For Once, I actually agree with William Kristol

Egad, when an American Conservative like me, and a warmongering Wilsonian Conservative, like Bill Kristol are actually agreeing. You know stuff is fudged up in the Country:

Unable to defend themselves on the merits, the administration and Democratic leaders are trying to change the topic to blaming Bush and Republicans. This is pathetic.

First of all, Obama is president. He has been for almost a year. Whatever mistakes Bush did or didn’t make, Obama is in charge — and the issue isn’t partisan score-settling, it’s whether the system he is in charge of is working. It isn’t.

One reason the system isn’t is some of the people he put in charge — Janet Napolitano and Dennis Blair come to mind. Another reason is certain concrete policy choices they’ve made — e.g., embracing a law enforcement approach and, without even weighing the choice, immediately choosing to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal suspect, not an enemy combatant.

via The Weekly Standard.

Go read the rest. It is very good….and yes, I agree with it all.

Obama promised change, and change he might be able to deliver, like mending the long standing rift between the Paleo-Conservatives and the notorious Neo-Conservatives. Yeah, I know, not everyone would go along with it. But it would be some, dare I say it? Progress!??! (In the Republican Party? GASP!) 😉

Update: Socialist liberals use Detroit attempted Terrorist attack to sound the horn to cut and run

As skeptical as I am; these morons are just pure bat shit crazy:

What is needed now are not partisan fights about whether the Obama Administration was doing enough to guard against terrorist attacks in the wake of shootings last month at Fort Hood, Texas. Instead, we should question whether our overreaction to the crimes against humanity on 9/11–including the creation of an endless “war” against terrorism–has done more to undermine our security than enhance it. American safety will be better ensured through common-sense counterterrorism and homeland defense measures, including extensive intelligence cooperation expert police work and border control.

via Are US Wars Fueling Domestic Terrorist Threats?– The Nation.

Oh yes,Katrina, let’s just cut and run and stop trying to fight the war on terror — so, that Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan can regroup and come back stronger. Not only in the Afghanistan region, but also in Yemen and other regions as well. What a pathetic bitch.  🙄  What more living proof do we need, that the Socialist Far-Left Liberal Democrats are nothing more than terrorist sympathizers? Which is why I will never vote for them again, ever. Give me a politico that gives a flying flip about National Security, please. Not some terrorist coddling asshat.

Oh, and… Police Work. Police work?!?!?!? That is another little bitch and gripe that I have with the Socialist Liberal Democrats. They see some Negro Muslim terrorist, who tried to blow up a damned plane, most likely at sixty thousand feet over my damned house, as nothing more than some common criminal thug. Sorry Liberals, this stupid idiot negro terrorist, was an non-uniform combatant. He should be at Gitmo. Actually, he should be strung from a damned tree! 😡 But, I digress.

There is much hubbub about why the system to failed. There is also news that the Government knew about this dude, and did nothing at all. All of the media outlets; including Fox News are asking, “why?” Hello! It does not take a damned rocket scientist to figure that little problem out. It is the elephant in the room, that nobody and I mean NOBODY wants to talk about.  Has anyone else in the world bothered to notice the skin color of this terrorist suspect? Uh, Duh. He is a black person. Our President is also a black person. One plus one usually equals two! It seems that nobody is either willing or even possibly able to make that connection. Our Government officials new about this guy and knew that plans were being made; but they did not do anything about it. Why? I will tell you why! Because they knew, that if they acted upon this little piece of evidence, that it would possibly upset the President; because the mean ol’ United States Government was picking on some poor young black man — of whom the the white man oppressed and the Government did nothing about it for so many years. I mean, if you were employed by the NSA or CIA and you were aware of this situation, would you want to risk angering a black President, who was all down with “The Struggle”(tm)? I think you all know what I mean.

There is your answer, the reason this piece of intelligence slipped by, was the same reason the Ft. Hood shooter went by, unstopped. political correctness gone horribly bad.

Update: It seems that my resident gay stalker from Grand Rapids does not like what I wrote. Sorry fag boy, but some of us, do not have our heads stuck up the socialist Democratic Party’s “P.S. Police” ass; Unlike you. Because of this, some of us can see things for what they really are. Unlike some men with homosexual tendencies.

2009 Worst Political Decade Ever?

I present two videos; the first by reason magazine, which is a very funny take on the past 10 years. Which comes via HotAir.com, who has a poll up with this decade versus a few other notable decades:

The second video comes via Jack Hunter, who video blogs over at the American Conservative. Here Jack lays out a very compelling case for the fact that starting with George H.W. Bush, continuing with Bill Clinton and finally with George W. Bush; the entire big government, got even bigger:

As Jack says, and yet, conservatives are now griping about Barack Obama’s big government agenda. However, it is to be said, that Jack Hunter does point out the hypocrisy of the Democrats, when it comes to the wars. They were, in fact, loudly condemning of Bush’s Wars, but now, they’re all but silent. (Except for a few… and I mean very few…)

One point that I will offer a rebuttal to, is Jack’s point that Bush touted a more peaceful Foreign Policy, when he ran back in 2000. Jack points out that this suddenly changed after 9/11. What he fails to realize is this; on September 11, 2001, the game changed. Terrorists slammed two planes into the World Trade Centers, one plane into the Pentagon, and one plane that was headed to the White House; ended up in a field in Pennsylvania.  As someone who had a terrorist almost blow up a plane near my house. I can fully understand why this game changed. However, because I am not a overly partisan blogger, I will say this; I do fully realize that Iraq, in hindsight was, in fact, a mistake. I have yet for anyone at all, to convince me otherwise, that Iraq was a direct threat to our Republic. I personally believe it was because of this massive screw up of the Bush Administration, that Afghanistan is now possibly a lost cause, and why Al-Qaeda is now attacking us once again. If I were Jack and those who agree with him; I would be watching the Yemen situation very closely. Because I tend to believe that Yemen is going to become Obama’s war, especially if he does not root out that Al-Qaeda group there.

As a fiscal Conservative; I must say that I wholeheartedly agree with Jack’s assessment of the G.O.P. and Republican establishment’s hypocrisy on spending; the same very people that are bitching to high heaven about Obama’s spending, were all but silent during the eight years of George W. Bush and his reckless drunken sailor like spending, which was primarily on a war in a country that really, when you get down to it, had zero to do with 9/11.  But, yet, you have Bloggers, who are pro-war, bitching about Obama’s socialist agenda and take over of health care, plus his screwing of the economy into the ground. My question is, where were these people back in Bush’s day? Oh, that’s right, partisanship —- Which is such a horrible disease.

In fact, just here the other day; I was ripped by a “so-called” Conservative blogger, because I went to his blog and left a rather nasty message about Obama, because I was quite pissed off about his handling of the attempted terrorist act here at the airport, which is less than 10 miles from my house. (I also e-mailed him and apologized for it too..)  This man goes out of his way to rat me out, and offers to give my damned IP address to anyone that wants it. But yet, on that same blog, he does the rather unfunny Osama/Obama joke on his blog. He removed it, presumably after one his readers bitched at him about it, but just the same, this idiot is going to bitch at me for being a ‘so-called’ racist and he does the same thing? That is hypocrisy and I think he knows that, because it was changed, I wish I had screen capped it and posted it here. But, I didn’t. Also, one of his commenters proceeded to give out my real name and drudge up crap that happened years ago. She also went out of her way to say that I, according to her, criticized the right more than the left. Which is, of course, stupid. I have pointed out stupid stuff on the far right and I will continue to do so; as much as I criticize the left.  My point that I am trying to make is this here. Just as much as I am not drinking the idiotic socialist Kool-Aid of the Democrats; I am also not drinking the idiotic Kool-Aid of the far right either, I consider myself to me a critical, or dare I say it? A free-thinker.

I will admit, that I am a supporter of the United States Military; but I will the first to admit, that I beginning to be very skeptical of the war in Afghanistan; and I will go out of my way to say that this is NOT the fault of the United States military. It never was, it is the fault of the jackasses in Washington D.C. who could not define a damned military mission, if their lives depended on it.  This is nothing new, it was the same way during the Bush Administration, much worse in fact. The problem is, our lives do depend on it. Al-Qaeda is still a damned threat and what does Obama do? Gives a half-assed speech as to the fact, that the government  is on it. Yeah, uh-huh, sure. You mean, like the Government has been on the hunt of Osama Bin Laden for the last damned eight years? I call B.S. people, big time.

So, to those who come here and think this is a far right, rabid Conservative Blog. Be forewarned; my criticism and skepticism of Government and politics; and those who engage in that profession, is NOT on a partisan basis. I am quite bi-partisan on my criticisms. This blog has always been that way, and always will be.

