Obama Squeals; Upsets Seals
May 1, 2012 Political
Barack Obama opposed everything George Bush did with regard to the Global War on Terror (and nearly everything else). He opposed all of the things that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden and when Seal Team Six carried out that mission Obama told Americans that he would not show pictures or make a lot out of it because, as he said, we don’t spike the ball.
That did not stop Barack Obama from taking all the credit for the success of the mission. Obama turned the mission over to a Naval Officer, Admiral William McRaven, and it was he who put the plans into place. Then Seal Team Six carried the mission to success. All of this was done with the mechanisims put into place by George Bush. Then Obama took all the credit.
Congrats to him for giving the order to carry out the mission. That is where his credit ends and the credit begins for all thoise who were actually in harm’s way. You see, while Obama might have suffered political damage from a failure, those who carried out the mission would have suffered injury or death had things gone badly. One only needs to remember Jimmy Carter and his disasterous plans in Iran to see what happens when a mission goes bad. Carter lost reelection but is still alive. Those who participated in his ill conceived mission in the desert have been dead for decades.
Now, the Navy Seals are not very happy with Barack Obama. They give him credit for giving the go on the mission but are very unhappy that he is using it as a political tool in his bid for reelection. They do not like being props for Obama’s campaign and they do not like the spotlight on them or their actions. They are upset that Obama is claiming that only he would have given the order and that Mitt Romney (the presumptive Republican nominee) would not have done so.
There is no way to know what Romney would have done but the Seals believe that any president would have given the order.
I have to disagree with that a little. While I have no doubt that Romney possesses leadership abilities and would have given the order, I have to disagree with the idea that any president would have.
Bill Clinton had the opportunity to take out Bin Laden on three occasions and he declined to do so. There is no doubt that Clinton had Osama bin laden in our crosshairs three times and each time he said no. One of his advisors (Sandy Berger) even stole papers from the National Archives to cover up information relating to this. If Bill Clinton had given the order on any of those occasions 9/11 might not have happened.
Ironically, the campaign ad the Seals are upset with features Bill Clinton telling viewers that Obama took the harder and more honorable path when he ordered that bin Laden be killed. This means that Clinton took the easier and less honorable path.
It is also interesting to note that the ad starts with the word Forward which has been a Socialist slogan for a very long time.
It was a great day for America and the world when Obama put into action the plans made possible by George Bush and ended the life of Osama bin Laden. It is not so honorable for the leader of this country to use this for political gain in order to be reelected.
The Navy Seals don’t like it and in the overall scheme of things their opinion matters more than that of Obama.
He gave the order but they risked it all to make it happen.
And it is not just the Seals who think this…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: barack obama, george bush, lies, mitt rombey, osama bin laden, politics, seals
Is Today Any Different For You?
May 1, 2012 Political
Today is May 1st and that is the day that all the Communist/Socialist/Progressive types love. While this day has many traditions the left sees it as a celebration of the labor movement and liberal causes. The liberals generally try to stir up trouble or organize. The Hispanic community likes to use it to draw attention to the plight of the illegals who have done nothing wrong except to enter this country illegally.
Today is no different as the Occupy FLEA Baggers are looking to cause a general strike. They want the people with jobs to stay home, call out sick or have a work slow down all in order to call attention to what they perceive as injustice. That injustice involves some people having more than they do. The Occupy FLEA Baggers are unhappy that some people have done well in life and they think that they deserve some of the money that was earned. These people think the rich don’t pay enough in taxes even though the rich pay more in taxes than the FLEA Baggers do (the few that actually pay taxes). Hell, most of the rich pay more in taxes than the FLEA Baggers will earn in a lifetime.
That is unfair according to them. The rich should give up some of that money and stop being so rich.
Here is an idea. How about you morons get jobs and earn money. Perhaps you can apply yourselves and become rich.
No, instead of that you all would rather try to shut down America. Good luck with that. Most folks will not notice and the morons who skip work in protest are probably expendable anyway.
I understand that these morons will block bridges and tunnels in order to make it tough for those of us who work to support them to get to our jobs. Is there anyway we can all borrow some monster trucks for the day?
It is sad to see that so many people have no ambition, no responsibility, and no sense of any kind of work ethic.
It is also sad that those who don’t have jobs (and appear not to want one) are asking those with jobs to skip work and help with their misguided venture.
When people stop looking for handouts, stop blaming others, start taking responsibility for their own lives and contribute to society then they will succeed.
Until then they are just a bunch of morons with nothing better to do.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: flea baggers, general strike, labor movement, may day, occupy
Obamascare, The New Path To Bad Medicine
Apr 30, 2012 Political
Anyone who thinks the Food and Drug Administration is in business to protect people is living in a fantasy world. The FDA approves drugs and says whether they can be used and by whom and then when there is a problem the FDA has no responsibility. It points fingers to the drug manufacturer. Of course those who made the drug are culpable but so are those who approved the drug.
