I can’t sleep – usually it is because of the bad dreams, which have been with me since my time in Somalia. Tonight it’s less heavy.

I’m worried about the Brown Shirt squads.

I just don’t know what to do about them. When they come knocking on my door offering a nice big, framed photo of Big Brother (with its’ embedded wireless camera and microphone) do I just smile and invite them in? Do we all sit around the tiny suburban home with the smell from the bad city sewer lines ( also a potentially shovel-ready project) – or do I yell them down and loose the dogs and see who makes it to the fence-line faster; an overweight Obamanator or an overweight English Bulldog.

I’m betting on the dog. That’s because the Bulldog doesn’t care about the re-education programs. He doesn’t care if 2+2=4 or if it equals 5.

And should I join the “mobs” at the town hall meetings? Should I go and picket, yell down a few senators or other useless functionaries and assorted pieces of inanimate office furniture? Should I write angry notes, make angrier phone calls to congressmen, which will all go unanswered? Should I get the H1N1 virus immunization as soon as it is offered – so as to avoid the huge lines in front of the new government-run clinics? Or should I hope the Pig flu takes me out and spares me a world without Twinkies and potato chips and all the other stuff THEY want to take away from us?

And that last one is an interesting question, isn’t it? As I get older, I can appreciate the siren call of the brightly colored chip bags in the grocery store. I can appreciate the smell of pipe smoke and the taste of good rum, but it’s all going to be legislated away – so we can all be healthier. The president will continue to smoke and drink, but that behavior will be re-educated out of us. They’ll sign Richard Simmons on as the new aerobics czar, next. We’ll all be jiggling the sad remains of those sweets away in the park – endless rows of Orwellian Citizens, dancing to some old Lionel Richie songs or something. Yeah, we will be all “dancing on the ceiling,” because we will be so light, we will float there, like some forgotten helium balloons.

Yeah, we’ll be lighter, but we won’t be free. Big Brother will be watching from that painting on your wall. He will look suspiciously like President Obama. Weird, huh?

I’m no different from anyone else. I don’t like people screwing with our nation – I don’t like dumb congressmen – I don’t like dumber union people – and heavies who attack people exercising their rights at these rallies. I don’t like the tenets of organizations like the Black Panthers. I think haters are among the most lost in our society. I don’t like smears against our regular citizens, I don’t like environmental legislation, which does nothing more than line the pockets of the rich and powerful – the buddies of those same Congressmen – while it forces unionization on contractors who do not want to be unionized (this is basically another form of money and power grab – and it’s legal!)

I don’t like any of it.

But I do like the fact that America is coming alive. I like the fact that the Tea Parties are continuing to grow. I like the feeling I get when I see congressmen running for the door at some meeting, because they are becoming afraid of the people. They should be afraid – or maybe they should act like men instead of mice or worms – and stand their ground.

Got balls? Guess not.

It’s 3:15 a.m. This is a condition I came away with from my time in the service. But I would never trade it for a chance to have the slate wiped clean. I loved serving my country. I loved wearing the uniform. I loved the military – even on the hard days. And I don’t ever remember being released from my oath – “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

So, while I am a civilian now and as such, some of this may no longer apply to me (the UCMJ, chain of command, etc), I will defend this country still, against all enemies foreign and domestic.

I don’t know about you, but it seems like we’ve taken a lot of the foreign enemies out of the equation, lately. Our troops have hammered the foreign killers into the dust – and continue to do so. But it’s the domestic versions – mostly those trying to turn a free nation into some kind of socialist experiment… those are the ones we need to keep our eyes on. Like the bulldog, we have to try to figure out whether they are really our leaders – or just a different kind of enemy – or maybe like the bulldog, we should just not try to add 2+2, and just chase them to the fence-line and bite them on the butt.

I’m looking at the bulldog now – he’s eyeing me dubiously.

So seriously, what do we do with those who would make this the USSA?

