Wednesday, May 29, 2013

A Tragedy In Fort Worth...

At approximately 1am on Tuesday, Jerry and Kathy Waller awakened to the sound of a burglar alarm emanating from the house across the street in their posh, country club neighborhood.  The occupant of the home in question, a widow in her 80s, lived there alone.   Being the good neighbor and kind, generous man he is (as described by neighbors), 72 year old Jerry grabbed his handgun and started outside to see if he could help the woman.  A few minutes later Jerry was dead.

Fort Worth police, responding to the burglar alarm, arrived at the scene and saw Jerry in his driveway with a gun in his hand.  They were driving marked police vehicles with lights and sirens and were in full police uniform.  They identified themselves as police officers to the man with the gun just before shots were fired.  Jerry was hit 5 or 6 times (reports vary) and died at the scene.

There are conflicting reports of whether or not the officers ordered Jerry to drop his weapon.  Both officers involved in the shooting, each reportedly with less than a year on the job, said they felt they were in danger from the gun wielding Jerry when they fired. 

One neighbor who spoke with the police after the shooting was a former Fort Worth City Council member.  She said the two officers openly wept when they discovered the tragic mistake.  Jerry’s wife was interviewed by TV reporters and said the police were “trigger happy”.  Of course, regardless of the circumstances his wife is going to be understandably upset.

I may catch some flak for my opinion but here’s how I see it. 

Jerry was in his driveway at 1am with a gun in his hand.  The police encountered him on an emergency response to a possible burglary.  IF they warned him to put the gun down and he didn’t, for whatever reason, then the shooting was most likely justified even though Jerry wasn’t the bad guy.  And that’s a big IF.  IF they didn’t warn him then they will have to explain why they felt they were in danger.  Simply having a gun in your hand when police arrive doesn’t mean you’re threatening them with it.  To use deadly force they would have had to feel like he threatened them with it.  Did he turn toward them when they spoke?  Did they warn him and he didn’t hear them because of the alarm (and possibly because he was 72 years old?)

There are simply too many variables here that have not been explained.  Jerry was definitely at fault for going outside with a gun in his hand because his neighbor’s burglar alarm went off.  Jerry was not a police officer nor did he have any authority to go hunting burglars at his neighbor’s home – regardless of how nice a guy he was or how badly he wanted to help his neighbor.  It’s certainly a tragedy that he’s dead.  But he most certainly contributed to it happening.

The Fort Worth Police Department have placed both officers on administrative leave and promise a full and transparent investigation into the incident.  For the police officers involved it’s a tragedy as well.  If they are exonerated of all wrong doing and maintain their positions, they will be forever changed by the incident.  Will they be hesitant to fire their weapons in the future, possibly putting themselves or others at risk?  Time will tell.

If they are found guilty of shooting Jerry without proper cause, their careers are over and they may possibly be criminally charged.  Two young rookie officers’ futures are in the balance right now.  Facts will either save them or ruin them.  I don’t think they can be somewhere in the middle.

I feel badly for all concerned in this case.  A 72 year old grandfather lost his life needlessly for trying to do something good.  A woman lost her husband of 46 years and the father of her children.  Two young police officers not only have to live with the fact that they killed an innocent man but could be facing the loss of their jobs or worse, prison time.  Everyone involved has had their lives changed dramatically.

I hope the investigation can be completed and those involved can get some concrete answers.  Nothing will change what happened nor will any answer be easy for all to accept.  It’s a sad situation all the way around.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Thoughts On Memorial Day... Addendum

This morning I posted my Memorial Day blog then went to church.  As is his custom, our pastor praised our military and our great country and paid honor to all fallen service members just before his opening prayer.  (He also honors service members past and present on Veterans’ Day and asks all veterans to stand and be recognized.)

One thing he mentioned, which I seem to have somehow forgotten in my earlier post (for which I am deeply sorry) is that not only should we be thinking of our fallen service members during our celebrations tomorrow but we should also be honoring and thanking their families.  The soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who have fallen gave the ultimate sacrifice for our country but their families also have sacrificed.  They allowed their loved one to go off to war, knowing full well they may not come back.  And they must live with the loss every day.

I should have remembered it when I wrote about my friend who lost her son.   She suffers every day with grief for her son and only child.  Yet when he first volunteered for the Marines she was proud of him and when he decided to go to Afghanistan for what would be his last measure of devotion to his country – even though she did not want him to go she was proud of him for what he was doing.  Who wouldn’t be?  And she is proud of him today, even through her tears.

At the end of the service today they had the orchestra play an all brass version of “America, The Beautiful”, with the orchestra leader playing lead on the saxophone.  They showed a slide show of military scenes, past and present, and had a verbal narrative on each slide of Memorial Day history and facts.  The performance was exceptional and the entire congregation stood up about halfway through.  It brought tears to the eyes of most of the veterans in the congregation – mine included. 

So in addition to thanking all fallen veterans, I want to publicly thank their families and loved ones as well.  Thank you for your sacrifice to our country and her people.  To the parents – thank you for raising your children to be honorable people who had the courage to put their lives on the line for us.  May God bless you all.

Thoughts On Memorial Day...

In the book of John, Chapter 15, verse 13, the Bible says:  “Greater love hath no man than this - that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

Tomorrow is Memorial Day – the day set aside by the federal government to honor our fallen military heroes.  Originally celebrated as “Decoration Day” right after the Civil War, and finalized by law with its current name in 1967, Memorial Day is normally celebrated with the raising and lowering to half-mast of American flags, parades, military rifle salutes, flags and more often than not, veterans from past wars dressed up in their old uniforms. 

I think for me, the latter sometimes has the greater impact on my emotions.  All war veterans are special.  Each and every person living free in the United States today owes that freedom to a military veteran, but even more to a war veteran.  They are the people who literally put their lives on the line for us all.  And to look at the lined but proud faces of the World War II veterans, the Korean War veterans, and the Vietnam War veterans as they stand there in their faded but well cared for uniforms, makes me proud as well.

Not that I’m not just as proud of the veterans from other wars and conflicts.  Don’t misunderstand.  I have nothing but respect for any and all war veterans.  What I mean is – as I look at these old and aging men and women, who are now in the latter years of their lives, I see the pride in their faces and understand the emotion many of them still feel about their service and their country.

There aren’t really too many World War II veterans left these days.  My dad was in the Army during World War II.  He was in his early 20s.  He died last year at the age of 91.  All World War II vets are in their 80s by now.  It won’t be long before they’re all gone – just another part of history.

Most Korean War veterans are proud of their service and of what they did in the war effort.  They were in an unpopular “police action” as well but the American people, at that time, still supported the military.

Vietnam veterans have more reason to be angry at the United States (for the way they were treated during and after the war) than any others.  By the time Vietnam rolled around the attitude of many American people toward the military had changed dramatically.  Soldiers were spit upon and cursed upon their return to the USA.  Yet you’ll find many of these guys still sporting a uniform on Memorial Day and still very proud of their service.  And most of them would stand up today, even in their 60s, to defend our country if necessary.

Today the American people have once again embraced our military.  I’m not sure when it happened - we’ve had several various actions throughout the world since Vietnam: Grenada, the capture of Manuel Noriega in Panama, Somalia, and others I can’t name right this minute.  Then came Iraq and Desert Storm.  Then Operation Iraqi Freedom, and finally Afghanistan, where we have been for a long time anyway.  With every passing year, war coverage became more up-close and personal.  Reporters embedded themselves in with the troops and reported live from the battlefield.  Our wounded warriors, both male and female, came home and were not only embraced but received far more assistance from a caring public than in any other time in history through organizations such as the Wounded Warrior Project, and others.  It breaks my heart to see these young kids, young warriors, come home with limbs missing or worse, traumatic brain injuries.  But at least there are people trying to do the best they can to help these brave Americans.

Today I want to say a special thank you to those courageous military members who have sacrificed their lives defending our nation (since the revolution), but most specifically those who have affected my life – beginning with World War II.  We are free today because of you.  And your sacrifice does not go unnoticed – at least by many of us.

I want to thank all veterans, past and present, for your service and sacrifice.  We have a day of our own in the fall but thank you anyway.  The old saying “A veteran is someone who, at some point in his/her life, writes a check to ‘The people of the United States of America’ in the amount of ‘Up to and including my life,’” certainly applies to all veterans every day and needs to be recognized as often as possible.

I want to send out one more thank you – on a personal note.  A very special salute and thank you to Marine Corporal Chad Wade, the son of a dear friend of mine who made that ultimate sacrifice on December 1, 2010, in Afghanistan.  Although I never met Chad in person, I know his mother.  Therefore I know his character and his dedication.  Chad returned to a war zone with only 9 months left on his enlistment, and after already having served a tour in Iraq, because he didn’t want his buddies to go back into combat without him.  The Marines didn’t send him – he volunteered.  And sadly, he didn’t make it home alive. 

Happy Memorial Day to all Americans.  If my post today reminds you of nothing else, let it remind you that while you’re grilling steaks, hot dogs and hamburgers in the back yard or the local park, and sharing the food and fun with your families and friends, take a moment to remember those who sacrificed their lives so you could do just that.  Those men and women would want you to celebrate your freedom – because they were proud to go and fight for you to have it.  God bless you all and may God continue to bless the United States of America.

Friday, May 24, 2013

I've Broken No Laws - But I Plead The 5th...

I feel compelled to write something about the IRS scandal and Lois Lerner, the former head of the tax exempt division, who is currently in the process of “testifying” before Congress concerning her role and influence in the targeting of conservative groups for “more scrutiny” and seemingly unfair practices concerning their tax exempt statuses.

On Wednesday, Ms. Lerner went before Congress and stated that she had done nothing wrong and had not broken any laws – just before claiming 5th amendment rights and refusing to answer any questions.  I wasn’t the only one who thought her actions were not only wrong but somewhat unbelievable.  She basically told Congress her side of the story then claimed her 5th amendment right, preventing them from any cross-examination of her testimony. 

In my humble opinion, she waived her 5th amendment rights as soon as she began telling her side of the story and Congressman Darryl Issa should have held her in contempt of Congress.  How bad can that be?  I’m in contempt of Congress on a regular basis!

I’m not sure what good it would have done, however.  If Ms. Lerner is charged with a crime, be it obstruction, contempt, or even perjury, she will have to be prosecuted by the Holder Justice Department.  So the entire thing would most likely be a waste of time and money. 

One must ask why Ms. Lerner would claim she did nothing wrong and had broken no laws then refuse to answer questions because she could incriminate herself.  How can you incriminate yourself if you’ve done nothing wrong?  I’m not sure how that works.

During an official investigation, federal employees, as a condition of employment, are required to cooperate and answer questions.  When I worked for the government, if I would have claimed 5th amendment rights during an investigation I would have immediately been put on administrative leave or home duty or something until a determination was made in my case.  I would probably have been formally charged.  It took over 24 hours for Ms. Lerner to be placed on administrative leave – and I’m sure it was only done because of the outcry from the public.

Making matters worse, in my opinion, is that Ms. Lerner has been appointed to head the IRS department that will be over Obamacare.  So a woman who is suspected of targeting conservatives (strictly non-partisan according to the IRS) will be in charge of deciding who gets certain health care benefits?  Gee – that makes me feel safe and secure.

In other news – President Obama has announced he will appoint Eric Holder to investigate the Justice Department’s seizing of phone records of journalists and their families in the national security investigation involving the Associated Press.  Mr. Holder, who last week recused himself from the case and said he really has no knowledge of it because his Assistant Attorney General is in charge of the investigation, is the perfect person to investigate something the President wants to go away.  Does anyone really believe Holder will be objective, impartial and fair while investigating his own department for illegal activities?  Besides Obama and Holder, I mean. 

This government is getting more out of control by the day.  Obama claims to know nothing about anything.  Holder doesn’t know about large scale investigations going on in his own department (just like he didn’t know about Fast and Furious) and the former head of the IRS doesn’t know anything about the agency targeting conservative groups.  Oh – and Jay Carney still thinks the attack on Benghazi was caused by a video….

Monday, May 20, 2013

God Bless The People Of Moore, Oklahoma

My heart is saddened by the news out of Moore, Oklahoma.  Not only did so many people die but many of them were children, trapped in a school where they should have been safe.  I don’t fault the school, or the staff, or any person for the children’s demise.  In an F5 tornado, or even a strong F4, there are very few safe places to be.  Unless they’re under ground, brick, concrete and steel are no match for winds of 200+ miles per hour.  The elementary school where the children died demonstrated that very well.

During my years in Puerto Rico and Miami I experienced numerous hurricanes; some with devastating force.  But I can tell you very easily I’d rather live through a hurricane than a tornado any day.  With modern weather prediction technology, with few exceptions they can predict how strong it will be, where it will hit and what we can expect.  I even got to the point where I could look at the animated radar, the air circulation, the high and low pressure systems and pretty accurately predict where the storm would go.  It became a hobby.

Tornadoes are completely unpredictable – except for the fact that they can look at weather radar and predict that there could be a tornado in a specific area.  The predictions have become somewhat better but they are still just predictions, not accurate forecasts.

Tornadoes come down from the clouds when they decide to.  They stay on the ground as long as they want to and dissipate when they’re ready.  Hurricanes at least are predictable, not only their path but how and when they will most likely dissipate due to changing conditions, terrain, etc.  Give me the hurricane any time.

As a father who has lost a child, I can also feel empathy for the parents who are grieving for their children tonight. It’s difficult enough to lose a child who has been sick and isn’t expected to survive.  To lose a child suddenly, particularly to a traumatic event, with no warning and no preparation is far worse. 

I also feel for the first responders who had to go and find everyone they could who was still alive, transport them to area hospitals, and then go back and look for the dead.  Sometimes people don’t realize that first responders have to deal with death almost daily.  As a former paramedic in the Air Force, I can tell you that dealing with death on a regular basis can make you cold hearted.  One can easily get to the point where life or death doesn’t matter as much as whether or not you did everything correctly.  It’s easy to forget that the victims you’re working on are people, with families and lives of their own.  It can make you cold.  That’s one of the reasons I didn’t pursue a career as a paramedic when I left the Air Force.

May God bless the victims and the families of the victims in Oklahoma.  They are living a hell on Earth.  They need prayer and intervention – and people who have not been so hardened by tragedy that they don’t much care anymore. 

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Jay Carney: These Are Not The Scandals You're Looking For...

Apparently, if you’re a member of the Obama administration, all you have to do to rid yourselves of a scandal (or three) is tell the American people the scandals don’t exist. 

The White House, and the more hard core liberal media, is doing just that.  Just when some of the mainstream media has begun seeing the President as a human being who actually can screw up and they’re actually reporting negative things about him, the White House is telling us that the scandals surrounding Benghazi, the IRS and the Associated Press aren’t real.  It’s rather like an old Jedi mind trick…  “These are not the droids you’re looking for.”

The other day White House Press Secretary Jay Carney went on Piers Morgan’s show and for the first time in a while Morgan was actually asking intelligent and serious questions.  In an interview that must have caught Carney by surprise (he was in friendly territory, afterall), the Press Secretary found himself being questioned about how the Administration could restore Americans’ “faith” in the president.

“You’re concocting scandals that don’t exist,” Carney said.                                        

Really?  Scandals that don’t exist?  Even the Democrats are outraged about the IRS scandal.  And the media is in an uproar over the seizure of AP’s phone records.  The only one neither the Democrats nor the mainstream media seem to care about is Benghazi, which I find revolting.  Four Americans died, the administration – from the President to Hillary to Leon Panetta – screwed up royally and they want us all to simply pretend it didn’t happen.  In a morning briefing last week Carney said “Benghazi was a long time ago.”  I wonder how the families of the dead and the surviving victims feel about that statement…?

