-clients, but that's another story). So, I talk to about thirty people on a typical day. One fellow I spoke to was rather rude, I must say.
 
This gentleman (ahem!) told me that he was sick of the credit union bothering him with mailings and phone messages. He was staying with the other broker, he proclaimed, and that's why he never responded to any of our correspondence. Then he reiterated that he was sick and tired of being sick and tired about our attempts to contact him.
 
Well! He could have, say, responded long ago, which would have saved him a lot of grief.
 
Instead, he snapped at me, which, on this particular day, brought me great laughter. Why? Well, he was angered because he couldn't bring himself to reject us.
 
On a different note, voters are sick and tired of politicians spending their money, taxing them too much, and regulating them into a slothful state. Yet, they voted in the (unnamed) party that features these three acts as their chief vehicles for policy. I wrote here a few years ago about the popular bumper stickers that said, and now I name the party, "Had Enough? Vote Democratic." My response: Had enough? Vote for 'em and they'll give you more(of the same that the naughty GOP had given us)--more spending, more taxes, and more regulation.
 
Well, that particular party is planning budgets based on the assumption of expiring tax cuts--that is, a tax hike--proposing incredible amounts of spending, and vowing rigorous regulation of industries they deem bad. From environmental mandates to not letting frugal, productive (read: rich) people reap the fruits of their sacrifices, all must be made well in god-vernment's own image.
 
And so the people are mad. They were sick and tired of the GOP going against its word by, well, taxing, spending, and regulating them. So they voted in the Democrats who have and will, well, tax, spend, and regulate them to death. Angry at their taxing, spending, regulating party in power, the voters only say, "I'm mad as hell and that's why I haven't called you back."
 
Isn't there an old saying that says something about making your own bed and sleeping in it?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Mockery XVII: Advice

Posted by Josh Todd on Monday, May 05, 2008 9:33:34 PM
It was just before the first round of the Major League Baseball draft and the Reds needed to take a marquee player who would have to be ready within three years to contribute to the big club. Then-Reds GM Wayne Krivsky needed advice.

So, he sought out his favorite source for wisdom: the conductor of a local symphony orchestra. Given this man’s vast experience at making moving pieces work together, Wayne’s choice was easy.

Another story: A local man was looking to make final preparations for retirement. Not knowing where to turn, he simply thought of the obvious. He visited the city unemployment office and grabbed the familiar face he saw there so frequently. The man clearly planned ahead for his frequent job changes, that the choice was clear.

If all of this makes sense, then, let me tell you another story (this one true). Actor Tom Hanks has endorsed Barack Obama for President of the United States.

Like all informed, intelligent voters, I always look to my favorite actors for voting pointers. I mean, actors, well, they act. They know how to create a reality they want. And since most of them cling to some variation of an old ideology that promises a different reality—a heaven on earth, or a utopia—I figure they are the best source for this type of advice.

According to Tom, Obama is the best man for the job. Since actors—folks who earn a living playing in pretend realities—know so much about being president based on their regular experiences around pretend presidents, I trust his advice.

Source(s): http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=90143
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »