The Good News – The Bad News

So, which would you like first?

I’m going to take a leap here and say that the Good News is that Our Free 50 is back. I hope you’ll agree.  You’re the reason.   Some of you have – after more than a year – still been returning to the site to check for new articles, or to re-read older ones.  I apologize that there was nothing new.  Likewise, many readers have continued to visit, or Like our Facebook Fan page – 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama..  I thank all of you.

The Bad News is that Barack Obama is still President and will remain so for the next 19 months.  God knows what, or how much additional damage he can do to America before his term runs.  They say the first step to healing is to recognize that you have a problem.

It should grieve all of us, that our President is so far from this important first step.  Instead, with all the arrogance of a child king, Obama looks at the colossal mess he has made around the globe and declares with absolute certainty, that he has restored the world’s respect for America.

In our next few issues, we’ll revisit the strategy and tactics that Obama has employed to create divisiveness at home and chaos both here and abroad.

Look for our new posts every Friday, beginning .June 12, 2015. My pledge to you is that the writing here will be both true and accurate to the very best of my ability.  I’ll also try to keep things fast moving and as interesting as reality allows.  One thing I am not is a computer expert…or even a computer average – so, if you can think of some ways to make this blog better, friendlier, better distributed, etc., I hope you’ll let me know.  In the meantime…

Thanks for being here and God bless the Un-Transformed United States of America.

Democratic National Circus! Part One

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.

Obama: Cops will Harass Hispanics – Reason #90

Only 65 Days Remaining!

Obama: Cops Will Harass Hispanics

Over the past three years, Obama has worked hard to inflame the passions of Hispanics and especially illegal immigrants.  It was Obama who used the bully pulpit to create a chasm between Arizona Latinos and the Governor and law enforcement officials.  He used the media to let Latinos know that:

“If you are a Hispanic American in Arizona — your great-grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now, suddenly, if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed.  That’s something that could potentially happen.”[i]

There is very little difference between this statement and the principle behind the Reichstag fire in Nazi Germany.  Obama needs always to find a common enemy that he can use to divide and polarize our nation.  Here, as in other statements, he makes clear that honest American immigrants should fear and distrust law enforcement officers – officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect and serve their fellow Americans.

Many people have pointed to Obama’s past as a Community Organizer and professional agitator; and theorized that he would like nothing more than to create more divisiveness in America and to manipulate that divisiveness into more votes for the Democrats – particularly, for himself.  Well, here it is.  In Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address, the most divisive President in history, told us that:

“Let’s also remember that hundreds of thousands of talented, hardworking students in this country face another challenge: the fact that they aren’t yet American citizens. Many were brought here as small children, are American through and through, yet they live every day with the threat of deportation[ii]…let’s at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, defend this country. Send me a law that gives them the chance to earn their citizenship. I will sign it right away.”[iii]

This is another Obama cheap shot and a “twofer.”  He is advocating a direct path to citizenship for illegal immigrant students – hoping to foster divisiveness between Latinos and the Republican Party.  Obama offers up a bill, which he puts on others to create – essentially the same as the questionable DREAM Act, which has already faced bipartisan opposition in Congress and which some say, amounts to opening “the door to allow millions of illegal immigrants to live and work in the U.S. without a vote of Congress.”[iv]  (Note: Since this writing, Obama has unilaterally enacted what amounts to the DREAM Act, completely bypassing Congress.  A lawsuit has been filed against the Administration by ten agents, alleging that they are being ordered not to enforce the Immigration laws.)

At the same time, he disingenuously casts the Republican Party as anti-immigrant, hoping to gain the vote of Latinos, while ignoring the economic and crime problems being experienced by residents along the Southwest border.


[i] President Barack Obama, (April 27, 2010), White House.gov Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President at Ottumwa, Iowa Town Hall, retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-ottumwa-iowa-town-hall

[ii] Note:  If they face the daily threat of deportation, they are illegal immigrants

[iii] President Barack Obama, (Jan 24, 2012), White House web-site, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address, retrieved January 25, 2012 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2012/01/25/2012-state-union-address-enhanced-version#transcript

[iv] Lamar Smith (Mar. 20, 2012), FoxNews.com web-site, The Truth About the DREAM Act, retrieved March 22, 2012 from http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/20/truth-about-dream-act/

Presidential Priority: Felon or Soldier? – Reason #84

Only 71 Days Remaining!