Bill O’Reilly says the AP phone records aren’t a scandal until more information becomes public.  As he often does, he’s giving the Holder Justice Department the benefit of the doubt.  Sorry Bill – I must disagree.  It’s definitely a scandal for how it was done and the fact that Eric Holder and the President deny any knowledge of it. I don’t believe either of them.  The investigation is concerning a national security leak and for Holder and Obama to deny knowledge of the investigation is more evidence they believe Americans are stupid.

In other news, the woman who was in charge of the IRS department caught targeting conservative groups, Israeli groups, Hispanic conservative groups, pro-life groups, etc., has been given a promotion.  Sarah Hall Marshall has been appointed as the head of the department that will control Obamacare.  One cannot help but wonder two things…  should she be fired for the targeting of conservative groups (or even prosecuted) and will conservatives be in danger of being denied medical care based on their political beliefs?  Don’t scoff.  No one thought the IRS was targeting certain groups either…  except the groups themselves.  And they were told they were wrong.

All in all it’s been a long, difficult week for the Obama administration.  It’s tough sometimes when people demand the truth and accountability – especially when you wish all the problems would just go away.  Keep working on that Jedi mind trick, Jay.  Maybe you’ll get some people to believe you.

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Chris Matthews - Is The Tingle Finally Gone?

It seems MSNBC's Chris Matthews isn't quite as enamored with President Obama as he used to be.  Just the other day, Mr. "I get a tingle up my leg every time he speaks" actually criticized the President concerning the various scandals in Washington recently.

“This President’s responsible for the federal government. He’s responsible even if he didn’t do anything wrong,” said Matthews on the Morning Joe. “He keeps acting like the only problem he’s got — the only real problem he has, viscerally — is the talking points in Benghazi because that gets to Susan Rice, people close to him, and Michelle.”

Matthews said President Obama needs someone to handle the day-to-day affairs of the White House to deal handle problems like the administration has seen over the last several days. He cited the lack of this leadership as a “real problem.”

“He is in charge of the entire executive branch. He is the boss. He needs a COO, someone who will carry out that authority every minute of the day through the weekend,” he continued. “He doesn’t want to do that. He doesn’t want to be chief executive, because he doesn’t want a chief operating officer. It’s the way he’s run the White House from the beginning — personally — and it’s a real problem. And now he’s getting blamed for things he knows nothing about, because he knows nothing about them because he doesn’t want to know about them. He doesn’t want to run the United States government. And that has been the problem.”

Matthews noted President Obama didn’t express any anger about the IRS story during his press conference earlier this week. Instead, President Obama only got angry when he was discussing Benghazi.

“Why isn’t he angry — really angry — about what happened with the IRS?” Matthews asked. “Look at him at that press conference. The only time he got really angry was when it was on Benghazi and the talking points, because that gets to him and his friends. And the problem is he’s chief executive, it comes down to that and everyone of these problems.”

“This is perfect. It’s gonna help save Mitch McConnell, it’s gonna help Tom Corbett in Pennsylvania, help Cuccinelli,” he lamented. “Anyone who is on that anti-government right that always says the government screws up in the end, they’re out to get you, now has their case for next November.”

Matthews blasted the administration and the excuses that have been given by the White House in the mounting scandals, pointing to the IRS and the Justice Department’s targeting of the Associated Press specifically.

“This is why it’s important to voters, when you go in the voting booth, you only get one vote. You pick Romney or Obama,” he noted. “When you pick Obama, you want to know the steering wheel that you just turned to the left a little bit, you want that to matter. That means you want that president you voted for to run things. That’s the only power you have as a citizen. Pick the person you want to run things, and then they run them.”

“For anybody to run around in Washington and say ‘We don’t run the IRS,’ or ‘We can’t control the Justice Department,’ and ‘I’m recusing myself,’ they say ‘The steering wheel doesn’t control the car anymore.’ The person says ‘I want the person I voted for to be in charge. The only power I have, and you’re telling me I don’t have it?’ Because you don’t have it. And that is going to really bug people, especially people that care about government doing a good job.”

Not to worry though.  The next day Matthews said that people who oppose Obama are racists and that at least 20% of them (those who oppose Obama) are white supremacists.  Now that's the Chris Matthews we know and love. 

I gotta ask, Chris - is the tingle gone or just waning...?

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

HHS Secretary Just Can't Seem To Follow The Law....

It appears Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius may have violated federal law once again in the performance of her official duties.

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) has suggested that Sebelius may have broken the law by seeking donations from health industry officials to help promote the implementation of Obamacare.

"Secretary Sebelius’s fundraising for and coordinating with private entities helping to implement the new health care law may be illegal, should cease immediately and should be fully investigated by Congress," Alexander said. "Such private fundraising circumvents the constitutional requirement that only Congress may appropriate funds."

Said criticism follows a Washington Post report detailing Sebelius’ appeals to insurance companies. The Post reported:

“Over the past three months, Sebelius has made multiple phone calls to health industry executives, community organizations and church groups and asked that they contribute whatever they can to nonprofit groups that are working to enroll uninsured Americans and increase awareness of the law, according to an HHS official and an industry person familiar with the secretary’s activities. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk openly about private discussions.  Many of Sebelius’s calls have gone to current supporters of Enroll America, the most prominent nonprofit group working on the health care law’s implementation, an HHS official said.”

If, in fact, Sebelius’s actions are illegal it will be the second time she has been accused of violating federal law while working in her official capacity.

In February of 2012, Sebelius violated federal law by using her Cabinet position to campaign for President Obama, federal investigators said last year.

The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) said Sebelius violated federal law in a February speech where she made "extemporaneous partisan remarks."

Sebelius voiced her support for President Obama and other Democrats during an speech at a Human Rights Campaign event in Charlotte, N.C., in direct violation of the Hatch Act.  The Hatch Act prohibits public officials from campaigning in their official capacities.  Sebelius strayed from her prepared remarks to rally support for Obama.

Not surprisingly, after the OSC cited Sebelius for violating the Hatch Act, her office reclassified the trip from “official” to “political” and she repaid the government for her expenses.  She then wrote a letter to the OSC saying they were pushing a “minor incident” too far. 

"I believe that you should have concluded that any violation was corrected when the event was reclassified as political," she wrote. "I believe that you should have concluded that the consequence of my going 'off script' at an official event was to change the nature of my appearance for cost reimbursement purposes only."

So apparently when you’re on “Team Obama”, if you break the law you simply reclassify your actions and all is forgiven.  After all - they're just minor little laws.  Must be nice to be in Obama’s cabinet….

The final disposition of the incident was left to the President so we all know what happened from there – nothing.  Sebelius is still the HHS Secretary and is still seemingly violating the law.  Maybe this time something will be done….?


Tuesday, May 14, 2013

The Benghazi Cover-up - According to Glen

Following the successful raid that killed Osama Bin Laden, President Obama began touting his success in fighting terrorism and saying that “Al Qaeda has been decimated.”  He basically told the American people that we didn’t have to worry too much about Al Qaeda anymore. 

Then, on September 11, 2012, the President’s worst nightmare came true.  An Al Qaeda backed terrorist group systematically attacked the U.S. Consulate and the attached CIA annex, killing our Ambassador to Libya and three other Americans.  Whether in complete disbelief, the paralysis of fear, or simple incompetence in the face of difficult decisions, the Obama administration did nothing.  In fact, it has been stated by many witnesses that various military teams were told to stand down rather than to respond to the seven hour long attack. 

Testimony by the so-called “whistleblowers” was that Hillary Clinton denied the normal, required security levels at the consulate even after they were repeatedly requested.  Gregory Hicks, then second in command in Libya, testified that he called the State Department directly when the attack began to inform Clinton of what was happening – a terrorist attack.

