Friday, December 28, 2012

Congressman blasts Obama's decision to 'arm' extremists

Calls decision to give Muslim Brotherhood F-16s 'unwise'

by John Griffing / WND Exclusive

Congressman Ted Poe, R-Texas, says it is irresponsible for Barack Obama to be “arming” a country that may be aiming for the destruction of Israel with a shipment of 20 F-16 fighter jets.

“It is reckless and unwise for the U.S. to give F-16s to Egypt and its new president/dictator, controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood,” he told WND.

“This extremist group is notoriously anti-American and anti-Israel. The United States should not be arming a country ruled by a group that has the destruction of Israel in its charter.”

Poe’s comments fall in line with other critics of the move, confirmed recently by federal officials.

Florida Rep. Vern Buchanan said, “American tax dollars must not be used to aid and abet any dictatorial regime that stands with terrorists,” and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, said, “We should also be cautious about the arms we provide.”

Obama is proceeding with his plan to gift Egypt with 20 brand new F-16 fighter jets as part of a $450 million aid package promised to Egypt in 2010 when it was led by the U.S.-friendly Hosni Mubarak regime.

Now Egypt is governed by the openly hostile Muslim Brotherhood, which has called for the destruction of America and Israel. The new President Mohammed Morsi, head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, recently joined in a public prayer to the effect of “Oh Allah, destroy the Jews and their supporters. Oh Allah, disperse them, rend them asunder.”

Poe, a member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, wasn’t pleased. Nor was Gen. Jim Cash, the former director of NORAD, who believes Obama’s actions just plain wrong.

“In my opinion, continuing to support them financially through foreign aid is criminal. I say that to emphasize how I feel about providing any type of weapon system to them. We have an out-of-control government right now, and this will cost this nation greatly in the long run,” he told WND.

America in the past frequently has withdrawn promises of arms shipments when instability seems evident.

But the promised delivery is going ahead for Morsi, whose regime recently began talks with Iran and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is known for his virulent calls for the overthrow of the West and his pursuit of nuclear weapons.

He has said he wants to “wipe Israel off the face of the map” and that “We don’t shy away from declaring that Islam is ready to rule the world.”

Critics believe that by doing business with Ahmadinejad, Morsi has forfeited his right to military help from the U.S., most certainly Obama’s gift of 20 F-16s.

But Obama’s pursuit of his own plan falls on the heels of other situations where critics contend he has given aid to those who are not America’s friends.

Among those incidents:
  • Obama proposed granting civilian protections to Islamic terrorists.
  • Obama indirectly funneled $20 million to terrorist organization Hamas. Obama has publicly stated that the aims of Hamas are fine, so long as they are achieved “peacefully.”
  • Obama reneged on missile defense pledges to Eastern European allies in a leaked deal with the Russian Federation, and used British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip in the face of British.
  • Obama delayed investigation of the Fort Hood massacre for months, warning of “political theater,” and yet wasted no time classifying any domestic violence as the result of conservative opposition to his policies as “terrorist,” even having the DHS release reports to that effect.
  • Obama has sought cuts to the U.S. nuclear deterrent that would reduce deliverable warheads to 300, which could leave America critically exposed to possible nuclear attack.
  • Obama has begun announcing once secret U.S. missile tests and satellite launches.
  • Obama unilaterally ended a strategic practice called “calculated ambiguity,” considered crucial by defense insiders, publicizing the exact number of warheads in America’s arsenal.
  • Obama has pledged to “de-MIRV” all American ICBMs – dramatically reducing options if an exchange ever took place between the United States and Russia – as there were some 3,000 strategic targets listed in the former Soviet Union at the close of the last decade.
  • Obama has allowed Iran to acquire top secret U.S. drone technology. Drones have self-destruct capability and, as Dick Cheney pointed out, can alternatively be destroyed by U.S. fighter-jets from the air – preventing acquisition by U.S. enemies. Former NORAD Director Jim Cash, when contacted by WND, said he did not believe the drone acquisition to be accidental.
  • Obama has publicly stated that Iran has the right to attain “nuclear energy.”
  • Obama has sent guns to Mexican drug cartels, not for tracking purposes, but in an apparent move to transfer weapons across international borders.
  • Obama has proposed awarding medals to soldiers in Afghanistan for “restraint,” saying he wants to avoid words like “victory,” and announced his intent to give the Taliban (the organization that trained and equipped al-Qaida prior to 9/11), a formal role in Afghanistan.
  • Obama removed “jihadi” from the national security lexicon.
  • Obama is vocally critical of America’s “superpower” status.
  • Obama ordered the creation of a “citizen assassination” program, attends “kill committee” meetings for the same, all while advocating Miranda rights for foreign terrorists.
In addition to the list, which is not exhaustive, there are structural issues, like intelligence leaks earlier this year or the leak of the TSA playbook, which could conceivably enable American enemies to exploit weaknesses in current transportation infrastructure.

