The Politics Of Mass Murders

It is not very often that you will read it on this blog, but for once Donald J. Trump is right about something.
And surprisingly, the Dear Leader, President Obama, is wrong.
Yesterday another mass murder took place and this time it was at a community college in Southwestern Oregon that took the lives of 10 people and injured another seven. It was an act of madness as is seemingly all of these mass killings have been. They always are.
My friend and fellow blogger, Mr. Social Extinction, juxtaposed the reaction of the current GOP front-runner for president, the Donald, and that of the Dear Leader, President Obama.
It appears that, of course, the Donald is cold and almost callous when you just read what is below:

"You're going to have these things happen and it's a horrible thing to behold, horrible. It's not politically correct to say that, but you're going to have that will be for the next million years, there's going to be difficulty and people are going to slip through the cracks. what are you going to do, institutionalize everybody?"

Good question since in almost all cases there is some kind of mental issue involved. And we will not completely know because this gunman, Chris Harper Mercer, was killed by police that arrived on the scene of the carnage. Of course there are many accounts on Mr. Mercer's life, but one thing is clear that there was some kind of issue. Mr. Mercer graduated from the Switzer Learning Center in 2010. It is a high school that specializes in youths with learning disabilities. It is a broad term, learning disabilities. But more will come out, that is certain. And to note, Mr. Mercer had multiple weapons that, at this writing, he passed all the background checks and appeared to purchase legally.
Which leads to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
We know that he is pissed off because the gloves came off in a news conference yesterday.
An aside.
Why do we have to hear from any president on such a situation before everything is known? Whoever the next president is, I sure as hell do not want hear that president go on the air to pontificate without ascertaining all the facts. Period.
Now back to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Why now, instead of just offering prayers and condolences, the Dear Leader, President Obama, said that we should just out and out politicize these events until there is "sensible" gun control laws.
Of course.
And now the Dear Leader, President Obama, claims that there is something "routine" about these reports. No, in fact these are still isolated incidents. That is why it is still big news.
But then the Dear Leader, President Obama, outright lied when he claimed that states and or localities that have strict gun laws have less violent crime. May I remind the president that his hometown of Chicago has some of the strictest gun restrictions and the highest murder, murder, rate at the hands of guns than many states with such laws as open-carry. And let me throw in a few cities like Baltimore, Detroit, and now even Los Angeles that the murder rate at the hands of a gun are up drastically.
So here is what our Dear Leader, President Obama, had to say about this matter:

"Somehow this has become routine. The reporting is routine, my response here at this podium ends up being routine. And what becomes routine is the response those who oppose any sort of gun control legislation."

Let me remind the readers here that the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats controlled the legislative (congress) and executive branches for the first two years of his presidency. And the senate was a veto-proof one at that. Hell, he could have done what he cited yesterday, the massive gun confiscation done in Australia after a mass shooting in 1996. And it was done under a conservative government there. Of course it would have been ruled unconstitutional under that pesky second amendment to the United States constitution. It reads in it's entirety:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,  the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. 

I highlight people because it means law abiding citizens that could be called up in the case of war and or insurrection.
The American left hates this and intentionally blurs the plain meaning every chance that it gets. And here it is once again.
While the Donald often makes little if any sense and has a sketchy record on gun control, his statement made perfect sense. All the laws other than outright confiscation of all firearms might have stopped this. But reality is that it probably would not have done a thing.
Thus, mass murders will constantly be a source of great division for many Americans. But it would behoove Americans to have a sane, tempered approach rather than a knee-jerk We can solve the problem if only.

Mike Huckabee Is Right About Iran Treaty And Israel

A broken clock is right twice a day and in regards to the Rev. Mike Huckabee and his recent remarks regarding the Iran treaty and the fate of Israel, he is correct.
Needless to say that the truth was spoken in very blunt terms by the Rev. Mike, one of 873 GOP aspirants to the party's presidential nomination.
What has people  and their undies in a bunch is this:

The president's foreign policy is the most feckless in American history. It is so naive that he would trust the Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven. This is the most idiotic thing, this Iran deal. It should be rejected by both Democrats and Republicans in congress by and the American people. I read the whole deal. We gave away the whole store. It's got to be stopped. 

It is the reference to the preferred mechanism of the Nazi death camps; the marching of many millions of Jews to their deaths in gas chambers and the subsequent burning of the bodies in cremation ovens that has the polite people all upset.
I agree that the words Nazi and holocaust are often mindlessly bandied about by people to make a point. But in this case, the Rev. Mike is referring to the Iranian leadership and their hatred of Israel. Such hatred that has driven the ruling Shia mullahs to develop a nuclear bomb in the first place. The treaty that has been worked out by Team Dear Leader is giving away everything to the Iranians and thus only delays what will be an inevitability. Supposedly the Iranians would not be able to develop a nuclear device for 10 years. And after that, well there really is nothing in place to stop the Iranians to develop a bomb. This is why many of us are beyond concerned that this treaty will let Iran develop a nuclear bomb just in a delayed manner.
It is not just people on the right that have deep concern that this treaty will reward Iran for bad behavior but a fair number of Democrats are walking a tightrope in the sense that they want to show loyalty to their leader, President Obama, but feel that the deal is not only against American interests but that of Israel's as well. And surprisingly some of Israel's enemies are not all that thrilled with a deal that gives Shia Iran unprecedented dominance in the Middle East. Nations such as Sunni dominated Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt the United Arab Emirates. While all Islamic-dominated nations maybe united in their dislike of Israel, there is nothing like the Islamic civil war between the Shia and the Sunnis. Think of it as the battles between the Roman Catholics (Sunnis) and the Protestants (Shia) that took place during the 1500s and 1600s. Only now there is the extra-added awesomeness of nuclear weapons that can be used between them and quite possibly Israel.
This is why the Rev. Mike is correct.
While he stated what many people think, it was impolitic. But desperate times call for desperate measures and yes, strong language. As an example, fellow GOP candidate and establishment lackey, Jeb! Bush said that the Rev. Mike and the GOP in general need "to tone down the rhetoric" especially on such things as this Iran treaty. Mr. Bush explained it all here:

The use of that kind of language is just wrong. This is not the way to win elections and that's not how we're going to solve problems. So, an unfortunate remark-not quite sure why he (Huckabee) felt compelled to say it.

Well, Mr. Bush, maybe it's because the Rev. Mike gives a damn about Israel. Since you are being advised by notorious anti-Semite James Baker, that explains why you do not seem so worried that you have said you will not repeal the treaty if you are fortunate to enter the Oval Office.
A bad deal needs to be called out as such. That is why the Rev. Mike spoke out. As have Sen. Marco Rubio and most of the other candidates running for the GOP nomination. Did the Rev. Mike ratchet the rhetoric by evoking the horrors of the holocaust? He sure did. But he is spot on. Unlike too many in the elite crowd, the Rev.Mike takes the Iranian leadership at it's word. For all the bluster of the Sunnis, they have not expressed a need to build nuclear weapons. They know that Israel does have the bomb and look to that in a strange way it is to their benefit and security.
If only our so-called current leaders, Democrats and certain Republicans, took the Iranian threat as seriously as the Rev. Mike Huckabee, we would have never had this treaty in the first place.

Why I Have Lost ALL Respect For President Obama

I believe that if you look in an updated dictionary and find the word douchebrain, you will find as a definition two or three words.
Barack (Hussein) Obama.
In a panel discussion this past Wednesday at CINO* Georgetown University, the Dear Leader, President Obama, finally let his inner socialism spew out of his mouth.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, blamed the rich and or wealthy for the increase of poverty in the United States. Poverty that has quite bluntly increased under his stellar leadership.
In this account, The Dear Leader, President Obama, had this to say about hedge-fund managers:

"I'm not saying this because I dislike hedge fund managers or think they are evil. You pretty much have more than you'll ever use and your family will ever use."

In between the words of the Dear Leader, President Obama, is an anecdote about the top 25 hedge-fund managers making more than all the kindergarten teacher in the United States combined. What our Dear Leader, President Obama, failed to mention is how hedge-fund managers love giving their money to the Democrats. Tom Steyer is but one example. But if you do not believe me, here is some more proof from Open Secrets. I will concede that the tide is turning and they are donating more to Republicans. But maybe, just maybe they are tired of being like part of a Stockholm Syndrome cult and don't like giving money to the very people that want to take as much of it as possible.
And why does the Dear Leader, President Obama, refer to those who have any means as "society's lottery winners."?
Most importantly, who in the hell is the Dear Leader, President Obama, to say what is or is not enough money anyone should make and or have? The problem is that he let his inner socialism out with that comment. Too bad the Dear Leader, President Obama, did not take a look in the mirror at his own, very privileged life.
But it sure did not end there. The economic envy became education and by extension social envy.
In the eyes of our president, it is an awful thing for people wanting to send their children to private schools.
Again, in the words of the Dear Leader, President Obama:

“Those who are doing better and better, more skilled, more educated, – luckier – having greater advantages are withdrawing from the commons. Kids start going to private schools, kids start working out at private clubs instead of the public parks, an anti-government ideology then disinvests from those common goods and those things that draw us together.”

