Hope is Not a Foreign Policy

Our Nation’s Homeless Veterans

Tom Skypek — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:38:51 +0000

A friend of mine passed along this article about our nation’s homeless veterans and an organization called Pathways to Housing which has been helping to provide housing options and treatment to homeless veterans. John O’Boyle, a Navy veteran, was homeless until just recently:

For 15 years, he was a nomad wandering the streets of his native New York before he got help from Pathways to Housing, a nonprofit organization.

O’Boyle spent two of his homeless years underground, riding the trains of the city’s subway system.

“I had nothing to do, so I rode the trains. I got to know the whole subway system like the back of my hand,” O’Boyle said. “The E train used to end at the World Trade Center. That was the best train to ride in the winter, you know; it didn’t go out into the open.”

O’Boyle was just one of about 154,000 veterans who call the streets home. Some find help through the Department of Veterans Affairs, which has approved funding for about 15,000 beds this year in transitional housing programs and provides approximately 5,000 veterans each year with residential services in VA hospital-based programs.

This leaves up to 134,000 veterans to fend for themselves. Private and nonprofit organizations, including New York-based Pathways to Housing, step in where the VA leaves off.

Psychologist Sam Tsemberis, Pathways’ founder and executive director, acknowledges the work the VA does but says nongovernmental organizations are essential to “take up the slack.” He estimates that veterans make up 20 percent of his clients, or about 125 of the 650 people the organization is currently housing, which reflects the national average of homeless veterans to nonveteran homeless.

“People who were mentally ill, living on the streets of the city in an intolerable unbearable condition” prompted Tsemberis to start Pathways.

The Pathways to Housing model is called “housing first.” The approach makes housing a top priority, even in treating homeless who have psychiatric disabilities and addiction. More traditional organizations require a person to be sober and stable before giving them their own place to live. This usually requires an uphill battle of up to two years of living in a shelter and meeting a number of requirements.

We need to keep our promise to our nation’s veterans. The government, and all of us as taxpayers, have a moral obligation to the men and women who have served this country. It is fashionable for politicians to champion veterans’ issues, but there has been far too little action on this front. There should not be 154,000 homeless veterans in the United States. I hope President-elect Obama and the new Congress take immediate steps to remedy this problem. It is hard to believe that with all the free handouts our government dispenses on an annual basis those most deserving of our support are neglected. Remember to thank a veteran. Freedom isn’t free. They fought for you.

Holding the Line on Defense Spending

Tom Skypek — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:38:44 +0000

The leadership in Moscow wasted no time in sending their own special, congratulatory message to President-elect Barack Obama by announcing the deployment of short-range missiles on Poland’s border-a NATO member and strident ally of the United States. President-elect Obama has a tremendous opportunity in the coming months to build a perception of credibility on matters of national security both within Washington defense circles and foreign capitals that will serve him well during his time in office. He should resist calls by Congressional Democrats such as Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) to cut defense spending. In fact, Mr. Obama should publicly articulate his intent to hold the line on defense spending for the foreseeable future.

Rep. Frank recently called for a 25% cut in defense spending. Cutting defense spending is the wrong message for a newly minted president to send to the world during a time of war. As Vice President-elect Joe Biden noted earlier this year during a primary debate, “Don’t tell me what you value, show me your budget and I will tell you what you value.” Today, defense spending in the United States is a little more than 4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This figure remains lower than the Cold War and Vietnam average of about 5.5%, according to a study by The Heritage Foundation.

Holding the line on defense spending would serve several purposes for the new president. First, it would send a clear message to the world that national security is Mr. Obama’s number one priority and that the will not gut the military as former President Bill Clinton did when he entered the White House in January 1993. This will lay the groundwork for an effective relationship between the Obama administration and the non-appointed civilian and military leadership in the Pentagon. Mr. Obama’s limited national security experience was viewed as his Achilles’ heel during the presidential campaign. By articulating a strong position on defense spending, he will allay concerns within the Pentagon, reassure America’s friends and allies and make clear to adversaries that his rhetoric is backed up by a well-funded United States military.

Second, Mr. Obama’s plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines will require significant funding to recruit, train and equip. This expansion of ground forces, coupled with other commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, will require Mr. Obama to maintain, if not increase, defense spending. Even if Mr. Obama proceeds with his planned withdrawal of troops in Iraq, this will likely be a slow process and will continue to require significant funding.

Third, this will show Republicans that Mr. Obama’s pledge of bipartisanship was more than a campaign promise. Republicans disillusioned from their electoral defeats will see accommodation in a decision that will benefit all stakeholders. Conservatives and Republicans will be looking for opportunities to support the new president and this issue is the perfect place to start.

Bloodletting

Tom Skypek — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:44:00 +0000

Congratulations to President-elect Obama. He won a decisive victory on Tuesday. It is my sincere hope that he makes good on his campaign promises of bipartisanship and governs from the center. I hope that he does not embrace the liberal policy proposals of Nancy Pelosi and Co., such as the Fairness Doctrine or the Freedom of Choice Act. It was an historic election that could only have happened in one country, but I have always been proud of my country and I’ve never needed an election result to validate my belief in American Exceptionalism.

