If you support our national security issues, you may love and appreciate the United States of America, our Constitution with its’ freedoms, and our American flag.
If you support and practice our fiscal issues, you may value worldly possessions.
If you support and value our social issues, you may love Judeo-Christian values.
If you support and practice all these values, that is all good; an insignia of “Wisdom” . - Oscar Y. Harward
National Debt Clock-Click Here-Real Time
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091117
Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!
Hope is the feeling we have that the feeling we have is not permanent. -- Mignon McLaughlin
"The one thing we can never get enough of is love. And the one thing we never give enough is love." -- Henry Miller
"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)
"When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth." (John 16:13)
Up to 1884, every region around the globe kept its own time. If we still lived that way, there would be international chaos in trading and communication.
However, today, Greenwich, England, is the fixed point for locating anything on earth. We call it the "prime meridian." If you visit that spot, you can stand with one foot in the Eastern Hemisphere and one foot in the Western. But how did that inauspicious London district become so important?
An astronomer named John Flamsteed spent his life creating an accurate navigational chart of the heavens, locating thousands of stars as the head of the Royal Observatory in---you guessed it---Greenwich, England. Through his work, people could begin to determine their precise location. Today, of course, it enables GPS (Global Positioning System) navigation.
When it comes to measuring truth, God is the one fixed point in the universe. He is the Prime Meridian. So here's the real question: in any given situation, do you determine what is true based on how you feel or on how God feels? Is your compass set on a fixed point or a moving target? Is your spiritual GPS focused on God or yourself?
We serve a God who embodies truth. It's not His desire that we live in spiritual chaos, each person doing what is right in his or her own eyes. He gives us His Word and His Spirit so that we might be guided into all truth, just as Jesus promised.
"The Patriot Post"
"But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever." -- John Adams
"At the heart of the American idea is the deep distrust and suspicion the founders of our nation had for government, distrust and suspicion not shared as much by today's Americans. Some of the founders' distrust is seen in our Constitution's language such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage, violate and deny. If the founders did not believe Congress would abuse our God-given rights, they would not have provided those protections. After all, one would not expect to find a Bill of Rights in Heaven; it would be an affront to God. Other founder distrust for government is found in the Constitution's separation of powers, checks and balances and the several anti-majoritarian provisions such as the Electoral College and the requirement that three-quarters of state legislatures ratify changes in the Constitution. The three branches of our federal government are no longer bound by the Constitution as the framers envisioned and what is worse is American ignorance and acceptance of such rogue behavior. Look at the current debate over government involvement in health, business bailouts and stimulus packages. The debate centers around questions as whether such involvement is a good idea or a bad idea and whether one program is more costly than another. Those questions are entirely irrelevant to what should be debated, namely: Is such government involvement in our lives permissible under the U.S. Constitution? That question is not part of the debate. The American people, along with our elected representatives, whether they're Republicans or Democrats, care less about what is and what is not permissible under our Constitution. They think Congress has the right to do anything upon which they can secure a majority vote, whether they have the constitutional or moral authority to do so or not." -- George Mason economics professor Walter E. Williams
"Can President Barack Obama and Congress enact legislation that orders Americans to buy broccoli? If so, where did they get that authority? What provision in the Constitution empowers the federal government to order an individual to buy a product he does not want? This is not a question about nutrition. It is not a question about whether broccoli is good for you or about the relative merits of broccoli versus other foods. It is a question about the constitutional limits on the power of the federal government. It is a question about freedom. Can President Obama and Congress enact legislation that orders Americans to buy health insurance? They might as well order Americans to buy broccoli. They have no legitimate authority to do either. Yet neither Obama nor the current leadership in Congress seems to care about the constitutional limits on their power. They are now attempting to exert authority over the lives of Americans in a way no president and Congress has done before. ... All versions of the health care bill under consideration in Congress would order Americans to buy health insurance.. If any of these bills is enacted, the first thing it would accomplish is the amputation of a vital part of our Constitution, and the death of another measure of our liberty." --columnist Terence Jeffrey
