Tilting At Windmills

Since last Saturday when The Insufferable Airhorn spoke in the Rose Garden about the “crisis” in Syria, we have seen the political role reversals of hawks and doves.

Bill Kristol, whom I abandoned some time ago, suggested in his op-ed at The Weekly Standard that “using this resolution to cast a vote of no confidence against Obama would empower those abroad making the case against placing confidence in the United States. That would be damaging. And in the real world, a vote against Obama will be seen as a vote for Bashar al-Assad, and for Vladimir Putin, and for the regime in Iran.”

Kristol insists “the right vote” by Republicans, a party that for at least two generations has held the banner of American leadership and strength, should not cast a vote that obviously risks a damaging erosion of this country’s stature and credibility abroad.”

Kristol continues, “A Yes vote is in fact the easy vote. It’s actually close to risk-free. After all, it’s President Obama who is seeking the authorization to use force and who will order and preside over the use of force. It’s fundamentally his policy. Lots of Democrats voted in 2002 to authorize the Iraq war. When that war ran into trouble, it was President Bush and Republicans who paid the price. If the Syria effort goes badly, the public will blame President Obama, who dithered for two years, and who seems inclined to a halfhearted execution of any military campaign. If it goes well, Republicans can take credit for pushing him to act decisively, and for casting a tough vote supporting him when he asked for authorization to act.”

Kristol, to my way of thinking, is correct on one point:  President Bush and the Republicans did pay the price when the Iraq war effort went badly and if Syria goes badly the current Oval Office occupant will be evisorated.  Kristol’s only concern is about Republican senators and congressmen re-establishing their “anti-Obama credentials.”  Good grief, man.  Sending our men and women to another pesthole is all kinds of wrong.

Caught between Iraq and a hard place are two of our betters—Hollywood actors Ed Asner and Mike Farrell.  In a stunning revelation about the silence of Tinseltown and their disappointment in their idol’s penchant for military action Farrell said, "I'm frankly deeply disappointed in the president's foreign policy, war-making, his reliance on military rather than diplomatic responses, his use of drones, continued allowance of the Guantanamo prison. He's a disappointment to me and other people I know."

"I voted for him, but I'm not proud. He hasn't thrown himself on the funeral pyre. I wanted him to sacrifice himself. Instead, he has proved himself to be a corporatist, and as long as he's a corporatist, he's not my president," Asner said. "A lot of people have lost hope—with the betrayals, the NSA spying…People aren't getting active because 'Who gives a shit?' is essentially the bottom line."

Another reason some Hollywood progressives have been reticent to speak out against war in Syria, according to Asner, is fear of being called racist.  "A lot of people don't want to feel anti-black by being opposed to Obama," he said.

What a magnificent example of cowardice.

Then there’s this.  District of Columbia delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) who has been a member of Congress since January 1991 confessed recently that if President McBombypants actually gets the votes he needs for the resolution “it’ll be because of loyalty of Democrats. They just don’t want to see him shamed and humiliated on the national stage."

On Thursday, September 5th, Chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus issued what is, in effect, a gag order asking members to “limit public comment”.  The request was designed to quiet dissent while “shoring up support for President Obama’s Syria strategy.”

That “red line” The Insufferable Airhorn has now disowned has gotten all over him, Hollywood and progressive activists.  It’s one big clusterfuck..

It reminds me of Don Quixote de la Mancha.  Quixote, as we all remember from our high school or college lit classes, was a victim of his delusions.  In Miguel de Cervantes’ novel, knight-errant Quixote tilts at windmills that he imagines to be giants:

“Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, ‘Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless.’"  

"What giants?" asked Sancho Panza.  

"Those you see over there," replied his master, "with their long arms. Some of them have arms well nigh two leagues in length."  

"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills. Those things that seem to be their arms are sails which, when they are whirled around by the wind, turn the millstone."

It is obvious to this observer that we have Don Quixote in the White House begging for lawmakers to unleash the dogs of war in a vicious snake pit of cannibalistic rebels and savage Islamic extremists.

I believe that America should stay out of Syria.  Let neighboring nations deal with the barbarians at their gate.  I am quite certain that Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has the spine of steel needed to protect his people.

"Once we take action, we should be prepared for what comes next," wrote General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, only one month ago. "Deeper involvement is hard to avoid."

We have learned in this decade via the Iranian Green Revolution in 2009 that barbarian elements in social revolutions cannot be harnessed.  Neda Agha-Soltan died of a single gunshot wound to the chest. Her last moments—captured on a cell phone camera and shown around the world—catapulted her into the symbol of the postelection reform movement in Iran.

No one will say how many have died in Egypt’s coup against the Muslim Brotherhood.

Two years after the Arab Spring revolution that toppled longtime dictator Moammar Gaddafi, and one year after the assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three others, Libya’s fragile government has little control over the nation’s security.

The whole of the Middle East is a powder keg and the blast wave that we invite by interfering in Syria may well involve America in a conflagration of tectonic proportions.

