“Merry ‘merriest’ of Christmas’s One and All”

Dear Friends: 

During this time of year, we must not forget the things we have and those we cherish. For we are fortunate and blessed with so many special things and loved ones that sometimes we tend to forget what Christmas is really all about…the birth of the Christ child and the ‘act’ of giving (helping those who cannot help themselves or are having a hard time). There are those who are homeless, indigent or simply with nothing (no means for subsidence). “WE as a people” of all nations, from near or far, whatever origin or culture, no matter your faith or religion, it is sometimes OUR obligation not to ‘pay back but to pay forward.’ Would it not make the heart grow just alittle bit fonder and the world a better place if WE joined together and help those who cannot help themselves? 

Just the other day, as I was taking my twelve-year-old to school, a local radio station here had a charity drive going, entitled: “Christmas is for children.” It’s a volunteer drive that the radio station and local businesses sponsor take requests from those families with children who simply cannot afford a single, solitary toy for their dear little one(s). The radio dj would send out a request over the airwaves about a certain child ‘wishing,’ ‘hoping’ for a specific toy. It didn’t have to cost too much, something simple and dear to their heart (e.g. a Barbie Doll, an art set with paints/crayons and colored pencils, or monetary donations, etc). A child who goes without at Christmas time is reprehensible. Would it not put a smile on a child’s face and teach them about the world being a good place and for the most part ‘people do care?’ 

Therefore; “Why don’t we not pay back but pay forward?” It’s a ‘win-win-win’ opportunity that offers so very much. Christmas is for everyone. “May God Bless You One and All.”

Warm Regards and Merry Christmas,

Wes Dodrill

Tiger Woods, 11 women and a partridge in a pear tree

Well sports fans, here we are yet again, another famed sports hero (so-called) has tasted the 'forbidden fruit.' For the life of me Tiger, WHY! You have the world on a string, the sports first 'billion-dollar' man and you go and do this. WHY! You have a lovely wife and two beautiful children. WHY! Did you think no one would find out? Did you think because of your status that you're above reproach? Well, do you! WHY! If your wife and you 'redo' your prenup, then she ends up taking the children to Sweden (where she just bought a mansion) and all that money....well, you deserve everything that's coming to you. WHY!

This scandal you and you alone have brought on to yourself is like that Christmas song; The Twelve Days of Christmas. You replaced the part where there were 'eight maids a milking,' to 'Tigers eleven maids a milking.' Tiger, they milked you as you were somehow took advantage of them. WHY! Gatorade has discontinued your drink, many of your commercials were (at the present time) been pulled from airing. What company in their right mind would want to associate their business with a 'philanderer?' I know, somehow you thought (or didn't) that no one would see or say anything. How naive is that! WHY! Children use to look up to you and say; "I want to be like Tiger Woods." If any of mine were to say or tell me that...given your present state of 'affairs,' (pardon the pun) I would strongly discourage them from doing so.

"Tiger Woods, you ought to be ashamed of yourself. You have brought great dishonor not only to yourself, but to your family, Especially on your wife and two children. How do you feel now, Tiger? One question remains; "Was it  worth it?" WHY? Only you have an answer to that question.

Respectfully,

WD

Party Crashers and the Secret Service

Here we are in the dawn of the 21st century with all of its' technological advances and we (Secret Service and WH Social Office) can't even protect the President, First Lady, the Vice-President and quite possibly the Prime Minister of India. Why? Was it oversight? Was it a 'clerical' error? Perhaps, it was ego! Yes, ego!! Apparently (until this has all been verified) the party crashers spoke with an official of DOD who assists the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF). According to the couple, they believed they were invited. (I wonder if it was a grand illusion or illusion of grandier?) Consequently, they still were not on any list to be admitted (authorized) into the White House, State Dinner for the Prime Minister of India. Earlier, they crashed the dinner for the Congressional Black Caucus and were 'very promptly' escorted out. How, I wonder. Yet, these two maniacal, self-ingratiating 'wanna-bes' took it upon themselves to  attend (crash) the State Dinner at the White House. Why? Was it for the purpose because it was there, like climbing Mount Everest? Was it because they wanted to rub elbows with Washington's 'holy-poloi?' Yes and no. They wanted to crash the State Dinner not only to see if it can be done, but see if they might get in for greater monetary or financial gain. The wife (Michaele Salahi) is trying to get on a reality show on Bravo TV (The Real Housewives of D.C.). Why the husband (Tareq Salahi) was there is anybody's guess, probably wanted to 'feel' and 'look' important like everyone else there. Consensus is that's something is lacking; status, class, prestige, or money, etc. THE FACT REMAINS AS TRUTH WILL BE TOLD (PROVED) SOON ENOUGH THEY WERE NOT INVITED!