The Obama administration’s lack of response to the attack suddenly became a campaign concern.  An attack by a “decimated” Al Qaeda could hurt his chances of being re-elected.  Talking points memos submitted to the White House from the CIA described the attacks as terrorist attacks yet, when the White House issued a statement the next day all references to Al Qaeda and terrorism had been scrubbed from the narrative. 

Certainly their worries make sense.  Seven weeks from the election the President didn’t want anyone to believe he wasn’t being exactly honest about Al Qaeda.  Fortunately for the President, a public protest erupted in Cairo, Egypt on September 10th because of an anti-Islamic Youtube video that had been produced in the United States.  The protesters targeted the embassy in Cairo, vandalizing the outside and eventually climbing the walls and replacing the American flag with the flag of – you guessed it, Al Qaeda.  What a perfect thing to use as a distraction from the truth in Benghazi.

And so, on the morning of September 12th, the official White House statement was that the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was a spontaneous event stemming from protests over the video.  It was perfect….  except that it didn’t contain a shred of truth.  The President, Jay Carney and Secretary Clinton spent the rest of the week pushing the video story.  The President even used it in his Rose Garden speech concerning the attack.  They attempted to pass it off as truth.

Five days after the attack, our ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, went on five separate Sunday morning news talk shows with the story of the video.  She denied the attacks were the responsibility of terrorists but merely spontaneous riots in response to the video.

Two weeks following the attacks, President Obama went before the United Nations and again professed it to be the result of a video.  All of these people knew the truth yet they all continued the mantra in order to maintain the faith of the Obama voters.  According to White House transcripts, President Barack Obama described al Qaeda as having been “decimated,” “on the path to defeat,” or some other variation at least 32 times after the attack, between September 11th and November 1st, 2012. 

Hillary Clinton appointed two people from the State Department to investigate the incident.  They decided the response to the incident was appropriate and that no one had done anything wrong.  They failed to interview Secretary Clinton because, in the words of one investigator, she had already stated she did nothing wrong.  The investigation was a complete waste of time.

Fortunately for the American people (but not so much for the President), news organizations not loyal to the President (OK… Fox) not only didn’t believe him but continued to investigate the incident.  Republican lawmakers also investigated it and held hearings in an effort to discover the truth.  During her Congressional testimony, when asked whether the attack was spontaneous or terrorism, Secretary Clinton uttered her now infamous phrase “What difference, at this point, does it make?”  In a typical effort to protect Obama and herself, the Secretary tried to negate the importance of what happened and hide the fact that they were still covering up the incident as much as possible.

Now, eight months after the incident, and though the President and Jay Carney still deny it, we now know the attack was an Al Qaeda based attack, the administration knew it by the next morning and everything they said about the video was a fabrication.  The President is on the defensive because he can’t admit lying to the American people but everyone with any common sense at all (and with their eyes and ears open) knows he lied and why.  Even members of the liberal mainstream media are talking about it and demanding answers. 

It’s not looking good for the President right now.  The liberal media has always been on his side and it seems they’re finally discovering what conservatives have known from the beginning – that Obama cannot be trusted and he’ll do or say whatever is necessary to maintain his Presidency.  Even as recently as yesterday he continued to deny the truth about a cover-up and ridiculed Republicans for even trying to find the truth, passing it off as simple partisan politics.  The families of the victims and the American public deserve the truth – even at Obama’s peril.  He claims his is the “most transparent administration in history.”  Well, Mr. President – time to put your job where your mouth is.

Monday, May 13, 2013

Obama Needs To Watch Some Re-runs - Of His Own Statements...

This morning during a press conference President Obama said that controversy over the Benghazi incident on September 11th is “a sideshow.”  Obama denied any suggestion that there was a cover-up, questioning recent reports that showed a State Department official trying to water down the administration's initial story-line on what happened the night of Sept. 11.

The President went on to say he called the incident a “terrorist attack” from the beginning (probably in reference to his mention of terrorism in the Rose Garden speech the next day – which has long since been debunked as a general statement on terrorism after he tried to use that statement in a debate against Mitt Romney.  Of course, that night he had help from the liberal debate mediator, Candy Crowley…)  and declared:  "If this was some effort on our part to try to downplay what had happened or tamp it down, that would be a pretty odd thing that three days later we end up putting out all the information," Obama said. "Who executes some sort of cover-up or effort to tamp things down for three days? So the whole thing defies logic."

Three days later they put out all the information?  Did I miss that?  Five days later, on Sunday, the 16th, Susan Rice went on five different national television shows and said the attacks were in response to the anti-Islam video made by an Egyptian born Coptic Christian, after said video was overdubbed with different verbiage and broadcast on Youtube.   There was no mention of terrorists or Al Qaeda.

Two full weeks after the attack President Obama himself went to the United Nations and again reiterated that the video was somehow responsible for the attacks in Benghazi – knowing full well it wasn’t the case.  You put out all the information, Mr. President?  In what country and in what language?  It certainly wasn’t in English here in the USA!

The Obama administration and the left in general want Benghazi to go away so they keep trying to make it a non-issue.  They still deny they attempted to cover up their failures during the incident even e-mail evidence and witness testimony prove otherwise.  So why is this unimportant to many Americans and why do they knowingly continue to let the President get away with lying to them?  Or do they really have so much faith in Obama that what he does either doesn’t matter or they refuse to believe it?

Poor Jay Carney – I’m almost beginning to feel sorry for him.  Almost.  His entire job is to protect the President from his own screw-ups, lies and deceit.  Carney has told so many lies since Robert Gibbs resigned that I don’t think he even knows the truth anymore.

Mr. President – the country and the world now know the truth about Benghazi, from your failure to respond to threat information prior to the attack, to what actually happened that night, to your failure to respond to the actual situation and your continued lies since then.  Lying won’t work anymore and releasing a story about the IRS violating the Constitution on a Friday afternoon to distract Americans from Benghazi won’t work either.  

Oh, and Mr. President - if you truly don’t know the truth about Benghazi by now, might I suggest you read my blog on a regular basis?  I will keep you up to date on your failures…

Marine Amputees Visit And Encourage Boston Marathon Bombing Victims

I heard about something on television the other night that I hadn’t heard or read before and couldn’t help but wonder why I hadn’t heard it.
t sard it.

Apparently, a group of military amputees went to visit amputee victims of the Boston Marathon bombings in Boston area hospitals.

Soldiers from the “Semper Fi Fund,” a veterans group for injured military personnel, came to Boston to meet with about a dozen bombing victims and their families at four different hospitals. They told them about the importance of getting active as soon as possible and setting goals to aim for. The group said they are planning a return visit.

The Semper Fi Fund has raised $74 million over the last decade, and has now set up a Boston Marathon fund for those hurt in the blast. The group helps modify the environment of the injured to help them stay mobile and active, as well as providing support in getting prosthetics and services.

“It’s a small club.  Not a lot of people know what it’s like,” said B.J. Ganem, a former Marine who lost a leg in Iraq in 2004.

These wounded war veterans wanted to let the bombing victims know that their lives were not over simply because they, too, suffered traumatic amputations.  They went to encourage them and to push them toward recovery by being examples.  What an awesome thing to do.

Did I just miss this story?  Was it on national television before?  This is the type of human interest story that should have been widely publicized.  The fact that these war veterans took the time to go help a group of civilians who, like them, lost limbs in much the same way they did shows the character of the group.  The fact that it wasn’t widely publicized seems to show what - a lack of interest….?

God bless this group of wounded warriors and the new amputees they went to support.  I cannot imagine the changes they will have to go through because of it.  But the human spirit is hard to put down if your mind and heart are in the right places in life.  Hopefully they will all recover and live healthy, productive lives, despite their loss.  And even though the world is an evil place and there are evil people who care not for human life – I pray we can one day put an end to terrorism in the world.  The killing of the innocent masses for any specific cause is despicable.  And we, as a country, should always fight against it.