Turd Blossom gets a divorce

Now this is interesting:

Karl Rove, former senior adviser to President George W. Bush, has been granted a divorce in Texas after 24 years of marriage, family spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

“Karl Rove and his wife, Darby, were granted a divorce last week,” said Perino. “The couple came to the decision mutually and amicably, and they maintain a close relationship and a strong friendship. There will be no further comment, and the family requests that its privacy be respected.”

The Roves were married in January 1986.

A family friend told POLITICO: “After 24 years of marriage, many of which were spent under incredible stress and strain during the White House years, the Roves came to a mutual decision that they would end the marriage. They did spend Christmas together with their son, and they plan to spend time together in the future. They maintain a strong friendship, and they both feel that that friendship is a source of comfort and inspiration for their friends and family.”

via Karl Rove granted divorce in Texas – – POLITICO.com.

This proves what I have believed all along. That social Conservatism is nothing more, than a well-planned and executed joke. I will not do the pile-on about Rove’s stances on Gay Marriage. However, I will present this video, done by Jack Hunter, who now Video Blogs over at the American Conservative. In this video, Jack makes some very valid points about the establishment Republicans in Washington D.C. at the 3:13 mark is where Jack really makes the point that I am making here.

I will be the first to admit; I do not always agree with Jack on foreign policy and war. However, I am in total agreement with him on the subject of social Conservatism. I being a child of the 1980’s, I remember very clearly all the talk that Reagan was going to get prayer back into schools, was going to see to it that Abortion was outlawed. Now did any of that stuff ever happen? Um, No. That is because the Republicans of that era, were exploiting the Conservative Christian community for their vote. Sort of like what Barack Obama’s campaign did to the far left during the election of 2008.

Enjoy the video:

The foiled terror attack, what it really means

This little article has been festering in my brain all day today. I finally believe that I might have enough here to really convey a thought or two. The recent information on the foiled terror attack here in Detroit is quite startling. First off, it is being reported that the terrorist’s father had notified the U.S. Government that his son was becoming ever increasingly radical in his Muslim beliefs. Second, the United States Government knew about this person for over two years and was either unable or unwilling to do anything about it.

This is a glaringly obvious deduction that anyone, with any kind of common sense and reasoning should realize, and that is that the United States Government cannot and will not totally protect the American people from a terrorist attack. The only people that can prevent such an event from happening, is the American people themselves. This is one instance when the “Nanny State” just does not work. A perfect example of this is the person that prevented this horrific act of cowardice from taking place. His name is Jasper Schuringa and he is not even an American. Jasper knew that it was either the terrorist or him; and he acted accordingly. Jasper deserves the highest of honors from our Government that is because he did, what our President has not seem interested in doing, and that is to tell the terrorists that the battle is on and that are willing and able to fight them in any capacity that is required to defeat them. Jasper did not wait for the big “Nanny State” government to do their job; he simply took care of business and for that, he should be commended. To any progressives reading this — I am sorry, but dithering around on the issue of Afghanistan is not what I consider leadership. By dithering, I mean delaying the increase needed in troops and then not sending the number of troops asked for, by the commanders on the ground. That is not leadership — that is a sad joke, which sums up this President in a phrase.

Another thought is this; for all of the errors in the thinking of the Libertarians and their idiotic Party, they do have one thing right, and that is that these terror attacks are result of war. As along as the United States of America has forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, there will be these sorts of attacks on our soil. The problem is that the libertarians believe that we should just pull out of the Afghanistan war and admit defeat. This would be grave error on the part of our Government, it would prove to Al-Qaeda that the United States is weak and can be easily defeated. If anything; at this point, the United States should step up its attacks on the hiding places of the Al-Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan and other places abroad. Ronald Reagan believed in peace through strength, and the United States should continue that policy now, by not allowing these wretched terrorists win the battle. We should do this by making these Islamic thugs lives a living hell and chase them to the ends of the earth, as President George W. Bush pledged to do in the days after 9/11.

The United States of America has a rich history of defending the homeland, and we should continue that traditions until these turban-wearing thugs are thoroughly defeated and victory is realized.

AWESOME BREAKING NEWS! : Radical Cleric who inspired Fort Hood Shooter, Nasser al-Wahayshi, killed in Air Strike in Yemen!

Awesome!

Reuters Reports: (H/T HotAir)

SANAA (Reuters) – A Yemeni air raid may have killed the top two leaders of al Qaeda’s regional branch on Thursday, and an American Muslim preacher linked to the man who shot dead 13 people at a U.S. army base may also have died, a Yemeni security official said.

Nasser al-Wahayshi, the Yemeni leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and his Saudi deputy, Saeed al-Shehri, were believed to be among 30 militants killed in the dawn operation in the eastern province of Shabwa, said the official, who asked not to be identified.

U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki may also have died in the air strike which targeted a meeting of militants planning attacks on Yemeni and foreign oil and economic targets, he said.

If all the deaths are confirmed, the air strike would appear to have struck a severe blow against AQAP, seen as the most dangerous regional offshoot of Osama bin Laden’s network.

“Anwar al-Awlaki is suspected to be dead,” the official said of the cleric who was on the run in Yemen, where he was on the government’s most-wanted list of terrorist suspects.

According to U.S. officials, the U.S. army psychiatrist who ran amok at the Fort Hood army base in Texas on November 5 had contacts with Awlaki.

The Yemeni official said one leading figure in AQAP, Mohammed Saleh Omair, was confirmed dead in Thursday’s raid.

The United States cooperates closely with Yemen in combating al Qaeda militancy. Pentagon officials were not immediately available to comment on any U.S. involvement in the raid.

The Yemeni official mentioned only one air strike, which a government website said had taken place at 5 a.m., but Al Arabiya television reported four raids.

Resurgent al Qaeda attacks have stirred fears that worsening instability in Yemen, an impoverished country struggling with multiple security threats, might enable militants to launch renewed attacks in neighboring oil superpower Saudi Arabia.

Al Qaeda’s wing in Yemen, where Osama bin Laden’s father was born, announced in January it had changed its name to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula — in an apparent attempt to revive the group in Saudi Arabia, where a tough counter-terrorism drive had halted the group’s three-year armed campaign in 2006.

Wahayshi, the new group’s Yemeni leader, threatened attacks against Westerners in the oil-exporting region. AQIP has also called for the overthrow of the U.S.-allied Saudi royal family.

This should send a message to these turban wearing bastards; you mock our Country, after one of yours does something stupid like open fire in a military base, your stupid ass is going to get hit. Kudos to the Military and President Obama for authorizing this strike. If you’ll pardon my frank speech; one ‘towel head’ terrorist down, many more to go. They should have done this to this bastard after 9/11, but the military did not. Finally, he gets justice, about damn time. Again, Hats off to our awesome Military for a job well done!

I would be willing to bet, that there are some families at Fort Hood, Families of the Victims of 9/11 and many other victims of terrorism; who are smiling broadly today. Merry Christmas to them, hope this brings a little happiness. 😀

Parker Griffith defects to the GOP

Some good news in the midst of all the bad news out of Washington D.C.:

POLITICO has learned that Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Alabama, will announce today that he’s switching parties to become a Republican.

According to two senior GOP aides familiar with the decision, the announcement will take place this afternoon in Griffith's district in northern Alabama.

Griffith’s party switch comes on the eve of a pivotal congressional health care vote and will send a jolt through a Democratic House Caucus that has already been unnerved by the recent retirements of a handful of members who, like Griffith, hail from districts that offer prime pickup opportunities for the GOP in 2010.

The switch represents a coup for the House Republican leadership, which had been courting Griffith since he publicly criticized the Democratic leadership in the wake of raucous town halls during the summer.

via Exclusive: Rep. Parker Griffith switches to GOP – – POLITICO.com.

Ed Morrissey has good analysis here on this one, head on over and read it. Personally, I believe that this is a sign that the writing is on the wall for this party. The era of Blue-Dog Democrats is over, you are either in the tank with the far-left progressives or you are out in the cold. While this might seem to be good strategy for the far-left; some are just not into the far-left progressiveness of Pelosi and Co. Some are saying that this is not a good sign on the left. It would mean the era of hope and change is cracking up. Which, in this writers opinion is a good thing.

