From Other Sites on the Line: 15 Feb 08

The Pakistani Spectator Interviews Radarsite


Note from Radarsite: Shortly after Radarsite posted The Pakistani Spectator's interview of our friend and fellow blogger Courtney M. aka Great Satan's Girlfriend, during which she kindly mentioned this author, I received the request for this interview. I am cross posting it here in full with comments because I believe that the questions they asked and the ideas brought forth in this dialogue are important. About halfway through the interview -- which, as you will see, consisted of some pretty tough questions, it occurred to me that -- whether I had intended it to be that way or not, in some small way I was speaking to Pakistan as an American, on behalf of America. Suddenly my answers to their very pertinent questions took on a much greater significance. I hope my answers reflect the sincere love I have for this great country of ours and that I did her justice.
rg

Would you please tell us something about you and your site?

I just turned 71 a couple of weeks ago, and I am currently enjoying one of the most interesting and rewarding periods of my life. I started Radarsite this past summer and had my first article published by Political Grind.Com in August. So I am actually pretty new to this whole world of blogging. Radarsite is my attempt to counter as much of the anti-Americanism that seems so pervasive in this world today as possible. I am an unapologetic patriot, and hopefully Radarsite conveys this sentiment through my own writings and those of my worthy contributors.

Do you feel that you continue to grow in your writing the longer you write? Why is that important to you?

A great question. Yes, I do feel I continue to grow, but not just in my writing, but in my views of this complicated world we are all living in. To me, it is extremely important that we continue to grow and if necessary change our opinions about things as we grow. One of the biggest mistakes which I think all of us can make, is to find yourself defending yesterday’s opinions even though they no longer hold water today. Or worse, defending your opinons against all challengers just because they are your opinions. I have a lot of opinions, but if my opinion on a certain subject proves to be wrong I’ll drop it like a hot potato.

I’m wondering what some of your memorable experiences are with blogging?

Well, this certainly has to be one of them. Actually being able to converse with someone in Pakistan, as we are doing right now, is nothing less than amazing to me. And I am immensely grateful that I have lived long enough to be able to be a part of this miracle in communication. Also, I’d have to say, it’s been thrilling for me to find out how many friends we actually have around this world. As Americans, we are often led to believe by our very own media that almost the whole world is unanimous in their hatred for us lately, whereas I have begun to see a different side to that coin. A very encouraging side. And you, if I may say so, are a part of that encouraging sign

What do you do in order to keep up your communication with other bloggers?

That is a full time job. But a pleasant one. First you must of course read their blogs. Then, if possible you must participate in the discussion. This of course means commenting on other’s work, or cross-posting articles, perhaps coming to their defense if need be — as they would come to yours. We also keep in touch with one another through our emails. I belong to a small group of conservative fellow bloggers who can communicate with each other in relative privacy, without worrying about the necessity of defending everything you’re saying. We are friends, we belong to a community. We care about each other and try to do our best to promote each other’s work — not for any personal gain, but because we sincerely believe in what we do and in the causes we advocate.

What do you think is the most exciting or most innovative use of technology in politics right now?

You can probably guess what my answer will be. It is this incredible democratic tool called the Internet, which, as you know, has proven to be such a thorn in the side of autocratic rulers and dictatorial regimes. We are the new frontier, me in my living room here in New England, USA, and you in your office (I presume) in Pakistan. And all the rest of us. The teenagers and the old folks like me. We are all the New Generation.

Do you think that these new technologies are effective in making people more responsive?

Obviously, I hope so. I believe they are becoming more and more effective, and more and more governments are beginning to recognize their inherent power, and the fact that they must deal with them, one way or another, like it or not. I believe that there are a great many of us around the world who, regardless of our differences, essentially want the same things for ourselves and our children. And, to me, democracy is the surest way to a better life. Not everyone feels this way of course, there are unfortunately those who at this very moment are being raised in an environment of hatred and racism and intolerance.You are dealing with some of these people there in Pakistan, and we are dealing with some of them here in America. Freedom, to some people, is a frightening and a threatening concept. These are the people I hope that we can reach.

What do you think sets Your site apart from others?