Sunday, May 12, 2013

"The Most Transparent Administration In History...." ?

In President Obama’s own words, his is “the most transparent administration in history.”  My first thought is “Really?  So you’re more honest, open and morally upstanding than say…  George Washington?”  But I guess being the narcissist that you are – you probably believe that.

Last week was an extremely revealing week concerning the transparency of the Obama Administration.  From Benghazi to the Internal Revenue Service, admissions and witness testimonies revealed the administration is about as far from transparency as it’s possible to get.

Three different witnesses testified before Congress concerning the September 11th terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen A. Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods.   Billed as a “partisan witch hunt” by the Democrats and the mainstream media, one of the most effective witnesses was Gregory Hicks, second in command under Ambassador Stevens and a career public servant.  Interestingly, it has been made public that Hicks is also a registered Democrat who voted for President Obama twice.  It’s difficult for me to understand how Hicks’ testimony is “partisan” given those facts but some Congressional Democrats and the media continue to call the hearings “right-wing story telling.”

Mr. Hicks testified that he was on the phone with then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the very night of the attacks and told her what was going on.  Hicks said he was shocked and embarrassed when the President, Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Rice began telling the world the attack was the result of a protest against an anti-Islamic video and when they continued to say it even after the truth became public.  He further testified he was criticized by the Undersecretary of State concerning his “management style” and “effectively demoted” because of his disagreement with the administration.

According to testimony given by former Tripoli Regional Officer Eric Nordstrom, Secretary of State Clinton waived security requirements for the U.S. consulate in Benghazi despite extremely high risk levels.  Security standards for diplomatic facilities are established by the Overseas Security Policy Board [OSPB] and the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 [SECCA].  According to Nordstrom and others, the Secretary of State is the only person authorized to waive security standards for areas of high risk.  This authority cannot be delegated.

Secretary Clinton says she did not waive the security requirements for the Benghazi consulate.  So if she didn’t do it, and that authority cannot be delegated – who did?

The third witness, Mark Thompson, a former Marine and now the deputy coordinator for operations in the State Department’s counterterrorism bureau, testified that during the attack his department was “pushed out of the loop” and was not involved in strategies and or coordination of any type of response.
Despite what administration officials (both civilian and military) say, there is evidence that military response and assistance was readily available but commanders were told to “stand down” rather than respond to Benghazi.  Then Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, said he did not send rapid response teams into Benghazi because he ‘didn’t know the extent of the danger and did not want to send people into harm’s way without knowing what we were facing.”  Huh?  He didn’t way no teams were available.  He said he chose not to send them.  My questions to Panetta are:  “Why have the rapid response teams if you’re not going to use them?  Isn’t that what they train for?”

In the first two weeks after the incident the President, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Jay Carney, along with the mainstream media, all maintained that the assault was caused by the video – knowing full well it was a lie.  Transparency?  Yup.  It was easy to see right through their lies.

In other big news this week, the Internal Revenue Service has publicly apologized to Tea Party members and others for targeting them for increased scrutiny during the 2012 Presidential campaign.  American political groups that had “Tea Party” and/or “Patriot” as part of their name were flagged by the IRS so the IRS could “take a closer look at their tax status.”

Of course, the higher-ups at the IRS said it was done by the lower level staff and they knew nothing about it.  However, as the story unfolds it seems there were plans at the IRS to do this as far back as 2011. 

Tea Party affiliates are understandably angry – first because it happened and second, because when they reported it last year they were mocked by the mainstream media and ignored by the government.  And now we discover that they were correct.  Calling it a textbook example of the very kind of government tyranny that tea party groups have been warning about, Republican lawmakers are demanding investigations into what Rep. Darrell Issa, (R) of California, called “unconscionable” behavior.  And Tea Party members want those responsible to be fired from the IRS.

White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney, asserted that the IRS Commissioner at the time was a Bush appointee, indicating that no one in the IRS administration knew anything about the targeting.  How far up it goes still remains to be seen but since the only groups targeted were Republican super PACs, it’s not difficult to figure out that the entire scheme was political.

Now, I’m not saying I think President Obama personally had anything to do with this.  What’s important now is what happens from here.  Just as I said after the Boston Marathon bombings, what matters now is what the President says and does about it.  Regardless of who was at the helm at the time – it happened on his watch and during his re-election campaign.  And those two things put him inside the circle of responsibility.

A typical response to either of these things from the left is “Well, George Bush lied.  Richard Nixon lied.”  I’m not sure why pointing out that a predecessor lied somehow gets President Obama off the hook but let’s look at those two comparisons.  Certainly Nixon lied.  His men broke into the Democratic campaign headquarters trying to get information that would help him get re-elected.  But nobody died because of it.  And while lies were told afterward, when it became evident that the crime had indeed been committed, Nixon had the decency to resign and those responsible for the crime and its cover-up went to prison.  I’m thinking were at the stage now where Obama should channel Nixon…

As for Bush – I guess it comes down to what you believe.  I believe Bush went with the intelligence he had – whether or not it was accurate.  I believe he believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons, and that the region and the Iraqi people were in danger.  What’s more, when Congress heard the evidence they had, the majority of both parties voted in favor of the attack.  Now given that the left is famous for saying that George Bush is an idiot, what’s easier to believe – that the intelligence provided was believed to be real and accurate or that the majority of Democrats in the House were duped by an idiot?  Hard to answer that one, huh?

I guess when President Obama says his is the most transparent administration in history it is true to some extent.  While I don’t believe he and I think alike on this subject – I think he’s very transparent.  It’s pretty easy for most conservatives to see right through him and his lies. 

Mr. President – I’ll say this to you.  The families of the four dead in Benghazi, as well as those wounded and scarred for life, deserve you to do the right thing and be honest and straightforward about what really happened and who dropped the ball and decided our response to the incident would be nil.  I don’t really expect you to take responsibility but I’m sure there’s someone out there you can throw under the bus.  Personally, I’m hoping it’s Hillary but I doubt that will be the case – because if it is I’m thinking she’ll pull you along with her.  After all – you’re living in the house she believes should be hers… 

Friday, May 10, 2013

Should There Be A "Mothers' Day"?

OK - many of you are now wondering, just from the title, if I'm crazy.  (Some of you wonder that anyway and have probably already made up your minds....)  But here's the reason for the title:

I read an article last night called “Why I Hate Mothers’ Day”.  The title alone drew my interest.  It was written by a woman, who is a mother herself, and I can only guess that she is unhappy and liberal.  I’m not judging her for her opinion but here’s why I think she is wrong in her ideas.

She says that Mothers’ Day is about making women who are mothers seem better and more special than those who are not mothers.  She says it makes (or tries to make) women who are not mothers to be somehow inferior to all the moms in the world.  As Colonel Sherman Potter used to say on “M*A*S*H”…  “Horse hockey!”  (One of my favorite shows ever, by the way.)

Mothers’ Day is about celebrating the women of the world who give us life and allowing our children to do the same thing.  After all, everyone on Earth had a mother at one time.  They wouldn't be here otherwise.

And sure – mothers are special – at least most of them.  Some women should never be allowed to have children for various reasons, just as some men should never be allowed to be fathers.  Let’s face it – there are people who simply do not have the moral aptitude, the discipline, or the ability to love and give of themselves to have children and raise them successfully.  I’m not talking about them.

The author went on to say she had taught her son not to acknowledge Mothers’ Day – not because she doesn’t want his love and appreciation but because celebrating Mothers’ Day just isn’t fair to those women who are not mothers.   She says she will probably live to regret that decision because as she gets older if her son doesn’t acknowledge her on Mothers’ Day it will hurt her.  But gee – you can’t have it both ways.

