Jimmy Brannon Blog

An Open Letter To Mitch McConnell

 

Senator McConnell, as a long time supporter and on behalf of millions of people in Kentucky and around the country, we offer you congratulations on your victory and your likely appointment as majority leader of the U.S. Senate. As you have aptly pointed out, this position will place you in unique position to make a difference for Kentuckians and for Americans during the upcoming six years.

This IS a time to redress issues which many Americans including Democrats and Republicans feel strongly about: including such things as health care, the drifting of foreign policy in the middle east, coal and environmental issues and so many other things you have spoken about in your campaign. It is certainly your prerogative and reasonable goal to carry forward an agenda that you were elected to do.

 It is, however, the nature and beauty of the democratic process that there are differences of opinions, sometimes very vigorous ones on issues of public concern. You know those differences of opinions well as minority leader in the Senate.

 While it is a time to promote a POSITIVE agenda, and Republicans must do that or the victory may be short lived, it is perhaps more important than anything else that your party and you as the leader of the Senate govern with BENEVOLENCE. It is NOT a time to punish the opposition or play Machiavelli.

 Above all it is time for HUMILITY.

 We appeal to you Mitch, to consider that you will soon approach the twilight of your career. There is, however, time to make this your finest hour. The naysayers and political hacks will do and say what they will but this is a time when America needs statesmanship. In the months to come, our Senator Mitch McConnell has the opportunity to leave a lasting legacy in the spirit of Henry Clay; but that depends on our senior Kentucky Senator assuming the role of statesman by putting America's interests ahead of manipulations and squabbles that have been enduring in our politics for too long on both sides of the aisle.

 We urge you in your dealings with both parties in the Senate to lead as a statesman. In the current climate where there exists a total vacuum in such leadership, Republicans and Democrats will follow you because America demands it.

To the parents of children lost in Connecticut

There is a special fraternity that exists for those who have lost a child. It is a fraternity that is filled with disbelief, sadness, sometimes despair, anger, resentment, and other emotions that dont easily fall within a particular classification. The event in Connecticut has touched everyone in America in different ways but the video that touched me the most was the one that showed the salt and pepper father shown next to a white van who was unconsolable upon apparently learning that his child's voice would never be heard again.  I wrote a book about my son, who died of cancer at age 13, mostly as a self therapeutic effort but I later found that it helped others who had experienced a similar fate. My experience involved wathcing a child suffer for three years before his death. But also it provided so many opportunities to enjoy our life or as some might say to "say goodbye." Those that have lost a child in a sudden, inexplicable event like that in Connecticut face a different set of horrors. To those of you in Connecticut I welcome you to a faternity I wish no one had to join

Senate Candidate is an idiot and should resign from race

Missouri Senate candidate Todd Aken, the Republican Senate candidate who is under fire for his comments about rape and a woman’s body should immediately resign from the race. Aken in an interview about abortion in rape cases said: "First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy after rape] is really rare," Akin told KTVI-TV in defense of his stand that rape victims should not be allowed to access abortions. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." At the outset, it is true that there is way too much “gotcha” politics going on these days and it’s also true that much of it is orchestrated by the media against republicans in furtherance of the media’s democratic party agenda. But this is not such a case where anyone else is to blame but the candidate himself. A parade consisting of everyone on the planet has rejected Aken’s comments calling them offensive. Aken for his part has apologized and said that people are forgiving. Offensive the comments may have been and forgiving the people may be. There are a millions of ways for candidates to get caught with their proverbial pants down especially with Democratic Party henchmen, the media, waiting in wait. And it is a shame to see legitimate candidates ruined over an indiscretion, bad act or misspoken word. HOWEVER, and this is the point with regard to Aken. How do you get to the point of being a candidate for the U.S. Senate and not know better than to even get close to that kind of a statement about rape and a women’s body? If it was just a matter of making an offensive statement or committing a bad act, forgiveness for his indiscretion might make sense. The real problem here is NOT that it was offensive, but that it was idiotic. I forgive him for being an idiot. But an idiot he remains.

57 % favor smoking bans in buildings open to public, final poll indicates

The blog's week-long poll has indicated that 57.1% favor a ban on smoking in buildings open to the public. Another 14.3 % favor such a law if there is an outdoor smoking area available, while 28.6% opposed the law.