One final thought, the errand boy sent by grocery clerks is slated to speak to the nation this Tuesday on taking military action against Syria’s Bashar al-Assad.  For the whole of his second term, this president and his apparatchiks have deflected and distracted through sleight-of-hand and carefully coordinated propaganda, not the least of which has been on the issue of Benghazi.  The lies are damnable. 

I think it’s important to note that Obama will use the eve of 9/11 (the World Trade Center attack and the Benghazi murders) to create an imagery and recount emotions meant to sway Congress.

As he feigns outrage, his argument for intervention is weak and this nation does not need to be thrown into the crucible he created.

While battling for reelection in August of 2012, he drew a “red line”.  Saying now, “I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line,” is his desperate attempt to rescue his personal credibility from his hubristic foolishness.

See also:  A Nation Commits Suicide

Gun Rights Policy Conference Review

This article was originally published at A Conservative's Voice

I had the privilege today to attend the 27^th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference hosted by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

The major focus of the conference was the current legislative and litigation environments that gun rights activists are currently working in.

As a staunch supporter of the United States Constitution I am very much in favor of Second Amendment rights and oppose efforts to restrict the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns.

As you can probably imagine, the people who run the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee are not big fans of Barack Obama or other liberal gun-grabbers.

Alan Gottlieb and Joseph Tartaro, founder and President of the Second Amendment Foundation respectively, opened the conference by discussing major topics that should concern gun owners.

One that stood out to me in particular was the topic of guns as a health issue.  With ObamaCare set to take full effect in 2014, a question has been raised by gun lobbyists as to how gun-owning households will be treated by health insurers.

Those who oppose the Second Amendment argue that households that own guns are at a higher risk for injury. 

My counter-argument to that is that gun ownership should fall under the protection of a pre-existing condition if I owned a gun prior to getting insurance.  Any constitutional lawyers, who are reading, feel free to use that.

Another issue that was raised by Jeff Knox, managing director of the Firearms Coalition is the issue of national reciprocity.

For those who don’t know, reciprocity refers to an agreement between states to accept concealed weapons permits for other states.

Reciprocity can be a confusing subject for those who don’t actively use the information.  Alabama, for instance, accepts permits from Colorado but Colorado does not accept permits from Alabama.

The goal of a national reciprocity act would be to simplify the agreements and create a national standard for concealed weapons permits.

As a gun rights activist I am for this.  Yet, as a states’ rights activist, I am against this.

I believe people have the right to personal protection both inside and outside of the home and therefore support the right to carry. 

I also believe in the right of states to manage things such as concealed weapons permits at the state level and not be constrained by a federal law.

So, my official position on this issued is to be determined.

Knox and Dr. John Lott, who is a commentator on FoxNews.com and for the Wall Street Journal, touched on the issue of gun-free zones.  Lott’s entire presentation focused on the effect gun-free zones has on violent crime rates.

Mass shootings, or as Lott so scholarly called them multiple-victim public shootings, most often happen in places where people with concealed carry permits are not allowed to carry weapons.

Recent examples include the shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, CO and at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, WI.  Both of these establishments were gun-free zones.

It has been statistically proven that criminals target places where they know it is against the law for people to carry concealed weapons.

The Virginia Tech shooting is another good example.  Knowing that it was illegal in Virginia to carry weapons on a college campus, the shooter in that case planned to have no resistance and for the ability to kill many people before police could respond.

Lott also noted that in 75% of the cases he studied, the shooter kills himself.  So, the idea that a concealed carry permit holder who stopped a gunman would also be guilty of a crime is quashed. 

In short, gun free zones do nothing but disarm law-abiding citizens as criminals would ignore the law anyway.

Other issues discussed included the UN arms treaty, school textbook language concerning the Second Amendment, and emergency room questionnaires that ask about gun ownership.

Whether you own a gun or not, the fact of the matter is that the right to bear arms is a constitutional right just like the right to free speech, trial by jury, and due process and it must be granted the same protection as every other right.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVERSATIONS SEGMENT FIVE: HEALTH CARE AND THE CONSTITUTION

With the advancement of progressivism taking a foothold in America's system of government the struggle for dominance between Constitutional originalists and progressives rages right up until today. That struggle is no more evident than with the debate over the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, affectionately known as ObamaCare. Dr. Richard Brake and Dennis Gallagher have that conversation on the fifth segment of Constitutional Conversations. 

Please note that this segment was taped before the Supreme Court ruled the  Affordable Care Act's individual mandate to be constitutional as a tax under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution. 

LIBERAL SILENCE IS DEAFENING ON SUPREME COURT RULING OBAMACARE CONSTITUTIONAL

Et tu, John? This was the anguished outcry of many conservatives to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority ruling on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, affectionately known as ObamaCare. In a startling reversal of his historically conservative and originalist judicial philosophy Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion of the Supreme Court to uphold ObamaCare.