Faith & Family
"Hard work and self-denial were part of our national character -- actually our Christian heritage. In recent years, the 'sound economic values' have eroded. ... But the problem, you see, is that values and the character they produce aren't divisible. People will not exercise restraint in their economic dealings while casting off restraints in their sexual and social ones. .... Or turn on the television. There, people are indulging every sexual desire in the midst of a consumerist paradise -- big homes, expensive cars and fashionable clothes. You can do anything you want. The 'Calvinist restraint' ... didn't preach chastity or thrift; rather it preached chastity and thrift. That's because it saw both as proceeding from a common source: the Christian understanding of man's nature and the purpose for which God created him. If you try to have the one without the other, you will get neither. Far from being obsolete, the old culture war is more relevant than ever. Restoring moral values across the board is essential to rescue a sagging economy as well as renew our nation's spirit." --author Chuck Colson
Pelosi Scolds Pelosi: Not Giving 3 Days To Read A Bill Is An "Absolute Outrage"
The House Health Care Bill Is Full of Surprises
Ronald Reagan once joked, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
Well, the Gipper was wrong. I have 12 even more terrifying words: "I'm the government's health care choices commissioner. Let me see your insurance policy."
You see, the health care choices commissioner will be the head of just one of the 111 new government agencies created by the mammoth health care reform bill, which passed the House last Saturday by the narrowest of margins.
Unless you've read all of the nearly 2,000 pages of the bill, you might not have heard of the health care choices commissioner. But there is a lot more in this bill you've never heard about as well.
For example, as Bill Pear writes in the New York Times, supporters of gay rights included an amendment that would lower taxes for gay couples, ensuring tax-free health care benefits for an employee's same-sex partner. This was never debated on the floor, nor was it passed as a tax measure. It was just swept up into what has become the health care grab bag. So chalk one up for the gay lobby.
Then there's a provision requiring vending machines to post calorie counts for the goodies they offer. And fast food chains will have to provide a "calorie count for each standard menu item." Health care reform?
The bill also has new programs such as grants for home visitation programs, in which nurses and social workers can coach new mothers on parenting practices and teach them how to interact with their child "to enhance age-appropriate development."
Like most of the congressmen, I haven't read these provisions, so I'm not sure who gets to decide what "age-appropriate interaction with children" is. But I'm not sure I want the government making those kind of decisions—telling parents how to interact with their kids.
I'm all for health care reform. Adequate health care is too expensive for too many. If we could clean up Medicaid and Medicare and provide health care subsidies for the working poor, I and a lot of other people would be dancing in the streets.
Now, the House members deserve some credit. They fought for, and won, pro-life provisions in the House bill.
But it's all now up for grabs in the Senate. Hopefully, the Senate will come up with a more responsible bill, which does not add a trillion dollars to debt, and which does not put the government in absolute control of our health care. The biggest issue to me is whether the government ultimately makes life-and-death medical decisions.
We've seen glimpses of this already. Just look at Florida's plan to combat a potential swine flu emergency. The state's approach to treating patients will be "the greatest good for the greatest number." But this utilitarian approach is a potential death sentence for the elderly and those with disabilities.
I urge you to go to the ColsonCenter.org and view this week's installment of the Two-Minute Warning, where I talk about the dangers of utilitarianism—especially as it relates to health care. And you can download some very valuable free materials.
I wouldn't be so concerned if this health care reform bill were just another example of bad legislation. But I fear much more is at stake. A government that decides who lives and who dies is no longer a government of the people and by the people. And it's certainly not a government for the people.