There are also the more philosophical issues that are thought by some to represent an inherent anti-American default position on the part of the president. The Muslim Prayer Day in 2009 is one such example.

Imams were permitted by Obama to hold a Muslim Prayer Day near White House premises in 2009, the same year Obama prohibited a similar Christian “Day of Prayer” despite the longstanding precedent for such gatherings. One of the speakers at the event is on record saying, “We are going to the White House, so that Islam will be victorious, Allah willing, and the White House will become … Muslim house.”

Similarly, Siraj Wihhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 WTC bombings, was invited to deliver the “Juma,” an Islamic prayer, at the 2012 Democratic National Convention. Wihhaj once remarked, “It is my duty and our duty as Muslims to replace the U.S. Constitution with the Quran.”

The invitation later was withdrawn after media coverage made the issue the focus of controversy.

Polls: NRA has higher favorable rating than Obama

By: Byron York / Beltway Confidential

A new Gallup poll shows that the National Rifle Association, the target of a wave of intensely negative news coverage after the Newtown, Connecticut school shootings, still has a favorable rating of 54 percent.  While down from the organization’s 60 percent favorable rating in 2005, that is still about a point higher than President Obama’s personal favorable rating.

A Huffington Post average of the president’s favorable ratings places it at 52.3 percent.  That average includes favorable ratings of 49 percent in a December 16 CBS News poll, 53 percent in a December 9 Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, and 56 percent in a November 18 CNN poll.

On the NRA, Gallup found that 83 percent of Republicans give the nation’s largest pro-gun organization a favorable rating.  Fifty-four percent of independents view the NRA favorably, and 36 percent of Democrats do so.

Gallup also found a difference between the public’s general favorable impression of the NRA and views on specific issues.  Only 35 percent of those surveyed said the NRA expresses their views on gun issues most or all of the time.  That means there is a significant part of the population that views the NRA favorably yet still disagrees with the organization from time to time.

Obama vs. America's Fiscal Health

By: David Limbaugh / Townhall Daily Columnist
Obama vs. America's Fiscal Health
The reason President Obama and Republicans can't come to an agreement on the fiscal cliff negotiations is that they don't share the same goals. This is also the key to understanding why President Obama appears far less worried about going over the cliff.

Republicans are focused on restoring the nation's financial health by promoting economic growth and reducing our horrendous deficits and debt. President Obama's primary aim is to complete his project of fundamentally transforming America.

I ask you loyal Democrats to please consider these things. Obama has demonstrated almost no concern for our crushing debt or deficits -- at least not since calling President George W. Bush unpatriotic for presiding over deficits and debt dramatically smaller than his own.

Obama's treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, showed a casual indifference to our debt when responding to questions from Rep. Paul Ryan during budget hearings. He flippantly admitted the administration had no long-term plan for bringing our debt under control and was unapologetic for having failed to submit any plan to restructure our entitlements.

When David Letterman asked Obama about the size of the national debt, Obama couldn't even make a guess. It seemed to be the furthest thing from his mind.

But Obama's cynicism about the debt doesn't change the fact that it is a looming national crisis. It's undeniable that our entitlement obligations are growing at an unsustainable pace and that our national debt and the annual mandatory interest payments on it are reaching alarming heights.

The budget debates essentially boil down to the Republicans' desire to return the nation to financial health vs. Obama's desire to use the government's taxing and spending powers as tools to remake America in his image rather than to facilitate economic growth or balance the budget.

Before you write off my comments as unfairly partisan, I ask you to ponder Obama's major negotiating demands. He is insistent, is he not, on increasing tax rates and reducing deductions for higher-income earners, even though it's an objective fact that Obama's plan to raise taxes on just a small percentage of Americans would not generate enough revenue to make a significant dent in our nation's deficits or debt. He has to be demanding this change, then, for other reasons. I can think of none, other than his idea of fairness, by which he means punishing the rich, even if it won't improve the economy or our fiscal picture.