The plurality of American conservatives anticipated Robert’s vote on ObamaCare to align with the other three conservatives on the Court, Justices Alito, Scalia and Thomas, who each voted to overturn the controversial health care legislation. Conventional thought had the swing vote to rest in the hands of Justice Anthony Kennedy. But Kennedy voted with Alito, Scalia and Thomas, and Roberts was the surprise judicial trump card.

Conservatives, stunned and outraged over Roberts’ vote, are calling for his head and branding him as a traitor, coward, a disappointment and a flip-flopper. Are these assaults on Justice Roberts merited? But then again since ObamaCare was upheld by the high court why isn’t the collective liberal left doing triumphant cartwheels? What is the political landscape to make of this abstruse political reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling? Perhaps it has something to do with how Chief Justice Roberts reconstituted the constitutionality of ObamaCare.

The State Of Our Disunion

RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE

HIPOLITIX

Listen to internet radio with HIPOLITIX on Blog Talk Radio

I was a guest on the Hipolitix radio show tonight hosted by Mark Jerrell. Please listen  to Mark and I discuss and debate the relevancy and influence of the Tea Party in the 2012 presidential campaign, how the GOP presidential candidates are being received by the Tea Party, the major campaign issues impacting the race for the White House and an assessment of the challenges President Obama faces as he ramps up his presidential campaign  

Please listen to a very lively, interactive and fair and balanced discussion on the above topics. 

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S RESET BUTTON

The following is an editorial by James A. Ward, CAPT, USN (ret.)

President Obama is no ‘appeaser’, just ask Osama Bin Laden. Or just ask the rich who do not pay their fair share. Charles Krauthammer concluded in his  piece entitled “The wages of appeasement” that Mr. Obama is a weak President appeasing Russia and Iran. In 2008 President Obama decided upon a policy of resetting relationships with Russia and Iran because his predecessors failed to forge positive relations between America and these two adversaries. The President sent Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with a symbolic reset button. In 2008 many reports predicted Mr. Obama’s charisma, superior intellect and presence would guide him as solver of America’s major problems.

A Google search returned over four million hits on the subject of Obama’s appeasement. There is a great deal of buzz on this matter with many believing President Obama is an ‘appeaser’. As Mr. Krauthammer rightly points out Russia and Iran have not responded positively to the reset button Secretary Clinton delivered to start the new relations. This week the Iranians are conducting naval exercises and threatening to shut down the Straits of Hormuz to disrupt the world’s oil supplies. This is tantamount to a political slap in the face to the President’s offer to shake hands with Iran without pre-conditions. The U.S. Navy has had to respond to the threat.

Is the President appeasing Russia and Iran or is there a leadership trait that could provide another explanation? Missing from the discussion of Mr. Obama’s appeasement is a look at previous President’s engagement policies with hostile states. Two recent examples are the engagement policies of former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush to establish positive relations between the U.S. and North Korea. North Korea, like Iran, was involved in nuclear development and the engagement provides insight. Each President’s initiative provided a reset in relations (albeit with conditions). The United States provided a billion dollars in incentives (oil and aid), but they failed to reform the relationship with North Korea. Kim Jun Il played both presidents masterfully, making deals, taking treasure from them and then breaking his promises.

But is Mr. Obama acting in appeasement or is something else at play? Certainly Mr. Obama could genuinely believe he has the best way to bring Iran into line. As a charismatic leader he has shown the ability to sway large numbers of allies to follow his lead. Look at the coordinated international stimulus and military action in Libya. Sociologist Max Weberdefined charisma as a quality of an individual by which they are set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural powers, superhuman, exceptional. The values of the charismatic leader are important. Their self-belief can be high so they believe they are infallible, able to sway their followers into the way and means they see as best. The follower’s perceptions are vital to this relationship. In this case Russia and Iran are not followers of Mr. Obama’s charismatic leadership and are not swayed by it to change.

When President Obama or former President Clinton meet people the followers often describe the experience as a life changing event due to their aura, passion, and vision. Oprah Winfrey, in describing the traits of power players, found the key to their influence is charisma, an aura of personality that draws people in and holds their rapt attention. Oprah states, “Charisma is as seductive as it is elusive; its powers are hard to resist and equally hard to pinpoint.” In the case of relations with Iran and Russia President Obama believes that his reasoned abilities will persuade, but he is blinded by an overreaching self-belief of infallibility. The President believes he can sway Iran into following his guidance. His inflated self-belief leads him to the misguided confidence that he can change the Iranian and Russian relationships. But the Iranian threats and military actions this week belie this belief.

What the President needs is a reset button for his over-reaching self-belief, not for changing Iran. For our country’s sake let’s hope that President. Obama gets a reality check on his abilities and comes to the place where he can indeed impact the course of relations with Russia and Iran. The other option is that in several years we will add his name among those of President’s Bush and Clinton as the appeasers of newly nuclear nations.

James A. Ward, CAPT, USN (ret.) is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy.  He has a MBA from Regent University. Mr. Ward worked in the US Navy's new technology development lab on command and control and networking projects.  Recent work involved supporting starting a new university in Tanzania and with NGOs in East Africa to complete water projects in Tanzania.  He is in the Leadership Ph.D. program at Regent University.