Another good question, and one that I’ve certainly considered. At the risk of sounding self-serving, I would have to say honesty and passion. That is something you can’t really fake, and I feel it is something that we, myself and my wonderful contributors, all bring to Radarsite. We believe that what we believe in is right, but even more importantly, we believe that we are being truthful, always being as truthful as humanly possible. And if we are proven wrong about something, then so be it. We will have no problems admitting it and moving on. We recently ran a rather scathing analysis of our own State Department, followed up by a second article by the contributing author, Shane Borgess, responding to arguments against his original piece from an ex-State Department employee. After talking it over with Shane, I wrote to the State Department and offered to post any response they might have. I explained to them that the most important thing of all to us was not being right, but getting it right. Especially when it’s about our own government in this time of troubles. In fact, in this particular case, we’d much rather be wrong. Who knows if they’ll respond. But the offer is there.

If you could choose one characteristic you have that brought you success in life, what would it be?

That’s easy. Learning — still learning — and learning to be scrupulously honest with myself, and accept responsibilities for my own actions and my own mistakes — and also for my own small triumphs.

What was the happiest and gloomiest moment of your life?

A tough question. I’ve had many of both. Thankfully, many more happy moments than gloomy ones. But, I would have to say that one of the gloomiest moments of my life was September 11, 2001. That day changed everything.

Do you think [the use of Twitter and other social networking tools by politicians] is bandwagon jumping or what?

I have no idea what that question means. Sorry.

If you could pick a travel destination, anywhere in the world, with no worries about how it’s paid for - what would your top 3 choices be?

Well, to be polite I should of course say Pakistan. But, I’ve never been to Rome. I’ve studied the Roman Empire for thirty years now, but I’ve never been to Rome. Yes, it would have to be Rome.

What is your favorite book and why?

Again, for anyone who reads a lot this is an almost impossible question. But I’ll try. For non-fiction, I would say Michael Grant for ancient history. For World War Two and Nazi Germany, Sir John Keegan and Professor Gerhard Weinberg — both of whom I’ve had the pleasure of corresponding with. And for more current topics, Mark Steyn, Victor Davis Hanson, and Bernard Lewis. Some of my favorite novelists would be Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Franz Kafka, and just for fun, John LeCarre, and perhaps, for the thrill of being transported back in time to a rowdy First Century Rome, that fragment of a novel, Petronius’ “Satyricon”.

What’s the first thing you notice about a person (whether you know them or not)?

Whether or not they are willing to be honest with themselves.

Is there anyone from your past that once told you you couldn’t write?

Ha! Now there’s a question. Just recently, a commenter wrote that I had “never written anything of value since I started posting.” Now that one’s pretty hard to beat.

How bloggers can benefit from blogs financially?

I have no idea.

Is it true that who has a successful blog has an awful lot of time on their hands?

Another great question. And the answer, amazingly, seems to be No. I am fortunate in that I am retired and I live alone, I can spend as much time as is necessary on my blog. But, to my continual amazement, some of those bloggers — a lot of them women, mothers with jobs and families — are more prolific than I could ever hope to be. I’m thinking now of my friends like Susan Duclos aka Spree of Wake Up America, Deb Hamilton of Right Truth, Miss Beth of Miss Beth’s Victory Dance, Amy Proctor, Barb of Faultline — all of these women have families and kids and jobs, yet still manage to put out some of the most successful conservative blogs on the net. And I can’t forget to mention my good friend Courtney M. (Great Satan’s Girlfriend) who is probably indirectly responsible for this interview taking place, and who, among all of the other things she is doing, is attending college full time. And so many others, like my buddy and contributor Shane, who has a family and a demanding full time career. These people put me to shame. I am in constant awe of their capacity for work and their creativity. And, of course, with any list like this, you live in fear of forgetting someone whom you truly respect and admire, as I’m sure I’ve done here. There are just too many to mention.

What are your thoughts on corporate blogs and what do you think the biggest advantages and disadvantages are?

I have no thoughts on corporate blogs. Sorry.

What role can bloggers of the world play to make this world more friendlier and less hostile?

We’re doing it right now, aren’t we? And I thank you for this opportunity.

Who are your top five favourite bloggers?