UGH! SMH** until it bleeds!
Does this dude believe the horse crap that comes out of his mouth?!
A primer on the Dear Leader, President Obama and his trajectory to the White House is needed.
Yes, Barack Obama was born in Hawai'i in 1961. He spent his early formative years in Indonesia and, surprise! Attended private school. When he did come back to the United States in his teenage years, Mr. Obama went to the prestigious Punahou School, courtesy of his banker grandma, you know, the one scared of black people on the street. And when Mr. Obama went to college, it sure as hell was not East Los Angeles Junior College. No, no, no!!! He went to Occidental College and for some reason did not finish undergraduate studies there. He transferred to Columbia University and finished there. And of course went on to Harvard law school.
Yeah, some interaction with the downtrodden of society.
In reality he did all the community organizing thing after years of left-wing indoctrination at elite private schools. And remember in his own words he talked about the kind of people he hung out with at Occidental:

“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.”

Oh yes, these are your average folks. Yes indeed.
Where does this crap come from? Seriously? Most people do not know folks like this unless they are themselves politically active and on the left.
The total rank hypocrisy of this president is just so out there. I mean the dude has totally benefited from being an elitist himself. He did not grow up in poverty like say Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. He did not have a moderate middle-class upbringing like Harry S Truman. He did not have a quintessential middle-class lifestyle as Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon.
Yet he dumps and promotes lies to foment class warfare.
I did not want to go to the fact the president and Mrs. Dear Leader, Michelle Obama, send their two daughters to the moat elite private school in the Washington, D. C. area, Sidwell Friends School. But hey, why not point out his hypocrisy?
Most Americans, rightfully, aspire to get to a higher station in life than they may have been born into. Very few are in the truly elite families of the United States. Most would like to be able to attain a home, work a job that they at least like and maybe get a promotion or two. Have enough money to live a comfortable retirement and to leave a little something to their children if they have any. And that includes those at the bottom of the economic ladder.
Maybe instead of dissing private schools, let the states have education back and break the power of teacher unions that dominate, especially in the large cities.
Instead of dumping on those of means, show that anyone can attain the same position. One of the reasons I love the show Shark Tank is that those who are the sharks are looking for something to take off with. They are investing in an idea and yes, eventually jobs. No, nSot everyone can get on Shark Tank, but there are people who are like them all across the United States.
Why can't our president unite the nation instead of dividing it every chance that he gets? Why can't he extol the virtues of hard work? Of the entrepreneur spirit that made the United States? Why can't he suggest that there are good ideas in private schooling and what needs to be done is bring them to public education? Why can't he stop playing the victim card and play the truth, the audacity of hope?
By letting the inner socialist out in the open, I have lost the little respect that I had for the Dear Leader, President Obama. I doubt he reads this blog (maybe the NSA does!) but what he needs to do is reach out and show a little humility. It will go a long way.

*CINO-Catholic In Name Only.
**SMH-Smack My Head.

Is President Obama A Christian? Yes, But . . .

Let me get this out of the way right now with the affirmation that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is a Christian as he has been baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; or if you prefer Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.
The reason I come to this conclusion is simple.
Not just because he says that he is. There is knowledge that indeed, then Messiah Barack, was baptized at Trinity United Church of Christ. He has spoken of his faith. He does use his understanding of Christianity to be the King Social Justice Warrior.
The latest reason I have to write this piece is that two Washington Post "reporters", Dan Balz and Robert Costa asked the now GOP 2016 presidential front-runner, Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker, if he believes that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is a Christian. Gov. Walker did the right thing and said that he does not know, nor does he care, if the Dear Leader, President Obama, is a Christian or not. In fact, Gov. Walker said that the question itself was not really all that worthy or important in terms of the political direction of the United States at this time.
But the Dear Leader's defenders thought that Gov. Walker's answer was weak because it was not a full-throated defense of his belief in Christianity.
Of course, they are wrong as those on the other side who have gone so far as to suggest that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is in fact an atheist.
It does not help the Dear Leader, President Obama, that his once trusted top political aide, David Axelrod, wrote in his recent book that the Dear Leader, President Obama, was really always for same-sex marriage and that, essentially, lied about it during the 2008 presidential campaign. Needless to say, there is this on the internets that show how far then Sen. Messiah Barack went to affirm traditional marriage. Of course those of us paying attention knew that it was kinda sorta, well a lie.
Running for the Illinois state senate in 1996, Messiah Barack was given a questionnaire by a left-wing newspaper, Outlines, that he was for same-sex marriage, "unequivocally". Follow this timeline here and one sees that he went all over the place on the subject. But it must be noted that he was for chipping away at government recognition of traditional marriage only. Had the Dear Leader, President Obama, not said on national and by extension international television, at Saddleback Church, to the face of Pastor Rick Warren that he was for traditional marriage, may these questions would not dog him and make many wonder is the Dear Leader, President Obama, a Christian.
Another area is the Dear Leader, President Obama, seemingly going out of his way to all but defend radical Islam. In these remarks before the National Prayer Breakfast, the Dear Leader, President Obama, seemed to try to draw an equivalence between the Crusades and the Islamic State. And his going out of his way to not make a reference to radical Islam or Islam as the leading force in international terrorism and indeed war.
Again, this does not mean the Dear Leader, President Obama, is not a Christian.
But I alluded to his brand of Christianity above.
It's Social Justice Warrior Christianity.
To me, it's no secret that the Dear Leader, President Obama, found his way to Trinity United Church of Christ and the "Rev." Jeremiah Wright. The "Rev." Wright was all about the social justice. Why he even believes and supports the concept of Black Liberation Theology. The "Rev." Wright is one of those that likes the Social Justice Warrior Jesus up against the deity of Christ. That Jesus Christ was sent to earth by God himself to bring all the world to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and thus with God and the Holy Ghost. What Trinity did was affirm what the Dear Leader, President Obama, was pursuing as a "community organizer" and that he could cite God himself as to why it was all good.
In fact, the United Church of Christ is the most liberal/modernist Mainline Protestant denomination around. Why the UCC makes The Episcopal Church look like a bunch of slow-moving right-wingers.
Social justice can be secular and religious. But the religious component is more of a earthly rather than a spiritual response as to what God supposedly wants in the world. And yes, some social justice is good and has already been done in history.
But understand that SJWC has a component of a more Unitarian approach to God. In fact, in The Episcopal Church, one of the "heroes" is an absolute heretic and, sadly, a former bishop by the name of John Shelby Spong. Why is Bishop Spong a heretic? Among some of what he believes is that there was no virgin birth of Jesus Christ. And no bodily resurrection. They are kinda some of the main beliefs of the Christian faith, no matter what denomination one belongs to. One can say that, essentially, Bishop Spong pretty much rejects the Nicene Creed, which is the statement of belief for most Christians. At best, Bishop Spong is a Unitarian. At worst, he reduces the Christian faith to being a glorified social service agency.
Again, when one understands the version of Christianity that the Dear Leader, President Obama, believes, it explains why he would go out of his way to defend Islam. To be for same-sex marriage. To see everything in terms of the haves and the have-nots. It is in some ways a celebration of victimology.
If one takes the time to understand SJWC, then one can understand where the Dear Leader, President Obama, is coming from. Why he commits self-flagellation that is so common among the SJWC. Why he easily takes up the side of the underdog.
Anyone who has read this blog knows that I consider myself a traditional, somewhat conservative Christian. Sure, I belong to The Episcopal Church, but there are many like myself that want to see the denomination move away from what I believe is destructive modernism.
I believe in the Nicene Creed as the simple statement of faith. Sure there were a lot of politics behind  a lot of the wording, but it has stood the test of time. I'm standard Protestant that there are two outward signs of being a Christian. Bapitsm and partaking of the Holy Communion. I believe that the Holy Bible (King James Version, of course) is the inspired word of God and necessary for all salvation.
That is the simple version of my faith in Christ.
Yet in my denomination, I might as well be a multi-horned fundamentalist.
Which is to show how far the Mainline Protestant denominations have strayed.
So yes, the Dear Leader, President Obama is a Christian. Just not a traditional Christian. Once people get that, one will understand his world view.