The Round up from all sides of the spectrum: : RedState, Matthew Yglesias, Club for Growth, Ezra Klein, CBS News, Washington Monthly, The Fix, Washington Wire, Glenn Thrush’s Blog, Think Progress, Scorecard’s Blog, The Note, TPMDC, Talking Points Memo, Michelle Malkin, Guardian, race42008.com, Daily Kos, Betsy’s Page, Real Clear Politics, Townhall.com, Hot Air, National Review, Outside The Beltway, Weekly Standard, Truthdig, msnbc.com, The Washington Independent, The Page and Indecision Forever

Quote of the Day

The real entitlements are never mentioned. The “defense” budget is an entitlement for the military-security complex about which President Eisenhower warned us 50 years ago. A person has to be crazy to believe that the United States, “the world’s only superpower,” protected by oceans on its East and West and by puppet states on its North and South, needs a “defense” budget larger than the military spending of the rest of the world combined.

The military budget is nothing but an entitlement for the military-security complex. To hide this fact, the entitlement is disguised as protection against “enemies” and passed through the Pentagon.

I say cut out the middleman and simply allocate a percentage of the federal budget to the military-security complex. This way we won’t have to concoct reasons for invading other countries and go to war in order for the military-security complex to get its entitlement. It would be a lot cheaper just to give them the money outright, and it would save a lot of lives and grief at home and abroad.

The U.S. invasion of Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with American national interests. It had to do with armaments profits and with eliminating an obstacle to Israeli territorial expansion. The cost of the war, aside from the $3 trillion, was over 4,000 dead Americans, over 30,000 wounded and maimed Americans, tens of thousands of broken American marriages and lost careers, 1 million dead Iraqis, 4 million displaced Iraqis and a destroyed country.

All of this was done for the profits of the military-security complex and to make paranoid Israel, armed with 200 nuclear weapons, feel “secure.”

My proposal would make the military-security complex even more wealthym as the companies would get the money without having to produce the weapons. Instead, all the money could go for multimillion dollar bonuses and dividend payouts to shareholders. No one, at home or abroad, would have to be killed, and the taxpayer would be better off.

Answering Laurence Vance

I write this piece to answer the libertarian leftist Laurence Vance’s smear piece against me. An article for what it is worth has only brought 143 visitors to my blog, as of this writing. For a man, who is supposedly an authority on all things libertarian; not to mention all things Austrian economics —That my friend is quite amusing, I guess Lew Rockwell and company are legends in their own minds — at best.

I will not sit here and pick apart this entire ridiculous article, which is filled with in inaccuracies about me, who I listen to in talk radio, and all the other silly assumptions that those of the idiotic leftist mentality believe about us, who happen to respect and support our Military. Nevertheless, I will correct this leftist imbecile on some issues.

First off, whom or what I listen to on television: I guess Mr. Vance assumes that Fox News Network in my Television when I am awake. This is a gross fallacy; I only watch Fox News during the daytime; that is, if and when, I decide to turn the blasted thing on. I think I may watch an hour of Television at most, as for during the opinion hour at night, the only person I can stomach on Fox News is, in fact, is Bill O’Reilly. I find Sean Hannity most annoying. Why is that? Because Sean Hannity is a water carrier, a talk points repeater. Quite bluntly, Sean Hannity is an idiotic gasbag — Not to mention he looks and dresses like a closeted gay twink. Sean Hannity is, in fact, a Republican. He spouts Republican talking points — all the while claiming to be a Libertarian. One thing I can tell you, Sean Hannity is not a libertarian, he is not even close. Even I, the most hawkish man in the blogosphere can tell you that. Sean Hannity, to me, represents the Bush-era Fox News. Which has since changed, they stopped with the stupid Bush-era talking points and moved on. Sean Hannity, well, not so much. As for Limbaugh, I respect the man for building such a large business around his, well, ego. However, I do not listen to him on a regular basis, and I will tell you why. Rush Limbaugh strikes me as someone who is love with his own voice — something that I find most highly annoying. Therefore, I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh for that reason. Like anyone else, I catch the clips online when he says or does something remarkably stupid. As for Glenn Beck, Beck peddles paranoia; I am not much into that sort of a thing really. Glenn Back believes that communism is still a real threat. I disagree; I believe that radical socialism is a real threat. However, staunch communism is not and has not been for many years — McCarthy saw to that little feat — and yes there is a big difference between socialism and communism, it even says this on the communist party USA’s website. I ought to know, I did look it up. I do not make a habit of yowling about things that I have no clue about, unlike some in this idiotic political blogosphere.

Therefore, yes, I do watch Bill O’Reilly; why, you ask — Because Bill O’Reilly is fair and yes, balanced. Anyone who actually watches his show knows that Bill does not carry water for the President, ever. Bill also is fair to the President; he does not just hate President Obama, because he is a socialist, much to the chagrin of those on the far right. Bill O’Reilly, like me, has a strong disliking of the socialist far left. This is because we both happen to know that socialism is a threat to the free capitalistic system in this country — this is why I respect the man. Another thing that made me begin to watch him at Bill O’Reilly was the fact that he stopped the policy of shutting people’s microphones off, that disagreed with him. I noticed that he was doing that, and because of this, I refused to watch O’Reilly. As much as I disagree with much of what the left has to say; I do believe that anyone in this Country, as long as they are not planning to overthrow or cause harm to anyone in this Nation, have the right to freedom of speech. This is what got Senator Joseph McCarthy into a great deal of trouble, this is why people like William Buckley Jr. and L. Brent Bozell Jr. (not to be confused with his son, Brent Bozell III) abandoned McCarthy. Because McCarthy wanted to exert thought police on the American people, that which is, sadly, a tactic of the far left. Because O’Reilly abandoned this practice of shutting microphones off, I began to watch him. I also starting watching Fox News and frankly stopped watching CNN and MSNBC because of the blatant partisanship of MSNBC and to a lesser extent CNN. I am all for a diversity of opinion, but when you actually stoop to the level of insulting your viewers, that is when I decided that the bus stopped here and I got off. (So to speak)

Getting back to the subject at hand here, Laurence Vance also accuses me of not being able to separate the Military from the Government. Which is most amusing, because his posting at Lew Rockwell’s Blog; he accuses the Military of occupying Iraq, which was done on the orders of the George W. Bush Administration — Which is something I pointed out in one of my previous postings. Therefore, to Mr. Vance I say — Project much, friend? But then again, when talking to a leftist, one can only expect so much — because to them, up is down and left is right, and the world is a very bizarre place; which is why I tend to avoid reasoning with them. After all, the Bible says; “If any man be ignorant, let them be ignorant” and I do try to follow the Bible as much as I possibly can.

While I am on the subject of Iraq, I feel the need to clear something up. If Mr. Vance or anyone else happens to believe that I am some sort of a Bush-supporting Republican, please be advised that this about as far from the truth that one can get. I did not vote for President George. W. Bush, at all, either time. During that time, I was firmly in the Democratic Party column. This pre-dated my blogging days. I was a left of center — albeit quite the “half-assed left of center,” but I digress. Further, I did support the Iraq war, until the reports came out and the White House admitted that they were wrong about Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, it was that little incident, that triggered me to start blogging in February of 2006 as a “left of center” blogger. I will explain the reasons why I switched sides for another posting, as this one is getting very long.

Finally, to answer Mr. Vance’s charge of being a “Red State Fascist” — If loving America and in loving America; knowing that in order to maintain the peace requires strength. If knowing that the United States Military is a valued treasure in this Country and should be highly respected — If wanting to see the United States of America protected from terrorists; both foreign and domestic, makes me a Red State Fascist — I plead the only thing I that I will ever plead to a charge as this — guilty as charged.

May God Bless the United States of America and May God Bless the United States Armed Forces. Further more, Thank God for our Military and Thank God for the privilege of being able to debate those who I disagree with, without the fear of being criminally persecuted for it. We live in a wonderful Nation and I will always defend her from those who would want to slander her. I feel that it is the most that I can do.

Obama and the Democrats play politics with the Nation’s Defense

My, what the Democrats will not to pass their idiotic socialistic healthcare bill! Captain Ed over at HotAir.com alerts to the fact that Michael Goldfarb has a source up on the hill; what he is telling Michael is unbelievable:

While the Democrats appease Senator Lieberman, they still have to worry about other recalcitrant Democrats including Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson. Though Lieberman has been out front in the fight against the public option and the Medicare buy-in, Nelson was critical of both. Now that those provisions appear to have been stripped from the bill, Lieberman may get on board, but Nelson’s demand that taxpayer money not be used to fund abortion has still not been met. According to a Senate aide, the White House is now threatening to put Nebraska’s Offutt Air Force Base on the BRAC list if Nelson doesn’t fall into line.