I think I just mentioned some of them. However, there’s also Snooper and Ben and Dean and Charlie and Hawk and Len and Robert N. and Norman and Helena — should I go on?

Is there one observation or column or post that has gotten the most powerful reaction from people?

Yes. This one is easy to answer. Although I’ve written many pieces critical of many different things, feminists, liberals, jihadists, Mexican-Americans — even the Queen of England, I have never received as much hate mail and personal attacks (like that one I mentioned above about my writing abilities) as I received for an article I wrote in unabashed praise of America, called “A Brief Message to America”. Earlier that week I had written what I thought was a somewhat controversial article about the Jews and anti-semitism, which I was sure would generate a lot of nasty responses — although it actually received none. But that small patriotic piece about America caused a major uproar of reaction. It made some people “sick”, some even found it “disgusting”. I was accused of being either a phony or a fool. In fact, I received such a surprising amount of passionate responses that I ended up writing another article about these reactions.
Surprisingly, the subject of patriotism in America it seems is more contentious and inflammatory than the subject of anti-semitism or Islam. To me, that was an eye-opener. Interestingly, almost all of the really hateful responses came from within the United States itself, and some of the most heartening support for America came from overseas.
This is how conflicted we are as a country. We are conflicted in much the same way as many other countries of the world are conflicted right now. And as Pakistan itself is certainly an example. I believe that we — the entire world — are in the midst of an “axial age” — a time of great decisions and of great consequences. And in some ways, I believe that our internal struggles have much more in common than one might think.

What is your perception about Pakistan and its people?

In a word — scary. Probably the same answer that a lot of Pakistanis would give about their perception of America.
We are both being torn apart by our internal struggles to come to terms with diametrically opposed ideologies, for which there seems to be less and less common ground for compromise. And — what makes this so particularly scary to so many people, is of course that we are both nuclear powers. We, both Pakistan and the United States, have the ability to wreak awesome devastation on mankind. And we are both in political and ideological turmoil right now. Now, that is scary.

Have you ever become stunned by the uniqueness of any blogger?

Another easy one. Yes, and you just recently interviewed her. Courtney M. (GSG) is absolutely unique and stunning. And good for you for noticing.

What is the most striking difference between a developed country and a developing country?

That’s a hard question. And it is a question that is at the very heart of so much of our present global unrest. A ‘developed’ country could arguably be described as a successful country. Therefore it becomes easy for that country to see the proper road to success for all other countries as being that same road which they themselves took, with such fortunate consequences — ‘This worked for me, so therefore it must work for you’. I think we’ve been humbled a bit recently by that good-hearted but somewhat myopic vision. But, I think we are still learning.
People of the world must in the end find their own way, we in America can lead by example, but we cannot dictate. Perhaps I am truly a hopeless patriot, but I honestly believe, in the depths of my soul that we are indeed a good country who tries very hard to do the right thing. Most of the time, I believe we have done the right thing. Even those times in our history for which we have taken the most criticism, from both within and without our own country. I do not believe that we are a selfish, self-centered Imperialist power just out to increase our own magnificence. I believe that we are trying to help the world change for the better. As you well know, these particular beliefs are not very popular in a lot of places both here and abroad these days. But that doesn’t change their inherent truth.

What is the future of blogging?

Again, I have no idea. We all hope that the future is bright and that our efforts will eventually make a difference. But our governments are having a tough time coming to grips with this latest threat to their autonomy. We’ll just have to see how it plays out.

You have also got a blogging life, how has it directly affected both your personal and professional life?

Radarsite and the people whom I have met through this blogosphere have become both my new personal and my new professional life. And I love it. Where else would I be talking with you right now?

What are your future plans?

To live long enough to see the world turn away from intolerance and hatred, and for people to begin taking pride in themselves again. To see people really start becoming honest with themselves, and giving up that all-too-easy and shallow comfort of the Victim’s Role. This world has been torn asunder too many times by the self-righteous destructive rage of “belligerent victims”. We must all start to grow up and accept responsibilty for our circumstances in this life and quit looking for scapegoats. Every one of us has the power to achieve some measure of inner peace and contentment. We just have start using this awesome power. Countries have to start using this power

Any Message you want to give to the readers of The Pakistani Spectator?