Enough of that, what about those at the White House who are suppose to handle all those security checkpoints and lists? Obviously, there was a complete and total breakdown in operations (blame squarely on the shoulders of Director Mark Sullivan). There obviously was no one at the gate (or door) as guests arrived to check those authorized 'off the list' (a difficult list to get on  by-the-way). Someone, somewhere along the way must have said to someone; "Its ok, let them through. I know them, they're good." (Pentagon official; Michele Jones). So lets' see if we have this straight:

1. Breach in White House Security: blame Secret Service.
2. Official (from the Office of the Social Secretary) not present at entrance to 'check' guests off the list.
3. Party-crashers (YES!); Michaele and Tareq Salahi knowingly broke through security checkpoints (for which they still may face criminal and or punitive charges; felony and or otherwise).
4. A Pentagon official (Desiree Rogers) with an ego from here to the moon who more than likely is not use to either being challenged or contested with.

 This is a group of individuals who set a 'prime' example of what not to do or be when it comes to physical security, protection of the President, when one has big dreams or delusions of grandeur or on an ego trip. Each and everyone of these ought o be held responsible and brought to some sort of action or actions for what they did or did not do. It is appalling that they (some) of these officials or servants of the government act in a manner that's somewhat less than stellar. As for the Salahis; they are what Webster defines as: 'epic' fibbers.

WD

Iran's Ulterior Motive or Agenda

Hello one and all, sorry I haven't posted these past few days. I've been alittle under the weather, doing fine now...much better. On to 'other' more important and serious matters at hand...

Today, on one of the cable news outlets, I learned (if their sources are reliable) that Iran will (not so distant future) commence military exercises to 'better protect' their nuclear facilities (Particularly the not-so-ultra secret facility in Qom). What are they thinking? What do they expect? A theocracy which appears to be 'self-serving' and are adamantly afraid of losing their hold on power. THEY established (shortly after the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the Shah, 1979) the Iranian Guard. Basically, their job is to keep the 'so-called' social order within their society. We all have seen how they 'keep' and 'restore' order recently after the unrest, post-Presidential election. 

Nonetheless, their 'one-time' position on any additional nuclear facilities was that no others had existed. Recently, once more, we have all learned of the 'good word' of the Government of Iran has been. There is such another facility in Qom. After satellite photos proved them to be very wrong...as if they were intentionally hiding it. What was their agenda then? All along to date, they have claimed that their nuclear intentions is for 'peaceful' and 'power' purposes (i.e., to supply themselves with increased amounts of electricity). Several countries, the United Nations (particularly the IAEA) have all demanded they either halt their program or allow visual 'on-site' inspections. They thought about it for a short time and that fell through. What was their motive then? More recently, they publicized that they would send their spent fuel for enrichment uranium outsourced to Russia and have it returned to supply their facility that is supposed to be used for electrical supply purposes. What was that supposed to prove? Better yet, what was that suppose to prove to the world? They recently went back on their word.

Given their present state of affairs, refusal for inspections and now to hold military exercises to 'better protect' their nuclear facilities...what's their ulterior motive on that? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (or a nuclear physicist) in this case to put two-and-two together...they want a fully operational nuclear facility! One in which not only produces a power supply for their country (a cover) but one that manufactures nuclear weaponry. THEY WANT TO BE IN 'THE CLUB' IN THE REGION. Their intent is just that. They believe that if they have nuclear capabilities that no one will bother or interfere with their so-called right to sovereignty. This sovereignty is held together by fear and intimidation. Plus, their intentions regarding the State of Israel is another matter. One in which we all better keep our eyes as well as our attention  on and remain there. I predict that whatever the status is there in Iran...if it gets unmistakeably and dangerously close to them getting the nuclear capability they need. Israel may rethink their policy on this issue and attempt to do something about it, then we all must be concerned about that.

The entire world, the United Nations ought to keep this issue at the top of their list of 'things to do' before it gets out of hand or proceeds any further on Iran's part. Remember; "An open wound that bleeds, bleeds. An open wound that is allowed to bleed and not paid proper attention to becomes poisonous."

