Category Archives: Strategy

“Fast and Furious” – The Lies Keep on Coming!!!

Posted on by
1

It’s in Your Hands!

Can we Stop the Damage?

In his recent interview with Hispanic journalists from Univision in Miami, President Obama was asked about the “Fast and Furious” gun walking operation.  Specifically, they asked if he thought he should fire Attorney General Eric Holder.  As he began his verbal defense of Holder – the first Attorney General in the history of the U.S. to be held in Contempt of Congress – Obama did the unthinkable for a president.  He lied.  He lied with impunity.

President Obama told the interviewer that “Fast and Furious” was a field initiated operation started under President George Bush.  When Attorney General Holder learned of the operation, he said, Holder shut it down.  This was a blatant lie – not even a close approximation of the truth – just more evidence that Obama considers Americans ignorant, gullible and yes…stupid.  The Bush era gun walking operation was known as Operation “Wide Receiver,” was worked in cooperation with the Mexican government, was considered successful and was terminated in 2007 – two years before Obama (or Holder) took office.

Will you Help?

While Obama and his people lie at every turn, spinning stories with no relationship to the facts, or even to commonsense, his favorable ratings continue to climb.  I remember speaking to a lady who loves Obama and plans to vote for him in November.  I asked, “Which of his policies are most important to you?”  Her response was immediate and without apology.  “I don’t know about that stuff.  I just love him.”

You may say I don’t get out much, but the truth is that I’ve yet to speak with one Obama supporter who has read both his books.  Perhaps, you heard the 2008 tapes of people supporting Obama and believing that his running mate was Sarah Palin!  Do you know somebody like this?  Can we just stand by and watch these people destroy the country through ignorance?  Or, can we engage and talk to them while there’s still a chance to change their mind?

As I write on the Home Page, this is clearly the most important election of  our lifetime.  When a president lies to Americans in such an open and reckless manner; when he fails to protect the lives of  U.S. personnel serving abroad; when he apologizes for America; when he opts for fundraising events over security briefings; when he forgets awarding a Congressional Medal of Honor; when he has time to call the owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, but not the mother of a dead soldier – there is a problem.

When debt spirals out of control, when over 8% of Americans are out of work; when more men than at any other time in history have left the workforce, no longer looking for work – there is a problem.  Would people vote for him if they knew these things; if they heard what he’s said about Americans?  I’m praying they would not.

What if you could help reverse the damage by learning all of the facts in a quick, easy read and then just sharing that information with your friends in everyday, informal conversation.  Here’s your chance if you don’t want the Obama lies, hate and divisiveness to continue.

Effective Monday, September 24, I’m reducing the price of my Kindle book, 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama, from $4.99 to to 99 cents – so that every responsible American voter can get  it and share its factual – easy to read content – with all of their friends.  99 cents is  the lowest allowable kindle book price on Amazon.  You can order at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0080JOAUE.   The paperback version of 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama is now available for $11.77.  Use the discount code AYW7MDA4 when ordering from www.createspace.com/3838729 and receive $2 off that already low price.

I am speaking to you from the heart as a fellow American – not as somebody trying to sell books!  If you believe as I do, that Obama’s policies are responsible for divisiveness, job losses, increased danger in the world, a weakening of America and potentially irreversible damage to our economy, please get, read and share 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama.  100% of all royalties remaining after these discounts will be donated to Wounded Warrior Project.  My gain will be the same as yours:  To know that together, we did our very best to stop the damage and return our nation to responsible leadership.

Obama’s Insult to America

Posted on by
Reply

Only 53 Days Remaining!

Now Available in Paperback

As this is being written, violent protests have occurred in more than a dozen Middle East and North African countries.

The wildfire of anti-American protests started on September 11, 2012,  11 years to the day after Islamic radicals brought down the Twin Towers and killed nearly 3,000 Americans.  But, today there is a difference – a very ugly difference.  Today, we face these attacks with an Administration ill suited to the task and seemingly preoccupied with damage control.  In that effort of political self preservation, the Obama administration insults the intellect of the American people and insults the memory of four brave American representatives killed in the Benghazi, Libya assault.