Yes. I want to say hello. I want to get to know you better, and for you to get to know us better. I don’t want us to be ’scary’ to each other anymore. And I want you to somehow find your own way to peace and happiness. Our two countries need each other’s help, now more than ever. I hope that through dialogue such as this — which you so kindly initiated — we can become closer and more trusting of one another. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak with you.
----------------------------------------------------------------
3 Responses »

Faultline USA on February 15th, 2008 :

This is an excellent interview with my good friend, Roger Gardner, of Radarsite. Roger is truly an amazing blogger who has made an important mark in the conservative blogosphere in a very short time. His eloquence, passion, and intellectual grasp of the issues are evident in all of his posts. There’s no doubt that at the ripe age of 71, Roger is a rising star and proof positive that age is no barrier in this brave new frontier of blogging!

Susan Duclos on February 15th, 2008 :

Wonderful interview with Roger. His passion comes out when he writes as does his love for America. It is real, it is true and it is what every citizen of every country should be able to feel. Pride in their country.

Snooper on February 15th, 2008 :

Roger, Roger, Roger! Roger has the ability to assess the many issues and situations with a keen perspective that very few can ever hope to achieve. He and I are from The Old School where personal and professional responsibility and accountability are The Norm, not The Exception. We are not victims and Roger’s outlook on the Victim Mentality is so true and it is missed by so many. The Victim Mentality is a terrible circumstance…something is always the fault of a something or a someone else…such shallowness is appallingly shocking.

As Roger mentioned, we are members of a tight group of Patriots and we love our country…we don’t always agree on the issues but this is what makes our interrelations so “unique”…something the world’s politicians have seemed to dismiss all together.

Kudos to our friend Roger of Radarsite and thanks goes out to this venue of reaching out.

Excellent interview Roger!

Thanks to The Pakastani Spectator

http://www.pakspectator.com/interview-with-blogger-roger-gardner/

From Other Sites on the Line

UPDATE: A friendly commenter pointed readers at Radarsite to Digger over at lifeafterjerusalem.blogspot.com, who offered a spirited attack on the Manuel Miranda memo, of which I recently commented in my post “Blistering Assessment of Foreign Service and State Department in Iraq Released”.

She likely hasn't read my post, but I find her thoughts interesting considering her background as a Foreign Service officer. She begins:

Miranda, for those who don't know, is Manuel Miranda, has been serving for the past year as the Director of the Office of Leglistative Statecraft in the Embassy in Baghdad. The memo in question was one he wrote to Ambassador Crocker. That is ended up in the press is of little surprise, since he is the same Manuel Miranda who gained access to the emails of Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee and leaked them to the Washington Times.

I suspect she believes some leaks are more important than others, which is why, rather than debate Mr. Miranda’s criticisms, she first works to undermine his credibility. I think it's very important that we hear about the work being done by our State Department in Iraq, especially considering that while the military has achieved so much, it seems our diplomatic corp has achieved so little. Here, with a chance to rebut Mr. Miranda Digger goes political, which might be symbolic of a problem when it comes to working alongside this administration to rebuild Iraq. The issue is not Mr. Miranda, it’s the competence of the State Department in Iraq.

The truth is that the State Department has far more experience than Miranda in managing multi-million dollar programs throughout the world. But Miranda seems to think highly-paid contractors rather than dedicated government servants who have experience throughout the world would be better at this mission. How offensive to those of us who have dedicated our lives to serving the country.

Manual Miranda's expertise is in management, borne of years of study and practice, and allows him to recognize particular problems when he sees them. He has outlined them specifically, Digger's educated answer is to attack the messenger with an ad hominem attack directed at his motives. Mr. Miranda never calls for highly paid contractors nor does he disparage the dedication of government servants - he merely bemoans a staffing system that offers a perpetual pool of inexperienced government servants unable to wield efficiently hundreds of millions of dollars in a constructive way.