The woman said she also hates Valentine’s Day because it is unfair to people who don’t have anyone special to love.  (Are you getting the liberalism thing yet?)  So based on the things she wrote, here is how I see her.  She’s a single mother, bitter about past relationships (particularly with the father of her child), who didn’t have a warm, loving family relationship.  She somehow believes that hating Mothers’ Day, a day that should make her happy to have her son, is going to somehow make that a little better.  And she’s very liberal in her views on politics and life in general.

Sound about right?  Of course – I could be wrong in my assessment.  But I don’t think so. 

As a parent whose child died, I suppose I have every right to hate Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day because people will be celebrating something that I no longer have.  I could grab on to my pain and grief and be angry and bitter because Christopher is no longer here.  I have never once felt that way.  The very first Fathers’ Day following Christopher’s death I was at a group function with some friends and acquaintances.  One of the guys hadn’t seen his estranged son for several years and was talking about how badly he felt.  Many of these people didn’t know about Christopher and when I became visibly saddened by his story I was encouraged to tell my own. 

As I was telling the group about Christopher, the door opened and Tom’s son walked in.  Of course, he was overjoyed to see him and immediately got up and went to hug him.  After a while he came back over to me and said “I didn’t know about Christopher and I feel badly that my son is here and yours isn’t.”  I shook his hand and gave him a hug and said “Tom – I’m so happy for you that you got your boy back.  Don’t ever feel badly about that.  Celebrate with him and enjoy him while you can.”  My heart was heavy that day because of my loss.  But seeing the joy in Tom’s eyes when his son walked into the room brightened my spirits immensely.  I was genuinely happy for him.

Mothers’ Day (and Fathers’ Day) is about celebrating those who gave us life and celebrating the lives we brought into the world.  I loved my mother – and still do even though she’s been gone for 20 years.  I’m proud to be a father, even if my son is no longer here.  The title alone is something no one can ever take away from me.  And I pity that poor woman who thinks it’s all about being unfair and demeaning to childless women.  That’s not it at all. 

Happy Mothers’ Day to all the moms out there - even to the one who wrote the article.  It’s not a day to demean and devalue childless women but a day to celebrate your own mother.  It's a day to revel in the joy of your own children and, as they grow older, for them to celebrate you.  There’s nothing demeaning to anyone in that.  It’s about love.

Maybe the author of the article should try to start “National Womens’ Day” or “You Don’t Have To Be A Mom To Be Special Day” or something like that.  Or maybe she should get over her guilt about being a mother when other women aren’t and learn to celebrate that wonderful part of her life.  There’s  nothing wrong with celebrating being a mom.  Without them we would all cease to exist.

Thursday, May 9, 2013

Democrats In Benghazi Hearings: Protect Obama And Hillary At Any Cost

During the Congressional hearings on the Benghazi attack yesterday it became clear to anyone who watched with an open mind that the goal of the Democrats was not to uncover the truth about what happened.  Their goal appeared to be protecting Hillary Clinton and President Obama at any cost – even at the risk of sounding absurd.

Rep. Darrell Issa, (R), opened the hearing noting the many ways in which the Obama administration has stonewalled Benghazi investigations, and how the Democratic minority in the House has aided the stonewalling.  The President has yet to explain what he did once he was notified of the attack.  All we really know is that no one seems to have spoken with him about it during the night and the next day he flew to Las Vegas for a fund raiser.

Rep. Elijah Cummings, (D), used his opening statement to attack Issa and assail the whistleblowers’ testimony (that he hadn’t even heard yet.)  Cummings basically filibustered their testimony by wasting time, while he claimed to be a champion of whistleblowers.

During the testimony, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D), questioned why they (Democrats) had not had access to witness Mark Thompson and why they didn’t know what he was going to say except to read about it in the press (which just happens to be their best friend.) 

“I agree with Mr. [Jason] Chaffetz complete that there should be equal exchange of information – that we should have access to all information – but the Democratic minority was denied access to a witness,” asserted Maloney. “The only way we knew anything about what Mr. [Mark I.] Thompson was going to say was what we read in the press.”

She then went on to say she was appalled that when Americans get attacked in another country what happens is that Americans here at home (i.e., the President, Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, etc.) get attacked for it.  She apparently sees no good reason for this quest for truth other than to politicize the event and damage the President and Hillary.  And she’s not the only Democrat who feels that way.

Cummings told the witnesses that “Death is a part of life”, then went on to say “We feel your pain.”  Congressman, with all due respect, if you really felt their pain you’d be trying hard to find the answers along with Congressman Issa, not criticizing the hearings and the witnesses.

In a statement the other day, our illustrious new Secretary of State, John Kerry, said every question had been asked and every question had been answered concerning Benghazi and that it was time for the State Department to “move on” and stop being slowed down by continuous questions.  Really?  Four Americans died, including an American ambassador.  We, the American public, as well as the victims’ families have gotten no answers about what actually happened and why, and you’re tired of endless questions?  What are you going to tell the families of those victims – that you got the guy who made the video?  At least Hillary made good on that rather flippant and ridiculous promise. 

Last, but not least, the ever clever White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney, said it is the opinion of the White House that the Republicans are merely trying to politicize the Benghazi incident.  It’s apparent that President Obama, Carney, Hillary, et al, don’t want the truth uncovered because the deeper this probe goes the worse it looks for Obama and Hillary.  From all evidence that’s been presented so far, it is obvious that everyone involved knew the attack on the US consulate in Libya was a deliberate terrorist attack from the beginning.  The President was informed and disappeared.  The Secretary of State (Clinton) and Defense Secretary Panetta did nothing and Panetta told the military to stand down.  CIA agents were also told to stand down.  Four Americans died, including two CIA agents who disobeyed that stand down order and went to help anyway. 

The administration tried, unsuccessfully, to sweep the incident under the rug because of the upcoming election.  After all – President Obama had already informed the American people that Bin Laden was dead and Al Qaeda was mostly disbanded and ineffective.  Then, in the weeks leading up to the election, they stalled and avoided questions and kept people from testifying before Congress which, sadly, did lead to Obama being re-elected by an uninformed public. 

In previous testimony weeks before, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said he did not send in a rapid response team because he “wasn’t going to send a team into harm’s way without knowing what’s actually going on.”  Mr. Secretary – my question to you would be “Why do we have rapid response teams if not for situations like this?  Would this not be similar to one of the situations they train for?”

It disgusts me that Democrats are more interested in partisan politics than in finding the truth in this incident.  Sure, there are Republicans who are using it for political purposes.  That’s the life of a politician.  But finding the truth should be first and foremost for both sides, regardless of the outcome.   The American people deserve honest answers.  The victims’ families deserve honest answers.  And the victims themselves deserve the respect and honor of a government that owes them for their service and sacrifice to tell the truth about what happened to them and to hold people accountable if they did the wrong thing.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Obama To Graduates: "Trust Me, Not Them"

Over the weekend President Obama made several commencement speeches at various schools, including Ohio State University.  In his speech at OSU the President made the following remarks:

“Still, you’ll hear voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s the root of all our problems, even as they do their best to gum up the works; or that tyranny always lurks just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule is just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.

We have never been a people who place all our faith in government to solve our problems, nor do we want it to. But we don’t think the government is the source of all our problems, either. Because we understand that this democracy is ours. As citizens, we understand that America is not about what can be done for us. It’s about what can be done by us, together, through the hard and frustrating but absolutely necessary work of self-government.

The cynics may be the loudest voices—but they accomplish the least. It’s the silent disruptors—those who do the long, hard, committed work of change—that gradually push this country in the right direction, and make the most lasting difference.”

I've often wondered why President Obama says things like "We live in the greatest nation in the world" but wants to "fundamentally change" it.  It doesn't make much sense to me.