First, we have an apology coming from the U.S. Embassy in Egypt – an apology that actually preceded the assault on the Embassy and the burning of the American flag.  The subject of the apology:  an obscure video released on YouTube in July, 2012, ridiculing the Prophet Mohammed.  Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney quite correctly took issue with Obama’s apology.  But, Obama has apparently been moderately successful in distancing himself from the Embassy’s statement, saying that he did not authorize it – while, at the same time, ridiculing Romney for “shooting before he aims.”

Well, how about that?  Any person who has ever served in a sensitive position in the military, or in the government in general, will tell you that there are protocols for virtually everything – particularly, statements made in the international arena.  The idea that an Embassy would release a statement essentially apologizing , on behalf of the United States, to a large religious block without presidential approval is stunning.  It is particularly odd that a statement amounting to an apology did not come from Obama.  The number of apologies he has made for our Country suggests strongly that somewhere in Washington there is an apology czar combing the wires for stories in any part of the world that could warrant a U.S. apology!

Then there is the obvious – and again I call on those who have served in the military, or in law enforcement.  Given the tensions in the Middle East – given the recent political transitions in Egypt and Libya – how is it even possible that this administration would not have increased security (with U.S. forces) for at least the preceding week and the week following the anniversary of 9/11?  Was this an oversight, or was as it the result of sheer hubris on Obama’s part?  Whatever the reason, four brave men were murdered.  They might have still been alive today, if this very basic step had been taken.

Now, while Romney continues to be the subject of over the top political attacks based on his stand against the initial Embassy apology, the White House is in effect repeating that apology. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney points out that the protesters were not protesting against Obama’s policies, or his administration.  They were protesting against a low budget video released in July, 2012 and amazingly causing people in Egypt and Libya to become sufficiently enraged to burn the American flag and kill four Americans – but, not until September 11 – a day that also “lives in infamy.”  That’s not enough.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had the audacity to repeat this theory in the presence of mourning family members of the four dead Americans.

While President Obama spoke today, during the arrival of our four murdered patriots, it is beyond comprehension that he reportedly first called the mourning families from his plane on the way to a campaign event in Las Vegas, that he has allegedly missed (presumably, by choice) 65% of his security briefings and that he refused a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in favor of an appearance on the David Letterman show. Even now, he continues to campaign – or, is he simply doing his best to avoid calls for a decision – to make this another “Present” vote?

This Administration seems thoroughly convinced that whatever they say to the American people will be believed and embraced without discussion or analysis.  Their behavior is no longer just insulting.  It is dangerous.

If these things are not sufficiently bizarre, former President Jimmy Carter has weighed in, saying that Obama should follow the example he set in handling the Iran hostage situation.  Those who remember can tell you that Jimmy Carter did not handle the Iran hostage situation.  He displayed weakness for the world as Barack Obama does today.  The election of President Reagan was singularly responsible for the release of the hostages, as the timing of their release overwhelmingly proved.  Perhaps, if we are fortunate, the election of Mitt Romney will have the same effect throughout the Middle East.

Obama’s “Arab Spring”

Posted on by
Reply

Only 55 Days Remaining!!!

9/11 Revisited

As families and friends once again gathered to mourn the losses of loved ones lost on 9/11, starkly different gatherings were taking place in the Mideast.

A mob of thousands attacked the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, hauling down and burning the American flag[1] while planting their own black flag, bearing the words: “There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger,” in the Embassy compound.[2]   Some members of the crowd were shouting, “We are Osama,” apparently referring to Osama Bin Laden.[3]

The assault, it seems, was actually preceded  by an unsolicited apologetic response from the U.S. Embassy, regarding a film made by an individual in the U.S.

“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”[4]

This apology was reportedly based on a film made by Sam Bacile, a self-described Israeli-American, depicting Muhammad as a fraud and philanderer.  Bacile is quoted as saying, “Islam is a cancer, period.”  He admits that “This is a political movie,” saying that “The U.S. lost a lot of money and a lot of people in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we’re fighting with ideas.”[5]

Apparently, the Embassy’s apology was not enough.

Another Sept. 11th attack – this one at the U.S. Embassy in Libya – resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three staff members. [6]  It appears that the Ambassador was killed at a “safe house,” and there is some speculation that his location may have been divulged by Libyan Security forces.  Some reports say he was carried to the hospital – others, that he was dragged through the streets.   On Sept. 12, 2012, more mob protests followed in Morocco, and Tunisia.