Vote ‘em out. Vote ‘em all out.  In the meantime, keep yelling the maggots down at these town hall meetings. Verbally hammer them mercilessly. And for those who wish to meet us on a more personal footing – who wish to beat us down physically in the streets…

You are outnumbered. You are outclassed (way outclassed in this case). Remember this…
We are coming for you. We are coming for you all.

Share on Facebook

We’ve all heard Barbara- Don’t Call Me Ma’am- Boxer’s comment about the townhall protesters being well dressed and hence, not grassroots.  Seems those on the left believe that their own constituents are nothing but low rent, can’t dress properly for public exposure imbeciles.  If I was a liberal I would be mad as hell that my leadership thinks so little of  not just my manners but also my ability to articulate my grievances in a civilized fashion.  And then I saw this… a video of anti-Bush protesters from 2004.  They called themselves The Smoketown Six.  This video shined a whole new ‘moon’ light on Boxer’s comment.  Seems liberals indeed don’t wear clothes to protest rallies.

Caution- ugly liberals butts are shown in this video:

Share on Facebook

William Jefferson, who was found with cash bribes in his freezer and was convicted of 16 counts of corruption on June 4, 2007 by a federal grand jury, is currently awaiting trial in Virginia after losing re-election. 

It would come as no surprise that a wife, living with a man hording cash in his freezer and taking bribes left and right, would be in the dark about her husband’s shady activities. 

Investigators had the same sentiments and upon further invesigtations found that she did in fact play a part in Jefferson’s scandals.

A firm owned by the wife of former U.S. Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., earned thousands of dollars but incurred no business expenses, an accountant said.

Jack Swetland, a New Orleans accountant who had worked with the Jeffersons since 1982, testified Monday at William Jefferson’s bribery and fraud trial in Alexandria, Va., The (New Orleans) Times-Picayune reported Tuesday.

Prosecutors allege Andrea Jefferson’s ANJ consulting firm was a shell company that accepted payments from companies who had sought William Jefferson’s help in brokering deals in West Africa.

John Conyers, head of the House Judiciary Committee, is having some family troubles.  His wife pleaded guilty to corruption and bribery charges last week.  We reported on the allegations earlier – here. 

Monica Conyers, the wife of the powerful chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., pleaded guilty to one count of bribery in a federal court in Detroit, this morning.

According to court documents, in late 2007, Mrs. Conyers, president pro tem of the Detroit City Council, twice accepted envelopes filled with cash, once in the parking lot of a Detroit McDonalds.

Mrs. Conyers faces up to 5 year in prison, three years supervised release and/or a $250,000 fine. Calls to an attorney for Mrs. Conyers were not immediately returned.

Wouldn’t you think that John Conyers, who recently said he would not investigate the corrupt activities of ACORN, due to the powers that be (which were him), should step down?  If a man’s wife is facing the possibility of up to 5 years in prison and has had to resign from the Detroit City Council, I do not believe that he should be anywhere near a Judiciary Committee.

The corruption is just astounding.  Big Government truly does breed Big Corruption!

Share on Facebook

E-Verify is an employment eligibility verification system which helps companies certify that their employees are able to work in the United States legally.  There was a lot of concern that, when passed, the Stimulus Bill which should create jobs and opportunities for Americans, would do the exact opposite.  Not only will the Stimulus Bill increase our deficit but it’s focus is on paying off donors, creating jobs for specific Democrat constituents, and giving employment opportunities to illegal aliens.  The Republicans saw all of this coming and the one thing they could curtail was the illegal alien loop-hole by amending the bill so that it would contain a stipulation requiring that the jobs created by the stimulus must go through the E-Verify certification system.  Representatives Kingston and Calvert were on the forefront of this matter:

One of Rep. Kingston’s amendments would have required all federal contractors to verify all employees and new hires through the E-Verify system. The amendment would have countered a new executive order that the Administration is expected to announce today that weakens the 2008 executive order requiring all government contractors to use E-Verify. The amendment failed by a 23-to-35 vote.

Rep. Kingston’s second amendment would have required all employees, contractors, and subcontractors of the Legislative Branch to use E-Verify. That amendment failed by a voice vote.

