Skip to main content

Senator John Kerry smacks down the Obama strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan...

I think he's still pissed that he didn't get to be Secretary of State:

Having just wrapped up his high-profile visit to Pakistan, Senator John Kerry (D - MA) pointed to growing turmoil in the South Asian nation, and slammed the Obama Administration for not having “an adequate policy or plan to deal with it.” According to Sen. Kerry, the “comprehensive new strategy” the administration presented last month “is not a real strategy.”

Sen. Kerry also cautioned the administration against talking about an “Af-Pak” policy. Though aimed at presenting the administration’s view that the two conflicts are inexorably linked through a unified US strategy, the senator says “it does a disservice to both countries and to the policy” and that the respective governments “don’t see the linkage.”


But, as much as I generally think he's a pompous ass, this time Kerry's right on the money.

Comments

Anonymous said…
He is right and he has also said that he is working with the Administration on this issue. He was not blasting President Obama. And, I have to disagree with you on the Senator's motives, I believe Senator Kerry realizes the situation in Pakistan is volitile recognizes the need to work together and with the Pakikstan government to resolve this situation. Senator Kerry has put aside petty differences a long time ago and has moved forward doing what is in the best interest of the US.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...