It’s interesting that our founding fathers believed future administrations could become tyrannical and structured the Constitution to ensure such a thing couldn’t happen.  More than once during his Presidency, President Obama has referred to the Constitution as a hindrance to what he wanted to do.  He has tried, so far unsuccessfully, to take some powers away from the other branches of government, such as the debt ceiling and budgeting, and make it part of the Executive Branch so he alone would be in charge of it.  He has also denied, on several occasions, that he is (or wants to be) king – something I don’t remember any other president doing in my lifetime.  It makes one wonder why he’s bringing it up.

Robert A. Heinlein, American author and purveyor of liberty and self-reliance, once wrote in a book: “There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.”  Since Heinlein died in 1988, there was no way he could have known about the upcoming health care law.  But was it a prediction?

American author Bruce Coville once said: “Withholding information is the essence of tyranny. Control of the flow of information is the tool of the dictatorship.”  Does that apply to the Obama administration and the mainstream media?  Information coming from “the most transparent administration in history” is partial, at best, and often non-existent.  The Benghazi fiasco is a perfect example.  It is becoming more clear with each passing day that the Obama administration is involved in a massive cover up of the flagrant mishandling of the entire incident.  From CIA agents to military leaders to other State Department personnel – the stories being told about what did and didn’t happen that night are vastly different than those that having been told by the administration.  And with very few exceptions, the mainstream media has backed the administration rather than search for the truth.  It is only in recent days, when the evidence of lies and deceit have become overwhelming, that the mainstream media has begun digging for and reporting facts.

The graduates of Ohio State have a choice – they can search for their own truths or blindly follow the President.  I’m hoping one of the things they learned in school was to think for themselves and find the truth, however painful or disturbing it may be, or however different it may be than the “truth” presented by the government.  This “transparent” administration doesn’t have a great track record for truth.  But of course…  that’s George Bush’s fault.

Monday, May 6, 2013

Why Truth About Benghazi Is Important

In the nearly eight months since the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, GOP lawmakers have been trying to get to the bottom of not only what exactly happened, but why our response as a nation was so poor and why it seemed the Obama administration was withholding information and/or outright lying about it.  Recently some so called “whistleblower” witnesses have surfaced who seem to be finally blowing the lid off of the can of secrecy.  It’s about time.  But what will they reveal?

Mark I. Thompson, the acting deputy assistant for operations in the State Department's counterterrorism bureau, will testify on Wednesday that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton willfully blocked out his department's involvement on the night of the September 11 Benghazi attacks — and that he has been threatened and intimidated by unnamed State Department officials about saying as much in public, and that al-Qaeda was involved all along.

As CBS News reports, the Obama administration "did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource, the Counterterrorism Security Group."  So why have them if they’re not going to be utilized in a terrorism emergency?

Of course, the Obama administration has already stated they know nothing about witnesses possibly being threatened and they will categorically deny that State Department officials, including the next Democrat Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, knew anything about bypassing the CSG.  But witnesses in the last week have said that not only could something have been done by the military to help stop the attack but that the administration, particularly Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and President Obama himself, lied about the video and the involvement of Al Qaeda in the attack.  So why isn’t anyone reporting this information beside right-leaning news outlets?

A search of the headlines on the web pages of ABC, CBS and NBC reveal that only CBS has anything in their headline pages about Benghazi.  There is no mention of Benghazi on the home page of ABC News or NBC News.  Not that it’s a surprise – NBC particularly.  After all – it was NBC who announced their bias toward President Obama in the 2008 elections.  There is no reason to believe that has changed.  ABC isn’t reporting anything either.

So why is it important?  I read some comments earlier following an article about this very topic.  There were many comments from people who not only believe the “whistleblowers” are a GOP led conspiracy but that regardless of what Hillary does, it’s OK.  They believe Hillary Clinton can do no wrong and that the Obama administration, regardless of the blatant evidence, is honest and above board and completely trustworthy.  I guess there were those who believed the same about Richard Nixon but since there was no internet back then, it did not get communicated appropriately.

The truth about what happened in Benghazi, and the truth about what happened afterward are important  for several reasons.  1.)  The Obama administration is lied to the American people about what happened because of the upcoming election.  If he’d have told the truth – that Al Qaeda wasn’t quite as “dead” as he stated, he may have lost the election.   2.)  The excuse that the attack was a spontaneous one following a protest of a video was given to deliberately lead the American people away from the obvious conclusion that Al Qaeda was not dead and that the President was lying – and for the same reason as #1.   And 3.)  Suzan Rice’s statements on the Sunday talk shows were also deliberate lies but not necessarily fabricated by her.  I believe she simply regurgitated the information she was given without properly vetting it.  Thereby, she was telling the truth as she knew it even though she probably knew it wasn’t really the truth.  What better deniability can one have than to give out information you were given, without proper vetting, and then saying “I told you everything they gave me.”  I believe she was a scapegoat – deliberately set up to take the fall if and when the truth came out. 

Those of us who did not believe the attack was a spontaneous result of a video were labeled as racists and haters of women and both together.  Now, it seems we’ve been vindicated as the truth comes out.  Except those who only get their news from the main stream media may never know the truth because only one mainstream outlet is reporting on it. 

Unless the Benghazi hearings destroy her chances, Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly be the next Democrat Presidential candidate.  Whoever runs against her from the GOP better have more cojones than John McCain or Mitt Romney and confront her on the issue of Benghazi.  Otherwise the American people are going to elect her – caring not how she lied to the country about Benghazi and God knows what else.  They just don’t seem to care about honesty in their own candidate.  Honesty is something that can only be demanded of the Republicans – probably because Democrats don’t really know the meaning of the word.
Nixon resigned over the Watergate scandal.  One can only hope Obama will be uncovered for the liar he is and that he’ll take his cue from Nixon.  The truth will eventually be revealed – even if the President’s own media outlets won’t report it.  Of course – people probably won’t believe it anyway…

Saturday, May 4, 2013

"Ten Things You Need To Know Today" - According To AOL

I was on AOL yesterday and saw a headline that said “Ten Things You Need To Know Today.”  Naturally, I was curious so I clicked on the link.  These are the ten things they said I needed to know:

1. BANGLADESH FINANCE MINISTER DOWNPLAYS COLLAPSE THAT KILLED 500:  He says "I don't think it is really serious – it's an accident" and "It happens everywhere."

2. PAKISTAN PROSECUTOR IN MUSHARRAF CASE IS KILLED:  Gunmen in a taxi fired upon the lawyer who was leading the charge against the former military ruler.

3. ASSAD REGIME ACCUSED OF `MASSACRE,' KILLING AT LEAST 50:  Activists say Syrian troops killed men, women and children in the mountain village of Bayda.

4. MOMENTS OF PANIC AT HOUSTON AIRPORT:  A man is dead after firing a gun at Bush Intercontinental, shot by a Homeland Security agent at the same time he turned the gun on himself.

5. BOSTON BOMBING SUSPECT'S REMAINS CLAIMED:  A funeral home picks up Tamerlan Tsarnaev's body for his family. The cause of his death is expected to be released soon.

6. OIL IMPORTS PLUNGE:  As production rises in the U.S., the daily flow of imported crude oil falls to a 17-year low.

7. WHO WILL LOSE WITH ONLINE GAMBLING:  As Nevada, New Jersey and Delaware lead the way, some warn the move will be bad news for casinos.

8. HOW THE NOOK WILL GET 700,000 MORE APPS:  Barnes & Noble struck a deal to get Google Play's games and apps on its tablets.

9. WHERE'S LINDSAY LOHAN? APPARENTLY, NOT IN REHAB:  Her lawyer told a judge the troubled actress was in lockdown for 90 days only to learn later that she never checked in to the facility.

10. MOST DON'T OBJECT TO WASHINGTON `REDSKINS':  Nearly four in five Americans think the team should keep its name, which some consider derogatory to Native Americans, an AP-GfK poll shows.

I don’t know about you but 3, 4 and 6 are the only ones I see that are something I probably should know.  I feel bad for the people who died in Bangladesh but it’s not the first time that a politician tries to downplay a tragedy by saying something stupid.