Morning Bell: A Deathblow for Obamacare
Standing in the Rose Garden on November 7th, President Barack Obama celebrated the passage of the House health care bill claiming: “The Affordable Health Care for America Act is a piece of legislation that will provide stability and security for Americans who have insurance; quality, affordable options for those who don’t; and bring down the cost of health care for families, businesses, and our government, while strengthening the financial health of Medicare.” Quite a bold statement if true. But a report released Friday by the non-partisan and independent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the agency in charge of running Medicare and Medicaid, blows the lid off of every one of Obama’s claims. All of the following quotes are from the report itself:
Health Care Costs Increase: “In aggregate, we estimate that for calendar years 2010 through 2019 [national health expenditures (NHE)] would increase by $289 billion, or 0.8 percent, over the updates baseline projection that was released on June 29, 2009.” In other words, Obamacare bends the cost curve up, not down.
Millions Lose Existing Private Coverage: “However, a number of workers who currently have employer coverage would likely become enrolled in the expanded Medicaid program or receive subsidized coverage through the Exchange. For example, some smaller employers would be inclined to terminate their existing coverage, and companies with low average salaries might find it to their - and their employees’ - advantage to end their plans … We estimate that such actions would collectively reduce the number of people with employer-sponsored health coverage by about 12 million.” In other words, Obamacare will cause millions of Americans to lose their existing private coverage.
Millions Pay Fines Yet Remain Uncovered: “18 million are estimated to choose not to be insured and to pay the penalty associated with the individual mandate. For the most part, these would be individuals with relatively low health care expenses for whom the individual or family insurance premium would be significantly in excess of the penalty and their anticipated health benefit value.” In other words, 18 million Americans will either face jail time or be forced to pay a new tax they will receive no benefit from.
Millions Lose Medicare Advantage: “Section 1161 of Division B of H.R. 3962 would set Medicare Advantage capitation benchmarks … We estimate that in 2014 when the MA provisions would be fully phased in, enrollment in MA plans would decreased by 64 percent (from its projected level of 13.2 million under current law to 4.7 million under the proposal).” In other words, 8.5 million seniors who currently get such services as coordinated care for chronic conditions, routine eye and hearing examinations, and preventive-care services would lose their existing private coverage.
Millions Placed on Welfare: “Of the additional 34 million who are estimated to be insured in 2019 as a result of H.R. 3962, about three-fifths (21 million) would receive Medicaid coverage due to the expansion of eligibility to those adults under 150 percent of the FPL.” In other words, more than half the people who gain health insurance will receive it through the welfare program Medicaid.
Seniors Access to Care Jeopardized: “H.R. 3962 would introduce permanent annual productivity adjustments to price updates for institutional providers… Over time, a sustained reduction in payment updates, based on productivity expectations that are difficult to attain, would cause Medicare payment rates to grow more slowly than and in a way that was unrelated to, the providers’ costs of furnishing services to beneficiaries. Thus, providers for whom Medicare constitutes a substantive portion of their business could find it difficult to remain profitable and might end their participation in the program (possibly jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries).” In other words, the Medicare cuts in the House bill are so out of touch with reality that hospitals currently serving Medicare patients might be forced to stop doing so. Thus making it much more difficult for seniors to get health care.
Poor’s Access Problems Exacerbated: “In practice, supply constraints might interfere with providing the services by the additional 34 million insured persons. …providers might tend to accept more patients who have private insurance (with relatively attractive payment rates) and fewer Medicaid patients, exacerbating existing access problems for the latter group.” In other words, those 21 million people who are gaining health insurance through Medicaid are going to have a very tough time finding a doctor who will treat them.
Reacting in part to Friday’s CMS report, Robert J. Samuelson writes in today’s Washington Post:
The disconnect between what President Obama says and what he’s doing is so glaring that most people could not abide it. The president, his advisers and allies have no trouble. But reconciling blatantly contradictory objectives requires them to engage in willful self-deception, public dishonesty, or both.
There is a reason why as more Americans learn about Obamacare, the less popular it gets.
Obama green-lights Arab land grab
But Israel threatens retaliation if U.N. approves Palestinian state
By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
TEL AVIV – A top Palestinian Authority official told WND that the PA reached an understanding with the Obama administration regarding a Palestinian threat to unilaterally ask the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state outside of negotiations with Israel.