Offutt Air Force Base employs some 10,000 military and federal employees in Southeastern Nebraska. As our source put it, this is a “naked effort by Rahm Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelson’s vote.” They are “threatening to close a base vital to national security for what?” asked the Senate staffer.

Indeed, Offutt is the headquarters for US Strategic Command, the successor to Strategic Air Command, and not by accident. STRATCOM was located in the middle of the country for strategic reasons. Its closure would be a massive blow to the economy of the state of Nebraska, but it would also be another example of this administration playing politics with our national security.

I will be straight and honest with you. During the 2008 election, I thought Michael Goldfarb’s outlandish behavior was asinine; I still do. However, this was one hell of a good catch. Goodness, what a better way to fuel the conspiracy theory idiots like Orly Taitz, who still believe that President Obama is some sort of a covert Muslim or whatever the hell it is that they think about him now.

I will say this, this story, if true, reeks of desperation. The Democrats are obviously desperate to pass this healthcare bill. Why is this? Because they know that if this bill goes down in flames, the Democrats are sunk. They already know that the 2010 elections are not going to be kind to them; the deep sixing of this bill will only make that worse. The problem is, seeing that the public option was stripped out; you have people like Markos Moulitsas saying that the bill should be killed. Either way, this is going to be a huge disaster for the Democrats. They promised change, they promised healthcare for everyone, they overreached like nothing I have ever seen before and now, they are going to pay for it dearly. Frankly, I could not be happier; you oversell yourself and promise the moon, the stars, unicorns and rainbows, and then do not deliver — then you suffer the wrath of the voters come election time.

The point to this blog entry is this; do not make promises that you cannot keep. If you do, you will pay and it is obvious to me and every other blogger out there that the Democrats made all sorts of promises to the American people, during the election of 2008 and now they cannot deliver. Because of this, they are stooping to desperate measures. Measures which will hurt our National Security, for this the Democrats will pay come 2010 and 2012.

Lew Rockwell Slanders the Military….Again

Lew Rockwell’s little weasel friend by the name of Laurence Vance is still at it slandering our Nation’s finest and best Military. Mr. Vance writes over at Lew’s Blog the following smear against the United States Military:

Obviously, this picture and story are supposed to counter the negative things I have said about the U.S. military. While I applaud the actions of Lt. Hickman and his fellow soldiers, I’m afraid it doesn’t counter anything. The U.S. military unjustly invaded and still occupies Iraq. This has directly and indirectly resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. It doesn’t matter how many Iraqi children are helped by the U.S. military. There is nothing these benevolent soldiers can do to make up for what the U.S. military has done to Iraq.

Mr. Vance’s inability to write a sentence with proper grammar structure aside, this is nothing more than a leftist slander against our United States Armed Forces. It is in fact true that our Armed Forces did invade the Country of Iraq. They did so BY ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, GEORGE W. BUSH. In other words, these fine brave young men and women were just doing their jobs and following orders; as one is supposed to do when in the Armed Forces. Not that Laurence Vance would know anything about serving our Country, he is too busy peddling his stupid religious books, and books that slander other Presidents —like FDR. Silly books that float the conspiracy theory that FDR purposefully allowed the ships to be attacked at Pearl Harbor and other such stupidity — Which is quite typical of the idiotic libertarian left and their idiotic twins the Paleo-Conservatives.

Some of you might wonder why I am going after Lew Rockwell and Vance. I will explain this; my family served in the United States Armed Forces, my uncle pulled a tour of duty in Vietnam. Luckily, he got out there alive. My grandfather’s two brothers pulled a tour duty in Germany during World War II.  When Lew Rockwell and Laurence Vance insult the United States Armed Forces, they are insulting my family, and that my friends, I take very seriously. My family who spilled blood on foreign soil, just so these two jackasses can run a blog, which is for the sole purpose of insulting our United States Military. I am for the idea of freedom of speech and I would not dare try to stop these two thugs from speaking their mind. Nevertheless, I will counter their idiotic accusations and general stupid slanders against our Armed Forces, no matter the cost and no matter how many people e-mail me and try to intimidate me into stopping. I will not stop, ever.

I am, in essence drawing the line in the sand here and saying, “This will NOT stand!” I will not allow two leftist thugs to slander our United States Armed Forces and get away with it unanswered. The American Military is treasure to America and I will not let it be slandered. Call me a “Chickenhawk,” call me whatever you want, but I will NOT allow this to happen unchallenged. Because those brave and woman out of the front lines deserve better than this and if I have to do it alone, I will.

To my readers, I ask you this, where do you stand? Are you with the United States Military or are you against it? The decision is yours.

Updated: Why I left the libertarian ranks: Exhibit A – Hatred of the United States Military

The following picture and caption that I am about to show you, comes from the libertarian leftist blogger Lew Rockwell. I present this personal exhibit as to why I left the Paleo-Conservative/libertarian ranks in favor of the Conservative, Pro-military ranks:

Hey Marines, how about some toys for this tot in Afghanistan:

toystots

I present this as “Exhibit A”, to the fact that the libertarian movement has been infiltrated by Anti-War leftists who hate America, our Military and why they should be stripped of their citizenship and deported out of our fine Country and into another country; like say, North Korea, Venezuela or maybe even Communist China. Not to be rude about this, but it just so happens, that if that dumb kids fellow Countrymen had not giving refuge and comfort to those who would seek to destroy America — Namely Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda; the damned kid would still possibly have his damned leg. Not to mention the fact that on September 11, 2001, our Country was attacked by Islamic terrorists who did more than just destroy a leg. It killed 2,996 of our people.

However, of course, you cannot tell this to the likes of Lew Rockwell and his bastard gang of leftists who hate this damn Country; they still believe that George W. Bush ordered those planes into the trade center towers. What really troubles me, is that the author of this posting is none other than Dr. Lawrence Vance, who is supposedly a Born-Again Christian. How anyone can harbor such hatred for this Country and our Nation’s Military and still claim to be ANY kind of a Christian is beyond me.

When I still was on the left; as little as that was, in terms of what I believed the Democratic Party to be about, I was always under the impression that Iraq was the war that was very unjustified and that Afghanistan was in fact, the good war that we were fighting to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden. I heard that from the left and I believed that myself. As it turns out, that was nothing more than a damned lie and the far-left knows it. The good majority of the far left either believes that George W. Bush ordered the attacks, to win his popularity or to justify going into Iraq. The rest believe that we had it coming or deserved the attacks because of our evil capitalistic society. This picture and caption are living proof of this; which is why, I left the liberal left and stopped voting for the Democratic Party.

Just to let everyone know, I said my piece on this and I am not interested in debating it. Therefore, I am shutting the comments off; because I want this posting to stand on its own.

Update:  After reading this entry again, I realize that I did leave out one important thing. My apologies for that, I do sometimes forget to include stuff pertinent to the entry at times; A.D.H.D. does that to a fellow. Yes, I am serious about having that little disability. Anyhow, the thing I forgot to include in this little shoving of the hatred of the libertarian leftists, into their faces, is the following:

There is one unifying cause that the libertarian leftists and the socialist liberal left is their inbred hatred of war and of anything military. Further more, the libertarians and liberals hate the current state of the Government, albeit for very different reasons. The libertarians hate the size of the Government and the fact that it has become too large, and too regulatory — Which is something I can identify with myself. The socialist left, however, is angry because they cannot control that large Government. The Socialist left does not mind big Government, as long as they can control it. A perfect example of this can be found here.

So, again, the reason why I lump the libertarian leftists in with the socialist is this, not because they are one in the same, they are not, even I know this. However, it is because the libertarian leftists are totally “In bed” with the anti-war socialist leftists who resent any sort of American values or capitalism or defense of the Republic. This has been proven many times with the vile acts at the Military recruiting office in Berkley California and such matters. Same goes for the Paleo-Conservatives, They too are “in bed” with the socialist left, when it comes to foreign policy. It has been that way for years and will continue to be that way. The difference between a Paleo-Conservative and a libertarian is one thing —protectionism. This is what the Democratic Party believed in, before globalists like Bill Clinton came on the scene and passed NAFTA. It should be noted, however, that the NAFTA agreement did not pass until the Republicans took back the Congress, and Clinton became an instant moderate.

Nevertheless, my feelings toward these libertarian leftists, their Paleo-Conservative counterparts, and their cousins the Anti-War socialist left remain unabated.

May we never forget: Pearl Harbor – December 7, 1941

December 7, 1941 – 68 Years ago today. The empire of Japan attacked the United States Military Base at what was then called the the Territory of Hawaii. (The United States had not taken possession of that territory making it the 49’th state yet.)