The FDA is so concerned about the health of people that it is considering removing the need for a prescription for certain drugs like those to treat high blood pressure and high cholesterol.
This means that patients would not need to see a doctor in order to get those medications. While that might be reasonable for some medications (like 800 mg Ibuprofen) it is not wise for others like blood pressure medication.
These conditions require monitoring by a doctor. The medications often require blood tests and other testing to ensure the medication is therapeutic and not causing damage. It is also important that people do not take the drugs to treat perceived rather than actual maladies.
What if the high blood pressure is caused by another condition?
The FDA is doing this for what reason?
It is considering making some medications over the counter (OTC) to reduce the cost of Medicare which is even more burdened by Obamacare.
The cost and not the health of the patient is the overriding factor in this decision. If people get injured or die as a result of this decision then it is a small price to pay to keep costs under control (which might not be under control for those not on Medicare as insurance companies decide not to pay for OTC medication).
Sounds like a back door death panel to me.
While I think the FDA does stupid things and makes some drugs prescription when they do not need to be I also think the random removal of drugs in order to save money is criminal.
Then again, Obamacare is a criminal law.
If we are going to have an FDA then it needs to make sound decisions that protect the public.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
There Are Many Ways To Help The Country, Like Obama Leaving Office
Apr 26, 2012 Political
Michelle Obama was asked by a school child if she was going to run for president. Michelle said that she did not think so because she did not want to be president. She said that she knows her strengths and that she feels that people can help the country in many ways even if they are not leading it.
As an aside, Barack was asked this question not long after he entered the Senate and he said he was not going to run because he was not ready to be president. He was right about that part…
Anyway, here is the answer Obama gave:
“Being president is a really hard job and it’s an important job,” Obama said. “And when my husband is running for president, we’re right in there; we’re serving, too. And I think that once his terms are over, we’ll go on to do other important things — because there are so many ways that you can help this country and the world, even if you’re not president of the United States.
“And I think one of the things you learn about yourself as you get older are what are your strengths and what are your interests. And for me it’s other stuff that is not being the president. So I probably won’t run. But that’s a great question.” The Weekly Standard
Michelle Obama is absolutely correct in saying that there are many ways to help the country even if you are not the president.
in fact, it would help the country greatly if her husband were not president. If he had never been elected we would be better off and if he loses in November we will be a lot better off.
So to paraphrase her for better accuracy, there are lots of ways to help the country particularly by making sure Barack is not president.
I guess if she were to run we would not have to worry about her birth certificate.
In any event, one Obama was too much for this country to take.
She discusses this in terms of her husband being reelected. If he is reelected I am certain that Michelle will never run for the presidency.
Because if Barack is reelected there will not be a country left for anyone to lead.
UPDATE: My fantasy involves all of them.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: catastrophe, michelle obama, President, school children, strenghts, weaknesses
The Abusive Police State
Apr 25, 2012 Political
The police in Richmond VA have a new initiative to help citizens avoid being robbed. While it is nice that the police want to be proactive the initiative is nothing but harassment.
How’s that? How are the police going to harass taxpaying citizens in the land of the free? Well, the midnight shift will go around neighborhoods looking in cars and if the cars have items in them that might entice a criminal to break in, the cops will knock on the doors of the car owners and awaken them in the middle of the night to inform them they are at risk.
This is nothing more than harassment. If people want to leave things in their cars and those things get stolen then it is their problem. If the police feel compelled to look in cars and inform people (who have no obligation to correct what the police find) then they should leave a note or contact the owners during normal hours.
The police are contacting them in the middle of the night to harass them so they will not leave items again.
When contacted about this an officer in the department said he really did not care about the inconvenience that it causes for people.
Isn’t that nice. The moron who is paid with the money confiscated from taxpayers does not care that his actions are an inconvenience to those people. I have to believe that he also does not care that he is likely violating the people’s rights as well.
We are moving toward a police state where the law abiding are harassed by those who are supposed to protect them, not from themselves but from those who prey upon them.
Perhaps if the midnight shift spent more time looking for people out looking in cars in the middle of the night they could catch those who are breaking into them. Perhaps if the justice system did not keep letting the ones who get caught back on the streets with a slap on the wrist then people would not have to worry about what they leave in their cars.
People in New York are falling asleep on the subway and then thieves are taking their things. Perhaps the police there can ride the subways and wake people up instead of nabbing the criminals who are robbing them.
Maybe this moron cop in Virginia can explain to people how his officers have nothing better to do than to look in cars. Is crime in Richmond so low that the police need to harass the taxpayers who are not breaking laws?
And maybe he can explain how it is that his officers can be in neighborhoods looking but when they are called it takes forever for them to respond…
We are moving toward a police state and something terrible is going to happen. Some elderly person will die of a heart attack because of the middle of the night intrusion or someone will get hurt because they thought the knock was coming from someone intending to do them harm.
What will the police do then?
Probably tell us that it is an inconvenience and they really don’t care much about it.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: abuse, police, richmond virginia, rights, taxpayer
Loading ...
Loading...