She also insists on ignoring what Mr. Miranda writes in his introduction:

“Nothing in this assessment is intended to cast doubt on the diplomatic strengths of the Foreign Service in Iraq. Nothing in this assessment should be read as critical of the hundreds of civilian men and women, of all ages and backgrounds, who work in Iraq tirelessly and at great personal sacrifice of their careers and family lives, and the many at lower levels of internal management that support us. Although my assessment is limited to certain areas of expertise, it is applicable Embassy-wide.”

Mr. Miranda is not a hatchet man out to hurt people. He's criticizing the way things are being done.

I find it ironic that he is criticizing Foreign Service Officers for rotating out after a year when he is also leaving after a year.

I wish he had stayed as well, but I imagine that if Digger's wounded pride exemplifies the reaction of those he has to work with in Iraq, the environment must be a hostile one.

I seem to recall that it was the State Department that argued for a plan for rebuilding Iraq BEFORE we started the war, and the Secertary Rumsfeld dismissed us as feet draggers. We are now seeing the results of the lack of planning but it has somehow become the State Department's fault.

The charges brought by Miranda weren’t about pre-war planning, but about the lack of support for the GOI right now, which makes everything said after this red herring meaningless. If she wants to debate the canard that there was no plan for rebuilding Iraq considered before the war, then we can also address the State Department success at sabotaging the Iraqi National Congress or the many groups inside Iraq that sought to assist in the transfer of power from Saddam to the Iraqi people.

Again, if memory serves, we were told before this war that the U.S. was not in the business of "nation-building." Then we trumpeted the Iraqi election of a government of their own. And now the State Department is criticized for conducting the business of government-to-government relations rather than governing Iraq ourselves. The Department is not the Government of Iraq, nor should we be.

The State Department is criticized for NOT conducting the business of government to government relations, and no where does Miranda intimate that the State Department should be governing Iraq. His constructive criticism focuses on the inability of our State Department and our Foreign Service to assist the GOI through its birthing process. When we talk of the GOI not achieving the benchmarks set out, some of the responsibility for that falls on our diplomats failing to bring to this complex process some of the lessons we have learned through the vast experience Digger claims the State Department has. When Democratic leaders such as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid talk about the surge being a failure and political progress being negligible, it's the failures of the State Department they are keying in on in an attempt to shape an argument for abandoning Iraq.

Overall, I found the memo to be pompous, partisan and, as someone who has very good friends serving in Iraq and who will no doubt serve there myself in the not so distant future, deeply offensive. It is full of the same old rhetoric about how the military is Iraq is perfect and the State Department is really just an impediment to the progress the military could make. The truth is we are part of the same team. Even Defense Secretary Gates recognizes the need for both soft power and hard power. No one blames the pitcher for not being a catcher and everyone recognizes that a baseball team needs both.

Overall, I find your response reactive rather than thoughtful, ideological rather than substantive. Never did Mr. Miranda say the military in Iraq was perfect, nor did he say the State Department is just an impediment - rather he makes the point that the State Department is under-performing in a role that is crucial, and that we ought to give it what it needs while increasing oversight on its performance in Iraq. Throughout her response I see only hurt feelings and partisan sniping, when, given her background, one would expect detailed insights into what State does and the challenges it faces. It might be, as I said earlier, that Digger's response typifies some of what many believe contributes to the lack of focus that paralyze the department.

The State Department starts from a position of supporting ‘stability’ rather than insisting upon a level of civility and human rights from countries, hewing to values that America says it represents. For this reason it’s no surprise that State was against the invasion of Iraq. But once we went in, State has a responsibility to represent the administration’s objectives. There are examples of State working to undermine this administration rather than support it, and while some disagreement between bureaucracies is expected, the level of partisanship has escalated to an extent that many Americans wonder aloud if lives are being sacrificed while the government bickers with itself. That’s me saying that - not Mr. Miranda, who has offered only his educated opinion as to why the performance in Iraq of our dedicated government servants has been substandard thus far. There should be one thing we can both agree upon - Americans do not know enough about what our State Department is doing, and I, for one, believe that we need more Mirandas speaking aloud about things that ought not be State secrets.