Presidential Priority:  Felon or Soldier?

During late December, 2010, while vacationing in Hawaii, President Obama made a phone call to Philadelphia Eagles Owner Jeffrey Lurie, passionately praising him for giving quarterback Michael Vick, a convicted felon, a second chance.[i]  Vick was sentenced to 23 months in federal prison in 2007, for participation in a dog fighting ring and for killing poor performing dogs by “electrocution, hanging, drowning and other violent means.”[ii]

Meantime, the family of Sgt. Sean Collins, a young soldier killed in Afghanistan on December 12, 2010, received a letter of condolence from their Senator, Maria Cantwell (D-WA), in which she expressed sorrow for the death of “Bryn” – not Sean.  Mr. Collins requested a phone call from President Obama to Sean’s mother, but after several days, he was reportedly informed that the President could not fit the call into his schedule.[iii]


[i] Posted by Kevin Hechtkopf, (December 27, 2010), CBS News web-site, Political Hot sheet, Obama Lauds Michael Vick’s Second Chance, retrieved January 7, 2011 from http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20026644-503544.html

[ii] ESPN.Com News Services, (December 11, 2007), ESPN web-site, Apologetic Vick gets 23-month sentence on dog fighting charges, retrieved January 7, 2011 from http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3148549

[iii] Megyn Kelly, (January 6, 2011), America Live, as posted on FoxNation.com, Too Busy for Fallen Soldier’s Family, But Plenty of Time for NFL’s Eagles?, retrieved January 7, 2011 from http://nation.foxnews.com/culture/2011/01/06/too-busy-fallen-soldiers-family-plenty-time-nfls-eagles

How does a President Forget the Recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor? – Reason #82

Only 73 Days Remaining!

Medal of Honor Recipient Forgotten

On June 23, 2011, speaking to members of the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, New York, President Obama – Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s armed forces – reminded the soldiers that:

“…First time I saw 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to, who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.”[i]

This could have been a fine moment for a President remembering an American hero….except for one flaw in his speech.  President Obama presented Staff Sergeant Jared Monti’s Medal of Honor, posthumously, to his parents at a White House ceremony conducted on September 17, 2009. [ii]  Sgt. Monti was killed in action on June 21, 2006.[iii]

These should be moments indelibly etched on the mind of a caring person – let alone a caring President…unless, of course, they don’t care.


[i] President Barack Obama, (June 23, 2011), White House.gov Speeches & Remarks, Remarks of the President to Soldiers of the 10th Mountain Division in Fort Drum, New York retrieved November 15, 2011 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/06/23/remarks-president-soldiers-10th-mountain-division-fort-drum-new-york

[ii] Ibid

[iii] United States Army, (2011), Medal of Honor Official Citation for actions of Staff Sergeant Jared C. Monti, Operation Enduring Freedom, retrieved November 15, 2011, from http://www.army.mil/medalofhonor/monti/citation.html

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

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

Astronaut: “…We just backed down and quit…” – Reason #80

Only 75 Days Remaining!!

Astronaut:  “…We just backed down and quit…”

Former Astronaut Gene Cernan – the last American to walk on the Moon – noted in an interview with FoxNews’ Megyn Kelly, that China’s interest in maintaining a “consistent space program as they look to the future, really surprises no one.

“What is a surprise and what hurts…is we’ve just abdicated our future leadership in space, and I think that’s significantly important – both from a civilian point of view, military point of view and certainly, it’s going to have a tremendous economic impact and make us vulnerable in the future…I think this has got long, long term implications…the country that controls outer space in one way or another – the country that controls the high ground…if they destroy the capability to destroy satellites…to interrupt communications.  Look what it would do to our banking system.  Look at our navigation system.  They’re going to put up a whole…GPS system of satellites, which is going to challenge those that we’ve already got up there.

“…we won’t be able to put an American on an American piece of hardware until the end of the decade.  That’s unacceptable…we just backed down and quit quite frankly…The whole nation hasn’t yet fully grasped the situation that we’re being put in by the present Administration…We’re cheating future generations…”[i]


[i] Gene Cernan, (Dec. 30, 2011), Fox Nation web-site, Interview with Megyn Kelly, Last American to Walk on Moon Tears Obama Apart Over Weak U.S. Space Program, retrieved December 31, 2011 from http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/12/30/last-american-walk-moon-tears-obama-apart-over-weak-us-space-program