While the issue is moot for many folks such as in Lexington where there is already a smoking ordinance, other places such as in Bourbon County do not have such a rule.

So the issue lives on.

Gatewood Galbraith's Legacy: One Proposal

Friends of Gatewood Galbraith know that forcountless thousands of Kentuckians who came to admire him over the past few decades, Gatewood’s persona will not be forgotten.

But it seems that the Commonwealth of Kentucky could benefit from an effort to memorialize Gatewood’s legacy in a more permanent way that honors our friend but more importantly carries forward some meaningful part of Gatewood’s legacy.

Friends, family and some of those who have worked closely in Gatewood’s campaigns over the past years may have a better idea but one that has crossed mine is the notion of a permanent Galbraith Commission chartered to fulfill some legitimate state policy on a permanent basis. Others may have a different idea but one such policy area that comes to mind is the area of open government.

A Galbraith Commission on Open Government charged with the responsibility of making recommendations relating to open and transparent government would seem to be a fitting tribute to Galbraith and more importantly a useful non-partisan commission that would help guide government in Kentucky toward greater transparency in the future.

Such a commission would seem to fit in with one of things I think of the most about Gatewood Galbraith’s policy goals, ‘transparent government,’ but at the same time would likely be supported by the Kentucky Press and others with an interest in ensuring government accountability.

There may be other ideas; perhaps already in place, but the idea of Galbraith’s legacy being carried forward in a permanent and useful means ought to be considered.

MITT ROMNEY’S CRITICISM PROVES GOVERNOR HUNTSMAN IS THE BEST CANDIDATE

Mitt Romney, in criticizing Governor Jon Huntsman for his service of his country as Ambassador to China, has displayed the very heart of the problem we face in America today: the inability of leaders to put country first and politics to the rear. Jon Huntsman did that by serving as Ambassador to China, perhaps the most important foreign policy position other than secretary of state. Yes, he was asked to serve by Barack Obama. But Mr. Romney fails to grasp two very important points: Number one, he fails to note that Governor Huntsman also served when he was asked to serve by US Presidents George W. Bush, as trade ambassador, and by President Ronald Reagan for whom he was a staff assistant in 1981. Does Mr. Romney care to discuss his comments about Ronald Reagan when he was a liberal Massachusetts candidate attempting to distance himself from President Reagan? The author of this blog was on the floor of the nominating convention for Governor Ronald Reagan in Detroit in 1980 and perhaps those of us who admire Ronald Reagan would find your response interesting. Number two and more importantly, this is the precise type of “put the politics first” style that has led our nation into retreat over the last few years. Governor Huntsman by putting his country first has proven that he is the kind of leader that we can trust to make America Great Again. Finally, the blog urges New Hampshire voters to consider another practical point. The fact that Governor Huntsman did serve his country when called, even by a Democratic president, is going to handicap the Obama billion dollar attack dogs from attacking nominee Huntsman. It is hard to attack a guy you appointed to a high position. Stick to the facts Mr. Romney! If you do, the voters will know that Governor Huntsman is the best candidate. Fact 1. Huntsman is the most qualified by experience. Fact 2. Huntsman is the most consistent conservative, no flip flops here. Fact 3. Huntsman is the most electable in the general election.

Blog Makes Election Endorsements-Galbraith the best choice

Whether you believe that David Williams is a principled leader or a political bully, or that Steve Beshear is an adequate Governor or a political hack, one fact is for certain. With either of those candidates you will be getting more of the same kind of politics we have had in the past. Gatewood Galbraith on the other hand offers voters a candidate who is knowledgeable enough to do the job but more importantly a candidate capable of serving without being bought by special interests, one who will not put politics first and the public interest last. Galbraith/Riley is the best choice. Other candidates who should be elected include Bob Farmer for secretary of agriculture. The attack on Farmer for being a promoter/comedian is not well taken. Farmer makes a good argument that he is capable of using his skills to promote Kentucky's brand as ag secretary. The blog believes that some of the statewide offices such as state auditor need to be eliminated by constitutional amendment but since we have to vote, Adam Edelin is the best choice. The race for attorney general is sickening. Jack Conway is an utter disgrace and should not be elected pooper scooper. Problem is the other fellow may not be much better. The blog holds its nose to vote against Conway.

