George A. Sprecace M.D., J.D., F.A.C.P. and Allergy Associates of New London, P.C.
www.asthma-drsprecace.com
Dr. Sprecace's Home Page...
Information categories at this site...
About Dr. Sprecace and this site...
Access related links...
Terms for usage of this site...

RAPID RESPONSE (Archives)...Daily Commentary on News of the Day
This is a new section.  It will offer fresh, quick reactions by myself to news and events of the day, day by day, in this rapid-fire world of ours.  Of course, as in military campaigns, a rapid response in one direction may occasionally have to be followed by a "strategic withdrawal" in another direction.  Charge that to "the fog of war", and to the necessary flexibility any mental or military campaign must maintain to be effective.  But the mission will always be the same: common sense, based upon facts and "real politick", supported by a visceral sense of Justice and a commitment to be pro-active.  That's all I promise.
GS

Click here to return to the current Rapid Response list

MONDAY through THURSDAY, September 27 through 30, 2004

The debates are coming!   So, what can we expect that will be new and different, especially given the sanitized rules that will apply?  Not much that is new or different.  In the first debate tomorrow, Senator Kerry will say that this was the wrong war at the wrong time.  President Bush will say, although not so eloquently as he said recently at the U.N., that this was an action that had to be taken, given the then-existing intelligence, and even in hind-sight.  (See "U.N. Speech A Study Of Conviction", by Cal Thomas, in The Day, Saturday, Sept. 25, 2004, Commentary, pA7).  Kerry will say that we have no allies.  Bush will prove that that is patently wrong.  (See "Who Said America Is Short On Allies?", by George Melloan, WSJ, Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2004, Opinion, pA23).  Kerry will say that Bush's actions are inflaming the Muslim world.  President Bush will say (I hope) that the world - and right now primarily the USA is in a struggle against terrorists and anarchists who have little to do with Islam but who are merely using that great religion as a screen.  And he will say (I hope) that the struggle over the next years will be between democratic countries and Islam on one side...and those terrorists on the other side.  That is already occurring in the two largest Muslim democracies in the world: Indonesia and Bangladesh.  (See "Islamists vs Democracy", by Maneeza Hossain, WSJ Monday, Sept. 27, 2004, Opinion, pA18).  Neither candidate will mention Israel unless pulled into it.  But then (I hope) both candidates will clearly point to the cynical anti-semitism of the UN, the rabid anti-semitism of the Palestinian (and Arab-supporting) power base, the self-delusion of the Arab world regarding the permanency of the State of Israel, and also some self-defeating actions of the current leadership in Israel and their settler-supporters.  (See "Anti-Semitism and the United Nations meet at long last", by Jeff Jacoby, The Day, Monday, June 28, 2004, Commentary, pA7).  That's my prediction.  But make sure to tune in, anyway.

GS

SUNDAY, September 26, 2004

Why am I not surprised?  The Day (theday.com) in today's edition has already endorsed John Kerry.  After some conclusory statements, all highly disputed, the editors basically admit to their position: "Anybody but Bush", thus dismissing anything that he does between now and November 2 regarding the extremely fluid situation in Iraq.  This, by a good newspaper that has been both heading and heeling to port since their current Editor and Publisher came aboard.  And what is their first argument?  America's worldwide "relationships".  With reference to de Tocqueville, he would not be surprised by, and would have admired this America's goals and actions following 9/11, policies and actions entirely consistent with the spirit of the 1800's decades of danger and decision.  Lincoln, too, did the right thing when he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, a very unpopular action at the time, in the midst of a Civil War that his side seemed to be losing.  "The U.S. and its allies should have waited while United Nations inspectors continued to search for weapons."  Waited for what?  More cynicism, hypocracy, fraud and irrelevance?  "John Kerry has only begun to define himself to the American people."  Right.  What he needs is four more years to do so.  Meanwhile, Americans need to give President Bush and our troops in the field a clear endorsement to the current policies and actions, in order to leave no doubt in the minds of friend or foe.  That's how we will materially improve America's security at home and abroad.  Not by ruminating in the "newspaper of record", the N.Y.Times today, about "What If America Just Pulled Out?" (by Roger Cohen, Section 4 - wk p1).   And not by issuing a premature and worried endorsement of "Anybody but Bush".