As for the Republican Party, we need new blood. We have strayed from our core beliefs of small government, personal responsibility and liberty. This election was not a failure of the conservative ideology, but a referendum on the messengers who have bastardized it. New entitlement programs and massive spending are not conservative policy positions. President-elect Obama didn’t run as a liberal. Instead, he co-opted the conservative ideology, championing tax cuts and vowing to cut ineffective programs. Leadership teams at the Republican National Committee should resign as well as chairmen of the state parties who lost seats in the House and Senate. The bloodletting should continue with leadership changes in the House and Senate Republican caucuses.

As retiring Republican Rep. Tom Davis noted earlier this year, “the Republican brand is in the trash can…if we were dog food, they would take us off the shelf.” Rep. Davis was right. We need to rebuild our party. Remember the oath? We could learn a lot by remembering what it is we’re supposed to be advocating.

I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person’s dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.

I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.

I BELIEVE free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity.

I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and that the best government is that which governs least.

I BELIEVE the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.

I BELIEVE Americans must retain the principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of changing times.

I BELIEVE Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.

FINALLY, I believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.

Bankrupt the Coal Industry?

Tom Skypek — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:34:27 +0000

What’s with Sen. Barack Obama and San Francisco? It seems like the only time we get Sen. Obama’s actual positions on issues is when he’s speaking in the City by the Bay. Remember when he said that folks from rural Pennsylvania “…cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them…” Well, it looks like his actual plans for the coal industry are cause for concern. Voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania should take note. The Ohio Coal Association president, Mike Carey, said today:

Regardless of the timing or method of the release of these remarks, the message from the Democratic candidate for President could not be clearer: the Obama-Biden ticket spells disaster for America’s coal industry and the tens of thousands of Americans who work in it.

Few policy areas are more important to our economic future than energy issues. As voters head to the polls tomorrow, it is essential they remember that access to reliable, affordable, domestic energy supplies is essential to economic growth and stability.

These undisputed, audio-taped remarks, which include comments from Senator Obama like ‘I haven’t been some coal booster’ and ‘if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them’ are extraordinarily misguided.

It’s evident that this campaign has been pandering in states like Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana and Pennsylvania to attempt to generate votes from coal supporters, while keeping his true agenda hidden from the state’s voters.

Senator Obama has revealed himself to be nothing more than a short-sighted, inexperienced politician willing to say anything to get a vote. But today, the nation’s coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to ‘bankrupt’ our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.

In addition to providing an affordable, reliable source of low-cost electricity, domestic coal holds the key to our nation’s long-term energy security – a goal that cannot be overlooked during this time of international instability and economic uncertainty.

Here’s the video:

A Clear Choice on Tuesday

Tom Skypek — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 22:00:00 +0000

Countdown

Tom Skypek — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 21:47:58 +0000

Tonight…

Tom Skypek — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 00:35:06 +0000

…bad weather Sen. Barack Obama delayed the start of the World Series.

LA Times Refuses to Release Tape of Obama Praising Controversial “Activist”

Tom Skypek — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:03:33 +0000

From FOXNews.com:

The Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a videotape that it says shows Barack Obama praising a Chicago professor who was an alleged mouthpiece for the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was a designated terrorist group in the 1970s and ’80s.

According an LA Times article written by Peter Wallsten in April, Obama was a “friend and frequent dinner companion” of Rashid Khalidi, who from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO.

In the article — based on the videotape obtained by the Times — Wallsten said Obama addressed an audience during a 2003 farewell dinner for Khalidi, who was Obama’s colleague at the University of Chicago, before his departure for Columbia University in New York. Obama said his many talks with Khalidi and his wife Mona stood as “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases.”

Khalidi is currently the Edward Said professor of Arab Studies at Columbia. A pro-Palestinian activist, he has been a fierce critic of American foreign policy and of Israel, which he has accused of establishing an “apartheid system” of government. The PLO advocate helped facilitate negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in the early ’90s, but he has denied he was ever an employee of the group, contradicting accounts in the New York Times and Washington Times.

Why won’t the LA Times release this tape? Isn’t a free press supposed to vet each candidate? Have even affectations of objectivity been forsaken? Here is Peter Wallsten’s e-mail: peter.wallsten@latimes.com and his editor’s: russ.stanton@latimes.com Please ask him to release the tape, so the American people can see what the Los Angeles Times and the Obama campaign has been hiding.

“Ladies and Gentlemen”

Tom Skypek — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 23:16:19 +0000

Tough Questions for Joe Biden

Tom Skypek — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 12:17:12 +0000

It’s refreshing to see the media asking the Obama-Biden ticket some tough questions. But as you can see, tough questions do not go unpunished by the Obama-Biden ticket.