Can The Dear Leader Stop Lecturing Long Enough So We Can Fight The Radical Islamics?!

OK, I get the feeling that the Dear Leader, President Obama, does not really think we are in a long term struggle to defeat radical Islamics and or their allies.
The National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, pretty much said so this past Friday in a speech regarding long-term national security goals of the United States.
But it was the Dear Leader, President Obama, speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast this past Thursday that rankles me and many who disagree about the most pressing long-term national security struggles of the United States.
In the speech, as he is wont to do, the Dear Leader, President Obama, found the need to remind the Christians assembled that hey, we did some pretty gnarly things in the name of Christ many a moon ago. And even in that portion of his remarks, the Dear Leader, President Obama, conveniently left out some pertinent facts to make the case that really, Christians are no better than the radical Islamic conflagration gripping the Middle East especially, but many other nations as well.
Here is the exact part of the speech that has many of us scratching our collective heads:

Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

Where, oh where to begin?!
Of course he started where all moral equivalency advocates start and that is The Crusades.
The Crusades as bandied about these days never, ever, tells the whole story and reasons of The Crusades in the first place.
One of the most suppressed, yet important, reasons of The Crusades was to restore safety for European Christian pilgrims making their way to the Holy Land. The reason that pilgrims' safety was at risk is because of the Muslim conquest of the Holy Land and Jerusalem. By 1076, when the Muslims conquered Jerusalem, travel to and from was extremely dangerous.
Thus in 1096, Pope Urban ordered what is now referred to as the First Crusade. By 1100, Jerusalem was in the hands of the Crusaders.
But of course it did not occur without bloodshed.
As this link notes, the monk, Fulcher, is the one that chronicled the bloodshed that occurred. Basically the Christian Crusaders killed anyone and everything that they could. The fact is that the Muslims are the ones that claimed upwards of 70,000 people were killed. Those that survived got the pleasure of taking the dead, rotting bodies out of the walls and gates of Jerusalem. As far as the Jews were concerned, they through their lot with the Muslims and fought along side of them to defend Jerusalem. Needless to say, when the Crusaders went on their blood lust, there was no difference to them regarding Jews and Muslims and anyone else.
Yes, there was a conquest and irrational bloodshed. This was a time where might was right. And once the Crusaders defeated the Jews and Muslims, they made the most of their might.
Again, most observant Christians know about this history. And yes, we are talking about 800 years ago.
Another aspect was the Inquisition that the Dear Leader, President Obama, made a very similar passing reference to.
Since he said inquisition with a broad brush, most people, Protestant and Roman Catholic, knew the reference is to the Spanish Inquisition.
No question that the Spanish Inquisition is the one of the numerous inquisitions that the Roman Catholic church had over the years. Looking at this link, it is clear that there were many others. But it is the Spanish Inquisition that was the most brutal and longest lasting.
If you note the timeline, the Spanish Inquisition began under the reign of Kind Ferdinand and Queen Isabella. It was shortly after the Christian unification of the Spanish peninsula. Before that, Spain was an Islamic foothold in Western Europe. Not unlike the Crusades, this was a case of the might makes right gone off the rails. One difference between the Spanish and numerous other inquisitions of the day is that Spain and the monarchy totally controlled it. It was as much a political as well as spiritual set of actions.
One of the reasons for the eventual decline of the inquisitions is the rise of Protestant Christianity. Not to say that Prostestants did not have problems as well, but no where near the extent of the inquisitions.
So, in the short and very sorry attempt for the president to lecture us on the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllllsssss of historical Christianity but made it to Christianity in the United States.
Of course we were lectured as to the fact that many Christians supported and defended slavery and the Jim Crow laws.
Major face palm and headshaking.
What the Dear Leader, President Obama does not mention that in the two subjects he brought up, the church was at worst divided. What the president does not point out is those who would be referred to today as Evangelical Christians, were some of the most ardent abolitionists. The leader agaisnt the Jim Crow laws and the horrible indignities that black Americans suffered was a Christian minister by the name of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Christians have evolved from the Crusades. The Inquisitions. Slavery. Jim Crow. Really, we have. We are not perfect and can always do more.
So lets come to today, Monday, February 9, 2015.
The most brutal religious force in the world today is Radical Islam. It is the Wahhabi's of Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda. And the most awful of all, the Islamic State.
There nothing, not one thing in modern Christendom and or Judaism. In fact, one of the great debates in modern Christendom is the death penalty in general. Do we see that in any form of Islam?
What is happening in the Middle East especially has far reaching implications. No matter what our Lecturer In Chief says.
Say all of Iraq and Syria fall to the Islamic State. How long will Jordan last? Lebanon? The Arabian peninsula? And Northern Africa?
Even though we are told that the Islamic State and all Islamic terrorists are not all that worrisome, it is that attitude that led to 9/11. And yes, it was bipartisan inertia that pervaded.
Today there is not one bit of credible numbers as to the size of and the strength of the Islamic State. It is the most successful of all the groups because they have actual territory. They are setting up the paradisaical Islamic governance right before our eyes. They are scarring several generations of young people with it's meting out of "justice". And while they may be stalled in taking more territory now, they have no problem in throwing hundreds of thousands of fighters as little more than cannon fodder.
The game the Dear Leader, President Obama, is playing is that of moral equivalence.
In other words, look we Christians have not been all that great in our history. We have done some bad things. So now it's Islam's turn one supposes. But you know, the overwhelming number of Muslims just want to live in peace and be left alone. This is but a few at most. Maybe not even a percent of all the Muslims in the world. If we give them credibility, well we make them more than they are.
Actually, in poll after poll in the Muslim world, even among Muslims in the United States, the percentages of those that have at least sympathy with terror groups is much higher than a percent. Anywhere from 10 to 20%. Of course any poll can be skewed especially in the way questions are asked and in context. But it is almost constantly those numbers.
The reason the Dear Leader, President Obama's logic is flawed is because he has to go back really far in religious history to make the case that we should not get on our high horse about this radical Islam. Islamic radicals are running roughshod all over Northern Africa and especially Nigeria. It is so bad that the government recently announced that is has to postpone elections scheduled for this Saturday until next month. And yes, Christians in the Central African Republic have been committing atrocities. In reaction to Muslim atrocities. When there is a civil war and religion is one of the main reasons, there are going to be bad things that happen to the innocent people in the middle. The CAR violence is used by some modernist Christians as a moral equivalency. But there is not one here. It is simply a breakdown of law and order and religious groups have taken advantage of the situation.
What I would like to see our president, no my president, do is not lecture us about some events that happened eons ago. Most Americans know of the Christian atrocities. Most Christians today do not look to all Muslims as evil. We can really tell the difference between the radical extremists and the people just wanting to live in peace and practice their religion.
What I want to see the president have is  a basic blueprint as to how we are going to defeat the radical Islamics. And I want him to say the fateful words. Radical Islam. By not saying that and trying the lecture about historical Christian evils, it makes many Americans wonder more about whether or not all of Islam is some bad deal. And is that not what we want to avoid?
To be blunt Mr. President, you need to stop lecturing and start planning to defeat radical Islam. Period.

The Big Red Wave Came A Crashin Successfully!