Ahmed Qurei, former PA prime minister and member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization executive committee, said in an interview that the PA "reached an understanding with important elements within the administration" to possibly bring to the U.N. Security Council a resolution to unilaterally create a Palestinian state.
Asked to which "elements" he was referring, Qurei would only say they were from the Obama administration.
A top PA negotiator, speaking on condition of anonymity, named the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, and National Security Council member Samantha Power as among the Obama administration officials who were involved with the Palestinians' U.N. threat.
Despite widespread assumptions the U.S. would veto any such U.N. Security Council resolution, the PA negotiator said that in initial discussions, the Obama administration did not threaten to veto their conceptual unilateral resolution.
"The U.S. told us that they prefer a negotiated settlement with Israel, but if we (Palestinians) insist on a resolution, the Americans will not necessarily reject it," the PA negotiator said.
"The U.S. has a history of never before vetoing any U.N. move to create a new state," the negotiator pointed out.
Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said yesterday the Palestinians had decided to turn to the U.N. Security Council to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip, West Bank and eastern Jerusalem.
Separately, the negotiator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that the Obama administration is "totally on board" with a plan by Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to create a state on the pre-1967 borders within two years.
WND first reported in September that according to a top PA official, the Obama administration has largely adopted the positions of the Palestinian West Bank leadership to create a Palestinian state within two years based on the pre-1967 borders, meaning Israel would retreat from most of the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem.
The PA negotiator WND spoke with yesterday said that his authority's primary goal now is to secure a letter of support from the Obama administration affirming the U.S. commitment to a pre-1967 Palestinian state within two years.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday hit back at the PA plan to unilaterally declare a state, warning such a move will be met by "one-sided Israeli measures." He did not elaborate.
"There is no substitute for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and any unilateral attempts outside that framework will unravel the existing agreements between us and could entail unilateral steps by Israel," Netanyahu told a high-level gathering of Israeli and American policy makers at the Saban Forum in Jerusalem.
Netanyahu stressed that in order to achieve peace, "negotiations must resume immediately." He affirmed Israel was prepared to begin talks "with a generous spirit."
"I want to stress that we are willing to take steps that will help in advancing the peace process, but it must begin, there is no reason to waste time," said the Israeli leader.
While negotiations were not easy, Netanyahu said, "there is no other way to bring about change."
In September, a senior PA official told WND that aside from supporting a Palestinian state in the pre-1967 borders, the Obama administration also had accepted the PA position that Israeli-Palestinian negotiations begin where they left off under Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who went further than previous Israeli leaders in his concessions to the Palestinians.
Olmert reportedly offered the PA not only 95 percent of the West Bank and peripheral eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods but also other territories never before offered by any Israeli leader, including parts of the Israeli Negev desert bordering Gaza as well as sections of the Jordan Valley.
"We understand from the U.S. that the Netanyahu government is not in a position to go against creating a state within two years," the PA official said.
The official claimed the Obama administration was ready to ultimately consider "sanctions" against Israel if the Netanyahu government rejected negotiations leading to a Palestinian state. The official refused to clarify which sanctions he was referring to or whether he was specifically told by the U.S. government it would consider sanctions.
The PA official claimed Obama can make a "headache" for Netanyahu if the Israeli leader does not conduct negotiations leading within two years to a Palestinian state.
Islamist terror strikes US again
On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting "Allahu Akbar!" committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.
What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Ft. Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of non-denominational shoplifting.
This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it’s an act of terror. Period.
When the terrorist posts anti-American hate-speech on the Web; apparently praises suicide bombers and uses his own name; loudly criticizes US policies; argues (as a psychiatrist, no less) with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices; refuses, in the name of Islam, to be photographed with female colleagues; lists his nationality as "Palestinian" in a Muslim spouse-matching program, and parades around central Texas in a fundamentalist playsuit — well, it only seems fair to call this terrorist an "Islamist terrorist."