Rep. Calvart’s amendment would have permanently reauthorized E-Verify, but it received resistance from, most notably, Rep. David Price who argued that E-Verify will be addressed during a larger immigration reform debate. The amendment failed 21-to-36.

American jobs are already being lost to illegal immigrants and health care costs are rising due to taxpaying Americans footing the bill for those who don’t contribute.  America’s unemployment rate is creeping close to 10%.  American citizens are out of work, but without E-verify some of these jobs will be given to people who aren’t even on the books in the United States.  How does that help our economy and how does that lower our unemployment rate?  I’m sure at this point many Americans would gladly take a job if they are out of work, no matter what that job is.

The jobs created by the stimulus will effectively be canceled out by the jobs given away to illegal aliens or a possible amnesty bill, if it passes this Fall.

Larry Summers, Obama’s economic advisor, exclaims that the only reason the government is taking control of private industry is due out of necessity.  This is the same crisis creating, fear-mongering that liberals railed against when Bush used it during the War on Terror -  why are they so complacent now?

Lawrence Summers defended Obama’s economic actions, saying they have been “particularly consistent and firm since the crisis began while he was campaigning for president.”

Even as Capitol Hill Republicans are railing against the administration’s interventions into the auto industry, Wall Street and healthcare, Summers said “the actions we take are those of necessity, not choice.”

Mark Sanford was right when he called out Obama, stating he was creating a “Savior-based economy.”  Anything “savior-based” will fail, especially when their messiah has never taken an economics course.

Share on Facebook

Our Democrat Party in Congress is actually taking ideas and pointers from a Canadian socialist on health care.  I thought the Democrats weren’t socialist though?  Isn’t socialist a bad word?  I would actually go further to say that they are a little left of socialist these days, which is why I have been so up in arms with all the news.

The leader of Canada’s New Democrat Party Jack Layton linked the future of his country’s universal health care system to President Obama’s public health care program in a Washington speech Wednesday.

Many conservative groups have pointed to Canada’s universal health care system as a reason to keep the American health care system in the private sector. Americans for Prosperity, for example, launched an ad campaign last week featuring a Canadian woman named Shona Holmes who was diagnosed with brain cancer and says in the ad the only way she survived was by seeking treatment in America.

Mr. Layton accused groups like this of “sowing the seeds of fear with myths and lies about Canadian health care” and said the futures of the two health care programs are dependent on each other in an address delivered at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

“There is no doubt that strengthening of our system in Canada will be easier with public health care in the United States,” Mr. Layton said. “Just as Canada built a strong public health system through a united effort, and just as America must do the same, so too can we strengthen and reinforce the health of all of our citizen through partnership.”

When reached for comment Ms. Holmes quipped “The only partnership we have is a place for desperate Canadians to run.”

Mr. Layton’s trip comes at the beginning of an aggressive effort to ramp up grassroots support for President Obama’s health care plan by Organizing for America. While in Washington, Mr. Layton met with Democrats on Capitol Hill as well as White House Communications Director Anita Dunn.

Here is a great comment that was listed under Amanda Carpenter’s article.

As a refugee from the Great White North, I disagree strongly [regarding commenter expatcanuk]. And I do know plenty about Canadian health care – I trained in it for eight years. The Canadian medical system has worsened substantially over the last 15 years; the infrastructure has not been maintained, the provincial governments have begun to resort to outright thuggery to force physicians to go to “underserved” areas, and the problems will worsen substantially as the boomers retire, since the demographic bulge is more pronounced in Canada. As for high quality of care, when you have significant rationing by wait list, as you do in Canada, there is no care, regardless of quality. as per Sally Pipes, a few facts: The average wait between seeing a primary-care doctor and getting treatment by a specialist is four months; 750,000 Canadians are on a waiting list for some medical procedure; 3.2 million Canadians are waiting to get a primary-care doctor. These numbers are enormous when you consider that Canada has a population of 33 million — about the size of California. Any “informed debate” has to ask why anyone thinks that a government entity has the interests of patients at heart. As for the NDP, they may not call themselves socialist, but they are strongly leftist – and I’ve never heard an NDPer in favor of capitalism, entrepreneurship, or innovation of any kind.