I just love all of the surfing analogies to the recently concluded totally awesome 2014 mid-term elections.
Some quick observations.
Our Dear Leader, President Obama, is a kinda sore loser, isn't he?
Republicans were supposed to lose governorships. Yes, they lost one (Pennsylvania), but gained in Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland and Taxachusetts, er Massachusetts. And the GOP even kept the Maine's governor's office after an all out assault by the Democrat party to take it away.
The GOP not only recaptured the senate but did so with ease. The final total should be a 54-46 GOP majority in the senate.
And it appears that the GOP will have no less than 245 seats in the house with some outstanding races not called yet.
And the GOP now controls this much of the United States, in particular in congress.
Yes, it is a damn red map, isn't it?
But let's start at this map.
As Michael Barone notes in this analysis of the 2014 election, yes it does look very red. But the splotches of blue are some of the highest-populated areas of the United States. So while the map does look favorable for the GOP, there is still work to be done to make any inroads into many of these urban Democrat strongholds. These strongholds can still in a great year give the Democrats the White House. But for the foreseeable future, congress is more than likely be in the hands of the Republicans.
My message is that the GOP can not and should not rest on it's laurels. The party needs to go anywhere and everywhere to win elections. No city, county, sheriffs office, state, or nation should be written off.
So how about that senate?
Your humble blogger seems to have gotten the winners right on election night. I was off on the numbers, but the results seemed to be correct. Out of the five big races I commented on, the only one that did not pan out was the race in New Hampshire between current Democrat incumbent, Jeanne Shaheen, and former Massachusetts senator, Scott Brown. Sen. Shaheen won exactly by the margin I thought Mr. Brown would win by. But I noted that a drawback would be the accusation of carpetbagging could hurt Mr. Brown. And I think that it did.
One thing that was learned is that the polls were kinda sorta off. Many of the races won by Republicans were by larger margins than the polls were indicating right up to election day. Interestingly, it appears that Democrats were polled on average more than Republicans. But here is the thing. Polls are but a snapshot in time. There is something called election day. THAT is the only poll that counts. Really, it is.
How is it that Republicans have gained governorships in a year that they were supposed to lose? And as I noted above, in some damn unexpected states.
Take Maryland.
No one, and I mean no one, saw Larry Hogan as a serious candidate against the sitting Lt. governor, Anthony G. Brown. But things started shifting dramatically towards the end of the campaign. But almost all believed that Mr. Brown would still win and handily because after all, Maryland is a solid Blue Democrat stronghold. Not only did Mr. Hogan win, but rather handily. The result was 51% to 47% in favor of Mr. Hogan. And in a state like Maryland, this is a landslide.
And how about Massachusetts?
Once again, the state attorney general, Democrat Martha Croakley, er Coakley, proved that she is so bad a candidate, she lost state office again to a Republican and this time for governor and Charlie Baker defeated the hapless Croakley, 49% to 47%. Mrs. Croakley also lost to former Sen. Scott Brown in the special election to replace the late Sen. Edward "Teddy" Kennedy in 2010. As for me, I want her to move to California and run for any statewide office as a Democrat. It's the way we can win something in 2018.
The two above elections are what happens in a year in which there is a big wave and some candidates that would never win pull off good upsets.
And there are the wins to complete a through take over of a state and that is what happened in Arkansas.
The governor's office is now that of former Republican congressman, Asa Hutchinson as he defeated former Democrat congressman, Mike Ross, by the handy margin of 55% to 42%. Republican Tim Griffin was elected Lt. Governor. Another Republican, Leslie Rutledge, is now the state attorney general. The GOP controls the state senate, 24-11 and the sea change was in the house of representatives where the minority GOP gained 13 seats and are now in the majority, 64-36. The congressional delegation and two senators are Republicans. And Arkansas is now the last state in the old Confederacy to be in the Republican column. There are no Democrat governors in the old Confederacy. Only Bill Nelson in Florida and until the December runoff, Mary Landrieu, are Democrat senators in the old Confederate South. The Democrats basically are down to representing racial minority districts in state houses and in congress.
To be fair the Democrats took away the governor's office in Pennsylvania in one of the few highlights of the election night. But the GOP increased their margins in the state legislature.
And the Big Red Wave did ripple here in California as the GOP gained two, maybe three, congressional seats and have denied the Democrats super majorities in both houses of the legislature meaning they will not be able to raise taxes without GOP votes. And a couple of state office races were close giving hope that the GOP could be competitive in the 2018 elections.
So, how did our Dear Leader, President Obama, the titular leader of the Democrat party, take the election results?
Well, lets just say not all that well.
The day after the thrashing that his party took, losing the senate, ground in the house of representatives and even governorships and state legislatures, the Dear Leader, President Obama, said the following:

“To everyone who voted, I want you to know that I hear you. To the two-thirds of voters who chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you, too.”

No, sorry, you can't give the back hand and claim that people too bothered to vote count the same. In fact, those people may have not voted for the Democrats had they taken the time and effort. But give it to the Dear Leader, President Obama. His delusion went even further:

“The American people sent a message, one that they’ve sent for several elections now.“They expect the people they elect to work as hard as they do. They expect us to focus on their ambitions and not ours. They want us to get the job done. All of us in both parties have a responsibility to address that sentiment.”

With all due respect to the office sir, no that is not why voters turned to the Republicans. They turned to the Republicans to reign you in. They want to bring you and your party back to the center. They want you to stop with legalizing as many illegal aliens as you can questionably. They don't believe in the climate change propaganda and want policies that will lead to economic growth. Not in a pipe dream of a government-made green economy. They voted for people that said we will work where we can with the president, but to no longer be patsies. And they want at the very least major changes in Obamacare. Most would be willing to scrap the whole monstrosity and start again.
This election was about a stark contrast between the Republican party and the Democrat party. It showed that the GOP at least was listening to the public overall much better than the Democrats. The Democrats thought that they could win supposedly tight races by the spectre of the Republican "War on Women" and that they want to take birth control away and put 'em back in the kitchen and for sure barefoot and pregnant. And if that did not work, stir up Black voters with the spectre of Ferguson and a national effort by all police forces, at the hands of the Republicans of course, to use Black youth as target practice. And if that did not work, why they would suggest that because many GOP voters were not in favor of same-sex marriage to look out for a GOP win would probably force all sexual alphabet voters back in the closet or some kind of reorientation camp.
The reason for the lack of effort on accomplishment and fanning the fires of fear is because there are no accomplishments. O-Care is a continuous disaster. The economy may be recovering, but at such an anemic rate most Americans do not feel it at all. We look and are absolutely feckless in the face of the rise of the Islamic State and the unrest throughout the Middle East. Our relationship with Red China looks like we are giving up the store at any given opportunity. In other words, to coin a phrase, the American people feel in a malaise.
But the GOP has to deliver. It has to pursue the policies of seeking to streamline the tax code and seek changes that will be accessible to the middle class. It needs to fight the attempts of massive regulation that is keeping the economy from maybe having a stronger recovery. It needs to stop the government from legalizing millions of illegal aliens and must, must support border security first, then reform. It must have the confidence of the American people that it can govern.
But the fact is that the Big Red Wave was just that. And it crashed on the Democrats hopes and dreams. Hopefully it will restore hope in the GOP and the American experience.