Obama and the 2012 Presidential Race

by little tboca

Here’s a taste of what Americans can expect in the Presidential Race of 2012. Obama has already kicked his class warfare into all of his campaign speeches and will continue this strategy for the next 11 months. He’s pretending that he’s looking out for the “middle class” – what a laugh.

He’s the one who knocked the middle class off their feet in three years; he stopped any and all job growth, he redistributed 787 billion dollars known as the stimulus bill, which should have been called Obama’s “Dissuasion” bill.

He backs the Muslim Brotherhood, trashes Israel, supports the Wall Street Protestors and continues hanging out with “America’s Most Wanted,” Marxists, Communists and Socialists.

Our final decision in 2012 will determine the future of our children, grandchildren and future generations. We must be resilient, determined and give them a legacy that they can wrap their arms around with pride.

So the question for 2012 is do we want to vote for the person who can “take our Country back” or will we succumb to the Liberal News Media’s lies and propaganda and give Obama his second term?

There is one man who can restore our Nations weak foundation, give us back our Freedoms, Rights and our voice. We can beat him to death for his mistakes, or we can acknowledge that he is the one person who has learned from his mistakes, asked God’s forgiveness for his indiscretions and give him 100% support.

Newt’s positive positions on economy, taxes, free trade, spending and regulations far outweigh his mistakes. We have the option of going to his website and asking specific questions, if we have any doubts on how he stands on certain issues. http://www.newt.org/news/letter-supporters-gingrich-urges-them-stay-positive or http://www.newt.org/meet-newt

There wouldn’t be a Republican majority in the house today without the Republican Revolution led by Newt Gingrich in 1994. Newt is the reason and the only reason that the GOP took over the house for the first time in forty years.

Newt Gingrich made mistakes, but the difference between him and so many of the Old Establishment Politicians is this; Newt actually revisited his errors while serving in the White House analyzing and correcting his mistakes in order to become the committed leader that he is today.

Two Quotes that come to mind about making mistakes:
1. There are no mistakes, no coincidences. All events are blessings given to us to learn from. -Elizabeth Kubler-Ross
2. All men make mistakes, but only wise men learn from their mistakes.” Winston Churchill

Everyone has the right to decide who the next 2012 Presidential Candidate will be and pick the man or woman of his choice. We must be strong and arm ourselves against the lies, propaganda and political rhetoric and that can only be done by doing our homework.

If we want to sit on our butts and let Obama and the Liberal News Media spoon feed us lies about Obama’s ideology, we’ll face defeat due to our own complacency, negligence and ignorance.

May God Bless America
As Always,
Little Tboca

A Message to Obama – the House – the Senate

by little tboca

Listening to John Boehner’s address today was not just disappointing; it was disgraceful that Republicans are once again playing American’s like a worn out fiddle. John talks about bi-partisan issues including the Keystone Energy Project extending unemployment benefits and payroll tax relief for Americans and finishes by say it cuts government spending.

The question that seems imminent is this, “Why even bother sending this bill to the Senate when you know Harry Reid is standing by his shredder awaiting its arrival? We know that President Obama will reject the Republican bill, because he threatened Congress before taking his 17 day vacation in Hawaii, saying “ he would reject the bill if it includes the Keystone Energy Project. “

We know that Canada’s Prime Minister (Steven Harper), although civil this week when he met with Obama isn’t about to wait on Obama’s sick political stance to delay any decision on this until 2013. Steven gave America a heads up and said, “Canada isn’t going to wait and will move forward with other customers, probably China.”

That’s straightforward language meaning “use it or lose it America,” either go forward with the Keystone Pipeline or consider the option off the table forever. Thousands of jobs are being lost because Obama is buying votes.

Boehner’s remark that the new Republican bill cuts Government spending and will be paid for over a span of 10 years is like a spoiled teenager who has maxed out all of your credit cards saying, “Gee, when I get thru college and land a job, I’ll pay it all back.”

Boehner is doing it again, first he throws out all the cool stuff for us to drool over and then if you read the fine print, we realize it’s going to cost us an arm and leg to pay for the bill.

Here’s what really happens tax relief given to the middle class, unemployment benefits extended is handed out the front door, but the cost of these benefits fly right out the back door increasing our National Deficit and putting more burden on all taxpayers.

No doubt we need tax relief and unemployment extensions, but when will Republicans and Democrats get it thru their heads that it must be paid for immediately by ruthlessly removing the politician’s sacred cows, downsizing Government, no more funding of NPR or Planned Parenthood etc., stopping the blood sucking grants that are sucking the life out of the taxpayers and so much more.

“Don’t spend it if you don’t have it to spend” - the irritating part is the Government has the money; they just don’t want to disturb their Political Elite Breakfast Club that has taken over our White House.