Further, he has stubbornly resisted meaningful spending cuts and has absolutely continued to dig his heels in over GOP efforts to reform entitlements to avoid our nation's impending financial meltdown.

On top of all this, Obama wants $80 billion more in "stimulus" spending. Can you believe this? In budget negotiations that are supposed to be about fiscal sanity, he's wedded to yet more federal spending of money we don't have. Finally, he is demanding that Republicans surrender their authority to set limits on future spending through budget ceilings.

As you can see, Obama's goal of fundamentally remaking America happens to be nearly incompatible with economic growth and national solvency.

Don't you see? There is no way Obama can do what he was born to do -- remake America in his image -- unless he continues to implement the very policies that drove us toward this cliff in the first place. Obama's ideology compels him to keep spending borrowed money and increase growth-suppressing tax rates on the very people whose productivity is imperative for economic growth. Maybe Obama cares some about economic growth and our national deficits and debt. Maybe not. Either way, he's tied to policies that harm both.

Republicans, for their part, are trying to get our spending and entitlements under control and to keep tax rates no higher than they are, not to protect the rich -- although the last time I looked, the Constitution applies to them, too -- but to protect economic growth and foster liberty.

Contrary to Obama's class warfare propaganda, it is his own policies, not those of Republicans, that promote greed and envy, by keeping people worked up about how much the other guy is making rather than encouraging them to become productive members of society.

How convenient for Obama that he can advance his goal of redistributing income and assets by characterizing Republicans as people who care only about the rich, which is absurd on its face.

A national leader who believed in America's founding principles and who subscribed to promoting equal opportunity rather than equal outcomes would be encouraging people off the government dependency cycle and into productive jobs. He would be seeking long-term solutions to our national debt rather than downplaying the crisis and using class warfare to facilitate his goal of social engineering.

The question is not whether America will wake up but when.

Media Ushers in Cowardly New World
What a difference a few month makes.

Last month we were told by a fawning news media how great things were. The economy was a little engine that could.  And the declining unemployment rate was touted in headlines as significant progress toward economic recovery.

Unemployment rate falls to 7.8% in September, reported the Washington Post- a four-year low...”nearly”… whatever “nearly” means.

“The nation’s jobless rate dropped to its lowest point in nearly four years in September. And unlike some recent declines, this one happened for the right reason: not because people gave up looking for a job, but because far more people reported having one.”

Hurray! The exclamation points by the Post (!!!) were implied.

Unemployment year-over-year still has magically dropped from 8.7 percent to 7.7 percent, not withstanding September, because mostly people stopped looking for work.

But you wouldn’t have known it by press accounts this year.

Oh my! Not in an election year? Under Obama? The most transparent politician…EVER?

Now clear of the pressures of presidential election politics, the press story has changed just slightly and so unexpectedly.
“Of course, things aren’t THAT great.” There are still plenty of reasons, we’re told, to write Obama a big, fat blank check because the economy is very, very fragile. 

It’s almost as if- I don’t know- had the fiscal cliff not existed, politicians would have had to invent it to justify more deficit spending.

Because the unemployment rate for November, touted at 7.7 percent, is dropping once again, this time for the wrong reasons, just as it has throughout 2012.

But now the press is taking note.

“And economists noted that the unemployment rate would have risen if more people hadn’t stopped looking for work,” reports the Associated Press regarding the most recent unemployment report. “Once people without jobs stop looking for one, they’re no longer counted as unemployed.”

Oh, my! Where was this transparently opportunistic analysis during the election?

While there are around 2.5 million more people with jobs year over year, those jobs just cover new entrants into the labor market. Still there are 2.4 more people not counted in the labor force since last November.

How convenient for an administration bent on getting people to stop looking for work while needing the unemployment rate to go down. 

And, the reason of course for the shifting press coverage is so they can now make the argument that only the government, through the intervention of the holy spirit of Obama, can rescue us, assisted by the crucifixion of the rich, who must pay for our sins. 

There are now 350,000 fewer people in the labor force now than in October, reports the BLS . In addition, the labor participation rates have fallen another 0.2 percent, which is 542,000 more people not in the workforce since October, echoes the press eagerly. There are 122,000 fewer people with jobs, month over month. And since about 200,000 new people enter the workforce each month, it shouldn’t surprise us that under Obama, of course, the unemployment rate is going down while not adding actual jobs.          