J. P. Blecksmith Did Not Die To See Iraq End Up Like This

J. P. Blecksmith was the first United States officer killed in the Battle of Fallujah, Iraq in 2004 and his family were members of my church, the Church Of Our Saviour, in San Gabriel, California.
Mr. Blecksmith was a son of the parish and was a marine corp 2nd lieutenant who came from an upper-middle class and long list of warriors family in San Marino, California. Mr. Blecksmith was a volunteer in the marine corps. No, he was not some poor, underprivileged kid from the wrong side of the tracks that joined the armed forces because he had no future, to paraphrase then Democrat presidential candidate and current secretary of state, John Kerry. He was in the marine corps and was doing his duty in Operation Enduring Freedom in liberating Iraq from the clutches of Saddam Hussein.
One does not know how he felt about all of the politics surrounding the whole Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacist Terror. He was a soldier. He did his job and his duty. And as all warriors fear, he gave his life for the cause.
And today we read and see that all Mr. Blecksmith and the thousands of brave soldiers, seamen, air force fighters, and marines is falling apart at breakneck speed.
The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (Syria) has rearmed and with breakneck speed and has captured huge swaths of Iraqi territory and the major cities of Mosul and Tikrit, the hometown of the dictator, Hussein. And they have effective control of the cities of Rahmadi and yes, Fallujah. And they are setting their sights on Baghdad.
The worst part is that the ISIS has gained all of this land while also being protagonists in the Syria civil war. This timeline explains how this group was defeated and ended up now on the march. It appears that the turning point was in July, 2013 when they were able to seize the infamous Abu Gharib prison and break out 500 fellow militants. That ISIS was able to infiltrate the supposedly toughest of Iraqi prisons inside Baghdad should have been a bad sign.
Now in territory controlled by ISIS, they are imposing the ever so judicious Sharia law in such a way that I am certain the Taliban is taking notes for when they regain power in Afghanistan. As the black flag of radical Islam is planted, such wonderful things as forcing all Islamics to go to the mosque and pray five times a day. Whether they want to or not. Of course no alcohol, no smoking and no drugs. Well, one of the three may not be a bad idea. But not in the radical Islamic way. And no public gatherings that are not approved by the ISIS forces. And in its weird interpretation of Islam, they will destroy all shrines, graveyards and monuments. Remember, that is what the former Taliban rulers of Afghanistan did to Buddhist shrines by blowing them up before the 9/11 terror attacks. Of course, the ladies are going to be protected by being forced to dress "modestly", re: burkas or similar restrictive clothing.
One other aspect of all of this is that the ISIS are Sunni Islamics while the government and armed forces are primarily Shia Islamic. And we now read and see that Iran is going to get involved by supporting the corrupt government of al-Maliki going so far as threatening military involvement.
The fundamental reason that this is happening is because it is the fault of the United States and directly the fault of the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Because it has been all about politics.
Remember during the 2008 presidential campaign, then Sen. Messiah Barack kept lying telling potential voters that the Iraq theatre was not one that was necessary in the WAIT. Afghanistan, that was the theatre we should have been in all the way and Iraq should have been left alone. It was kind of cute by a half for he sounded like a hawk in Afghanistan and a dove to his left-wing Democrat base on Iraq. But because the 2008 election was really not about Iraq or the overall WAIT, it sounded pretty good to a war-weary public. The United States would draw down in Iraq and leave a token force and concentrate on vanquishing the enemies in Afghanistan.
Well, negotiations broke down over how many and what the role would be of the token American forces that would remain in Iraq beyond 2011. The breakdown that led to total American military withdrawal was how American forces would or would not be granted immunity from the Iraqi government and be subject to it's laws.
Had we extended negotiations on that, we could have had a force of anywhere from 30,000 to 70,000. The 30,000 would be more than enough to continue to be a presence and train the officer corp and the regular forces.
But for Team Obama, they would rather not have any extended negotiations for if that happened and a deal could have been worked out, there would still be a strong American military presence today.
Basically it would be forces like the forces that we had in West Germany after World War II. Oh, and we still do, even though there is no threat of a Nazi resurgence that was feared in the days after the formal end of hostilities. Or the decades-long threat of communist East Germany and their patrons, the former Soviet Union that is no more.
If there was any military presence in Iraq, Team Obama would have broken a major 2008 campaign foreign policy promise. For they did not close down the Guantanamo prison where many of the worst of the worst terrorists have been and are still being held. They had to get totally out of Iraq. And thus in November, 2011, the last troops came home. And of course Team Obama used it as fulfilling a promise to be out of Iraq. Team Obama rode that to reelection.
Remember, it took years for the United States and its World War II allies to train a purely defense force in West Germany, Italy and Japan but forces did not place any false timeline for it to happen and pull armed forces out of these three nations. Again, United States forces are in all three nations. Yes, the numbers are reduced dramatically, but they are still there.
But Iraq, well when the public, fed by the Democrat party left-wing propaganda, tired of the seemingly endless military action essentially gave up. the Dear Leader, President Obama and his allies wanted to end all military action in the WAIT. They wanted to return to the pre 9/11 mindset that all this terrorism is but a legal issue and all terrorists would be prosecuted in American courts and afforded the same rights and privileges as American citizens. If convicted, they would be jailed in American prisons. Team Obama would address, as they saw it, the root causes of such terror and terrorist groups.
But, as noted, Team Obama ended up keeping Guantanamo open. Yes, they made a grave mistake in trading five former Afghan Taliban for one American soldier, and it is probably using this to empty Guantanamo any way they can. And they did not try the chief architect in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, in a civilian court in New York City as the attorney general, Eric Holder, wanted to. He was tried in a military court.
So in a sense, reality smacked the collective faces of Team Obama.
But in Iraq, that did not happen. And yes, the United States is reaping what it sowed.
And yup, forces of genuine evil are on the march to Baghdad and a goal of radical Islam may come true.
The rebirth of the medieval caliphate.
And it is unfolding right before our collective eyes.
For the most part, thanks to Team Obama and wanting us to ignore the Mideast and the descent to radical Islamic chaos, we in the United States don't seem to care. I mean, if it gets in the way of the latest fauxtrage of the week, we can't be bothered.
Peace at any price is a false peace for eventually those who sue for peace end up having to fight war with enemies that do not value peace.
I don't believe that J. P. Blecksmith or any of the 4,485 other American troops that died in Iraq in Operation Enduring Freedom did so to see what is happening today. The total disintegration of Iraq into a caliphate state.

Gen. Eric Shinseki's Resignation Will Not Solve The Veteran's Administration Mess

Well, it did not take long at all to pin the whole Veteran's Administration scheduling scandal on the VA secretary, Gen. Eric Shinseki as he became the highest-ranking casualty as he "resigned" today.
I put resigned in quotes because I do believe that that Gen. Shinseki was given the choice of being fired by the Dear Leader, President Obama, or resign.
Inexplicably, Gen Shinseki is being made the fall guy for a scandal that has been long in the making and a sad story of how the VA does not take the best care of all of our veterans.
Yes, Gen. Shinseki was at the helm as VA secretary for the whole Obama administration until today, but I can't lay this particular scandal all on him.
What it really is that the medical bureaucracy that is the VA is out of control and putting unrealistic goals on mid-level administrators.
And before anyone goes on the The VA has not been fully funded canard, under the Bush and Obama administrations, VA spending has gone up 235% since 2001 to today. Ed Morrissey takes us down the spending in the VA since 2001. And Team Obama has made sure to have double-digit budget increases in four out of the six annual budgets. And in the Morrissey report, he cites an article from John Merline at Investor's Business Daily explaining how much of those increases went to medical care and debunks a left-wing talking point that the VA budget has not kept up with the two most recent war theatres in the War Against Islamofacist Terror, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Now the scandal started to percolate at the Phoenix, Arizona VA hospital and that there were multiple scheduling lists. A real one that was on a computer and a fake one on paper. The fake one essentially was the Black Hole and where they might, or might not, actually schedule an appointment.
But even the real, computer schedule, had its problems.
This is from the link at The Arizona Republic:

July 2013:

In an e-mail exchange among employees at the Carl T. Hayden VA Medical Center in Phoenix, an employee questions whether administrators are improperly touting their Wildly Important Goals program as a success because it shows a dramatic reduction in wait times for patient appointments. "I think it's unfair to call any of this a success when veterans are waiting six weeks on an electronic waiting list before they're called to schedule their first PCP (primary-care provider) appointment," program analyst Damian Reese complains. "Sure, when their appointment was created, (it) can be 14 days out, but we're making them wait 6-20 weeks to create that appointment. That is unethical and a disservice to our veterans."

I highlight in particular the wait from the time a patient calls to schedule an appointment until the VA calls back to set an appointment. A call is made, the potential patient gives the pertinent information and gets a call back in six weeks. Assuming it is exactly six weeks, and it is every day and not just "working days", Monday through Friday, that is 42 days. Count only work days and add 12 days to the 42 and it could be as long as 54 days until and actual appointment is set. And that is the low end. If it is the 20 weeks out using the same formula, a potential patient is waiting up to 140 days or as long as 180 days just to see a doctor.
Now with the paper list, the reality is that few, if any, ever saw a doctor at the VA Carl Hayden hospital in Phoenix. And it is known that at least 40 veterans died as a result of this.
But it was not limited to the Phoenix VA Hayden hospital, but it is the worst.
According to this article in USA Today, scheduling delays and trying to cover up the delays are systemic in the Phoenix VA hospital. The report says that 1,700 veterans are not on any waiting lists to set appointments at all even though they need to see doctors. And as bad are the 1,183 that are waiting more than six months just to see their primary care doctor.
And according to the Austin American-Statesman, the Central Texas VA was cooking the scheduling books to show appointments for screenings seemingly sooner than they really were. And there is an e-mail trail to prove that to be the case.
So why is this happening?
Because the hospitals all want the bonuses that they receive if the appointments are in a timely manner.
So why the delays? Especially to see primary care physicians?
Remember, the VA has been funded thoroughly. And of course, there is built-in budgeting for the potential bonuses.
This is but the tip of the iceberg on how the VA medical system operates.
My father in law literally fought the VA for 10+ years to get simple hearing aids. And he deserved them. He was in the navy during the Korean War and worked in the machine room/shop on the ships. As a result his hearing loss began then and the VA would not approve the hearing aids because they kept trying to suggest other reasons for his hearing loss. He could have probably attained the hearing aids through private insurance that he had. But he served his nation. He enlisted before the armed services could draft him. And he deserved them. Eventually, he did attain the hearing aids through the VA. But it was not an easy thing to do.
And the above tale ended about nine years ago.
So it is not anything new.
The way that the VA operates and treats veterans has long been a disgrace. It transcends presidential administrations, parties and ideologies.
But the scheduling scandal, that escalated under the Obama administration. And yes, it did so under the tenure of the now former VA secretary, Gen. Shinseki. But because a lot of other problems began long before Gen. Shinseki became VA secretary, this was just another layer and Gen. Shinseki proved to be a lousy civilian administrator.
But the good general's leaving under a cloud (FTR, Gen. Shinseki served his nation with pride and honor and deserves our respect for that) of scandal is not going to solve the scheduling problem.
Because the whole VA system needs massive overhaul. And that will take someone from outside the government and the armed forces to take on. It will need to have someone with a strong business background that can apply positive changes to the system that will benefit all veterans. It is a project that could take many years for a lot of these problems took years to fester and grow like a boil on a rear end.
This is a huge test for the Obama administration. The president is going to have to make some very tough decisions. There is no doubt that this is a defining moment. Does Team Obama want to make the kind of reforms that maybe unpopular at first, but extremely necessary? Can they bring in that outside person to seek the reforms and make the VA work for the veterans and not just the bureaucrats? Clearly this will not be the task of the caretaker secretary, Sloan D. Gibson.
The "resignation" of Gen. Shinseki does not change the fundamental fact that there needs to be a through investigation of the scheduling scandal and that may require a special congressional oversight.
The only thing that has changed? Gen. Eric Shinseki is the scapeboat and the biggest head to roll.