Share on Facebook

The U.S. and U.K., after the American Revolution have managed to be two of the greatest and longest allies on the international stage.  Not only are the two countries allies, but they also seem to follow hand-in-hand when it comes to politics and economics.  The U.K. however, is probably 10 years ahead of the U.S. if the U.S. continues to swing to the left and implements more socialist policies…

There are striking similarities in the operations of British parliamentary elections and the American electoral college.  Both systems effectively determine their nation’s executive leadership:  the American system by means of an electoral college which translated popular votes cast for President into winner-take-all state blocs of electors which actually elect him, and the British system by means of single-member constituencies for the election of individual MPs which, in the aggregate, likewise determine the British chief executive.  Following a British general election, the MPs serve as functional equivalents of presidential electors in determining who is to be the Prime Minister:  electors by voting for their party’s nominee for President and MPs by their support for the leader of their party in forming his (or her) government.

The structures of both electoral systems – the “winner-take-all” blocs of state electoral votes in America and the “first-past-the-post” or “plurality-winner-takes-the-seat” in Britain – almost always ensure that the presidential candidate or party running first in electoral support will enjoy a considerable bonus in electoral support will enjoy a considerable bonus in electoral votes or Commons seats.  In the British election of 1987, for example, Margaret Thatcher and the Conservative Party won 42.4% of the national vote and with it received 57.5% of the seats in the House of Commons.

It should come as no surprise that the two political systems are similar, mainly due to the fact that the United States was formed from immigrants of The United Kingdom and their knowledge of government stemmed from British politics.  However, the advantage was carrying with them the aspects of that government that they saw faulty.

Throughout history Britain and the U.S. have gone hand-in-hand and have seemed to have followed parallel paths.

In World War I the UK and the US both took desperate measures to maintain wartime production levels.  During the great depression the U.S. was hit the hardest, but Europe and the U.K. also suffered various repercussions due to the depressed economy of America, just not as bad as today because the global economy was not as intertwined back then.

The Reagan revolution in the early 80′s took place after another economic downturn when liberals were put in charge of the United States’ government.  The same event took place in the United Kingdom when Margaret Thatcher of the Conservative Party was ushered into office.  She took over after the Labour party was through demolishing their markets.  Both Margaret Thatcher and Reagan were against socialism and forms of government that reflected policies that provided for more government control and less freedoms for individual citizens.  Both leaders were able to implement conservative principles and legislation that put their economies back on track and permitted years of prosperity, GPD growth, etc.  When people were reaping these benefits they forgot where they came from and became complacent and spoiled.  They were spoiled to the point of electing those same individuals/party members that believed Government could resolve all the problems of society or at least the PERCEIVED problems of society.  This political cycle has been ongoing throughout history, and probably won’t stop any time soon – which is why I am hopeful for 2010.

The U.K. and the U.S. are so intertwined that Gordon Brown has cronies from the 90′sin the Clinton cabinet that are now in Obama’s cabinet.

One minister sketched the skein of long-standing political contacts that Brown has in Obama’s administration, including Larry Summers, Robert Reich and Timothy Geithner: “I think Obama will feel very strongly drawn to back Brown … you can’t underestimate how much the development of the new Democrat projects and the new Labour projects of the early nineties are intertwined. Many of Obama’s closest advisers are Brown’s mates – they have looked up to Gordon for a long time. I think there will be a lot of pressure to help Gordon’s position.”

If Obama’s cabinet members truly do look up to Gordon Brown and we see what is currently occurring in Britain than we have a lot of hard times ahead of us.  Gordon Brown and his labour party have enacted frivolous fiscal policies, horrible national security decisions and have put their country in a precarious position for years to come.  The U.K. is estimated to have one of the lowest GDP growth rates in the next few years and they are experiencing a lot of turmoil due to hate speech laws and the lax immigration policies of middle eastern extremists.