It is a day, that will live…. In infamy…

Update: Video removed, because the ignorant bastard who owns it, can’t remember telling me that I could link to it.

Damned idiot.

Here is the entire “Day of infamy Speech”, Now this is a way to make a speech! Obama, Take notes!:

[podcast]http://www.radiochemistry.org/history/video/fdr_infamy.mp3[/podcast]

I do not know quite why it is that I get so emotional when the anniversary of the attack of Pearl Harbor comes around; but do I ever. I guess it is because it affected my personal family a great deal. My grandfather’s two brothers, Frank and Harlan Hayes both were in the United States Army and my grandmother’s stepbrother Jess Runyan served also in the Military in World War II. My Great-Uncle Frank and Harlan both served in Germany, with Frank getting his finger blown off, while tossing a hand grenade that went off too soon. They were able to reattach it, but he never was able to use the finger very well after that. I do not know much about Harlen, or I would share his story. Jess Runyan came back from World War II with the condition now known as traumatic stress disorder or as they used to call it — shell-shocked. Jess was never able to work and collected military benefits, and I think social security for the rest of his life. Jess never married. For what it is worth, all of these people lived in Dalton, Georgia, which is where a good amount of my family is from.

Another reason is because, damn it, I just love America; since when did that become a federal crime? This Nation is the best-damned Nation on earth. Yes, we are having some bad times here; the economy is bad, jobs are scarce. However, the status of this Nation could be much worse; we could be living in same situation as North Korea or even communist China. I guess Pearl Harbor is a personal one for me, because I happen to be a history buff and because of my family’s involvement in that war. I believe also that the Nation’s isolationism also caused the attack as well, not to mention the economic warfare that was being committed against Japan by FDR. This same mentality of isolationism is what had affected the United States the day that the September 11 attacks in 2001. We were different Nation then and we are now a different Nation since those attacks. The tragic thing about the 9/11 attacks, is that they became quite politicized. When the attack on Pear Harbor took place and then the subsequent war began; America stopped being Democrats and Republicans; and just started being Americans. The sad thing is that after 9/11, there was a short burst of American patriotism. However, it did not last; there are many reasons for this, I believe the biggest reason is times have changed greatly. I could get into all that, but this blog entry would end up being over 50 pages long.

I think the biggest and best thing that Americans can do for those who perished in World War II is to never forget what happened and to work to ensure that it never happens again. We must ensure that the politics of our Nation or any other Nation gets that sort of ugly point again. This is why I believe that wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are worth every last dime and worth every life lost. There are those that say that fighting that war in Afghanistan is not worth it and that it is another Vietnam. I disagree with that nonsense. ANY War that is worth fighting is worth winning. I just wish those on the Socialist Left realized that as well. There was a time, when Democrats actually believed in fighting wars. This all changed in the late 1960’s with the rise of the socialist and hippy movements. Vietnam was essentially lost because of the socialists that had taken over the Media at the time. Walter Cronkite’s literal lying to the Nation about the Tet Offensive was a perfect example of that. Thankfully, there were Democrats who crossed over, for whatever reasoning, who still believed in defending this Nation and believed the Wars could be won, and because of that, and because of President’s like Ronald Reagan; we have the great Military we have today. It is my personal hope, that President Barack Obama will continue that respect for our Nation’s Military. Although, as of late President Obama’s performance as a leader, when it comes to the war in Afghanistan has been dismal at best.

Therefore, in conclusion, I simply end with this — May we never forget December 7, 1941. Because to do so, would be a horrible tragedy.

neverforget1941

May we never forget - December 7, 1941

The National Pearl Harbor Survivors Association website is here.

Obama send in 34,000 more troops with ‘Offramps’ to Afghanistan

Last night I wrote, in some not-so politically correct words, that the President is not interested in fighting the war in Afghanistan. It appears that this news article confirms what I have believed all along.

Quote:

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he’s called “a war of necessity” in Afghanistan, U.S. officials told McClatchy.

Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire, the officials said.

The U.S. officials all spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly and because, one official said, the White House is incensed by leaks on its Afghanistan policy that didn’t originate in the White House.

They said the commander of the U.S.-led international force in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, could arrive in Washington as early as Sunday to participate in the rollout of the new plan, including testifying before Congress toward the end of next week. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry also are expected to appear before congressional committees.

As it now stands, the plan calls for the deployment over a nine-month period beginning in March of three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y., and a Marine brigade from Camp Lejeune, N.C., for as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.

In addition, a 7,000-strong division headquarters would be sent to take command of U.S.-led NATO forces in southern Afghanistan — to which the U.S. has long been committed — and 4,000 U.S. military trainers would be dispatched to help accelerate an expansion of the Afghan army and police.

This all sounds nice and pretty; that is until you read down further…:

A U.S. military official used the term “decisional” to describe Monday evening’s meeting among Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Gates, Clinton, National Security Adviser Jim Jones, Eikenberry and senior U.S. military commanders.

The administration’s plan contains “off-ramps,” points starting next June at which Obama could decide to continue the flow of troops, halt the deployments and adopt a more limited strategy or “begin looking very quickly at exiting” the country, depending on political and military progress, one defense official said.

“We have to start showing progress within six months on the political side or military side or that’s it,” the U.S. defense official said.

It’s “not just how we get people there, but what’s the strategy for getting them out,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday.

The approach is driven in part by concerns that Afghan President Hamid Karzai won’t keep his promises to root out corruption and support political reforms, and in part by growing domestic opposition to the war, the U.S. officials said.

HotAir.com’s Ed Morrissey is not impressed at all:

The increase in troops is a good decision, but the off-ramps almost completely undermine it.  The point in extending our footprint is to win the trust of the local communities and prove our reliability in providing them security, which is the central thrust of McChrystal’s COIN strategy.  By getting them to trust our commitment, we can get them to help fight the Taliban themselves, as we did with the Anbar Awakening in Iraq against al-Qaeda, and greatly improve the intel we get from the locals.   If we send 34,000 more troops but give ourselves a six-month time frame for success or bug-out, the locals will very  quickly come to the realization that allying with us will be suicide.  The COIN strategy only worked in Iraq because George W. Bush was adamant that we would stay until we won.

A Commander in Chief doesn’t need “off-ramps.”  Any President can call an end to a deployment based on his own judgment.  Putting these conditions into the American strategy signals weakness — a desire to pull out without getting blamed for the decision.   Obama wants to be off the hook for an eventual withdrawal by claiming that he’s forced to do it because of these benchmark failures.  And if Obama’s that keen to retreat, he should just do it now.

Ed Morrissey hit the nail square on the head. President Barack Obama was never, at any point, interested in fighting the so-called good war in Afghanistan. President Barack Obama knew that he was inheriting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and he knew that if he continued them, that he would also inherit the backlash from the left that goes with them. Therefore, he is devising a way of getting out that region and making himself look like the saint and President George W. Bush look like the bad person.  This was the plan all along; never at any point was there a plan to fight this war until victory; but rather a plan of stealth defeat.

There are many reasons why the Democrats will not fight the war on terror. Namely, it is because to a certain degree the Democrats actually sympathize with the terrorists. The Democrats have always had a disdain for Israel and its right to exist; many Democrats have always felt that President Harry Truman royally screwed up when he decided to formally recognize Israel as a sovereign Nation. It is due to the frosty relationship towards Israel that sparked the attack of the U.S.S. Liberty by a rogue faction within the Israeli Defense Force. Many people who are of the hatemonger class, like to blame Israel and the Jews for that attack; the problem is, they are blaming the wrong people, they should be blaming the Democrats for it.

Not only this, but you also have about sixty percent of the Democrats who actually blame Bush for the attacks on 9/11. They actually believe that Bush knew the attacks were coming and actually allowed them to happen. This is why Eric Holder and the justice department are having civilian trials for a few of the 9/11 conspirators. They desire to drag out of the stuff that happened in the months after 9/11, as to make a mockery of them.  The remaining people within the Democratic Party and those who are of the far-leftist mentality actually have the audacity to believe that the United States of America actually deserved the attacks on 9/11, because of our capitalistic society and because of our past treatment of blacks; because we do not give enough hand-outs to poor people and so forth . President Barack Obama’s former Pastor even said as this very thing, and now President Barack Obama is allowing them to have civilian trials; ponder that scary thought for a moment.