The Republicans have many “Aces in the hole,” but actually don’t want to disturb their old political establishment. They could start the impeachment process against the AG (Eric Holder) and they could ask the American people to vote on the KEYSTONE PIPELINE on National TV.

Obama rants and raves and says he can’t wait to create jobs for America, well, let him put his money where his mouth is this time. He also says in his speeches he’s gonna take it to the American people! So take it to the people, quite playing “Gotcha,” and “he said, she said.” Let our voice be heard!

Americans need a one stop Government Shopping Mall - one website that exemplifies the meaning of real transparency tells us daily what new bills are on the horizon, what is going on behind closed doors, what the Feds are doing, what Bernanke is doing, what the DOJ is doing and why our National Deficit keeps growing at the rate of 4.9 billion per day.

Americans want their voice back – Obama, the House and Senate are our employees and we’re on a need to know basis.

Frankly we don’t trust those in the White House and we’ve lost all confidence in their ability to run our Government.

May God Bless America
As Always,
Little Tboca

Obama Bypasses Congress...Again

Barack Obama’s campaign to usurp congressional authority continued yesterday with new fuel economy regulations for cars manufactured in model years 2017-2025. 

This latest proposal by the President is the latest in a series of mandates which circumvent the legislative process.  

This “We Can’t Wait for Congress” campaign began after the President’s American Jobs Act was defeated in Senate.

These new fuel economy standards were developed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation, two federal bureaucracies with unelected leaders.

The President is openly defying the Constitution by issuing law, not through Congress, but through bureaucratic mandate. 

The press release promoting these new regulations states, “Today’s announcement is the latest in a series of executive actions the Obama Administration is taking to strengthen the economy and move the country forward because we can’t wait for Congressional Republicans to act.”

Mr. President, We the People are represented in government by Congress.   By defying Congress, you are defying the people. 

Our Constitution expressly separates powers among the branches of government.

 In fact, the first section of the first article designates Congress as the legislative body:

            “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the

            United States, which shall consist of and Senate and House of Representatives”

            -Article I, Section 1, the Constitution of the United States

Moreover, the Constitution provides that the President may, “recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” (Article II, Section 3).  The same section states the President, “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. 

As you can see, the Framers of the Constitution were very explicit in the division of responsibilities. 

In layman’s terms, the Congress is responsible for making the laws, and the President is responsible for enforcing the laws. 

What this President has done is borderline dictatorial.   He believes these laws need to be passed because he says so. 

The notion that he is accountable to the people is completely lost on President Obama.

The worst part about this whole situation is that the media refuses to call Obama out on his abuse of power. 

The end of the press release states that there will be an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposal after it is published in the Federal Register. 

If that isn’t a slap in the face, I don’t know what is.

I genuinely believe that this President has failed in his responsibility to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Obama Refuses to Defend Israel

The United States has been the number one defender of Israel since it became a sovereign state in 1948.

Up until now, U.S. Presidents have recognized that the continuity of Israel's existence is crucial to our presence in the Middle East.

Then, Barack Obama was elected President.

At the G-20 summit this past weekend, Nicolas Sarkozy, the President of France called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a "liar" is a conversation with Barack Obama.

Instead of coming to defense of Netanyahu, Obama instead reportedly said, "You are sick of him, but I have to work with him every day."

That's not what I would call supportive of the Israeli PM.

Israel faces the greatest threat to its existence of any nation. It is surrounded by a sea of enemies, including our mutual enemy, Iran.

The President is very two-faced in his rhetoric. When he addresses the matter publicly he sounds supportive of the State of Israel, but apparently in private he laments about having to work with Netanyahu.

I would be much more confident in this President if in this situation he had told Sarkozy that he does not believe Netanyahu is a liar and that the western world needs to be more supportive of Israel.

Instead the President stooped down to the level of of the French president and embarrassed himself and America as he has done repeatedly throughout his presidency.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/08/white-house-silent-on-conversation-with-french-president-dissing-israeli-prime/#ixzz1d92GK17u

Obama will Bank on Foreign Policy Successes

Since President Obama's economic policies have been nothing short of an epic failure, I expect that the president will lean heavily on certain foreign policy victories during his reelection campaign.

This year alone, Osama Bin Laden and Muammar Gaddafi have been killed, and the President announced the withdrawal of troops from Iraq in time for Christmas.

Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. may switch to an advisory role in Afghanistan as soon as next May at the NATO summit.

It seems as if Obama's political advisers are getting desperate and will plan on diverting attention away from Obama's poor record on the economy and jobs.

The American people need to look past the propaganda and spin and realize that the economic damage this administration has done far outweighs the small gains they have made overseas.

Moreover, it should be stated that Bin Laden would have been killed no matter who was in office. The grunt work to kill Bin Laden was done by the CIA and the military, all Obama did was sign off on the operation, which any president would have done.

Also, the killing of Gaddafi was done by his own people, and the President will need to be careful about how much credit he takes, because it was supposed to be a "NATO operation". Otherwise, the whole operation could be deemed unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Act.