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney condemned the U.S. Embassy apology.  President Obama distanced himself from it and condemned Romney’s participation in the conversation.

Meanwhile, the response from the new Egyptian President, Mohamed Morsi, told the real story.  While he indicated that it was the duty of the Egyptian authorities to protect diplomatic missions, private and commercial property, he also said Egypt’s government:

 “respects and protects the right of expression and the right to protest peacefully under the law and will firmly oppose any irresponsible attempt to veer off the law.”[7] 

The real heart of his statement was this:

“The presidency condemns in the strongest terms the attempt of a group to insult the place of the Messenger, the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and condemns the people who have produced this radical work,” “The Egyptian people, both Muslims and Christians, refuse such insults on sanctities.”[8]

Our Embassies have suffered at least two 9/11 anniversary attacks.  Four more Americans are dead.  Our flag has been burned, and other U.S. Embassies in the Mideast have been attacked.  What does America have in return1.     

  1. Another speech from Obama.
  2. An attack on Romney by the Obama Administration for condemning the inappropriate U.S. Embassy apology.
  3. An open Mic incident revealing a conspiracy among mainstream journalists, coordinating hostile questions for Romney[i]
  4. A further erosion of free speech in America. 

God bless the proud Americans who gave their life in service to our nation.  God bless the United States of America.

TO BE CONTINUED…

 [1] Nick Dietz, (Sept. 12, 2012), CBS News Web-site, Egyptian protesters attack U.S. Embassy over Muhammad film, retrieved Sept 12, 2012 from http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7421376n

[2] CNN Wire Staff (Sept. 12, 2012), CNN web-site, Protesters attack U.S. diplomatic compounds in Egypt, Libya, retrieved September 12, 2012 from http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/11/world/meast/egpyt-us-embassy-protests/index.html

 [3] Posted by Jim Hoff (Sept. 12, 2012), The Gateway Pundit web-site, Radical Islamists Chant “We Are All Osama!” at US Embassy in Egypt on 9-11, retrieved Sept 12, 2012 from http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/09/radical-islamists-chant-we-are-all-osama-at-us-embassy-in-egypt-on-9-11/

[4] Byron York, (Sept. 11, 2012), Washington Examiner web-site, Beltway Confidential, Romney: Obama administration response to embassy attacks ‘disgraceful’, retrieved Sept. 12, 2012 from http://washingtonexaminer.com/romney-obama-administration-response-to-embassy-attacks-disgraceful/article/2507676#.UFD7ulFSRJY

[5] FoxNews (Sept. 12, 2012), FoxNews web-site, Filmmaker Sam Bacile in hiding after anti-Muslim film sparks violence in which American diplomat was killed, retrieved Sept. 12, 2012 from

[6] Jonathan Lemire, (Sept. 12, 2012), NY Daily News Web-site, U.S. ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens killed, along with three other Americans, in attack on consulate in Benghazi, retrieved Sept. 12, 2012 from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/u-s-ambassador-libya-chris-stevens-killed-americans-attack-consulate-benghazi-libyan-officials-officials-ambassador-chris-stevens-killed-tuesday-night-a-group-embassy-employees-consulate-evacuate-staff-article-1.1157387

[7] CNN Wire Staff, (Sept. 12, 2012), CNN web-site, New protest turns violent outside U.S. Embassy in Cairo, retrieved Sept. 12, 2012 from http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/meast/egypt-us-embassy-protests/index.html

 [8] Ibid.

[9][9] Joel B. Pollak, (Sept. 12, 2012), Breitbart.com web-site, Big Journalism, article by the Right Scoop.com, MSM Reporters Caught on Open Mic Planning Attack on Romney, retrieved Sept. 12, 2012 from http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/12/Mainstream-Media-Caught-Coordinating-Attack-on-Romney-Open-Mic-NBC-Time-New-York-Times

 

Democratic National Circus! Part One

Posted on by
Reply

Only 60 Days Remaining!

Obama and Israel – Really???

For the past two weeks, voters have been treated to the rare opportunity to observe a microcosm of the ideologies that drive both the Republican and Democratic Parties today – ideologies that affect the lives of all Americans.