Of Shaking Hands With A Dictator And Selfies And Barack's Excellent Adventure In South Africa

Yeah, all in one day, the president of the United States, the Dear Leader, Barack Obama, had an excellent adventure in South Africa.
Shaking hands with the vile dictator of Red Cuba, Raul Castro in a reception line at the memorial service for the late South African president, Nelson Mandela. And really, he did not have to. Seriously, he didn't. Yet he did and it was not just an obligatory hand shake with the dictator Castro. Nah, there were smiles and they were yucking it up, beaming smiles at each other. It was not long. I mean, the Dear Leader, President Obama, did not hold up the line or anything like that. He could have all but ignored the dictator Castro. And yet there he was. At a memorial service making a clear political statement.
Now it would not be much but I did have a sneaky suspicion that maybe, just maybe there was more to that handshake.
And I was right.
According to Eli Lake and Josh Rogin at The Daily Beast, Team Obama has been holding mid-level talks on such issues as direct postal service, disaster response, and migration, re: immigration issues.
Why would there be such talks if not for the eventuality of reinstating diplomatic relations with Red Cuba?
Here is a prediction.
When the Republicans increase their numbers in the House and take the senate next year, the Dear Leader, President Obama, will be a total lame-duck. Unless he totally abandons his socialism liberalism and adopts the GOP agenda, he will get not one thing done in congress.
So, can anyone say foreign policy?
The Dear Leader, President Obama, will reinstate full diplomatic relations with Red Cuba. He will recognize the communist dictatorship of the Castros.
And it will not stop there.
The talks with the Islamic Republic of Iran? Another precursor of what the Dear Leader, President Obama, will do and reinstate full diplomatic relations with Iran. He will recognize the Shiite Islamics, the Islamic republic as the government of Iran.
I know it seems improbable, but that is where I see things going.
There is not more to say on this topic.
But the selfie, the selfie the Dear Leader, President Obama, took with the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, and the Danish Prime Minister, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, that is something I would expect from a
teenage gal.
Which leads me to something my friend Social Extinction said on my Facebook page in my reaction to this:

Our president is such a teenager. Wasn't stoicism expected of them once upon a time?

Why yes Mr. Social Extinction, stoicism was expected at a funeral/memorial service for a current or former head of state. Granted it was more celebratory than solemn, it is no excuse to mock the occasion.
Mr. Social Extinction made me come up with the correct new phrase to describe the Dear Leader, President Obama:

TEENAGER-IN-CHIEF

There is not other way to describe it.
There is the titular leader of the free world, the Dear Leader, President Obama, the prime minister of Britain and the prime minister of Denmark in between the two. And they yuck it up for the cell phone camera. All of them. And if you look at the photo in the last link, you see a very teed-off First Lady, Michelle Obama.
And she is right to be teed-off.
At some point, Mrs. Dear Leader, Michelle Obama, had enough and had to change places with the awe-struck Dear Leader, President Obama, so he was not continuing to laugh and yuck with the Danish Prime Minister Mrs. Thornin-Schmidt. Another photo shows the titular leader of the free world kissing his wife's hand. Seemed to appear to be some kind of teenage 'do you forgive me?' if you ask me.
That makes me think about when the teenager-in-chief got to shake hands with the dictator Castro. It made me think of what was said in those very brief moments:

Like, OMG! There you are! Comadante Castro! AWESOME dude! Oh I'm sorry I'm not meeting with the big dude himself, Fidel! Hey, can you tell him a 'what up?' from me? Oh man, AWESOME to meet you dude.

At this point, would anyone expect less than such a dialogue from the teenager-in-chief? No wonder the dictator Castro feigned a smile and seemed to try to move the Dear Leader, President Obama, along. He couldn't take it anymore.
Folks, the president of the United States, no matter who he or she is and no matter what party they belong to represents all of us at occasions such as a state memorial. As Mr. Social Extinction pointed out, there does need to be a certain stoicism at occasions such as this. Our president, no my president, did not show any of this.
Could he have avoided shaking the dictator Castro's hand? Possibly and he should have made every effort to not do so. The image of the American president recognizing the legitimacy by doing what he did must send a chill down the spine of every freedom-loving Cuban everywhere.
Did he have to participate in the childishness of the selfie? Of course not. There was nothing wrong with exchanging pleasantries, but a selfie?! The line was crossed. The shark was jumped.
Watching the events unfold Wednesday in Johannesburg made me think that, sadly, this was nothing more than Barack Obama's Excellent South African Adventure.

The American People Have Stopped Listening To The Dear Leader, President Obama

Yes, I think that it is true.
The American people, save for his base, has given up listening to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Same thing happened to former President George W. Bush. To a lesser extent to former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton. There comes a point, usually about this time, that the people and or voters just stop listening.
And it does eventually come back to bite the incumbent president.
And sometimes a president will just get desperate and hope that there fulminations to the base will somehow get to those not listening.
Let me explain.
In 2006, most of us conservative and Republicans did not see the forest through the trees. We thought that somehow then President Bush will get his overall message across, especially on Iraq. The people overall were just tired of the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacist Terror. And no matter how hard he tried, the people just stopped listening. Coupled with a relentless assault by the liberal left of the Democrat party and the mid term election of 2006 was an utter disaster that saw the Republican control of congress end. And of course the election of the Democrat presidential candidate, then Sen. Messiah Barack.
It is exactly what is happening today.
I find myself on the other side now. I am not listening to the Dear Leader, President Obama. He can say the sky is blue and after a grunt under my breath, I just don't care.
It is the overall reason that the American people do not support the Dear Leader, President Obama, on his "policy" regarding the use of chemical weapons in the civil war in Syria. Besides having an absolutely incoherent approach to the issue,  the vast majority of people just were not paying attention. They do not care. No, not that they don't care about the Syrian people but that there is not just a war weariness but just a thought that this president and the political class as a whole is just totally out of touch.
So while a gunman was going on a total rampage at the Washington Navy Yard this past Monday, the president made a passing comment about it while going on an uncontrollable rant of Republican bashing regarding budget issues and the funding of Obamacare.
While I personally loathe any president inserting themselves in the middle of an ongoing unfolding story, especially when a crazed gunman is involved, it was built up on all media he was going to comment on the situation. He did and continued on the rant without realizing how petty to most people it would come off being.
So much does the leader of the party, in this case the Dear Leader, President Obama, become a pariah that few if any candidates will want him to campaign for them openly in next year's congressional elections. For once people stop listening, they do not want to hear anymore. Those that vote are going to look for change.
Trust me my Democrat friends, this is going to happen.
I do not know if there is one issue in particular or just that now with the advent of the ever expanding social media landscape, but the overall populace just tunes out a president at this point in their presidency.
Now the Dear Leader, President Obama, gets a five point advantage because there is a segment of those asked in polls that they do not have a vile hatred. I know people do not like why I believe that to be the case, but even in a poll there are people that do not want to be branded as racist and thus will say that sure, they like the Dear Leader, President Obama, personally. But keep asking questions and the same people pretty much will not like any of his policies. And if you take that out of the equation and you are looking at borderline George W. Bush numbers at the same point in their presidencies.
Again, we see that he is playing totally to his base now. He long ago gave up on any Republicans and all but has given up on the middle-of-the-road voters. Now he is even not paying attention to a good part of his base, the low-information voters. No, it is all the base that he believes will be able to offset all the negativity.
It won't.
So what to do?
Not unlike George W. Bush, the Dear Leader, President Obama, will just keep things the way that they are and hope that somehow those that vote in the midterm congressional elections will be what got him reelected in 2012.
But his name is not on the ballot anywhere in 2014. And the same type of voter will just not show up. The motivation of that voter in 2012, reelecting the Dear Leader, President Obama, is not there. Many of those voters are probably disenchanted by what has happened under the second term. Some just liked him and could care less about anything else. And yes, whether we on the right want to admit it or not, we had the same kind of voters in 2004 for then President Bush. The Big Mo is on the other side. The people really unhappy with the Dear Leader, President Obama, is much more motivated than those that like the dude. Because again, there is less of that than in 2012 when everything was rainbows and unicorns.
But for us on the right, there is still that subculture of RINOs* that want nothing more to do than snatch victory that can be had in 2014. They constantly look for ways to try to save the Dear Leader, President Obama.
However, once again the Tea Party is getting back in groove and the issue that they have going their way is the implementation of Obamacare.
Again, the motivation is on the side of the outs, not the side of those already in.
Maybe it can be something called a six-year itch among voters.
But one thing is certain.
The American people have stopped listening to the Dear Leader, President Obama, and will continue to do so until the 2016 election.