A bright star of this year's ballot is KC Crosbie who is far better than Todd Hollenback for state treasurer. Lexington Mayor Jim Gray gives a great endorsement of KC and it appears she has done her job well on the Lexington council. She deserves a chance. Another candidate who deserves election is Bill Johnson. Johnson's resume is exemplary. The problem is Johnson is pitted against Allison Lundergan Grimes (you have to say it a couple of times, and then see if you can think of anything else that rhymes.) Allison Lundergan Grimes may be capable and will surely win, but the blog doesnt like the politics that is based on these blatent name recognition efforts. Maybe next year Ritchie Farmer will have his name changed to Ritchie Wildcat Farmer.

Jon Huntsman- the most qualified and sensible candidate for U.S. President

In this climate of sound bites and political back biting on both sides of the aisle in Washington, there is one candidate who exemplifies the common sense and experience that will move the nation forward in a positive way on economics and in our foreign policy.

The story of Jon Hunstman for those who have'nt taken the time to look at is, is a story of accomplishments in private business and as Governor of Utah.  Much of that story can be found on Huntsman's web site and won't be repeated here. http://www.jon2012.com/about-jon

The real reasons Huntsman should be president have to do with real facts and real issues not partisan politics. For example, Huntsman is the only candidate including the President who has set in a succinct and sensible way what he would do to get the American economy moving again. That plan won the praise recently of the Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904583204576544703176083600.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

For another example, on the issue of foreign policy, Huntsman is the only candidate on the Republican side with actual foreign policy experience. http://www.jon2012.com/blog/Tags/Foreign-Policy

More importantly, Huntsman is the only candidate on either side to have the common sense to with reference to foreign policy to know when to hold'em and when to fold'em. Mr. Obama has been the Bush 3 we heard so much about in 2008 when it comes to the insanity in Afghanistan. The only other candidate that has opposed the continued "episode" in Afghanistan is Ron Paul, who is basically advocating an isolationist policy that is dangerous to America.

For those who are concerned about a foreign policy that protects American interests but at the same time values hard nosed common sense, consider the statements of former Homeland Security head, and Pennslyvania Governor Tom Ridge:

Ridge called the former Utah governor and ambassador to China "the only candidate with demonstrated success at the state, national and international levels." He said that Huntsman "has the unique ability to bring people together, to build consensus around the kind of ideas and the kind of change we need to affect to make America more secure, more prosperous, and more competitive.

"I'm certainly proud to join him .....and to publicly announce my strong support and endorsement of a man who I think would be a great president of the United States of America. A great country needs a great leader with a great vision and I think he's standing next to me." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20107419-503544.html

It is time for us to get this thing right and the jimmy brannon blog appeals to the good common sense and independent streak of the people of New Hampshire and others to give Jon Huntsman and in the process, the United States, a good strong hand up.