Predictably, the first of the two national conventions was “conservative” (no pun intended).  Speakers cited the reasons for supporting Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and they were not shy about enumerating the policy failures of the past four years.  The emphasis however, was not on the past, but on the future and on what a Romney presidency would mean to the country and to our economic recovery.  Noticeably absent from the narrative was an “Obama bash fest.”  With the exception of an imaginative skit by actor Clint Eastwood, references to the president were largely measured and respectful, albeit critical of his policies.

By comparison, last week was an entertaining, but disturbing circus.  Much like the Obama presidency itself, the Democratic National Convention  was a spectacle of questionable decisions, illusions and insults to the intellect of American voters.  Here, over the next few days, are just a few of what I sincerely hope most readers will see as additional “Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama.”  The future of our country depends on it.

Issue #1

Midway through the Convention, it was discovered that Obama had omitted “GOD” from the Party Platform.  It was also discovered that he had omitted any reference to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  These were not just absent from the Platform.  They were removed from the Party’s previous presidential Platform.  It was a conscious decision.  This was first exposed in an interview by FoxNews Anchor Bret Baier with Senator Dick Durban (D-IL).  When asked to explain the basis for these omissions, Durbin became visibly agitated and defensive, suggesting that Fox and Baier were attempting to paint the Democrats as “Godless.”  But, despite Durbin’s reaction, we soon saw  Convention Chair Antonio Villaraigosa calling for a voice vote from delegates, in order to return God and Jerusalem to the Platform.  Most Americans, I think, would suspect that such a voice vote would be a mere formality.

Not so.

The first call for “Yea” or “Nay” produced an indiscernable difference in shouting volume between the two camps.  A noticeably confused Villaraigosa called for a second vote – same result.  Villaraigosa, as if searching for advice, stopped and looked to staff members – one of whom told him

“You’ve got to rule, and then you’ve got to let them do what they’re gonna do.”[1]

He again repeated the process.  Results?  Still the same.

Then, with amazing finality, Chairman Villaraigosa looked straight into the camera, announcing that:

                 “In the opinion of the chair, two-thirds have voted in the affirmative.”[2]

The truth is that the difference between “Yea” and “Nay” votes was barely discernable, if at all.  The suggestion that either side won by a 2/3 majority is sheer fantasy.   As we later discovered, Chairman Villaraigosa’s “Opinion” had already been posted to his teleprompter.  He could have no other opinion.  The “Party” had spoken – he was just the face.  We have to wonder if this is the process that Obama has followed in his alleged efforts to reach compromise and bipartisan solutions in Washington.  No wonder Republican Governors want voter I.D.!!!

The bigger, far more troubling part of this saga however, is that rank and file members of the Democratic Party, in large numbers, voted against returning “God” and Jerusalem to the Party Platform.

At the close of the convention when Cardinal Dolan gave the Benediction, the “Amens” were plentiful and loud – as loud as the “Yea’s” and “Nays” of the earlier votes.  We can only surmise from this, that the controversial issue for rank and file Democrats was not “God,” but the idea of Jerusalem being the capital of Israel.  This of course, begs the question of 1) whether or not the Democratic Party has, under Obama, become hostile to Israel; and 2) Who, in the Democratic Party was “testing the waters,” by removing “God” from the Platform.  While all of his minions were racing around to certify that the omissions were made without Obama’s knowledge and that he was proactive and adamant in having them re-inserted in the Platform, the fact remains that it was Obama’s Platform.  Were its writers using accepted boilerplate language, both items would have been included, because they had been there in 2008.  It is far more likely that these omissions represented a conscious decision executed with Obama’s personal approval – or even more likely – at his direction.

In the opinion of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), DNC Chairperson, none of this amounted to more than a “Technical Correction.”

TO BE CONTINUED…

[1] LA Times, (September 6, 2012), La Times web-site, Awkward moments for Villaraigosa during God, Israel vote at DNC, retrieved Sept. 7, 2012 from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/09/mayor-antonio-villaraigosa-dnc-vote.html

[2] Ibid.

Can Obama’s America Defend Itself and the World?? – Reason #81

Posted on by
Reply

Only 74 Days Remaining!

Will Obama Short-Change America’s Deterrent?