*-RINO-Republican In Name Only.

The More We Know About Syria, The Less We Need To Get Involved With Bombing Or Any Other Military Action

The more that I hear the Dear Leader, President Obama, and even conservative supporters regarding bombing Syria for the use of chemical weapons the less inclined I am to support such a mission and oppose it stronger each and every day and more so by the hour.
Today in a press conference in St. Petersburg, Russia, at the G20 summit, the Dear Leader, President Obama, may have said one of the most idiotic things in regard to the situation yet. Here is the quote:

"Over 1,400 people were gassed. Over 400 of them were children. This is not something we fabricated, this is not something we are using as excuse for military action . . .I elected to to end wars, not start them."

Oh Dear Lord, this is douchbrainery on steroids.
Lets take the estimate of those killed in the attack.
According to the Dear Leader, President Obama, the number is over 1,400. Yet even in this article many do not believe that number and in fact believe that the numbers are less than 1,400. Granted some of that skepticism comes from Russia, an ally of the current Bashar Assad regime in Syria. But again in the article it suggests many leaders have skepticism about the claims.
But the whopper is the left's always fall back position whenever "action" needs to be done.
It's because or for the children.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, cited a number of over 400 who died being children.
It is an awful way for children that are innocent victims to die. No matter who was behind the attack. But my question for the Dear Leader, President Obama is this. What about the 98,000 plus that died as a result of conventional warfare? And the second question is what about the many children who died out of that 98,000? What their lives were not important until one side or the other used chem weapons? That is sure the implication I get from such a comment.
And the real zinger is why the Dear Leader, President Obama, thinks that he was elected.
To stop wars, not start them.
UGH!
Really that is a sophomoric comment because he is not starting a war but becoming an active participant in a civil war. A war that not only the majority of Americans oppose but one that is not in our national interest.
Again, understand that everyone in Syria just plain sucks.
The current dictator, Bashar Assad, is certainly no friend to the United States. He is allied as noted with Russia and worse, Iran. Assad is an Alawite Islamic which is an offshoot of Shi'a Islam. Alawites are serious Twelvers and like some Christians who believe in the End Times, these people do to from a radical Islamic perspective. And many would have no problem speeding up the Islamic End Times.
Oh, but those that oppose Assad, from the Free Syria Army, the least objectionable group to the Al-Nusra Front, well they are primarily Sunni Islamics and even worse than what is in power now.
While some proponents of bombing Syria, such as Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, say the Free Syrian Army are pretty cool, they dismiss the other groups allied with the FSA as a minority. Well, like so many things Sen. "F--- You" McCain is wrong about, he is here too. In fact if you read this post I wrote and start adding the numbers, well they are roughly equal in numbers. The substantive difference is that the FSA were former members of the Assad armed forces.
And while both sides practice brutality, the rebels are really more brutal than people want to realize. Even the Ol' Gray Lady, The New York Times, reported on this yesterday when a former rebel smuggled video of an execution of seven Syrian soldiers. The following video does not show the actual execution but is graphic none the less. And it shows the dead soldiers being thrown in an unmarked grave.



.

But if that is not enough for you, here is Abu Sakkar a rebel fighter and watch what he does.

Yes, this sick degenerate eats the heart of a dead Syrian soldier.

And the Dear Leader, President Obama, our illustrious secretary of state, John F. Kerry (Reporting for duty*), Sen. John "F--- You" McCain want to shed American blood and treasure to support these bastards.

Again, ALL SIDES in this civil war suck. Not one is in the interests of the United States to see in power. But in this case, you have to go with the Devil you know against the people that we do not know about or want to bury our collective heads in sand and ignore. It is not just the atrocities but what the rebels could do once the overthrow, execute Assad and his family and implement. Radical Islam right on the Mediterranean Sea.

Yet those that want to attack Syria are planning, adjusting and refining what action the armed forces of the United States will take. No doubt it will be the navy with warships and aircraft carriers, and the air force. For now.

And remember, we do not know for certain who committed the chem weapon attack. We are asked to believe Team Obama and the rebels that it was the forces loyal to Assad blindly. Remember these people did not want to and did not blindly follow former president George W. Bush and the much more verifiable evidence of WMDs in Iraq, And also the fact that Saddam Hussein used the weapons and invaded another nation, Kuwait, in 1990. Without more absolute verifiability, we can not do what our president is asking us to support.

The more we know about the Syrian civil war, the more that we should not get involved in the matter that the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his new allies such as Sens. "F--- You" McCain and Goober Graham. We need to continue to let our leaders know that We The People just say no to bombing or any other military action in Syria.

 

Why We Should Not Get Involved In Syria's Civil War

UPDATE:

To show that the opposition to bombing Syria is making for strange bedfellows, even The Ol' Gray Lady, The New York Times, is noticing that maybe the opposition may not be a bunch of Freedom Fighters seeking mom, falafel and democracy. Do read this article here. Although it describes a brutal act, it still does not top the brutality of the link I left you with at the end of the original post.

09-04-2013
I know that the few people totally with the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his new found love of the armed forces of the United States will say to me, "Why did you favor the war against Iraq? Because it was your guy, Bush? Don't you remember that Bush lied and people died?"
OK, I will address those legitimate points later.
But what is before us, now the congress of the United States, is whether or not to support the Dear Leader, President Obama, in his mission to use the air force of the United States to bomb Syria because allegedly the dictator, Bashar Assad, used some kind of chemical weaponry on his people in the two-year old civil war last month.
And absent absolute, compelling evidence and the willingness of the Dear Leader, President Obama, to want regime change with allies, not enemies, of the United States, I can not support that at this time.
Today the senate foreign relations committee voted to authorize the Dear Leader, President Obama, to use force in response to the use of chemical weapons. The vote was 10-7 with newly elected senator Edward Markey (D-Mass (of course)) voting present. And it was not a strict party line vote either as this break down shows. FTR, here is the vote by party:

YES
Sen.  Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Christopher Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.)
Sen. John "F--- You" McCain (R-Ariz.)

NO
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.),
Sen. Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen.  Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