I feel badly for the prosecutor in Pakistan as well but the government is corrupt and extremism is no stranger to that area.

The conflict in Syria is definitely important since we are possibly poised to intervene.

A suicidal gunman in a US airport is always pertinent.  Thankfully he didn’t take anyone with him.

Personally, I don’t care a hoot about what happens to the body of Tamerlan Tsarnaev.  Sure, they should send him back to his mother and I don’t have a problem paying for it with taxpayer money.  But I don’t need to read about it.

Increased US oil production leading to decreased imports is great news.  I’m happy to read about that and hoping it will lead to a drop in gas prices.  Of course, what will probably happen is that US oil companies will find themselves with more oil and gas and begin exporting it…

Online gambling affects many people in this country but I’m not one of them.  I don’t play games of chance online.  In fact, there are very few games I play online period.  I feel badly for people who lose their savings to gambling but it’s not something I needed to know yesterday.

Don’t own a Nook, don’t care one way or the other about their apps.

Lindsay Lohan?  Really?  Does anybody but the judge and her lawyer really care where she is?

The Washington Redskins being under pressure to change their name because it’s not “politically correct” and derogatory to Native Americans.  This has been ongoing for years.  For my thoughts on political correctness, see my previous post. 

So out of ten things AOL said I needed to know yesterday – three of them are important and I could have waited until today to learn any one of them.  I guess what I consider important is far different than what AOL feels is important.  Imagine….

Political Correctness And The Loss Of Free Speech....

Political correctness is no more and no less than someone, be it an individual, a group or the government, putting limits on freedom of speech.

Certainly there are instances where limiting free speech was deemed necessary to protect the public.  Yelling “FIRE!” in a crowded theater for instance, or getting on a plane and saying you’re going to blow it up, regardless of whether or not you actually have a means.  (Nowadays you’re more likely to get beaten and tied up by the passengers before the authorities have a chance to get to you.)  Saying you’re going to kill a politician or a judge is also an example of restricted freedom of speech.  And I’m not going to sit here and say I disagree with these rulings.  But those examples are not done out of political correctness.

Recently, in Washington State, legislation was passed to remove a list of words from official government documents because they weren’t “gender neutral”.  Basically, they removed a list of words that contained the word “man” if they could find other “gender neutral” words to replace them.  Some of the words on that list were “penmanship, journeyman plumber," and "signalman."  They did not remove “airman” or “seaman” because of objections from the military.

In my humble opinion, anyone who is offended by a word like “penmanship” because it seems masculine is a bit too sensitive.  I’m wondering what words they’re going to find to replace “woman, women, and female?”  After all – each of those words contain a nasty, derogatory and demeaning masculine word.  Right?

Political correctness, loss of free speech and ever increasing nanny government are working together to “fundamentally transform” our nation from the free, democratic republic as it was founded to a progressive, socialistic, moving toward a totalitarian nation.  Don’t believe me?  Let’s take a look at some of the freedoms that have been and are being taken away from you.

In 2012, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act that authorized indefinite detention, without due process, of anyone suspected of aiding terrorist organizations, including American citizens.

He also signed HR 347, creating “No Free Speech Zones” in public areas, which prohibits protests near anyone who has Secret Service protection.  In other words – no one can heckle or yell at the President in a public forum or face criminal charges.

The Attorney General recently argued that the President has full authority to kill American citizens with drone strikes if they are suspected of aiding terrorists on foreign soil.  And he has already done so.  These Americans did not receive due process of law.  They were simply killed.

New York is the greatest example of the nanny government taking over.  Mayor Bloomberg has outlawed smoking in many public places, including beaches and parks.  He attempted to outlaw soft drink cups larger than 16 ounces and has limited the amount of narcotic medications that can be given by a physician in an emergency room to three tablets.  He is now working on legislation to force store owners to hide cigarettes so they cannot be seen by customers.  (He hasn’t outlawed the sale of them yet but wants to “protect” people from seeing them on the shelf.)  Oh – and he has outlawed salt in restaurants.  And all of these things he has done to protect the public from itself.  Can it be too far away that the federal government begins doing the same thing?

Some people get carried away in their attempts to make everyone “equal” and the same.  I can tell you that we are not the same, regardless of how many rules and laws are made to make us that way.  It used to be that individualism was what made America strong and great.  Now the progressives want to move toward collectivism and make us all the same.  Can you say “Big Brother”?

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Pelosi To Introduce "Obabycare" While Doctors Murder Infants

I watched a news report last night about Nancy Pelosi’s newest plan to take more tax money from Americans.  She will soon be introducing a bill that provides government subsidized child care for all.  According to Pelosi – “quality, affordable child care is a right for all Americans” so that women/mothers can contribute more to society.  (I wonder i they'll call it "Pelosicare" or "Obabycare"...?)  And apparently she believes the taxpayers should pick up the tab for it.

Not that it’s a surprise.  One has to wonder if there is anything in our lives these days that Democrats think we can and should handle on our own.  They (Democrats) seem to believe that the government should be involved in every facet of our lives and, of course, make us pay for that involvement in the form of new and increased taxes.  It’s not cheap for the government to be your guardian, after all.

In other news, the murder trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia still goes largely unreported by the mainstream media.  Gosnell is accused of killing babies by using scissors to cut their spinal cords. Authorities allege that some of the infants were born alive and viable during the sixth, seventh and eighth months of pregnancy and were deliberately killed.

How is a case like this not news?  How does a pro athlete’s sexual preference, or Jodi Arias’ murder trial (for killing her boyfriend) or even the latest escapades of Lindsay Lohan take priority over the murders of multiple babies? 

A friend of mine said something last night that brings it all together.  She said “It amazes me when I read that if a woman is pregnant and in an accident and killed by another driver, they call the fetus a baby and two counts of manslaughter are brought against the guilty party.   But if a Dr. does it on purpose it is just a fetus???!!!” 

She is spot on with that comparison yet abortion advocates fail to see the contradiction between the two.  I wonder, in a state that has very liberal abortion laws, if that driver who kills a pregnant woman can get one count of manslaughter thrown out of court because the state has already demonstrated it doesn’t recognize that unborn child as a baby?  I’m sure it will only be a matter of time before that happens.

I personally don’t believe Roe vs Wade will ever be repealed.  It’s been the law of the land for 40 years and even though Republicans continue to make it an election issue, I don’t believe it will change.  However, even Roe vs Wade doesn’t allow for the atrocities committed by some abortion doctors today.   

In two videos recently recorded in abortion clinics, doctors who provide abortions are heard saying they would either kill a baby that was born alive during an abortion or simply allow it to die. 

One video features a D.C. doctor, Cesare Santangelo, who said that in the unlikely event that an abortion resulted in a live birth, “we would not help it.” Santangelo was answering repeated questions from an undercover operative about what would happen, hypothetically, if she gave birth after an unsuccessful abortion.

“I mean, technically, you know, legally, we would be obligated to help it, you know, to survive, but . . . it probably wouldn’t,” Santangelo is shown telling the woman, who was 24 weeks pregnant. “It’s all in how vigorously you do things to help a fetus survive at this point.”

Another video released Sunday shows an unidentified worker in the Bronx saying the clinic would put the baby in a jar of “solution” that would cause it to stop breathing.  The two videos are posted below if you care to view them.

Abortion has become the new norm in birth control, it seems.  Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion clinic in the country, and possibly the world, and is subsidized by the federal government.  I’ve heard abortion advocates say “It’s better to abort a baby than to have it be born unwanted.”  I disagree.  There are plenty of childless couples out there who would be willing to adopt an unwanted baby.   What we need to do in this country is make adoption easier and less expensive.  The government wants to make it easier and less expensive for people to immigrate into the country.  Why not first work on problems we already have here at home?

One more thought....  maybe Nancy Pelosi should push the abortion thing (and increase federal funding of same) so there will be less need for child care.  How about that one, Nancy??