In closing, I simply will offer this sober note. Elections have consequences. The American people elected a man, who was supposed to be a stark contrast to President George W. Bush, someone who could lead. What the American people received was an out of touch, dithering liberal elitist, who in all honesty could not even lead his own household, if the truth were told. President Barack Obama is more interested in shoving his rather idiotic social agenda, of wealth redistribution and outright class warfare onto the American people, than a fighting a war that will ultimately decide America’s success or demise. We should remember this come the elections of 2010 and of 2012 and decide wisely our choices for those we plan to put in office.

Breitbart to AG Holder: Do your job douche nozzle or we will burn the Democrats come 2010!

Oh Man, there’s gonna be many a Democrat singing the blues, if Eric Holder does not do his job before 2010.

The Video:

Breitbart: There’s a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they’ve recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it’s link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn’t come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General’s office, and they’ve now realized let’s get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that’s why we’ve been forced to offer this latest tape.

Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?

Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it’s not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it’s not just ACORN, and we’re going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don’t give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.

Hannity: This is a blockbuster, what you’re saying here. You guys have more tapes, you’ll release them before the election, that could have a big impact on the election, obviously…

via Big Government  – Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We’ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election.

Needless to say; this election cycle coming in 2010 is going to be an extremely interesting one.  😯 If I were holder, I would be contacting Andrew and pronto. Because if there is something huge that Andrew is sitting on, like a corruption tape, involving say, The President. The fall out would be huge; As in Richard Nixon kind of huge.

Others: Townhall.com, Moe Lane, Top of the Ticket, Stop The ACLU and YID With LID

Updated: A Huge Blunder by the Obama Administration

Possibly one of the biggest blunders by the Obama Administration:

WASHINGTON — Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and four other men accused in the plot will be prosecuted in federal court in New York City, the United States attorney general announced Friday.

But the administration will prosecute another set of high-profile detainees now being held at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba — Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is accused of planning the 2000 bombing of the Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen, and four other detainees — before a military commission.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced those decisions in a news conference Friday at the Department of Justice. The arrangements would mean that civilian prosecutors would handle those detainees accused of the 2001 terrorist attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, northern Virginia and Pennsylvania, while the 2000 attack against the Cole would remain within the military system.

via Key 9/11 Suspect to Be Tried in New York – NYTimes.com.

Here is why this is a big blunder; I’ll let William Teach‘s words say it for me, This is what he wrote in the comments section of Allan Colmes Blog:

You’re forgetting one thing, Alan: KSM is NOT an American citizen, and not entitled to the protections of our Constitution unless we afford them to him.

The problem with “Affording” them to these guys is this, as Ed Morrissey writes:

That brings up a key question.  What happens if the judge throws out key evidence over nitpicky technicalities?  What happens if KSM and others get found not guilty because of gaps in the evidence chain resulting from national-security issues or “evidentiary issues”?  Will Obama let them walk away?  If that happens, look for a massive amount of anger to overwhelm the naive Commander in Chief.  And if Obama isn’t prepared to let them walk after a potential acquittal, then it makes a mockery of the criminal trial, and of the justice system itself.

These terrorists belong at a military tribunal, not the justice system employed for Americans to judge other Americans for civil criminal conduct.  Instead of giving these men the oblivion they deserve, we’re incentivizing further attacks on the US by giving them the biggest possible PR platform.  We may as well put them on TV and call it Dancing With the Terrorists, or So You Want To Be A Jihadist Martyr.

I have worse scenario than that; what if we happen to get a judge that is a Muslim? What happens if during that trial he begins to feel a twinge of sympathy for these terrorists and begins to nitpick at the evidence and ends up tossing the case out of court? I know it sounds far fetched; but it could happen.

Either way, is this massive blunder by the President and I look for Fox News to go on the attack over this. These guy should be tried in International Court. Just like the Nazi’s were. But because our President is a liberal; this will not be done. He is of the belief system that the terrorists were nothing more than common petty criminals and should be treated as such. This is the same mistake that President Bill Clinton made and it is why September 11’th happened in the first place. As long as the United States continues to make the same mistakes,when it comes to handling of terrorists, we will continue to see terrorists attacks on our soil. It is a fact of reality.

Update: Hell, Democrat Jim Webb even thinks that this is a bad idea! (H/T Ed at HotAir)

I have never disputed the constitutional authority of the President to convene Article III courts in cases of international terrorism. However, I remain very concerned about the wisdom of doing so. Those who have committed acts of international terrorism are enemy combatants, just as certainly as the Japanese pilots who killed thousands of Americans at Pearl Harbor. It will be disruptive, costly, and potentially counterproductive to try them as criminals in our civilian courts.

The precedent set by this decision deserves careful scrutiny as we consider proper venues for trying those now held at Guantanamo who were apprehended outside of this country for acts that occurred outside of the country. And we must be especially careful with any decisions to bring onto American soil any of those prisoners who remain a threat to our country but whose cases have been adjudged as inappropriate for trial at all. They do not belong in our country, they do not belong in our courts, and they do not belong in our prisons.

I have consistently argued that military commissions, with the additional procedural rules added by Congress and enacted by President Obama, are the most appropriate venue for trying individuals adjudged to be enemy combatants.

Update: It seems that my gay stalker Ed Brayton does not like what I wrote. Big surprise there, seeing he is a leftist libertarian/classic liberal;  or as I like to call them small Government liberals. I guess he and his sheep that follow after him, did not bother to follow the links and see, that yes, in fact, I did refer to the International criminal court. Anyhow, my stalker says that Conservatives do not support that idea. To that I reply;  Who says that I follow the Republican/Conservative talking points? I believe that these terrorists ought to be tried in international criminal court or at least in a Military trial and NOT in a civilian court on American soil. As Obama said HE felt they should be, back in 2006. But now has flip flopped on, now the he has been elected.

Confirmed: President Obama wants the United States to fail in Afghanistan

Yesterday, some moron liberal left this comment in my comment section of a posting that I made about the Ft. Hood Speech that Obama Gave:

Say, Pat, do you happen to know *why* Obama was 40 minutes late to give the speech?

He was talking to wounded survivors of the attack.

Really, though, it was a perfect situation for you–suppose he had cut short that meeting? Then you could have slagged him for insulting the survivors by running off to the speech.

To Wish I replied back:

Your opinion, of course.

You somehow miss the fuller point. The man is a damned empty suit. He has no true feelings for our Military. He only cares about his political record. I am sorry, I tried giving him the benefit of the doubt. But it is quote obvious, that he just doesnot care. If he did, he would order a congressional investigation into the rampage and call it what it was, A TERRORIST ATTACK! But he does not do that; because he either secretly agrees with this mans actions or is at last sympathetic to the Jihadists cause.

Of course, this doesn’t surprise me that you don’t get this; most socialists liberals are that dumb.

Now comes the news of the confirmation of what I stated:

President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Obama is still close to announcing his revamped war strategy — most likely shortly after he returns from a trip to Asia that ends on Nov. 19.

But the president raised questions at a war council meeting Wednesday that could alter the dynamic of both how many additional troops are sent to Afghanistan and what the timeline would be for their presence in the war zone, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Obama’s thinking.

This my friends, is a strategy for failure. This President just does not care about winning the war on terror. All President Obama cares about is passing his rather idiotic social agenda. If President Obama knew that it would not “Deep Six” his poll numbers; he would pull the United States of America out of Iraq and Afghanistan in a New York Minute.

My friends, elections have consequences —- and this is one of them. Keep this in mind, come 2010.

Others Covering this Story: JustOneMinute, Jules Crittenden, The Jawa ReportOutside The Beltway, , BLACKFIVE, Stop The ACLU, Another Black ConservativeJammieWearingFool, MoonbatteryDon Surber, The Foundry,, Below The Beltway, Scared Monkeys,, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, Townhall.com and Gateway Pundit (Via Memeorandum)

DC sniper John Allen Muhammad has been executed

I remember this story, like it was yesterday:

He was happy to watch the sniper die.

“I feel better. I think I can breathe better,” Nelson Rivera said as he watched the execution of convicted killer John Allen Muhammad. “I’m glad he’s gone because he’s not going to hurt anyone else.”

Rivera’s wife Lori Ann Lewis-Rivera, was one of Muhammad’s 10 victims in a three-week killing spree in the Washington, D.C., area in October 2002. She was gunned down as she vacuumed her van at a Maryland gas station in 2002.

Muhammad taunted police with written messages and phoned-in threats and demands.

He was put to death at the Greenville Correctional Center in Virginia Tuesday night as the victims’ families sat behind glass while watching, separated from the rest of the 27 witnesses.

The execution came hours after Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine denied a last-minute clemency request and a day after the

Supreme Court declined to intervene in the case.