Margaret Thatcher recently made a statementabout the Labour party and the current state of her country, which is a big deal since Lady Thatcher rarely speaks publicly these days due to health issues and old age.  Instead of using Labour in her statements I will replace it with Democrat:

Thatcher rarely speaks publicly now; her concerns were relayed last week by Lord Lamont, the former chancellor in an interview in the political current affairs magazine Holyrood. “I can tell you exactly how she feels,” he said. “Mrs Thatcher is appalled by the current situation, very concerned about it indeed. I spoke to her very recently and her attitude is: this is how it always ends with Labour Democrats.”

Another close friend of Thatcher said the former leader believed Brown Obama had spent beyond Britain America’s means. “It’s an absolutely accurate description of every Labour Democrat controlled government since the war,” he said. “They have always left office with a huge economic crisis – the public finances in a terrible state and the economy in disarray. She feels strongly about it because she came to power in 1979 after the Callaghan (Substitute Reagan for Thatcher and Carter for Callaghan) government had to go to the IMF. She sees it as a repeat of history.

“Her general view would be that you have to have prudent economic management,” he continued, “and although BrownObama has used the word ‘prudence’ ad nauseam, it has only ever been a word, not an action.

“I have talked to her over the past five or six weeks, and her view is exactly what Norman [Lamont] said. This is what always happens. It always ends in disaster when you have a Labour Democrat government.”

In another post I also wrote about this scenario and what is currently taking place – again I will substitute where I wrote about Labour and use Democrat (as if looking into a crystal ball):

The national debt since the New Labour Democrat party took control has risen to over 49% of GDP and still growing.  The budget deficit is deepening, the tax yield is falling and therefore taxes are increasing, and unemployment is at historic levels.

The only markets in Britain’s America’s economy that have seen job growth in the last 10 years are the public sector, the banking and financial services industry and construction…

New Labour Democrats continue to spend money that the country does not have and it continues to implement heavy restrictions and regulations on the economy.  The debt to GDP ratio continuously rises, as has AmericaU.K.’s since the 1970s (after we rid ourselves of the gold standard).  The United Kingdom and The United States have both made pacts with the devil, whereby, they have played with the economy and fiddled by implementing heavy government regulations as well as “sauteing the books” just enough to distort the markets and create devastating bubbles and hybrid securities that grew tentacles throughout all sectors of the free markets.

Now think about what happened with ENRON, do we remember SOX compliance?  SOX compliance, otherwise known as Sarbanes-Oxley, is still used today and it has created major profit losses at companies due to the red tape and number of auditors required to implement it.  The jobs created by SOX are similar to that of the U.K., where 1.25 million public-sector jobs were created along with pension plans.

Growth in public-sector jobs, though, ultimately depends on growth in tax revenues from the private sector, which contracts – this becomes a vicious circle.  At some point the private sector will contract so much because of the dominance of the public sector that the public sector will be unable to survive with a lack of adequate funding.

This spells disaster for years to come…

Daniel Hannan of the U.K. Conservative Party continues to hit the nail on the head and makes remarks very similar to how many conservatives in the United States feel.

Not only are the policies seemingly intertwined, but the corruption and fraud in big government is also quite similar.  We have various members of congress, non-profits, and lobbyists that are under investigation or have already been indicted for corruption.  The most striking parallel is in regards to the Speaker of the House of Commons – Michael Martin just stepped down as the Speaker due to the debacle with the expenses filed by several MPs in the parliament.  Nancy Pelosi has been making various flubs and quite frankly she could also have made impeachable offenses by intimating that the CIA lies and misleads and stated she was not briefed on the interrogation methods.  It will only be a matter of time to see if the parallels remain and as Mr. Martin stepped down, so will Nancy.

Share on Facebook

A new study conducted by the Pew Research group found that the happiest people were those who were old, white, male republicans.  The survey found that Americans grew happier as they aged even as the economy is still in abeyance…

Happiness is a complex thing. Past studies have found that happiness is partly inherited, that Republicans are happier than Democrats, and that old men tend to be happier than old women.