Published by Reuters

Blips on the Screen: 13 Feb 08

Imam Soharwardy Drops Suit Against Ezra Levant

by Shane Borgess of Political Vindication
http://politicalvindication.com/

Hot Air has the details this morning about the Canadian Imam who initially lodged a complaint against Ezra Levant for printing the Danish cartoons in his magazine. He's now dropping the complaint, calling off the Canadian Human Rights Commission that was investigating the charge. He says:

"Over the two years that we have gone through the process, I understand that most Canadians see this as an issue of freedom of speech, that that principle is sacred and holy in our society," said Soharwardy, president of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada.

"I believe Canadian society is mature enough not to absorb the messages that the cartoons sent. Only a very small fraction of Canadian media decided to publish those cartoons."

Do you see that last line? That is Soharwardy dancing in the end zone. In his world, everyone must peg their freedoms to his sensitivities, and the fact that so many magazines were unwilling to risk their lives printing obnoxious, but ultimately harmless cartoons is a victory for Islam, and he's reminding us of that. His quip that he believes Canadians are mature enough not to absorb the messages the cartoons sent has nothing to do with why he sued Levant - Imam Soharwardy believed the cartoons were an offense against Mohammad. He believes that infidels must follow Quranic law just as Muslims do, and that means no pictures of Mohammed and certainly no insults against him either. We're all Muslims now.

Ezra Levant sees this for what it is, a public relations ploy by the Imam to appear magnanimous even as he backhands the country he has chosen to live in.

For two years, this corrupt, radical imam has hunted me using the resources of the taxpayers of Alberta for the "thought crime" of publishing a cartoon he didn't like. I had a preliminary discussion with my lawyer today. My aim is to file an abuse of process claim in the Court of Queen's Bench within the month. Whether or not I sue the commission itself, and its inquisitor Shirlene McGovern, is something I haven't discussed yet with my lawyers.

When the chief complainant in a two-year censorship exercise admits the whole thing was improper, an abuse of process suit is not just about recouping my losses. It's about holding a little fascist, and the government agency he hijacked, to account, and having grown-ups -- that is, real judges in real courts -- tell them that what they've been doing is morally and legally wrong.

Fight on, brother. To give an inch in this fight is to lose mile in the next.

Flashback: Outraged Canadian Asserts Bloody Right To Post Danish Cartoons

Blips on the Screen: 13 Feb 08

Revolution Muslim.Com: Any Questions?










Hat tip to Robert Nelson of Operation America Rising:
http://www.operationamericarising.com/index2.html

We in America are getting used to new and even more hateful outrages daily; but some are worse than others. This latest from the heart of New York City itself. If you still have any doubts about these "peaceful muslims" intentions here in the U.S. read on:

An ACT! for America supporter in New York recently came across a group of Muslims who were handing out flyers. She got in line to take one and alerted us to what was being distributed.

We direct you to www.revolutionmuslim.com.

On the home page you will see at the top right a drawing of an automatic weapon that appears to be an AK-47. Scroll down the home page and you will read the following:

“Our mission is to one day see the Muslims united under one Khalifah and under the commands of Allah (SWT).”

[This is part of the worldwide agenda of militant Islam: to establish sharia law and unite the “umma” – the Muslim world – under one ruler, the caliph. Implicit in this, but not stated, is the rule of Islam over all people, as this is the only path to world “peace.”]

“We pray that we may witness the dismantlement of western, secular dominance across the world as we hold it to be pagan and idolatrous in the majority of its presumptions. We seek a resurrection of the just example set forth by centuries of Islamic rule throughout the ages and we hold it to be self evident for the objective soul and mind that Allah is One and that Muhammad ibn Abdullah is His Prophet and that the religion offers the solution to all of the world’s ills and afflictions.”

[This is the call for the destruction of democratic governments and the establishment of the political rule of Islam.]

In the “Radical Review”, January 2008, Volume 1, we read:

“Rise up and ride the peak of Revolution, the time has come to triumph over those that wish to deceive…Rise Up Ya Muslimeen!”

It is important to emphasize that this is not an Islamic organization in the Middle East, but in New York City. And, if their “hit” counter is to be believed, over 769,000 people have visited their website.

To read the rest (if you can stomach it) go here:
www.revolutionmuslim.com.
To join the fight go here:
http://www.actforamerica.org/

Blips on the Screen: 12 Feb 08

The Incredible Upward Trajectory of Courtney M.