Muhammad was declared dead at 9:11 p.m.

via Families of DC sniper victims celebrate John Allen Muhammad’s execution.

I, like many others, were glued to the television, for me it was CNN, watching as this story played out. I, like many others, were still raw after 9/11. CNN never did put the terrorist connection on it. Even though the killer admitted that his motives were of a Islamic terrorist sort. What makes me so damned angry, is the fact that the Liberal media likes to paint this bastard as some sort of a victim of war. The common excuse is that he was driven crazy by the first gulf war. Sorry, I do not buy that idiotic bunch of tripe at all. I know many people who served in that first gulf war; one man personally, while he did have a nasty cough, that he could not shake. He never killed anyone, at all. The sad fact is; that the Ft. Hood shooting and this case are two peas out of the same damned pod, and the idiotic liberal media just will not put the two together. Because they fear a backlash from the Muslim community.

As much as I know, that it will most likely get me attacked for saying this, I happen to agree with this guy here:

I will simply end with this; this is one black man, that I am extremely glad to see is dead. One terrorist down, many millions more to go.

Ft. Hood shooter tried to make contact with Al-Qaeda

This is getting downright interesting….:

U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

It is not known whether the intelligence agencies informed the Army that one of its officers was seeking to connect with suspected al Qaeda figures, the officials said.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) said the CIA had, so far, refused to brief the intelligence committees on what, if any, knowledge they had about Hasan’s efforts.

CIA director Leon Panetta and the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, have been asked by Congress “to preserve” all documents and intelligence files that relate to Hasan, according to the lawmaker.

via Fort Hood Shooter Tried to Contact al Qaeda Terrorists, Officials Say – ABC News.

I would be willing to bet a old wooden shoe, that before it is over with; that the CIA will come out and say that this guy had direct ties to Al-Qeada. It will also come out that the CIA and the FBI were scared to bother the guy for fear of accusations from him and his family of Anti-Muslim or Arab Bigotry by the Government. This is what happens when you allow your Government offices to become “PC” in nature. People die, just that simple.

It appears that this White House and the Governmental agencies that work under it have no clue the seriousness of the war on terror. Whether it is one person or a legion of them; they are dangerous criminals and should be treated as such. Of course, Obama will not even use the phrase to describe what these murderous thugs are doing; which is the “War on Terror” or “Terrorism.”‘  Obama, along with his fellow Democrats are basically wanting to treat this like some sort of average criminal activity. Which of course, is not what it is; it is people killing in the name of a religion. A false and quite Satanic Religion; but I digress.

As I have written on this blog many times; Elections have consequences and this is one of them. The American people are watching; all of them, not just the liberals in California, New York and Chicago. But all of America.  If President Obama and this congress treats this like some sort of isolated incident and not as a part of the broader war on terror. They will pay the price during the next election in 2010 and in 2012 as well. Because the America people did not elect someone who waffles on leadership and that my friends is exactly what President Obama and this Congress is doing, they are more interested in passing socialist programs that will bankrupt this nation; than they are being diligent on the war on terror. That is not what the American people elected; and the Democrats will find this out come next year and in 2012.

State Worker gets beat up at a SEIU meeting

Your Unions hard at work!

The Video is here, and boy does it ever show the damage.

The Story:

A state worker is recovering after a bloody brawl at a union hall. He says members of the local SEIU 1000 beat him up and sent him to the hospital all because he wanted to expose allegedl corruption within the union.

Ken Hamidi is a state worker at the California Franchise Tax Board. Last night he walked into a union hall in Sacramento for an SEIU local 1000 meeting.

“We had every right to be here, very simple; it wasn’t anything private or anything exclusive,” said Hamidi.

But Hamidi says the union members did not want him there.

“Three, four people jumped at me, wrestled with me, then did all that,” said Hamidi. “I was covered in blood and then over to the emergency room.”

via State Worker Beat Up At SEIU Meeting For Speaking His Mind – cbs13.com.

Wow, Is this what the SEIU means about Stronger Together? Stronger for beating people up? Unbelievable.

Of course, who can forget these fine selections? :

The Democratic Party goon squad. Doing the heavy lifting for Obama.

I wonder how many Main Stream National outlets will cover this little attack?

*crickets*

I will not hold my breathe least I turn blue and die.

Others Covering: Gateway Pundit, American Glob and NewsReal Blog

Give to Project ValourIT Today!

Just a reminder, these guys need your help.

This comes via From My Position….On the Way!

Click here to give to Soldiers Angels. You will be getting voice activated laptop’s to our war injured. Let’s help those who put thier lives on line; for our President and for all of us.

Joe Lieberman says that he will back GOP filibuster of Senate Healthcare Bill

I have an idea as to why Lieberman is doing this; well, I have several different ideas:

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said Tuesday that he’d back a GOP filibuster of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s health care reform bill.

Lieberman, who caucuses with Democrats and is positioning himself as a fiscal hawk on the issue, said he opposes any health care bill that includes a government-run insurance program — even if it includes a provision allowing states to opt out of the program, as Reid has said the Senate bill will.

“We’re trying to do too much at once,” Lieberman said. “To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now.”

Lieberman added that he’d vote against a public option plan “even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line.”

His comments confirmed that Reid is short of the 60 votes needed to advance the bill out of the Senate, even after Reid included the opt-out provision. Several other moderate Democrats expressed skepticism at the proposal as well, but most of the wavering Democratic senators did not go as far as Lieberman Tuesday, saying they were waiting to see the details.

Lieberman did say he’s “strongly inclined” to vote to proceed to the debate, but that he’ll ultimately vote to block a floor vote on the bill if it isn’t changed first.

“I’ve told Sen. Reid that if the bill stays as it is now I will vote against cloture,” he said.

via Joe Lieberman: I’ll block vote on Harry Reid’s plan – Manu Raju – POLITICO.com.

Here is my official theory as to why Lieberman is doing this. For one; I believe that Lieberman is doing this to get back at the Senate Majority leader for his scolding of him for supporting John McCain during the 2008 election. Another theory I have is that Lieberman is attempting to garner support amongst the Conservative leadership on the hill. Maybe Lieberman is going to try for a run as a moderate to Liberal Republican in the not-so-distant future in the Senate. Either that, or Lieberman knows that he will never be elected as a Republican or a Democrat ever again and he is doing this, thinking that it will, someday be seen as his last great feat to save the Country from out of control socialism.

Either way, I believe that any chance of Lieberman getting back into the Democratic Party just totally dissolved. At this point, if I were a Democrat, I would want Lieberman’s head on a platter.

Others: Michelle Malkin, Townhall.com, Weekly Standard, The Corner, AmSpecBlog, The Greenroom, JOSHUAPUNDIT, The Moderate Voice,

Some advice that Obama should really listen to

Seeing that the running meme in the political Blogosphere is the fact that Obama White House is trying to marginalize its critics. I thought I would post a very well done speech: (H/T to HotAir for Video and Transcript)

Transcript:

In 1969 and during the first half of 1970, I was a wet-behind-the-ears, 29-year-old staff aide in the West Wing of the Nixon White House. I was working for the wisest man in that White House, Bryce Harlow, who was a friend of President Johnson, as well as the favorite staff member of President Eisenhower, and President Nixon’s first appointee.

Based upon that experience and my forty years since then in and out of public life, I want to make what I hope will be taken as a friendly suggestion to President Obama and his White House: don’t create an enemies list.

As I was leaving the White House in 1970, Mr. Harlow was heading out on the campaign plane with Vice President Spiro Agnew whose job was to vilify Democrats and to help elect Republicans. The Vice President had the help of talented young speechwriters, the late Bill Safire and Pat Buchanan. In Memphis, he called Albert Gore, Sr., the “southern regional chairman of the eastern liberal establishment.” He labeled the increasingly critical news media, “nattering nabobs of negativism.”

Those phrases have become part of our political lore. They began playfully enough, in the back and forth of political election combat. After I had come home to Tennessee, they escalated into something more. They eventually emerged into the Nixon enemies list.

In 1971 Chuck Colson, who was then a member of President Nixon’s staff and today is admired for his decades of selfless work in prison reform, presented a list of what he called “persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration.” He said he thought the administration should “maximize our incumbency . . . [or] to put it more bluntly, . . . use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.” On that list of 20 people were people like CBS correspondent Daniel Schorr, Washington Star columnist Mary McGrory, Leonard Woodcock, the head of the United Auto Workers, John Conyers, the Democratic Congressman from Michigan, Edwin Guthman, managing editor of the Los Angeles Times, and several prominent businessmen such as Howard Stein, of the Dreyfus Corporation and Arnold Picker, vice president of United Artists. The New York Times and the Washington Post were made out to be enemies of the Republic.