The slight bump the president has received in his approval ratings will be short-lived as the economy and poor jobs situation will move back to center stage.

Obama has been playing the blame game since he took the oath of office.

First is was Bush's fault and then it was the Republicans' fault and then it was the Arab Spring's fault, and then it was the Republicans' fault again, and now it's the whole Congress' fault.

Not once has this president accepted responsibility for anything.

I believe that the American people, or at least the intelligent ones, will look past the nonsense the Obama campaign will put out and vote this disgrace of a president out of office.

FAST AND FURIOUS, SOLYNDRA AND ALL THAT JAZZ

“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists — and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president."

Presidential candidate Barack Obama, Des Moines, IA, November 10, 2007

Be wary of holier than thou campaign decrees. As the left’s messiah was paying tribute to himself in Iowa, George Kaiser, key Obama political bundler and investor in Solyndra, was most likely collecting his thoughts on how to wrangle some payola from his candidate, if elected. To wit paybacks are a bitch, especially for the American taxpayer.

The Obama regime has been busy lately triaging a number “what did you know and when did you know it” scandals, which are a hodgepodge of incompetence, cronyism and partisan bullying. The conventional wisdom is how they appear to be very Watergate-like. But the aroma of these scandals reeks more of “plead the fifth” Chicago- style gangsterism, the President's hometown, than the inside the beltway cloak and dagger trappings of Watergate.

Number one on the hit list resulted in the tragic death of an American border agent. “Fast and Furious" was an ATF gunrunning operation where 2,000 weapons were sold to small-time gun buyers in the hopes of tracing them to Mexican drug lords trafficking in weapons along the southwestern border and into Mexico. This botched sting operation has been connected to at least 11 violent crimes in the United States, including the killing of border patrol agent Brian Terry in Arizona with one of the ATF Fast and Furious weapons, and approximately 200 violent crimes in Mexico.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is busy investigating Fast and Furious and the Solyndra scandals. Rep. Issa also sits on the House Judiciary Committee and AG Eric Holder, America’s “crack” chief law enforcement officer, testified to that committee on May 3 claiming “sin conocimiento” in the whole Fast and Furious mess up until just a few weeks before the hearing.

But evidence surfaced that Holder was in cover up mode and he knew of Fast and Furious as of July 2010. In fact he had a conversation on the operation with Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) in the Senator’s office in January, 2011 and also told Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) on March 10, 2011 that he had learned of "concerns" about the program. So obviously Mr. Holder lied under oath to Congress as to his knowledge of this fiasco. In the wake of Mr. Holder’s congressional canards he threw under the bus and fired a number of ATF and U.S. attorney officials.

The looming question is why was this feckless operation initiated in the first place. Be careful if you’re planning on posing this question to an Obama spokesperson lest you have your head handed to you, just ask CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson. ATF Special Agent Peter Forcelli testified to Rep. Issa’s committee’s that the entire operation was a grand waste by saying, “The thought that the techniques used in the “Fast and Furious” investigation would result in “taking down a cartel” given the toothless nature of the “straw purchasing law” and the lack of a strong “firearms trafficking statute” is, in my opinion, delusional.”

Was Fast and Furious simply more incompetence emanating from the Obama regime, a la its economic policies, or was there something more insidious at play? Some claim that Fast and Furious was an elaborate attempt to further the Obama regime’s efforts to satisfy second amendment restrictions for its special interest lobbyists. Rep. Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Grassley (R-IA) have even posited that the Obama administration actually initiated the program as an advance attempt at furthering gun control in the U.S. In fact, ATF and Explosives agent, John Dodson told Rep. Issa’s House Oversight Committee that David Voth, supervisor of Fast and Furious was “jovial, if not, not giddy but just delighted about" marked guns showing up at crime scenes in Mexico.”

Rep. Issa’s committee has subpoenaed communications from top Justice dept. officials. But regardless of the committee’s findings as to whether Fast and Furious was due to ineptness or treachery,  AG Holder's self-serving cover up  adds a disrespectful insult to the tragic deaths of agent Brian Terry and others.

From Fast and Furious’ sinister cover-up we turn to Solyndra’s crony capitalism. Solyndra is the poster child for Obama’s socialist utopia, where “omnipotent and brilliant” central planners such as he select society’s winners and losers,at the expense of the taxpayers; and you’re definitely a winner if you contributed heavily to the central planner’s campaign. It’s sordid details include George Kaiser, key Solyndra investor with a 35.7% stock ownership through his Foundations, billionaire oilman, a major Obama donor and frequent guest at the White House who openly indicated that the President was fast and loose with the taxpayer’s dollars saying, “There’s never been more money shoved out of the government’s door in world history, and probably never will be again, than in the last few months and in the next 18 months.” Kaiser’s Solyndra received $535 million loan federal guarantee and that’s a lot of shoving.