And even before the economy got nasty, seniors were found to be generally happier than Baby Boomers. Some of that owes to the American Dream being lived by past generations, while Boomers work two jobs and watch the dream wither.

In times like this, it’s clear how age can have its advantages. While not all seniors are weathering the recession well, for many the impact is much less severe than it is for younger people.

Why? Many people 65 and older retired and downsized their lifestyles before the economy imploded, according to Pew analysts. Most aren’t raising kids and many are not so worried about being laid off. Loss of income can be, of course, a source of stress and displeasure. (While money doesn’t buy happiness, a study in February showed cash can help, especially when people use it to do stuff instead of buy things.)

If you’re thinking that Republicans are happy just because they perhaps make more money, that does not seem to be the case. The study that found Republicans to be happier than Democrats also showed that it held true even after adjusting for income.

It’s those age 50-64 who’ve “seen their nest eggs shrink the most and their anxieties about retirement swell the most,” the Pew survey found. It also finds that younger adults (ages 18-49) “have taken the worst lumps in the job market but remain relatively upbeat about their financial future.”

[...]

Now for the good news: A study in January found that key groups of people in the United States have grown happier over the past few decades, while other have become less so. The result: Happiness inequality has decreased since the 1970s. Americans are becoming more similar to each other on the happiness scale.

The real story and the real irony of all of this is not the study itself, but the comments under the original article.  The liberals posting on the board are hateful and angry!  LOL!  Could it be that those who align themselves with faith and fill that void in themselves are more content?  I think that is a definite reason.  I also think that the individualism of conservatives and republicans who believe in working hard and not taking handouts is also liberating and makes them feel more optimistic about life in general.

Share on Facebook

If there was one thing you could always say about President Bush, it is that he always stood on his principles and values.  He had an enormous amount of integrity and did not compromise any of those things for political expediency.   He firmly believed every move and decision he made was based on what was best for the American people.  He did not rely on polling data or popularity statistics.  President Bush’s firmly held beliefs in a post 9/11 world are what guided him.

Now President Obama, on the other hand, stands on his teleprompter.  As he has “navigated” his way through the first 100 days in the Oval Office, we have yet to really see the characteristics of integrity or doing what is right by the American People.   At least two of his cabinet members should have been tossed; Turbo Tax Tim Geithner and Secretary Napolitano, both of whom have embarrassed the Oval Office and outraged the American people.  If he really stood on principle and integrity they would have been gone.

President Obama showed signs of this early in the election cycle when he said he would accept public financing of the campaign, but when the primary season was over and he was the nominee, he opted out of the system and continued to collect just shy of 3/4 of a billion dollars, most of which is untraceable.  That in itself goes against the Open Government Act by fully disclosing all donors.

President Bush walked his talk after the campaign.  He worked with the Democratic leadership, showing bipartisanship on the budget, FISA, immigration and other issues.  The only thing he would not compromise on (thank goodness) was a troop withdrawal time table.  Democrats tried in vain to force his hand as the Obama backing MSM flooded the evening news night after night with each road side bomb image they could find.  Very little attention was paid to the success we were having, only the carnage.  This unwavering stance against a timed withdrawal was significant because he did not want give the emboldened insurgency a window in which to “wait it out”, and to prevent these politicians from micromanaging commanders in the field.  True, there was pressures to change strategies in order to combat this issue, and the administration did just that; they initiated the “surge”.  And guess what, it worked!  Now Mr. Obama on the other hand has shown about as much bipartisanship as Iran has shown cooperation with the UN….Uh that would be none!  The GOP has been completely shut out of the administration, being told to basically shut up and sit down because “we” (the Dems) won.  So much for a new era of cooperation and open government.

What people fail to realize in Iraq, is that not only did we rid the world of a very evil dictator, who’s atrocities are well documented (so in fact there is you weapon of mass destruction), shut down Dr. Germ Rihab Taha (who was identified by UN weapon inspectors specifically), the mission also brought stability to the region as a whole.