On Thursday, February 16, 2012, 34 members of Congress sent a letter to the White House, cautioning against further cuts in America’s nuclear arsenal – this, in response to an apparent plan by President Obama, for unilaterally reducing America’s nuclear strength by as much as 80%.[i]  In the unlikely event that a cut of that size is called for, the U.S. would be reduced to approximately 300 nuclear warheads: leaving an “arsenal about the size of France’s Force de Frappe.[ii]  The Congressional letter states, in part:

“At a time when every other nuclear weapons state has an active nuclear weapons modernization program and many are growing their stockpiles and capabilities, it is inconceivable to us that you would lead the United States down such a dangerous plan as has been reported…. [W]e seek to understand the basis on which you would instruct the National Security Staff to pursue these radical reductions in U.S. nuclear forces.” [iii]

The Congressman go on to cite the assessment of retired General Kevin Chilton, who testified in 2010 that “…the arsenal that we have is exactly what is needed today to provide the deterrent.” [iv]

According to the Washington Free Beacon, “Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney said even considering such deep strategic cuts is irrational.”  General McInerney reportedly went on to say:

“No sane military leader would condone 300 to 400 warheads for an effective nuclear deterrent strategy.

“Going down to 1000 to 1,100 is risky enough and frankly in today’s world, very risky. The purpose of our nuclear force structure is to deter any adversary from even thinking that they could minimize our attack options. Such thinking is very dangerous and will only encourage our adversaries to make bold decisions.”[v]

The letter from members of Congress also reminded President Obama that:

“We are doubly concerned that you have abandoned your pledge to support the U.S. nuclear weapons modernization program by your latest budget submission.” [vi]

What does this mean as a practical matter?  America is reportedly the only holder of nuclear weapons not modernizing its systems.  Following the 2008 Presidential elections, General Kevin Chilton illustrated to the Wall Street Journal

“…a prop to illustrate his point: a glass bulb about two inches high. ‘This is a component of a V-61’ nuclear warhead,’ he says. It was in ‘one of our gravity weapons’ — a weapon from the 1950s and ’60s that is still in the U.S. arsenal. He pauses to look around the Journal’s conference table. ‘I remember what these things were for. I bet you don’t. It’s a vacuum tube. My father used to take these out of the television set in the 1950s and ’60s down to the local supermarket to test them and replace them.’

“And here comes the punch line: ‘This is the technology that we have . . . today.’ The technology in the weapons the U.S. relies on for its nuclear deterrent dates back to before many of the people in the room were born.”[vii]

And as a study continues to determine if America will unilaterally strip itself of up to 80% of our nuclear deterrent, a Georgetown University study reports that China – which “…has never agreed to be part of any strategic nuclear framework,” and has never been part of any related negotiations, may in fact, have the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet. [viii]

 

[i] Robert Zarate, (Feb. 18, 2012), The Weekly Standard web-site, The Blog, Lawmakers Urge Obama to Abandon Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament Study, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/lawmakers-urge-obama-abandon-unilateral-nuclear-disarmament-study_630062.html

[ii] Washington Times Editorial (Feb. 16, 2012), EDITORIAL: Obama’s Unilateral Disarmament, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/16/obamas-unilateral-disarmament/

[iii] Robert Zarate, (Feb. 18, 2012), The Weekly Standard web-site, The Blog, Lawmakers Urge Obama to Abandon Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament Study, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/lawmakers-urge-obama-abandon-unilateral-nuclear-disarmament-study_630062.html

[iv] Ibid

[v] Bill Gertz, (Feb. 14, 2012), Free Beacon web-site, Nuking our Nukes, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://freebeacon.com/nuking-our-nukes/

[vi] Robert Zarate, (Feb. 18, 2012), The Weekly Standard web-site, The Blog, Lawmakers Urge Obama to Abandon Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament Study, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/lawmakers-urge-obama-abandon-unilateral-nuclear-disarmament-study_630062.html

[vii] Melanie Kirkpatrick, (Nov. 22, 2008), Wall Street Journal web-site, Sounding the Nuclear Alarm, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122731227702749413.html

[viii] Washington Times Editorial (Feb. 16, 2012), EDITORIAL: Obama’s Unilateral Disarmament, retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/16/obamas-unilateral-disarmament/

Our Detached President