Solyndra was a solar panel manufacturing company that received its $535 million federal loan guarantee via Obama's failed Stimulus package. The President has a green jobs spending “slush” fund of approximately $30 billion which was rolled into the Stimulus plan which is devoted to playing Russian roulette with taxpayer’s money. The Solyndra plant cost $733 million, $535 million funded by taxpayers, and was replete with robots that whistled Disney tunes, spa-like showers with liquid-crystal displays of the water temperature, and glass-walled conference rooms. “The new building is like the Taj Mahal” said John Pierce who worked as a facilities manager at Solyndra. It’s comforting to know the Solyndra folks were enjoying state of the art comfort at taxpayer’s expense.

In April 2010 President Obama touted Solyndra as “leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future”. But according to financial reports Solyndra didn’t have much of a future itself. A month before the President’s laudatory comments the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers issued a warning about Solyndra’s going concern status by stating the company wasn't making money, never had, and this raised "substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern."

Solyndra violated it’s government loan terms in December 2010 and admitted to the Obama regime it was running out of money. But the Obama regime continued to fund it despite it’s projected bankruptcy, continuing the process of throwing precious taxpayer money after a bad investment, and Solyndra subsequently filed for bankruptcy in September 2011. Solyndra isn’t the only failed green energy company to be selected by the Obama regime's scratch card venture capital lottery. It's one of 42 other projects in the Energy department’s taxpayer funded governmental venture capitalist lottery totaling $30 billion. At least four other “Solyndras” have received stimulus funding only to later file for bankruptcy.

So the Solyndra story ends with taxpayer’s losing $535 million in some bankrupt green company orchestrated by the Obama regime’s desire to play loan shark to one of his crony capitalist donors. But not to worry because there is a happy ending for the Obama cronies. Mr. Kaiser, the President’s favorite bundler, is fine since his Solyndra investment has preferential treatment in the bankruptcy proceedings, and the Solyndra executives have invoked the Fifth Amendment refusing to testify before Congress. So the old payola is alive and well in the Obama regime and his cronies, who in Chicago gangland fashion “copped the fifth”, would make Al Capone proud.

Fast and Furious and Solyndra-- the equivalent of Chicago’s Capone era St. Valentines’ Day massacre and gangster graft. The song lyrics to “My Kind Of Town”, the famous homage to President Obama's hometown,  say Chicago “has all that jazz”. It appears that the President has taken some of that jazz to the White House.

GIBSON GUITAR STRUMS THE "OBAMA BLUES"

Imagine the following company:

A thriving and successful American business started in 1902 with U.S. manufacturing plants that employs U.S. workers to produce high-end, iconic musical instruments.

Sounds like the idyllic company and one that couldn’t possibly exist under the Obama economy. But such a company does exist, its name is Gibson Guitars Corp., and it’s being bullied by the Obama regime for the most inane reasons. Gibson’s business, the quintessential American company and manufacturer of the iconic Les Paul Gibson guitar, is under siege by the Obama regime, ironically the very regime that is touring the country in a Canadian made bus with the President in full campaign mode desperately pleading for national support for his failed, repackaged $500 billion jobs “stimulus” proposal.

Ostensibly the focus of the Obama regime’s attack on Gibson is related to the government's unreasonable interpretation of an obscure law called the Lacey Act. The Lacey Act makes it a crime to import plants or wildlife into the U.S. if those goods were obtained in a way that breaks the laws of another country. The regime claims Gibson violated the Lacey Act through the manner in which they utilized exotic ebony and rosewood fingerboards from India in the manufacturing of their guitars. Apparently, according to the regime, Gibson violated the Act by importing ebony and rosewood fingerboards that were not 100% processed in India, under Indian law, and by Indian workers.

The Obama regime also has a similar beef with Gibson pending from 2009 dealing with Madagascan wood obtained in violation of Madagascan law. On August 24th the DOJ raided Gibson’s Tennesee HQs and two factories, shut down it’s operations, seized 24 pallets of Indian rosewood and ebony, as well as a number of guitars and computer files, causing lost productivity and $1 million in lost profits. The regime still holds $500,000 of Gibson property from the pending 2009 accusation.

That’s it! Environmental PC and governmental red tape run amok. The only offense Gibson apparently committed was that Indian workers did not process the fingerboards in India and instead 40 Gibson workers processed them in the U.S. Neither the 2009 nor this recent accusation has resulted in formal charges from the Obama regime; just intense harassment.

In a press statement Henry Juszkiewicz Gibson Chairman and CEO said,

“Gibson is innocent and will fight to protect its rights. Gibson has complied with foreign laws and believes it is innocent of ANY wrong doing. We will fight aggressively to prove our innocence. Gibson has a long history of supporting sustainable and responsible sources of wood and has worked diligently with entities such as the Rainforest Alliance and Greenpeace to secure FSC-certified supplies. The wood seized on August 24 satisfied FSC standards.”

Mr. Juszkiewicz also challenged the ambiguity of the Lacey Act by saying it requires companies to use “due care” not to import wood that was harvested illegally but does not explicitly define what that requirement entails and stated, “You shouldn’t pass a law unless you’re very specific about how to abide by it.” Advancing business uncertainty—a guiding principle of the Obama regime’s economic deterioration strategy.