The link above points out a lot of interesting political implications of this and the expected subsequent vote for the resolution next week.
But back to the point as to whether the United States should at this point become a player in this quagmire.
The link to Wikipedia shows that this is one helluva mess. The government has a coalition of forces that is about 341,000. The rebels also have a coalition of about 146,000.
Syria is supported by Iran with about 150 advisors as well as the Iranian puppet Hezbollah and about 1,500 to 5,000 fighters. It also has support in the international community from Red China and Russian. Most important, and the reason we may be getting involved is that they have the secret weapon of chemical weapons that they have already allegedly used on their people.
The rebels are a motley crew to say the least. The largest group is the secular Free Syrian Army with a strength of about 50 to 80.000. Then it gets mostly murky and more radical Islamic. The next largest group is the Syrian Islamic Liberation Front with about 37 to 40,000. Then there is the Syrian Islamic Front with a force of about 13,000. Oh of course they want to set up an Islamic state based on Sharia law, as does the former Islamic Liberation Front. Very important to keep these players separate I guess. And here comes another of the wonderful opposition fighters, the Al-nusra front. Oh these dudes are real charmers. They don't just want there 7,000 fighters to bring down the Assad government and set up an Islamic state under Sharia law but want it for the whole of the region. And just a point of note that these dudes will not protect Christians, a minority, as they beheaded a Roman Catholic priest after his monastery was destroyed by said fighters. Oh yeah, I am up for taking these dudes over Assad. And let us not forget the wandering band of Mujahideen that are about 7,000 Sunni Islamics and pretty much hate Shi'a Islamics and the Alawites, a Shi'a sect of which Assad is a part of.
As I wrote, the opposition groups are just more and more radical Islamic and now overshadow the Free Syrian Army.
And note that there is a lot of divisions within divisions that make who we should have been or are now supporting all the more difficult.
This civil war is a direct result of the so-called Arab Spring which saw uprisings against long-time mostly pro-West dictators and autocrats. The Arab Spring, hows that going? Er, not so well. Islamic regimes are now in power in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. But Egypt's military just said no and threw out the government of Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. Libya is totally ungovernable and Tunisia is ready to throw out their Islamics. And Syria is the most drawn out and longest of the wars of the Arab Spring.
The whole Arab Spring has turned into Islamic Winter. And the worst aspect is that that last hold out, Bashar Assad, is not even a remote friend of the United States. In fact he is as unsavory as they come. But if you look at the potential that can win this God forsaken civil war, Assad actually starts looking good.
First reason why the United States should not get involved in this dispute is that there is no discernible American interest in siding with either side. Assad is a brutal dictator that is in bed with the Iranians and radical Shi'a Islam. The opponents who want to dislodge Assad are a rogues gallery of radical Sunni Islamics. We blew our chance to actively support the Free Syrian Army straight away and they are being overtaken by the radicals. What is being proposed will not make a difference.
Second reason why we should stay out is we have no game plan beyond our navy firing off cruise missiles in the hope of maybe scaring Assad to not use chemical weapons. There is no plan to do anything to take out any of the possible chem weapon sites. Yes there is the risk of the weapons releasing and causing more death and mayhem. But if we are trying to stop Assad from using them, don't we want to get rid of them? And since we are not taking sides and seeking regime change then this is a recipe for disaster and embarrassment for the United States.
The third reason why we need to stay out is we really do not know for absolute certain what side did use the chem weapons in the first place. The specter of Iraq hangs very high on this. After all, we were told by many intelligence sources that Saddam Hussein had WMDs and yet none were found. Thus many who were for the invasion of Iraq felt that they were lied to and wanted to turn tail and run so fast. Many went so far as to suggest that Afghanistan was a "good" war and Iraq was a "bad" war not realizing that they are theatres in the War Against Islamicfacist Terror. So, in a nation at civil war and rebel forces holding a great deal of territory, one has to at least think that they have some access to chem weapons. And that they may, may have staged the whole event to get exactly the outcome of outrage against Assad and a little help with air power to get rid of him. Why should we believe the intelligence on this blindly if not even more blindly than we did in regard to Iraq? It is as if George W. Bush is still in the White House, right?
Forth reason is simple. We don't know what we want to happen in Syria. There is no one saying that there is a desired outcome of bombing Syria. Do we want the rebels to win? Eh, not really. Do we want to bomb Assad into submission? Maybe. If we do not have a total game plan, then forget it.
The reason that we are in this mess is simple. It is because we have blown the whole Arab Spring. By not guiding it away from the radical Islamics taking power in Tunisia, Egypt and held off in Syria, we tacitly accepted Islam beginning to unify and form an Islamic Crescent and the reinstitution of the Caliphate. To be blunt it is amateur hour in Washington from the Dear Leader, President Obama, on down.
The bottom line is that we, the United States, should not get involved in Syria unless we radically change course. And since we will not, lets work harder to verify who actually used chem weapons. And where are the chem weapons depots. That would be a good start. I leave you this link as to what we could be supporting, tacitly, by bombing Syria.

Say, Can Obama EVER Be Mocked?!

You know the rules of presidential bashing change from administration to administration I suppose.
For instance, none of the late night talk show hosts dared to mock the current occupant of the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama, during his first term.
Fast forward to the early days of term number two for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Now the host of The Tonight Show, Jay Leno, finds it safe to diss the Dear Leader, President Obama, so much that he is a guest on The Tonight Show last week. Even David Letterman and Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon feel a little OK to throw in a diss or two.
Now lets go back to the George W. Bush administration.
It was not that long ago. It ended on January 20, 2009 at 12 noon, Eastern Standard Time.
Yet for eight years, the steady drumbeat of Bush bashing hit lows that are beyond low. Here is one depicting Mr. Bush as a vampire

OOOOHHHH!!!!! So scary! George W. Bush the vampire taking a chunk out of Lady Liberty's neck! Should throw the whole Village Voice in jail, right?
Say, do you remember all the jokes about Mr. Bush being a monkey?

 Why even supposed news reporters like Erin Burnett referred to the 43rd president as a monkey and while she apologized, it did not end her lively hood. In fact, she is now a major player at CNN. Yeah, really Miss Burnett should be unemployed at the least and maybe jailed for treason.
And who can forget this gem of a movie made while Mr. Bush was president, Death Of A President. You know that this was the movie about . . .the assassination of President Bush. And of course it was not condemned at all. It attained critical acclaim. Nah, it really should have been so condemned that a hit squad should have gone after all involved in the movie, right?
We must endure this bit o' history because now that we are deep in the Age o' Obama, the rules have certainly changed.
Pretty much any criticism of or joking at the Dear Leader, President Obama's expense is . . .wait for it . . . RAAAAACISM!
Remember, there are five A's in RAAAACISM!
What else to explain what happened recently at the Missouri State Fair in which a clown donned an Obama mask? Now to be fair, the clown did not just put on the mask, but whipped the crowd up asking if they wanted to see a bull chase him in his Obama mask. And the crowd went wild and did want to see that.
So lets go through some things.
This is Missouri, not exactly Obama Country. The Dear Leader, President Obama, lost here in 2008 and 2012. In 2012, the result? The Dear Leader, President Obama, lost 44% to 54%. This is the State Fair and not held in a town like Kansas City or St. Louis. These are conservative people, by and large. And yeah, not inclined to like the Dear Leader, President Obama.
It was a perfect storm, so to speak.
And the person that notified the media, he clearly had an axe to grind because he did not like the event and the clear animus against the president. For Perry Beam spoke about it to a lefty blog, Show Me Progress. So he is not an innocent bystander in all of this.
In wake of what was meant to be humor, there is a helluva lot of collateral damage.
For one the clown who is either unidentified or one Tuffy Gessling is banned for life in participating in any events at the state fair. And the announcer of the rodeo event, Mark Ficken, resigned from his post as president of the Missouri Cowboy Rodeo Association so that he can explain that it was not him but the clown whipping up the crowd.
And the wrath of the left?
Well, it is up and running.
It is so bad that the Missouri NAACP, which FTR the C is for Colored, is calling for the Department of Justice and the Secret Service to investigate this horror.
I think that Byron York at the D. C. Examiner has this right.
It is a two-fold situation in which some people are uncomfortable that the Dear Leader, President Obama, was so disrespected and ridiculed at a family event. On that I agree. Maybe the real problem, to me, is that this was interjected at an event that is probably attended by people of all walks, not just Republicans, conservatives and Obama-haters. And yes, some people took it to mean that the perception would be cool to see the Dear Laeder, President Obama, chased down in a violent manner by a bull.
Where I get ruffled is that somehow, any mockery and or criticism of the Dear Leader, President Obama, is taken so seriously by his supporters and sycophants. While eight years of abuse, even hoping the assassination of the then sitting president, George W. Bush is shrugged off.
And I hate the race card being thrown in as well.
Most of us that do not like the Dear Leader, President Obama, and to be clear it is his policies, do so because we don't believe that it will be good for the United States. The fact that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is mixed race, sorry but he is not all Black but had a White mom, is beyond secondary for me. Could care less that he is what he is. He is a child of God. Race is irrelevant.
I must ask where was all this outrage when Mr. Bush was assaulted in ways much, much worse than the Dear Leader, President Obama, even hopes to be? Was the Missouri NAACP calling for an investigation into the makers of the movie Death Of A President? Was not not a potential idea for a terrorist or a whack job?
I will be the first to note that I took offense to some of the outrageous assaults on Mr. Bush. But there were really and truly so many. I tried to stay away from those that were just a bit trivial. It is why I always refer to Mr. Obama as both the Dear Leader, a mocking of his cult of personality, and as President Obama because even though I did not vote for him, he is my president. I do respect the office and yes, the man who is the current occupant. But many of those who hated Mr. Bush would not even call him president. They did not like the outcome of the 2000 election so much that they could not respect the constitutional outcome. And for the record, I loved the late comedian, Steve Bridges, who did the greatest impersonation of Mr. Bush ever.
Having fun at any president's expense is always a fine line. Mocking and ribbing is all but an American birthright. But this administration can not take anything that dares to do any of that. It is true. The fact that the NAACP believes that the clown in the Obama mask should be investigated is a sign of the times.
I hope that when all of this dies down, the clown will be allowed to participate in the Missouri State Fair. He did nothing wrong. There need not be any investigation of any kind.
What is needed is not to change the rules of criticizing and or mocking the President of the United States no matter who he or she is. Period.