But the president won’t. Despite his promise to get to all the facts. Because there’s no such thing as "Islamist terrorism" in ObamaWorld.
And the Army won’t. Because its senior leaders are so sick with political correctness that pandering to America-haters is safer than calling terrorism "terrorism."
And the media won’t. Because they have more interest in the shooter than in our troops — despite their crocodile tears.
Maj. Nadal Malik Hasan planned this terrorist attack and executed it in cold blood. The resulting massacre was the first tragedy. The second was that he wasn’t killed on the spot.
Hasan survived. Now the rest of us will have to foot his massive medical bills. Activist lawyers will get involved, claiming "harassment" drove him temporarily insane. There’ll be no end of trial delays. At best, taxpayer dollars will fund his prison lifestyle for decades to come, since our politically correct Army leadership wouldn’t dare pursue or carry out the death penalty.
Maj. Hasan will be a hero to Islamist terrorists abroad and their sympathizers here. While US Muslim organizations decry his acts publicly, Hasan will be praised privately. And he’ll have the last laugh.
But Hasan isn’t the sole guilty party. The US Army’s unforgivable political correctness is also to blame for the casualties at Ft. Hood.
Given the myriad warning signs, it’s appalling that no action was taken against a man apparently known to praise suicide bombers and openly damn US policy. But no officer in his chain of command, either at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or at Ft. Hood, had the guts to take meaningful action against a dysfunctional soldier and an incompetent doctor.
Had Hasan been a Lutheran or a Methodist, he would’ve been gone with the simoon. But officers fear charges of discrimination when faced with misconduct among protected minorities.
Now 12 soldiers and a security guard lie dead. 31 soldiers were wounded, 28 of them seriously. If heads don’t roll in this maggot’s chain of command, the Army will have shamed itself beyond moral redemption.
There’s another important issue, too. How could the Army allow an obviously incompetent and dysfunctional psychiatrist to treat our troubled soldiers returning from war? An Islamist whacko is counseled for arguing with veterans who’ve been assigned to his care? And he’s not removed from duty? What planet does the Army live on?
For the first time since I joined the Army in 1976, I’m ashamed of its dereliction of duty. The chain of command protected a budding terrorist who was waving one red flag after another. Because it was safer for careers than doing something about him.
Get ready for the apologias. We’ve already heard from the terrorist’s family that "he’s a good American." In their world, maybe he is.
But when do we, the American public, knock off the PC nonsense?
A disgruntled Muslim soldier murdered his officers way back in 2003, in Kuwait, on the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Recently? An American mullah shoots it out with the feds in Detroit. A Muslim fanatic attacks an Arkansas recruiting station. A Muslim media owner, after playing the peace card, beheads his wife. A Muslim father runs over his daughter because she’s becoming too Westernized.
Muslim terrorist wannabes are busted again and again. And we’re assured that "Islam’s a religion of peace."
I guarantee you that the Obama administration’s non-response to the Ft. Hood attack will mock the memory of our dead.
Ralph Peters’ latest novel is "The War After Armageddon."
No American President Ever Bowed to a Foreign Leader — Until Now
By Michelle Malkin
Crikey, is there a single adult in the White House who can teach the commander-in-chief some presidential protocol?
The Left complained that George W. Bush was too much of a cowboy on the global stage.
It’s better than having a waterboy:
First, the Saudi King. Now, the Japanese Emperor. What’s he going to do with Russian President Medvedev on Sunday — the downward-facing dog yoga pose?
FYI: Everyone else in the world seems to know how to greet the Japanese Emperor without scraping the floor…
What a Spineless Blunder:
Reminds me of one of my favorite Tea Party signs:
'Nubs the Dog: The True Story of a Mutt, a Marine & a Miracle'
by Helena Sung
Maj. Brian Dennis and Nubs the Dog today.
