Honore vs Obama

What if the election for President of the United States came down to a choice between 2 African Americans, General Russel Honore and Senator Barack Obama? They are both tall, dark, and of mixed racial heritage. For me, the things that these two men have in common come to a quick end. I don't think the election would even be close. I'm talking '72 Nixon vs McGovern rout that Honore would do to Obama.

In one corner you have a man who waxes poetic in his speeches. Senator Obama:

"if you sense, as I sense, that the time is now to shake off our slumber, and slough off our fear,"

"In the face of despair, you believe there can be hope,"

In the other corner you have a man does not waste words and does not suffer fools in his speeches. General Honore:

"You are stuck on stupid. I'm not going to answer that question."

"I'm totally unconfused about our mission,"

"Better is harder."

"I'd rather be in the middle of the game, playing hard with little hope of winning than to be an observer."

There is an excellent article on the American Thinker website that compares and contrasts these two men.
Personally if it came down to a choice between these two for POTUS I would not hesitate to vote for General Honore.

Compare Texas 1836 to Iraq 2006

I recently read an article that made me think of comparisons between a fledgling new Republic of Texas in 1836 and a fledgling new Republic of Iraq in 2006. In both cases these republics are supported by volunteers from the USA. Heroic men like Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie volunteered to fight to defend the right of Texans to live free and independent of a former tyrant. Heroic men like David Petraeus and Lt Gen. Odierno volunteered to fight to defend the right of Iraqis to live free and independent of a former tyrant.

From the Alamo, Colonel Travis wrote to his countrymen the following:

Fellow citizens and compatriots: I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna--I have sustained a continual bombardment and cannonade for 24 hours and have not lost a man--the enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise, the garrison is to be put to the sword, if the fort is taken--I have answered the demands with a cannon shot, and our flag still waves proudly from the wall --
I shall never surrender or retreat.

Then, I call on you in the name of liberty, of patriotism and of everything dear to the American character, to come to our aid, with all dispatch. The enemy is receiving reinforcements daily and will no doubt increase to three or four thousand in four or five days. If this call is neglected, I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible and die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor and that of his country--Victory or Death.

Now as I understand the letter was dispatched to the small settlement of Washington-on-the-Brazos. The aid with all dispatch did not arrive and the Mexicans with overwhelming force defeated the 80 Texans at the Alamo.

Now I worry today if General Petraeus writes a similar letter to a larger settlement of Washington DC what will the Democratically controlled Congress do? If I am to believe a recently passed non-binding resolution that was passed in the House and had 56 aye votes in the Senate then they are no more help for General Petraeus than the help that Colonel Travis received. Some people would say that while the Democratic party has the majority of seats in the House there are a lot of new members of the House who are Blue Dog Conservative Democrats. My reply to those people is every member of the House Democratic party voted aye to the resolution opposing sending additional reinforcement to General Petraeus. I think that there are many similarities, and I think we need to 'remember the Alamo' when we vote in 2008.