Ten Years Is Nine Years Too Long In Afghanistan; Past Time For Obama

Ten years ago Friday, the United States invaded Afghanistan launching America on what has become likely the nation’s most prolonged ludicrous use of military force in a century or more. Following 911 armed with substantial evidence that the Taliban in Afghanistan was responsible for much of the 911 tragedy, the United States correctly begun the Afghan conflict to force the Taliban out of power and kill the terrorists responsible for 911. Few Americans disagree with that. Most of that military exercise was and should have been concluded in a matter of weeks. But now for ten years, the United States has and continues to muddle through an insane project that becomes even more absurd when you listen to military spokesmen who support this horrible waste of America’s best. Consider General McChristell interviewed on October 3, 2011 by CBS News wherein he says that the afghan war is a job half done: "We didn't know enough and we still don't know enough," he said. "Most of us — me included — had a very superficial understanding of the situation and history, and we had a frighteningly simplistic view of recent history, the last 50 years." What is even more troublesome are the statements of current U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Marine Gen. John Allen, who told CBS this week about the “plan.” "Well, the plan is to win. The plan is to be successful. And so, while some folks might hear that we're departing in 2014 as a result of the Lisbon Conference and the process of transition, we're actually going to be here for a long time," Allen said. This blog vigorously resists a return to isolationism and fully supports the use of military force when (a) immediate security interests of the United States dictate, and (b) when military force is necessary and can achieve identifiable results. With the fall of the Taliban and the disruption of terrorists in Afghanistan it is debatable whether immediate security interests of the United States are present in that far away land. But one thing is NOT debatable. Military force at least to the point of ground troops is NOT necessary in Afghanistan and there is zero possibility of favorable results by 2014 or a lifetime thereafter. There is an important analogy to make with the war in Iraq. In Afghanistan we clearly went to war for the right reasons, while as Democrats point out in Iraq, we were mostly sold a bill of goods. Even if actions against Iraq were desirable, the Bush Administration had at its disposal many other means which were less intrusive, less expensive and less deadly for American troops. Continued use of UN and international sanctions against Hussein, imposition of no fly zones and even use of air and strategic military force against Hussein’s government would have crippled that government and allowed the not insignificant Iraqi resistance with the assistance of U.S. and allies to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s government over a period of time. The expense in dollars and lives would have been a fraction of what the Iraq war has cost. BUT, the fact is that this debate is now one for academics because the fact is we are in Iraq. And the further fact is that there is an end game in Iraq. Despite the questionable basis for going into Iraq in the first place, the fact is that there is a light at the end of the tunnel and it appears likely that if the United States is willing to see the matter through, a sustainable, somewhat democratic government may come to exist in Iraq. And such a result is important to American security interests due to the importance of Iraq, geographically, strategically and economically. The verdict is still out on Iraq and we should see it through to the end. But in Afghanistan there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Not one single diplomat, politician or American military leader can tell you what it means to “win” in Afghanistan. Aside from isolationists and opportunistic politicians no one ‘necessarily’ suggests that the United States ‘abandon’ Afghanistan to use General Allen’s term. But a couple of air force bases, advisors, some intelligence and special forces operatives is a completely different matter than ground troops that had no business being there in Afghanistan in the first place. The Obama Administration should have enough sense, if the Pentagon does not, to understand that terrorists exist all over the globe in many different countries. This ridiculous exercise in Afghanistan is probably the most ludicrous action of the United States military in the nation’s history. All ground troops should be immediately moved to safe locations in Afghanistan to begin their withdrawal not in defeat but in recognition that “we came, we saw, we conquered,” but in the end we’re not interested.

A message to Libyans, Egytians, Syrians....

President Obama has done a good job in handling America's role in the matter of Egypt, Libya, Syria and the Middle East generally......What has NOT been done by the Adminisitration to the extent that it should be is to emphasize the philosophical bases for the revolts in these countries. The people of Libya and Syria must be told, and the US. President is the one person who should do it, that the war they are fighting is not just about removing a dictator but rather is one that is based on principles of liberty and freedom that transcend generations, governments, religions and indeed are rights that belong to the citizens of those countries as human kind.

As Americans we have an obligation to speak out about freedom as the very first of the revolutionary democracies.  It is true that a motivation is to win the hearts of the young people fighting on the streets in freedom, but it is also an obligation that is born from America's own beginnings.

Mr. President to the people of the Middle East perhaps we say:

"When we survey the wretched condition of man, under the monarchical and hereditary systems of Government, dragged from his home by one power, or driven by another, and impoverished by taxes more than by enemies, it becomes evident that those systems are bad, and that a general revolution in the principle and construction of Governments is necessary.

What is government more than the management of the affairs of a Nation? It is not, and from its nature cannot be, the property of any particular man or family, but of the whole community, at whose expense it is supported; and though by force and contrivance it has been usurped into an inheritance, the usurpation cannot alter the right of things. Sovereignty, as a matter of right, appertains to the Nation only, and not to any individual; and a Nation has at all times an inherent indefeasible right to abolish any form of Government it finds inconvenient, and to establish such as accords with its interest, disposition and happiness. The romantic and barbarous distinction of men into Kings and subjects, though it may suit the condition of courtiers, cannot that of citizens; and is exploded by the principle upon which Governments are now founded. Every citizen is a member of the Sovereignty, and, as such, can acknowledge no personal subjection; and his obedience can be only to the laws.

Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man, 1791