GS

SATURDAY, September 25, 2004

GS

FRIDAY, September 24, 2004

Nuclear energy, Si; nuclear weapons, No, at least for any countries that do not yet have them.  This sounds arrogant and unfair.  But the current situation is bad enough, the product of the Cold War.  Any further proliferation invites world-wide disaster, especially in view of the irresponsible actions already taken by wanna-be countries like North Korea and Iran in their relationships with terrorist groups.  And we can forget about the U.N. and its perennial pronouncements on the subjects, however well-intentioned.  I believe it was Josef Stalin who asked: "How many divisions does the Pope have?"  The U.S. and other willing nations must offer to empower non-nuclear nations with the ability to have nuclear energy, as a means also to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil.  But as far as nuclear weapons, and the steps leading to that goal, are concerned, we should make it very clear: "You build it, we break it!"  To that end, the recent American approval of a sale of 600 "bunker-buster" bombs to Israel is a good start.  Does anyone have any better idea on the subject?   The period we are currently in reminds me of the inaction of the world during the 1930's regarding the illegal and war-like activities of Germany and Japan.  This time, if there is a World War III, there will not be a World War IV.

GS

THURSDAY, September 23, 2004

GS

MONDAY through WEDNESDAY, September 20 through 22, 2004

GS

SATURDAY and SUNDAY, September 18 and 19, 2004

GS

FRIDAY, September 17, 2004

GS

TUESDAY throutgh THURSDAY, September 14 through 16, 2004

GS

SUNDAY and MONDAY, September 12 and 13, 2004

For a country that prides itself on its democratic electoral process, there seem to be too many ill-conceived ideas sprouting this time around: eliminating the Electoral College; changing the "winner take all" rule for State Electoral College votes (see the pending initiative before the voters in Colorado); using poorly tested electronic voting methods without paper backup; first passing, and then undermining the McCain-Feingold election financing reform Act; absentee or pre-voting for convenience; sloppy identification procedures that allow some people to vote in more than one jurisdiction.   All this on top of governmental action distorted, if not entirely paralyzed, during the never-ending election year (or two years...).  Maybe we do need Jimmy Carter and an international commission to monitor our election.  And maybe we're losing our minds.

GS

SATURDAY, September 11, 2004

GS

FRIDAY, September 10, 2004

GS

WEDNESDAY and THURSDAY, September 8 and 9, 2004

KERRY FOR PRESIDENT...OF FRANCE
GS

TUESDAY, September 7, 2004

The following is not, and is not intended to be, medical advice.  But, in view of the great and appropriate interest in former President Clinton' s current problem, the following are my personal procedures and goals.

GS

MONDAY, September 6, 2004

GS

SATURDAY and SUNDAY, September 4 and 5, 2004

It's not difficult to sympathize with President Putin of Russia these days.  The most recent example of "Islamic" terrorism there evokes the same feelings as occurred on 9/11 here in America: sadness and rage.   Just picture a situation wherein either or both Mexico and Canada were hostile nations harboring and supporting terrorists plying their terrible violence in our border states with the aim of seizing those states.  That's what President Putin is faced with.  What do you think we would do?  Of course, the liberals would gladly give up Texas for a little peace.  But seriously, after trying to dissuade any foreign supporters by threat of direct action, we would invade and pursue a scorched earth policy reminiscent of Sherman's march to the sea.  That might or might not produce peace.  But it would produce control.  That, in addition to developing his own "homeland security" department, is likely what Putin will now do.  Is this a "war of civilizations"?  No.  Is it a war of conquest?  No.  But it surely is a war, and a war that will likely last a generation.    What's the alternative in the short term?  As Karl von Clausewitz said in the 19th century: "war is merely politics by other means".  Sad but true.  In the long term, whether now in Iraq or later throughout despotic lands of whatever "religion", the people will have to throw off their own yoke with politics of whatever means.

GS

FRIDAY, September 3, 2004

President Bush's acceptance speech: good substance, form and delivery.  He proposed several needed initiatives, including re-training of segments of our work force whose jobs have been eliminated through globalization.
And what did John Kerry have to say "at midnight"?  "I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq."  Oh, yes you are, if that's all the desperate and untrue retort that you can come up with.

GS

THURSDAY, September 2, 2004

GS

WEDNESDAY, September 1, 2004

Some observations, so far, on the National Republican Convention:

GS


Return to:
Home
Categories
 
 

Copyright Notice (c) Copyright 1999-2017, Allergy Associates of New London, PC