If you look back, Moamar Kadafi quickly and quietly ended their rebellious ways and cracked down on terrorists in Libya.  Syria also became much more user friendly, and cooperative.  So there were broader positive effects.

Mr. Obama who was not a Senator when the Congress initially authorized action in Iraq, on the campaign trail he waved the “No More War” flag like the checker flag at the end of a car race.  The election was soundly anti-Bush, and all the rhetoric that goes with that.  ‘When he is elected president, we will be out of Iraq in 16 months at the most. There should be no confusion about that’.

Well as you all know, the mission (and I am not complaining about this) remains on target and is, in fact, in a winding down phase.  We have consolidated much of our operations to specific areas in Iraq, handed over control and security operations to the Iraqi Army and Police force in many areas, continue to train and equip those forces so when we do leave, there will be stability and peace inside the borders.  Mr. Obama’s rhetoric got him into the White House, but the reality of the situation on the ground in Iraq dictated his actions.  And if the people who were so hell bent on completely ditching the quote “Bush Doctrine” (as Charlie Gibson tried to nail Sarah Palin with) they would have realized that this notion of up and run out of Iraq was not plausible in the least.

President Bush was thrust into a situation that day in September, unbeknown to America or our intelligence agencies.  We went from a 20 plus year time of relative peace and suddenly thrust into war, against an enemy that does not belong to a nation or state, but operates in the shadows among innocent people whom they will sacrifice without any hesitation.  Yes, mistakes were made.  But this nation was kept safe, and still is, by those policies President Bush put into place.

Now we have a floppy fish in the White House.  Yes he was thrust into an economic situation that has not been pretty.  However, Mr. Teleprompter as not shown us anything except he is bent on a socialistic agenda and that he changes his word like we change underwear.

Now Mr. Obama wants to openly (yes there is that word open again) and without preconditions, have talks with these nations that simply hate the United States.  Iran, who is pursuing nuclear weapons and calling for the destruction of Israel,  North Korea, who has nuclear material but can not build a delivery vehicle,  Venezuela, who just yesterday seized American Owned and Operated energy sites and equipment, and Cuba, where money can now flow freely without using a 3rd and 4th party intermediary.  Oh yes lets not forget Mexico.  Yet, another apology from Mr. Obama and Secretary Clinton for causing the drug war along the boarder.

Mr. Obama and his economic team have showered the coffers with billions and billions of dollars in order to prop up the economy.  Thus far, nothing.  New jobless filings hover around 600K and overall, 6.5 million people are out of work, and counting.  Now that Chrysler and GM are making significant cuts, that is going to go up more this year. Not only does that effect line workers in the auto plants, but spills out to the suppliers and peripheral businesses that support them.

Mr. Obama, first week in office broke the most basic of his campaign pledges, saying that the practice of earmarks and pork spending would immediately come to and end.  Say what?  The first two things he signs into law are pork laden wasteful bills that did nothing.  The Stimulus package, which failed to stimulate the American people, was shoved through the congress by the new Dem Majority in the middle of the night in which no one was even able to read.  And what was in there (Mr.  Dodd)?  Bonuses for the executives at AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac!!!  Next he signed an Omnibus bill that contained over 9000 earmarks, again pushed through on a Dem freight train in the middle of the night.

Now the administration continues to politicize national security doctrine as the administration stammers on what our evil interrogators did to terror suspects.  This emboldens the enemy, teaches them our techniques so now they can prepare for what little we actually do.   The September 10th mentality of the administration puts us in jeopardy. Many of the policies that Mr. Obama so vehemently touted against remain in effect. The naval prison at Guantanamo Bay was ordered closed yet remains open as Obama plans where to send its inmates; the president has yet to establish a coherent policy on Iran — following in the Bush administration’s footsteps and while American troops are being removed from Iraq, most will stay in place until 2010.