Hat tip to my good friend Deb Hamilton at Right Truth
http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2008/02/blogger-courtne.html

Great Satan's Girlfriend is famous!

Semi charmed, self absorbed, self centered, Machiavellian, manipulative, cruel, precious, conniving, deceitfully sweet, materialistic, narcissistic, jealous, hedonistic, stuck up, semi retarded, wishful, lazy, spoiled, high maintenance ne’er do well pixie with a penchant for immense libraries, depleting strategic cash reserves and wrecking cars every 9 months...

And that's just for starters --

For those of you out there who haven't yet had the pleasure, meet Great Satan's Girlfriend. One of the most exciting blogs you're going to find in this infinite, but all-too-often unremarkable blogosphere. Smart, sassy, incredibly well-informed and connected, GSG has created a whole new language for political bloggers, backed up by impeccable research and a fearless, piercing intellect. And -- she's sexy. Sounds like I'm a little biased, doesn't it? I'm not biased; I just love her. From that very first surprising paragraph, I was hopelessly smitten -- as I predict you will be too.

Recently CM was interviewd by a Pakistini journalist. Now, I don't know about you, but I don't know that many people who've been interviewed by Pakistani journalists lately. See what I mean?

Here's one of the first questions:

What do you think sets Your site apart from others?

My unbridled optimism. My passion armed to the teeth with facts, history and a wonderful fully crunk smartassticness that will probably be appreciated more if I could snag more readers.

Now, honestly, who else do you know who talks like this?

To check out this whole unique interview follow the link below. But first, I must make one disclaimer. I am, thankfully, no longer in one of those inexplicable "down" moods, but -- as you can probably tell by my writing -- am presently having the time of my life.
rg

http://www.pakspectator.com/interview-with-blogger-courtney-m/

And check out Great Satan's Girlfriend at:

http://greatsatansgirlfriend.blogspot.com/

Blips on the Screen: 11 Feb 08

McCain and Petraeus for Republican Ticket?

I mulled over this intriguing combination with a few other minds this past weekend. John McCain is within a heartbeat of becoming the de facto nominee. Originally, I suspected Mike Huckabee could very well be McCain's choice for running mate. A surefire way to garner votes from the religious right. But, that may not be what McCain is after. What if instead he bolsters his "we will not surrender" battle cry with a man of General Petraeus' reputation and stature at his side? A man ready to defend America's position, surge and theatre in the Middle East could very well be the man of McCain's hour. With a Democrat ring preparing for an unleashing of the hounds of MSM -- a brilliant strategy in the McCain camp would be to now begin the careful sowing of Vice Presidential seeds in the minds of Americans today. If surrender is truly not an option -- I can't imagine a more effective ticket.

-- Thanks to Helena Handbasket

From Other Sites on the Line

by Shane Borgess. Cross posted from Political Vindication
http://politicalvindication.com/?p=1769















Blistering Assessment of Foreign Service and State Department in Iraq Released

For those who have been willing to dig a little deeper than the simplistic reports our media feeds us about what is happening in Iraq, another bunker busting report surfaced recently offering a devastating critique of the civilian performance of our government there. Bill Gertz breaks the story and offers a link to the Departure Assessment of Embassy Baghdad by Manuel Miranda from the Legislative Office of Statecraft. Mr. Miranda has spent the last year in Baghdad working for the State Department as the Senior Adviser for Legislative Framework, among other things, and offers to Ambassador Ryan Crocker his professional opinion on the competence and ability of our Foreign Service and the State Department in Iraq. His general assessment begins thus:

After a year at the Embassy, it is my general assessment that the State Department and the Foreign Service is not competent to do the job that they have undertaken in Iraq. It is not that the men and women of the Foreign Service and other State Department bureaus are not intelligent and hard-working, it is simply that they are not equipped to handle the job that the State Department has undertaken. Apart from the remarkable achievements of Coalition forces in the pacification of Iraq, the few civilian accomplishments that we are presently lauding, including the debathification law and the staffing of PRT's are a thin reed. It was regrettable to see the President recently grab on to it.