Maintaining the integrity of national and international environmental laws is critical. But in times of chronic national unemployment of 9.1% with the President imploring Congress to pass his so-called jobs stimulus package it’s baffling to have that very same administration attack a profitable and fully staffed U.S. company, jeopardizing its profitability and risking employee’s jobs.

After creating all of this confusion and embarrassing press the common sense expectation would be that the Obama regime would call off the investigative dogs. But in typical bizarre fashion the Obama regime actually advised Gibson to ship their fingerboarding jobs overseas! According to Gibson’s chief legal counsel Bruce Mitchell, the government encouraged Gibson to have the fingerboard work done overseas. Mitchell is quoted as saying,

“I think they’re taking the position that we should be shifting these jobs overseas. We have – probably 40 people in our factory here just at USA who are doing the inlays into the fingerboard … that are putting the fret on. If all that was to be done over in India, then …. those jobs would be lost.”

So while President Obama touts his repackaged smoke and mirrors $500 billion “stimulus’ snake oil bill with one hand, he strangles U.S. companies employing American workers with regulatory red tape, risks their ongoing business and encourages them to ship jobs overseas with the other.

As one ponders why in the heat of one of the worse economic recessions and unemployment periods in American history would the Obama regime target a successful company like Gibson using shaky legal grounds, the other ponder is if other guitar companies are being targeted under the Lacey Act. The materials used in guitar manufacturing must be relatively common amongst manufacturers, so other guitar companies most assuredly must be under investigation for the same charges levied against Gibson. In fact, one of Gibson’s leading competitors, C.F. Martin & Co., employs the same wood as Gibson and admits that several of their guitars contain East Indian rosewood, which is the exact same wood used in at least ten of Gibson’s guitars. But for some reason C.F. Martin’s plants have not been raided by the DOJ, nor are there any current or pending charges against its manufacturing process.

The reason could lie less in the Obama regime’s concern for how exotic wood is processed and more in good old fashioned political partisanship. C.F. Martin’s CEO, Chris Martin IV, is a long-time Democratic supporter having made $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the DNC. But Gibson’s CEO Henry Juszkiewicz is a Republican who has donated to Republican candidates. The appearance of partisanship in the Obama regime’s attack on Gibson is transparent, shameful and insidious and informs the public that this administration does not care a whit to reduce unemployment. Its sole raison d'être is to advance its socialist agenda and will reward those who support them and terrorize those who rebuke them.

Selective targeting and intimidation tactics are actively employed in the Obama regime. Woe to those American companies who are doing their level best to stay afloat and maintain their employees in this Obama-induced economic funk and are simultaneously harassed on trumped up charges simply because their management does not support the regimes’ socialist agenda. They too could find their business under siege.

When the Obama regime is beating down a business it’s a helpless feeling and all they can do is sing the “Obama Blues”--just ask Gibson and Boeing. If they need any guitars for the instrumental they know where to look.

Mitt Romney Is Our John Kerry

I didn’t say this. My husband did. And it’s a good observation. Mitt Romney is the candidate that sticks out as the one that ‘fits the mold’ – the mold that Republicans so desperately need to break out of. When stacked up against President Obama, he doesn’t offer much “change” or “hope” compared to his primary opponents. And his message is bound to be lost in the media’s death-by-a-thousand-paper-cuts methods of tearing down boring candidates, just as they did with John Kerry.

Republicans are perfectly poised to have a sweeping victory, if only they would nominate a fresh, new face (literally) instead of a middle-aged white businessman/politician.

Let’s take a look at Herman Cain.

The pros:

• He’s got a plan. And more importantly, he’s got a plan people can understand. None of this “I have a plan – I can’t explain it on TV because it’s an extensive 7463935 point plan that makes everything 362740 times more complicated to understand than it already is – but trust me, I’ve got a plan, and it’s fantastic” crap.
• He’s a good communicator. With some professional support, he’ll be a great one.
• He’s not a politician. Thank God.
• He’s got a fantastic story. The man beat stage four cancer for crying out loud!
• He’s black. That takes away Obama’s worn out race card. If you think he’s not planning to pull that puppy out this go around, you are gravely mistaken, my friend.

The cons:

• He’s not a politician. It hasn’t really happened yet, but if they get desperate and he seems like a big enough threat, Cain’s primary opponents will call it a sin that he’s never held a political office before.
• He’s black. There are still bigots. Besides the crazies who are probably also felons and therefore not allowed to vote, there are old people who wouldn’t vote for a black man even if two black men were the only names on the ballot. They are dying off, thankfully, but unfortunately they vote more than any other age group. I’m hoping that most senior citizens are NOT those people.

Note that those cons are really only valid in the primary race, and become a moot point, for the most part, in a Cain v. Obama scenario.

It’s my personal hope that the GOP finally wrenches itself from it’s establishment fetish and jumps at the opportunity to join the 21st century.

See more at www.gopcampaigner.com