Little, Brown Books for Young Readers
When Maj. Brian Dennis of the United States Marine Corps met a wild stray dog with shorn ears while serving in Iraq, he had no idea of the bond they would form, leading to seismic changes in both their lives. "The general theme of the story of Nubs is that if you're kind to someone, they'll never forget you -- whether it be person or animal," Dennis tells Paw Nation.
In October 2007, Dennis and his team of 11 men were in Iraq patrolling the Syrian border. One day, as his team arrived at a border fort, they encountered a pack of stray dogs -- not uncommon in the barren, rocky desert that was home to wolves and wild dogs.
"We all got out of the Humvee and I started working when this dog came running up," recalls Dennis. "I said, 'Hey buddy' and bent down to pet him." Dennis noticed the dog's ears had been cut. "I said, 'You got little nubs for ears.'" The name stuck. The dog whose ears had been shorn off as a puppy by an Iraqi soldier (to make the dog "look tougher," Dennis says) became known as Nubs.
Dennis fed Nubs scraps from his field rations, including bits of ham and frosted strawberry Pop Tarts. "I didn't think he'd eat the Pop Tart, but he did," says Dennis.
At night, Nubs accompanied the men on night patrols. "I'd get up in the middle of the night to walk the perimeter with my weapon and Nubs would get up and walk next to me like he was doing guard duty," says Dennis.
The next day, Dennis said goodbye to Nubs, but he didn't forget about the dog. He began mentioning Nubs in emails he wrote to friends and family back home. "I found a dog in the desert," Dennis wrote in an email in October 2007. "I call him Nubs. We clicked right away. He flips on his back and makes me rub his stomach."
"Every couple of weeks, we'd go back to the border fort and I'd see Nubs every time," says Dennis. "Each time, he followed us around a little more." And every time the men rumbled away in their Humvees, Nubs would run after them. "We're going forty miles an hour and he'd be right next to the Humvee," says Dennis. "He's a crazy fast dog. Eventually, he'd wear out, fall behind and disappear in the dust."
On one trip to the border fort in December 2007, Dennis found Nubs was badly wounded in his left side where he'd been stabbed with a screwdriver. "The wound was infected and full of pus," Dennis recalls. "We pulled out our battle kits and poured antiseptic on his wound and force fed him some antibiotics wrapped in peanut butter." That night, Nubs was in so much pain that he refused food and water and slept standing up because he couldn't lay down. The next morning, Nubs seemed better. Dennis and his team left again, but he thought about Nubs the entire time, hoping the dog was still alive.
Excerpt, "Nubs: The True Story of a Mutt, a Marine & a Miracle,"
Little, Brown for Young Readers
Two weeks later, when Dennis and his team returned, he found Nubs alive and well. "I had patched him up and that seemed to be a turning point in how he viewed me," says Dennis. This time, when Dennis and his team left the fort, Nubs followed. Though the dog lost sight of the Humvees, he never gave up. For two days, Nubs endured freezing temperatures and packs of wild dogs and wolves, eventually finding his way to Dennis at a camp an incredible 70 miles south near the Jordanian border.
"There he was, all beaten and chewed up," says Dennis. "I knew immediately that Nubs had crossed through several dog territories and fought and ran, and fought and ran," says Dennis. The dog jumped on Dennis, licking his face.
Most of the 80 men at the camp welcomed Nubs, even building him a doghouse. But a couple of soldiers complained, leading Dennis' superiors to order him to get rid of the dog. With his hand forced, Dennis decided that the only thing to do was bring Nubs to America. He began coordinating Nubs' rescue effort. Friends and family in the States helped, raising the $5,000 it would cost to transport Nubs overseas.
Finally, it was all arranged. Nubs was handed over to volunteers in Jordan, who looked after the dog and sent him onto to Chicago, then San Diego, where Dennis' friends waited to pick him up. Nubs lived with Dennis' friends and began getting trained by local dog trainer Graham Bloem of the Snug Pet Resort. "I focused on basic obedience and socializing him with dogs, people and the environment," says Bloem.
