In an eighty-eight word passage of his Inaugural Address, President Barak Obama issued an elegant but forceful repudiation of the past eight years of George Bush’s aggressive and misguided foreign policy doctrine. Without mentioning the word “torture” Obama rubuked the Bush administration’s premise that keeping America safe required torturing captured enemy combatants from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib. Rejecting the application of raw American military power to achieve foreign policy objectives, Obama called for prudence and restraint in the use of force. Spurning the arrogance of taking unilateral actions to advance America’s interests at the expense of our friends, Obama invoked the vision of a new international community engaged in alliances and bound by principles and diplomacy.

Hoping to turn the page on Bush’s disastrous effort to convert the 911 terrorist attack on America into a crusade to clense the Middle East of extremists from Iran to Lebanon, Obama offered the world Muslim community “a new way forward based on mutual interests and respect.” In making the appeal Obama was sowing seeds he clearly hopes to harvest in his proposed upcoming major address in a Muslim country. With an escalating war to prosecute

in Afghanistan; a complicated and dangerous militaray drawdown to execute in Iraq, and the Arab street seething at Israel’s Gaza invasion that left 1,400 Palestinians dead, the new Commander-in Chief has to pivot quickly in the Middle East. Indeed, Obama will likely dispatch a special envoy to the Middle East this week to help ensure the uneasy cease fire brokered by the Egyptians between HAMAS and Israel’s holds until new talks begin.

While repudiating Bush’s militarist drive to make the U.S. the world’s unchallenged superpower for decades to come, Obama left no doubt that “terrorists” should not mistake his change of direction for weakness. Quite the opposite, Obama was sending a direct message to al Queda that he is coming after them, saying “you will not out wait us, we will defeat you.” Obama’s warning’s were not reserved soley for America’s avowed enemies. Breaking with the Bush administration’s silence on Arab authoritarian regimes it supported, Obama offered the following advise; “To those who cling to power through corruption and deciept and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.” Obama’s not so subtle warning aimed at the Sunni monarchies in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the Gulf Emirates, that America will not come to your aid to suppress rebellions provoked by your repressive regimes will be heard in capitals across the Middle East.

Perhaps the most significant point in Obama’s Inaugural Address was what he did not mention; Iran. There were no warnings or condemnations of Iran as the “world’s leading nuclear proliferator and state sponsor of terrorism that were the hallmark of Bush’s incendiary rhetoric. It was Obama’s first opportunity to set the tone with Iran before a world audience. Through his silence, Barak Obama left the door open to Tehran.

At the end of the day President Barak Obama’s central message was that we live in a far different world than America’s political leaders have been willing to acknowledge. The United States is no longer omnipotent, and we cannot simply push countries around. Military power has real limitations and the world’s wealth has been dispersed among rising nations that no longer march to Washington, D.C.’s drumbeat. We are entering a new multipolar era where global cooperation, diplomacy and shared decision making regarding the global economy, access to energy resouces and forging durable international security arrangements are the industry of many nations. Obama’s has asked America’s reluctanct political machine to grow up and change with the times. For many in America’s power elite, it is a change they do not believe in.

Our taxpayer dollars have been grossly misused and abused in the name of fighting an ambiguous War On Terror. Can Bush or any of his supporters explain why we have spent so much more on a war against a nation that never attacked us than on one whose former government supported those that did?

Amount of money spent on fighting the homeland of fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers (Saudi Arabia) – $0.

Amount of money we give the Saudis every day in oil and gas payments – billions.

The Bush Administration – misappropriating your money since 2001.

Of all the ways the Bush administration has been an abject failure, this stands out for the real life consequences that can result when determined nutjobs get their hands on a few bucks and the requisite materials. Since the President has no more elections to participate in, it is no wonder he spent more time today furthering his party’s political future than concerning himself about the safety and wellbeing of those that live in Al Qaeda’s favorite target. No bullhorn and arm around a fireman this time around. Instead, its onward GOP, vote McCain!

“We need only to look at Spain and see that they’re certainly willing to try to do something that is significant that could affect an election process,” said Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, chief of the U.S. Northern Command. “I think it would be imprudent of us to let down our guard believing that if there’s no credible threat that you know of today, there won’t be something tomorrow.”

The sick part is that Republicans will use this rationale as a reason to re-elect more Republicans (because those wimpy, godless, treasonous, commie bastard Democrats don’t know the first thing about protecting a nation) instead of recognizing that their signature issue the past seven years has resulted in one policy failure after another. It was always more about fearmongering and dividing Americans with yet another wedge issue than protecting us from fundamentalist Muslims (who of course are way more dangerous than fundamentalist Christians….right). Who were the geniuses that decided we should let our guard down against Al Qaeda and instead focus on secularists in Iraq? On the most critical policy decision that was made the past seven years, McCain and Hillary were both wrong while Obama was right. At least McCain is tough (and stupidly stubborn) enough to persist with and defend this flawed decision while Hillary has tried to have every side of this issue, so much so that she has made John Kerry’s continued policy evolution look consistent.

Truth be told, the left has become so jaded that many of its members are working more feverishly than Big Brother to strike down any opinions or notions that deviate from the general realm of liberalism. First, it was done by the media (and please don’t rage on about how there is no liberal media bias; it’s a dead subject; the sooner you admit that there is an inherent bias – not a conspiracy by any means, but an innate liberal inclination in most national outlets – the sooner you’ll be on the path to rectifying it) and now it has permeated the most rudimentary political discussions and debates.

Take, for instance, a piece I wrote last week about John McCain. In sum, the entry was intended to present a brief and concise case for McCain, a candidate who leans left on some issues (and by “leans left” I mean simply that he is willing to work with liberal members of Congress on a number of bipartisan bills, which is apparently a crime punishable by political extrication). While some conservatives have understandable disdain (I am not one of them) for Senator McCain, I was taken aback by the horrific attacks that came from members of the left who had read my blog (instead of attacking the facts, they decided to attack my person):

My answer:

The lesson that we have all learned from the past seven years is that competence (not personality) matters.

Telephone companies have cut off FBI wiretaps used to eavesdrop on suspected criminals because of the bureau’s repeated failures to pay phone bills on time.

A Justice Department audit released Thursday blamed the lost connections on the FBI’s lax oversight of money used in undercover investigations. Poor supervision of the program also allowed one agent to steal $25,000, the audit said.

In at least one case, a wiretap used in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation “was halted due to untimely payment,” the audit found. FISA wiretaps are used in the government’s most sensitive and secretive criminal investigations, and allow eavesdropping on suspected terrorists or spies.

“We also found that late payments have resulted in telecommunications carriers actually disconnecting phone lines established to deliver surveillance results to the FBI, resulting in lost evidence,” according to the audit by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine.

This is a somewhat awkward development considering Kean’s son endorsed Giuliani.

“I didn’t come here and wouldn’t criticize Mayor Giuliani. I think the Republican Party this year is fortunate to have a number of good candidates. I just happen to feel that with this world we live in, with the dangers abroad, all around us, and the dangers here at home, that we need the very best. And the very best, I believe, is John McCain.”