It is important to note that all the enhanced interrogation tactics that we used actually yielded crucially important intelligence that helped keep this country safe,”  with the eight years of safety on the home front since Sept. 11, 2001.  Even though congressional leaders claimed to be left out of the loop on these techniques, it was revealed that the same Dem leaders, who bewitched President Bush, were duly informed of those methods.  But as Dems, true to color, they pretended to take the moral high road, and were thus outed as hypocrites using this issue for political expediency.
Obama’s own Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, wrote an internal memo last week citing the “high value” information about Al Qaeda’s operations yielded by tactics such as water boarding, but its morality has been called into question by human rights monitors and many others both in and out of the Obama administration.

So therein lays the conflict with this administration. Integrity, direction, political expediency, governing by polling data, and letting Nancy Pelosi write its budget a mere 3 Trillion and some change.
So we as Americans have to wonder, where the transparency, openness, and new era of cooperation is.  Yeah, that is right, so sorry, we lost.

Share on Facebook

We all knew that Ms. Piglosi was lying from the get go when new information came to light regarding who was privy to the CIA briefing about interrogation methods, namely waterboarding.  She came up with a Bill ‘Clintonesque’ to attempt to confuse anybody who can’t read or surf the net. 

She admitted the CIA briefed her and others on interrogation methods, including waterboarding, on suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay prison.  BUT her excuse was she didn’t know that they would ACTUALLY use those methods on the terrorists.  She then asked what the definition of IS, is.

Most of us were not born yesterday, so it was obvious she was grasping at straws during her press conference.  However, there was no proof, only “he said, she said,” of the briefing; that is until the CIA released their briefing report yesterday.

Intelligence officials released documents this evening saying that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was briefed in September 2002 about the use of harsh interrogation tactics against al-Qaeda prisoners, seemingly contradicting her repeated statements over the past 18 months that she was never told that these techniques were actually being used.

In a 10-page memo outlining an almost seven-year history of classified briefings, intelligence officials said that Pelosi and then-Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.) were the first two members of Congress ever briefed on the interrogation tactics. Then the ranking member and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, respectively, Pelosi and Goss were briefed Sept. 4, 2002, one week before the first anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The memo, issued by the Director of National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency to Capitol Hill, notes the Pelosi-Goss briefing covered “EITs including the use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah.” EIT is an acronym for enhanced interrogation technique. Zubaydah was one of the earliest valuable al-Qaeda members captured and the first to have the controversial tactic known as water boarding used against him.

*EITs = Enhanced Interrogation Techniques

Human Events obtained the list of those who were briefed and privy to the interrogation techniques in 2002 – and not surprisingly, Democrat after Democrat is listed on this document:

• Nancy Pelosi
• John Rockefeller
• Harry Reid
• Dianne Feinstein
• Jane Harman
• Babs Mikulski
• John Murtha
• Adam Schiff
• Carl Levin
• Russ Feingold
• Evan Bayh
• Bob Graham

They are going to need another made up CRISIS to get out of this one!

Share on Facebook

The Democrat Corruptocrats strike again!

…the House Judiciary Committee chairman’s May 4 statement exonerating ACORN couldn’t have come out at a worse time. “Based on my review of the information regarding the complaints against ACORN, I have concluded that a hearing on this matter appears unwarranted at this time,” Conyers said in a statement aired that night on CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight.”

Just hours earlier his fellow Democrats in Nevada, Secretary of State Ross Miller and Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto dropped a bombshell. ACORN and two former senior ACORN employees in the state, they announced, had been charged with a total of 39 felony counts related to voter registrations.

“By structuring employment and compensation around a quota system, ACORN facilitated voter registration fraud in this state,” said Masto. “Nevada will not tolerate violations of the law by individuals nor will it allow corporations to hide behind or place blame on their employees when its training manuals clearly detail, condone and, indeed, require, illegal acts in performing the job for the corporation.”

This article doesn’t even have the latest news, whereby another region of the United States, Pennsylvania, has just filed more felony charges against  ACORN today!

Share on Facebook