A month later, Dennis finished his deployment in Iraq and returned home to San Diego, where he immediately boarded a bus to Camp Pendleton to be reunited with Nubs. "I was worried he wouldn't remember me," says Dennis. But he needn't have worried. "Nubs went crazy," recalls Dennis. "He was jumping up on me, licking my head."
Dennis' experience with Nubs led to a children's picture book, called "Nubs: The True Story of a Mutt, a Marine & a Miracle," published by Little, Brown for Young Readers. They have appeared on the Today Show and will be appearing on The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien on Monday.
Was it destiny that Dennis met Nubs and brought him to America? "I don't know about that," says Dennis. "It's been a strange phenomenon. It's been a blessing. I get drawings mailed to me that children have drawn of Nubs with his ears cut off. It makes me laugh."
Obama Betraying Military, Causes Troops to Die in Afghanistan
From one of the mouths on one of his faces, Obama NOW says that his worries about military spending are delaying his decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan. That’s funny. He wasn’t worried about too much spending when he signed the $787 Billion (which we didn’t have) porkulus package into law. He doesn’t seem too worried about spending TRILLIONS more dollars we don’t have on a freedom destroying takeover of the American health care system. He doesn’t seem too worried about spending TRILLIONS more dollars we don’t have, and completing the destruction of our economy by pushing his cap-and-charade climate change agenda, and vowing to sign the Copenhagen Treaty. He doesn’t seem too worried about the BILLIONS of dollars that are being funneled to his cronies and union buddies in the form of political payoffs.
The amount of fraud, waste, and abuse of the Medicare system last year would fund the 40,000 troops that General McChrystal is requesting for an entire year.
Here’s a Nancy Pelosi, “Are you kidding me?” moment if I ever saw one. During his current Asian “Apologize for America” tour, Comrade Obama stopped at Eielson AFB in Alaska. There he told the 1,000 some-odd troops in attendance the following:
“I want you guys to understand that I will never hesitate to use force to protect the American people and our vital interests,” Obama told the troops. “But I also make you this promise: I will not risk your lives unless it is necessary to America’s vital interests.”
“And if it is necessary,” Obama added, “the United States of America will have your back. We’ll give you the strategy and the clear mission you deserve. We’ll give you the equipment and support you need to get the job done. And that includes public support back home.”
I wonder if he includes the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq in this statement, because he is using military force, and he is risking American military lives in those places. Does he consider Afghanistan and Iraq to be “America’s vital interests?” If he did, he would give them a “strategy and the clear mission” they deserve, and he would indeed “have their back,” and would be giving them “the equipment and support” they “need to get the job done.”
He has delayed for 3 months giving the General THAT HE APPOINTED the men and material that he has requested, so what does that say about Obama’s attitude toward Afghanistan? What does it say about his attitude toward the military in general when looked at in the larger context of his military spending plans?
It appears to me that Chairman Maobama is attempting to destroy the military just as he appears to be intentionally trying to destroy the economy. What will fill the void? Remember that “civilian security force” Obama spoke of during his campaign? The one that he said would be “just as well funded and equipped as the military?” The current military swears to protect and defend the constitution. Obama’s new “military” would swear allegiance to him.
Didn’t we learn ANYTHING from the second world war? Brown Shirts, anyone?
"The e-mail Bag"
Take Down The Bird Feeder
I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it was, as I filled it lovingly with seed.. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.
But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.
Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table .. everywhere!
Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket.
And others birds were boisterous and loud. They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.
After a while, I couldn’t even sit on my own back porch anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleanedup their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio.
Soon, the back yard was like it used to be …. quiet, serene…. and no one demanding their
rights to a free meal.
Now let’s see. Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care and free education, and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen.
Then the illegal’s came by the tens of thousands.. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for
free services; small apartments are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen
by an emergency room doctor; your child’s second grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn’t speak English.
Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to ‘press one ‘ to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than ‘Old Glory’ are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties..
Just my opinion, but maybe it’s time for the government to take down the bird feeder.