The purpose of the Surge, now one year old, was to pacify Iraq to allow the GOI (Government of Iraq) to stand up. The State Department has not done its part coincident with the Commanding General's effort. This is not the fault of intelligent and hard working individuals skilled at the functions of the "normal embassy." The problem is institutional. The State Department bureacracy is not equipped to hand the urgency of American's Iraq investment in blood and taxpayer funds. You lack the "fierce urgency of now."

Foreign Service officers, with ludicrously little management experience by any standard other than your own, are not equipped to manage programs, hundred of million in funds, and expert human capital assets need to assist the Government of Iraq to stand up. It is apparent that, other than diplomacy, your only expertise is your own bureaucracy, which inherently makes State Department personnel unable to think outside the box or beyond the paths they have previously taken.

This is an entirely predictable reaction if anyone has any studied the work of our diplomacy department at all over the last 20 years. There's nothing I can add to what Mr. Miranda writes other than the empty feeling I get as a reward for assuming the worst and finding it reinforced here by a man who has the credibility to make the case. Everyone needs to read the assessment from front to back, I'll only offer lowlights here.

I would venture to say that if the management of the Embassy and the State Department's Iraq operation were judged by rules that govern business judgment and asset waste in the private sector, the delays, indecision, and reorganizations over the past year, would be considered willfully negligent if not criminal. In light of the nation's sacrifice, what we have seen this past year in the Embassy is incomprehensible.

Most emblematic of the State Department's weakness in basic management was its decision to dismantle and cannibalize the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office rather than to strenthen it and to fix its problems, among them inadequate management by Foreign Service officers placed at the helm. The fact that this massive reorganization was undertaken at the critical time that it did, and even while the Commanding General was requesting greater civilian support of the GOI has to join the list of fatal errors that we have made, this time under the State Department's ledger.

The Foreign Service gets grilled:

The Foreign Service's gripping culture of excused inaction is also framed and exacerbated by the paralyzing question of the "buy in" of Iraqi officials in some of the areas in which they most need, and that we can offer, assistance. The obvious reality that nothing can happen without Iraqi support is over-used as an excuse by bureaucrats who simply do not have the ability of conceiving or executing scenarios of institution-building assistance that does not comport with their past experience and over-cautios diplomatic instincts.

Simply put, Foreign Service are nto equipped to manage process-oriented assistance programs and yet we have put into their hands hundreds of millions of dollars. Any American graduate school study group could do better.

The excuse-making tendency of the Foreign Service is most evident in the areas of meeting Legislative Benchmarks and Rule of Law Objectives, which I address in Specific Assessments below.

In this excuse-making culture, the State Department has been an albatross around the neck of the Coalition command, whose leaders and personnel have a leadership profile radically opposite to the State Department's. Among other things, the State Department has failed to assist Coalition initiatives by delaying or failing to supply the civilian expertise needed in a thoughtful and timely manner and also delaying decisions on funding and staffing vital to GOI (and our) success.

Mr. Miranda goes on to talk about important information being withheld from the White House, the State Department and the Commanding General in Iraq for an assortment of reasons. He goes into detail about the staffing problems and deep dysfunction related to information transfer between outgoing and incoming staff. They're reinventing the wheel with every functionary swap (which happen often because of one year stints). His conclusion:

The State Department would do the nation a service if it admits that it is not equipped to the job you have undertaken. Our congress has an obligation to give you the oversight our national sacrifice demands. We are now living our latest error.

As a graduate of Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, I was proud last year when I swore in at the State Department. By the middle of 2007 that changed. I was ashamed for my country. I repeat, however, that my observations are not that you all are anything but wonderful Americans, it is that you are doing a job for which you are not prepared as a bureaucracy or as leaders.

The American and Iraqi people deserve better.

Am I the only one who senses that another great calamity faces America? I may be too pessimistic about the ability of our government to take seriously the danger we face, but the government that failed to protect its people in 9/11 seems to look a lot like the government that claims to be protecting us now. Whether we're relying on a border guard on the Canadian border or a airline check-in clerk at the airport, our first defense must be better than our last. President Bush, are you listening?

(Political Vindication!)