Respectfully,

WD

 P.S. View related and recent news article at Yahoo:
         http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091122/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_war_games

“The Bow”

Recently, President Obama made a swing through the Asian countries, by week’s end this week he’ll be in South Korea. However, when he was in Japan and was greeted by the Emperor of Japan, he bowed. Some (mostly political pundits, critics and perhaps even most Republicans) say he bowed ‘too low’ that might have displayed a weak America or weak leadership. I highly doubt this. If one were schooled and had any knowledge whatsoever in Asian culture and tradition; that the lower the bow…the more respect and honor one exhibits to whom they’re bowing to. That’s all and nothing more. There’s no ‘weak’ America, no weak leadership, no ‘less-than’ Presidential President here at all. What’s all the hub-bub! I think President Obama showed and paid an enormous amount of respect to the Emperor and Empress of Japan. It was a show of good will, a demonstration of our having good relations (showing respect to the Japanese as a strategic partner in the region). “So, to all of you political strategists, pundits, ‘spin doctors,’ ‘nay-sayers,’ critics, news analysts (syndicated and cable), and those who simply like to complain about something…anything; get over it! It was nothing more than America paying its’ respect to a country’s monarch.”

JFK vs LBJ

Well, here we are...in a quagmire of sorts with this thing called; "the Afghan War." Oh! The Afghan War to fight terrorism. For those of you history buffs, the Obama Administration has decided to 'drop' the to fight terrorism portion and call it simply, a war.

Where this thing gets tricky is that there are brave men and women (America's Finest) are the ones doing the fighting, securing and dying over there. The commanding general for the U.S. forces in Afghanistan (Gen. McCrystal) has requested several thousand more 'additional' troops to get the job done. Its been weeks and our 'pride and joy,' 'illustrious,' bright young President still has yet to make a decision on whether to approve or disapprove. He's had several options and of late he has gathered his 'meeting of the minds' of a National Security Council and most senior military advisers and directed them to come up with so-called 'revised' options. Now, today while he's in Japan (on the first leg of his Asian trip) he wants to include a plan of "how to get out of Afghanistan." Its LBJ all over again! He's running this war from the White House. President George H.W. Bush (during Desert Storm) let his military commanders run the show and keep him advised and updated. Look how well that worked out! He (President Obama) blames Bush '43' for leaving this war as he put it; "on his doorstep." He's in to one-year of his Presidency...its now HIS war and his alone. He needs to 'fess up' and make some substantive decisions (he needs to lead and act).

ANALYSIS: "President Obama, give your commanders on the ground in Afghanistan what they need to get the job done! Stop running this war from the White House! Every time you have to make a decision like this, don't call a meeting of your advisers (again and again) to the Situation Room for frank discussions and requesting more options. Make a decision! The longer you wait, the more time you take...it just adds that much more stress, pressure (not to mention) danger in harm's way for our troops. YOU SIR have no idea whatsoever of what its like to serve in the military. YOU NEED TO LISTEN and DECIDE! 

What we have is a scenario of "JFK vs. LBJ." On the one hand, as described above, President Obama is reminiscent of the decision-making to LBJ. I suspect all the while (he) President Obama wants to be like JFK and the Vietnam Conflict. He sends advisers but does not get too involved. He stated just before his assassination that in Vietnam; "It's their war. They're gonna have to fight it. Its' up to them whether they win it or lose it." It has been alleged that the Karzai Government in Afghanistan is corrupt. This has been stated so on more than one occasion. So why Mr. President, why are we there?

One final thought; Mr. President. I am nearing my fifty-first year in this life time. I have seen a great deal. Seen things most generations won't ever see or witness... ever! Society has changed, this much is true. So has our government and its way of doing business. Our government officials and  most senior advisers there in your White House are too soft. You're too worried about what others might think!  You're too wrapped up in party politics! Some of you, need to grow a spine and 'get tough' with the Afghanis, the Iraqis, the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians, the Japanese, the North Koreans and so on. President Obama, you need to show the world that we're the United States of America.

"Mr. President, I remember Jack Kennedy. I recall how he and his senior staff worked to making tough choices expeditiously. Jack Kennedy was tough (when needed). He made sound decisions on the spot and not weeks at a time before he decided. President Obama...you're no Jack Kennedy."

WD

P.S. "I can't help but think the real reason why President Obama wants out of Afghanistan and Iraq is the economy. The U.S. economy is slow in recovery...we spend way too much (at tax-payers expense) on Afghanistan and Iraq. He wants to get it off the books. Its pulling his numbers (over-all job approval rating) down."

CIA: 1 - Intel Czar: 0 and 'turf' warfare

Recently, the CIA has won a long-standing battle of "intelligence turf warfare" against the Director of National Intelligence or Intelligence Czar. In a published article (Newsweek.com, 11/12/09, by Mark Hosenball); "In every country where U.S. intelligence agencies operate, the CIA's station chief will continue to be the most senior U.S. intelligence officer." This was according to a White House ruling.