Now make no mistake, politics was not such a gentlemanly affair in those days either. After Barry Goldwater had won the Presidential nomination in 1964, Daniel Schorr had told CBS viewers that Goldwater had – quote – “travel[led] to Germany to join-up with the right wing there” and – quote “visit[ed] Hitler’s old stomping ground.” — unquote. Schorr later corrected that on the air.

What was different about Colson’s effort, though, was the open declaration of war upon anyone who seemed to disagree with administration policies. Colson later expanded his list to include hundreds of people, including Joe Namath, John Lennon, Carol Channing, Gregory Peck, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Congressional Black Caucus, Alabama Governor George Wallace. All this came out during the Watergate hearings. You could see an administration spiraling downwards. And, of course, we all know where that led.

Now the only reason I mention this is because I have an uneasy feeling, only ten months into this new administration, that we’re beginning to see symptoms of this same kind of animus developing in the Obama administration.

According to Politico, the White House plans to “neuter the United States Chamber of Commerce,” an organization with members in almost every major community in America. The Chamber had supported the President’s stimulus package and some of his early appointments, but has problems with his health care and climate change proposals.

The Department of Health and Human Services imposed a gag order on a large health care company, Humana, who had warned its Medicare Advantage customers that their benefits might be reduced in Democratic health care reform proposals—a piece of information that is perfectly true. This gag order was lifted only after the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said he would block any future nominees to the Department until the matter was righted.

The White House Communications director recently announced that the administration would treat a major television network, Fox News, as “part of the Opposition.” On Sunday White House officials were all over talk shows urging other news organizations to “boycott” Fox and not pick up any of its stories. Those stories, for example, would include the video that two amateur filmmakers made of ACORN representatives explaining how to open a brothel. That’s a story other media managed to ignore until almost a week later when Congress decided to cut ACORN’s funding.

The President has not stopped blaming banks and investment houses for the financial meltdown even as it has become clear that Congress played a huge role, too, by encouraging Americans to borrow money for houses they couldn’t afford.

He was “taking names” of bondholders who resisted the GM and Chrysler bailouts.

Insurance companies, once the allies of the Obama health care proposal, have suddenly become the source of all our health care problems—because they pointed out, again correctly, that if Congress taxes insurance premiums and restricts coverage to those who are sicker and older, the cost of premiums for millions of Americans is likely to go up instead of down.

Because of that insubordination, the President and his allies have threatened to take away the insurance companies antitrust exemption.

Even those of us in Congress have found ourselves in the crosshairs:

The assistant Republican leader, Sen. John Kyl of Arizona, said to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that the stimulus plan wasn’t working. The White House wrote the governor of Arizona and said, “If you don’t want the money, we won’t send it.” Sen. McCain said that this could be perceived as a threat to the people of Arizona.

Sen. Bennett of Utah and Sen. Collins and I as well as Democratic Senators Byrd and Feingold all have questioned the number and power of the 18 new White House czars who are not confirmed by the Senate and have suggested that is a threat to constitutional checks and balances. The White House refused to send anyone to testify at congressional hearings. Sen. Bennet and I found ourselves “called out” on the White House blog by the President’s communications director, Anita Dunn.

Even the president, in his address to Congress on health care, threatened to “call out” members of congress who disagreed with him.

This behavior is typical of street brawls and political campaign consultants. It is a mistake for the President of the United States and the White House staff.

If the President and his top aides treat people with different views as enemies instead of listening to what they have to say, they’re likely to end up with a narrow view and a feeling that the whole world is out to get them. And as those of use who served in the Nixon administration know, that can get you into a lot of trouble.

This administration is only ten months old. It’s not too late to take a different approach – both at the White House and here in the Congress.

Here is one opportunity. At the beginning of this year, shortly after the President’s inauguration, the Republican leader, Sen. McConnell, addressed the National Press Club. He proposed that he and the President work together to make social security solvent. He said that he would make sure the President got more support in that effort from Republicans than President George W. Bush got from Democrats when he tried to solve the same problem. President Obama held a summit on the dangers of the runaway costs of entitlements which I attended. Every expert there said making social security solvent was essential to our country’s fiscal stability. There is still time to get that done.

On clean energy, Republicans have put forward four ideas: build 100 nuclear plants in 20 years, electrify half our cars and trucks in 20 years, explore offshore for low-carbon natural gas and for oil, and double energy research and development for alternative fuels. The administration agrees with this on electric cars and research and development. We may not be far apart on offshore exploration. And, at his town meeting in New Orleans last week, the President said the United States would be “stupid” not to use nuclear power. He is right, since nuclear reactors produce 70% of our carbon free electricity. So why don’t we work together on this lower-cost way to address clean energy and climate change instead of enacting a national energy tax?

On health care, the White House idea of bipartisanship has been akin to that of a marksman at the state fair shooting gallery: hit one target and you win the prize. With such big Democratic congressional majorities, the White House figures all it needs to do is unify the Democrats and pick off one or two Republicans.

That strategy may win the prize but lose the country. Usually, on complex issues, the President needs bipartisan support in Congress to reassure and achieve broad and lasting support in the country. In 1968 I can remember when President Johnson, with bigger majorities in Congress than President Obama has today, arranged for the Civil Rights Bill to be written in open sessions over several weeks in the office of the Republican leader, Everett Dirksen. Dirksen got some of the credit; Johnson got the legislation he wanted; the country went along with it. Instead of comprehensive health care that raises premiums and increases the debt, why should the White House not work with Republicans step by step to reduce health care costs, and then, as we can afford it, reduce the number of Americans who don’t have access to health care?

The President and his Education Secretary Arne Duncan have been courageous— there is no better word for it— in advocating paying teachers more for teaching well and expanding the number of charter schools. These ideas are the Holy Grail for school reform. They are also ideas that are anathema to the labor unions who support the President. President Obama’s advocacy of master teachers and charter schools could be the domestic of equivalent of President Nixon going to China. I, among others, admire his advocacy and have been doing all I can help him.

Having once been there, I can understand how those in the White House feel oppressed by those with whom they disagree, how they feel besieged by some of the media. I hope the current White House occupants will understand that this is nothing new in American politics—all the way back to the days when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson exchanged insults. The only thing new is that there are today multiple media outlets reporting and encouraging the insults 24 hours a day.

As any veteran of the Nixon White House can attest, we’ve been down this road before and it won’t end well. An “enemies list” only denigrates the Presidency and the Republic itself.

Forty years ago, Bryce Harlow would say to me, “Now Lamar, remember that our job here is to push all the merely important issues out of the white house so the president can deal with the handful of issues that are truly presidential.” Then he would slip off for a private meeting in the Capitol with Democratic leaders who controlled the congress and usually find a way to enact the president proposals.

Most successful leaders have eventually seen the wisdom of Lord Palmerston, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom who said, “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies.
The British writer Edward Dicey was once introduced to President Lincoln as “one of his enemies”. “I did not know I had any enemies,” was the Lincoln’s answer; And Dicey later wrote, “I can still feel, as I write, the grip of that great boney hand held out to me in token of friendship.”

So here’s my point. These are unusually difficult times, with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list. Let’s push the street-brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues: creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.

Now, do I believe that Obama was listen to this advice? Most likely not, as his White House is doing that same thing that Bush’s did; except for Obama has a bigger share of the media on his side, Bush did not. It is quite obvious that Obama is in full campaign mode, which will be to his own downfall. You watch and see.

Another Mao Worshiping Communist in the White House

Here we go again!

Via Gateway Pundit:

So, who is Ron Bloom? Jammie Wearing Fool writes:

The name Ron Bloom is one that we need to start paying attention to. He has a long history of being the negotiating face of unions in a suit. He is a Harvard Business School graduate who has worked for the unions beginning with SEIU for decades. The most recent union he represented was the United Steel Workers (USW) before becoming a part of the automotive team that Obama put together. You know the one that had the head Steven Rattner having to resign over some questions about his personal finances mixed in with a little fraudulent money gifts.Rattner was replaced by Ron Bloom, and voila the United Auto Workers (UAW), got a sweetheart deal backed up by the power of the federal government to try and stave off bankruptcy.

Nice….. So, President Obama’s communications director is a Mao-Loving Communist and now his Manufacturing Czar; or Union Liaison is now a Mao-loving Communist. I expect that Glenn Beck is going to be all over this one. President Obama needs to rid himself of these people or resign his Presidency.