It was understood, that as a result of the investigation of the 9/11 Commission the establishment of a 'National Director' for Intelligence was suppose to eliminate any and all confusions as it pertains to so-called 'turf warfare,' sharing of intelligence and information amongst the various agencies. NOW, comes the subject matter of "who's in charge" as top U.S. intelligence representatives in foreign countries. Did the 9/11 Commission miss this? Was this subject for analysis ever discussed? Apparently not, this has been such a long-standing feud of sorts between the CIA, its' Director and the Director for National Intelligence that it first began to take root during the Bush Administration. Was this not the same administration who claimed to have, "taken care of all that?" NOT! Apparently, this time, President Obama and his advisers can say in all honesty that it was left on their doorstep when he (they) took office. The previous CIA Director (Michael Hayden) argued that CIA station chiefs should remain "paramount" everywhere they operate. The new Intel Czar (Dennis Blair) locked horns with the new CIA Director (Leon Panetta) for a resolution in this matter. They could not reach a mutual settlement on this issue. It was then sent to National Security Adviser Jim Jones. He could not broker a solution and the matter was then referred to Vice President Biden. Biden indicated that; "The status quo should remain...that CIA station chiefs should always be the top U.S. spies overseas." Again, according to the article; "One consolation for the intelligence czar; CIA station chiefs will be encouraged to bill themselves as "DNI representatives."

More and more we hear about how the 9/11 Commission with all its' analysis and investigations found serious flaws in intelligence system and community. The creation of the position as DNI was to remedy all matters as it related to the discovery of, gathering, processing, compiling and formulation of intelligence (along with the sharing of info amongst various agencies) so as to not create any further problems for the U.S. The Director of National Intelligence was overruled in favor of the CIA Director on who's turf is the 'top spy' as station chief, a 'single point-of-contact' (intel rep) for our ambassadors in foreign countries.

ANALYSIS: A new commission ought to be sanctioned by the President for reinvestigation and provide recommendations on how the worthiness, relevance and importance of need for the position of Director of National Intelligence. The Director of the CIA has always been (and should always be) the 'chief intel' officer and 'national director.' A dual role which also would include the responsibility to brief the President on intelligence. Whatever department or apparatus the DNI has, this bureaucracy ought to be eliminated.The DCI ought to be the 'chief overseer' of all intelligence gathered (regardless of department or agency). The DCI must once again assume this role. Cohesion IS the answer in resolving these kinds of situations; continuity.

WD

On this Veteran’s Day

"To my fellow veterans past and present; I wish to extend my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to all of you, my brethren. On this day, (I believe) the American people do honor and appreciate our service to this country. No where in the world is there a nation quite like ours. We owe everything we have to our veterans. “Always faithful, true and service to country” are the parables in the carrying out of orders be each veteran serving. On this Veteran’s Day, November 11th shall always be THE day dedicated to the brave men and women of our armed forces."

President Barack Obama

Recently, it has been reported in certain circles that President Obama wants to ‘combine’ September 11th (or Patriot’s Day) with Veteran’s Day and rename it; “National Service Day.” If this is true, this veteran says; “ABSOLUTELY NOT!” November 11th is OUR DAY and ought to stay as such. When (if) this should ever make it to Congress, I HIGHLY DOUBT that it will pass. The American People would be so incensed that Congress (regardless of party) would take heed. Email the President or any member of his cabinet and let your opinion count! Click on the White House link below:

Tell the President...tell the Cabinet

“With the greatest of sincerity and admiration for my fellow veterans, we can and must do more. Veterans are owed an enormous amount of gratitude, one of which might never can be repaid. Sacrifice, duty, honor, service to country are the hallmarks of what it means to be a veteran…God Bless my fellow veterans…thank you!'”

WD

The Two Koreas

Recently, (Tuesday morning, Korean Peninsula) the two navies of North and South Korea went head-to-head along the disputed western sea border. Why? A South Korean warship shot at a North Korean navy ship that crossed the disputed western sea border to which the North shot back. A South Korean officer (under condition of anonymity) states that there were no casualties but it remains unclear if the North had sustained any at all. However, there was 'considerable' damage to the North Korean ship.

Is it not interesting that these kinds of 'naval chess games' have been going on since the end of their 1950-53 civil war which ended in an armistice with no peace treaty? Why? South Korea realizes that there are some nearly one-million plus North Korean soldiers poised at a moments notice which could come charging across the border and DMZ (Demilitarized Zone). As an ally of the South, American forces have never left and are  on constant guard. Due to an armistice treaty, we are obliged to 'aid' and 'assist' our ally (South Korea) should any skirmish ever break out. Northwest by north to the northeast along the North Korean border sits one very long border of another country which concerns the United States; China. We must proceed with absolute caution and our U.S. intelligence community, as well as our Joint Chiefs, Secretary of Defense need to follow, monitor this tense state of affairs very closely. Why? Should the situation between these two implode, it could possibly draw in the entire region into an armed conflict, one of which might have catastrophic repercussions for generations to come. I don't believe the United States would let this happen, let alone allow itself to be drawn into some sort of 'cat and mouse' game perpetuated by the North.

ANALYSIS: "I strongly believe that on part of the military regime (with the blessing by the so-called; 'Dear Leader'), a plan was formulated and put into action  by the North as a 'show of force' to see what the South might do. The South responded. The North goes back to its homeland and will widely publicize a campaign of 'provocation' by the South Korean navy. Of course, the media in the North is pure propaganda as propaganda can be. They (the North) will cry wolf once more to try and entice the United States into direct 'one-on-one' talks regarding its' nuclear weapons (if any at all) and program. The last thing the North wants is 'six-party' talks, for them, this is a waste of time. After all, the North wants what the U.S. has; resources, food and restore normal relations. Hence, at the United Nations sanctions would be lifted and being listed as a nation of 'state-sponsored' terrorism would be revoked. My advice; I say we 'wait and see' and do nothing for the moment. Lets' see if the North propagates itself once more in the western sea border or some other contrived act of desperation to get the attention it wants. All in all, the North is saying nothing more than that of a child; "Hey! What about me? Don't I count too?"

WD

Introduction to "The Political Beat"

Hello one and all! Welcome! Today, here and now is the first publication, an introduction to all of you regarding my 'blog' entitled; "The Political Beat." I decided to create and publish The Political Beat for a variety of reasons;

(1) To publicly critique and analyze (in an open forum) what it is our 'so-called' elected officials AND appointees are doing in Washington, my home State of Ohio and the world in general

(2) Theorize; to theorize the actions or expound on the thoughts and comments of those in officialdom

(3) Create an 'open forum' of discussion regarding the mass media in general (i.e., Syndicated television, media publications, cable news shows, etc)

(4) Critique, analyze, theorize exact moments or decisions in history that helped shape this world, a country for good or ill (World Politics, Comparative Politics, American Politics, National Security and Intelligence are also subject to 'analyzes' too (and anything else I might think of)

(5) Last but not least, it has been said; "controversy is the 'spice' of life." There is nothing more truer than this. There will be times that the comments or analyzes I will make, at some point or another will undoubtedly furrow someone's feathers, figuratively-speaking. Regardless of their rank, status or class in society; I will use life's old adage; "I calls 'em as I sees 'em" (a baseball metaphor). By the way, no subject matter, current event or historical perspective/theory is off limits. "No holds barred here." However, 'professional courtesy' will always be the order of the day

Nonetheless, I decided to create this blog to 'air the clear' (No, that's not backwards but correct). You see, I am nearing my 51st year (Lord willing and the creek don't rise, many more years on Mother Earth). At my young age, I've taken a many of trips around the barn of sorts. My personal experiences, stations of assignment and travels around this vast world have seen various cultures and traditions in other countries, not like the United States. Moreover, I've been witness to 'certain' places in history (and practices) which no one will see the likes of ever again, this largely has to do with society and politics. I served a number of years in the U.S. Armed forces, United States Army, active duty for nearly eight years. I was on a career track of making the military my life, then I got hurt. During my time-in-service was where I bared witnessed to a 'few' historical moments and places.

I AM a disabled war veteran (Desert Shield/Storm, 1st Gulf War) one who sees things in a different light of sorts; street smarts, maybe, old school, or the "School of Hard Knocks, absolutely! My age (50 years young), decided to return to college and complete my educational pursuits and set a 'good example' for my children. I get around with the use of wearing knee braces on a daily basis and with a cane. Please don't feel sorry or sympathetic for me. I did my duty, it was my job. It's the price one pays, I guess. When ya come right down to it; I feel I have something to contribute, a unique perspective on the world and everything else in general, that's why I'm 'blogging.'

I hope that for those of you who read this blog will find it interesting and sometimes insightful. If you agree, fine. If you (or we) disagree, lets debate like elder statesmen and debate some more. The exchange of one's ideas and beliefs can be a uplifting experience for all. Anyway; "WELCOME!"

WD