Ok, here’s the point that the press, the Democrats and the GOP moderates won’t tell you America: Even if you solve the so-called fiscal cliff, Obama’s voodoo economic policies won’t work. They aren’t based on economic science. They are rigid ideology wrapped in the gift paper packaging of wishful and convenient thinking.

They aren’t so much socialist as they are the most logical extension decades of Keynesian thought. Obamanomics, in fact, are the culmination of 80 years of liberal thought from both the left and the right in this country.  

And with four more years of out-of-control government run by the same technocrats who got us into the mess, in December of 2016 you’ll wish then that you were as well off as you are today.

Obamanomics works so poorly that the typical ways that we measure economics can’t even adequately explain what’s going on in the economy. The old rules don’t apply anymore, because fiscal and monetary policies don’t conform to the economic realities facing the country.

These massive distortions can be seen in stock markets and supermarkets- and, as we see, in the unemployment rate, which is going down despite unemployment technically remaining unchanged.

Commodity prices, which should be much lower, have remained stubbornly high despite a worldwide economic slowdown; gold trades independently of the dollar on speculation regarding government policies; public benefits remain sacrosanct and celebrated even as they literally bankrupt public budgets; and Joe Biden remains a heartbeat away from being the most powerfully inappropriate man in the universe.     

We’ve entered a cowardly new world where every time someone gives up looking for work it helps drop the official unemployment rate, while simultaneously allowing Obama to shellac the rich.

It’s kind of like following a policy where a dollar’s value today is only worth 90 cents tomorrow. Who would do THAT on purpose? 

And it all took place in a few, short election months.

Think what a difference four more years will make.

A novel idea

By: Diane Sori
Here's a novel idea...maybe those in Congress and the POTUS should be paid as volunteers...NOTHING! 
After all they're supposed to be public servants...serving for the good of the country. Public service is NOT supposed to a career but an honor for a limited amount of time to give others who want it a chance to serve 'We the People' NOT us give them fat paychecks and perks from OUR taxpayer pockets.
And for those who say then only the wealthy can serve oh how wrong you are as most of the so-called wealthy career politicians got that way by being career politicians. The salary and perks are HUGE so that someone entering NOT wealthy becomes wealthy in a few short years. And if one is already wealthy they should NOT take a salary...that should be a rule along with term limits, after all this is volunteer work...NO one is forces anyone to do it.
The game is almost over and guess who loses
By: Diane Sori

OK...first let me say this one more time..there is NO such thing as a 'fiscal cliff''s just an extension of time 'to raise monies' for repayment of the IOUs we already owe to foreign countries helping to keep us solvent.

'To raise monies' in tax 'We the People' to cover the misplaced spending of a president who just doesn't get basic economics cannot spend more than you take it.

In reality, what has been going on in DC is nothing but a dog-and-pony show being played out with Obama and Boehner bantered back and forth over something that does NOT exist. Raising taxes does NOT a fiscal cliff make...raising taxes is a simple screwing of 'We the People' (again) so that we are the ones who pay for Obama's out of control spending.

So while Obama now is making a huge show of concern, phony of course, about the supposed fiscal cliff by cutting his yet another vacation short and flying back to DC to stick his nose into the last minute useless negotiations, Michelle and the girls get to stay in Hawaii living the good life until January 6th and all on our taxpayer dime.

Oh much for how he cares about OUR money.

Anyway, yesterday Prince Harry said there was little time to put together a deal to avoid the fiscal cliff and that no resolution was in sight. Like we didn't know that. And while Congress will be in full session by the end of the weekend, there really is NOTHING new to our taxes will increase come January 1st and this could very well send us back into recession and negatively affect global financial markets.

Adding to that is the fact that all this increase will do is cover eight and a half days of government out of control spending. For eight and a half days 'We the People' will be paying for God only knows how long.

And so Obama continues to try to convince us that a tax raise is needed so we don't go over the non-existent fiscal cliff but nothing could be further from the truth. Now this is important to remember about Obama's wanted tax increase so please listen up...when it's broken down, one-third of those taxes raised will be consumed by useless government bureaucracy, paper pushing if you will...another third will simply NOT be collected, as in you get collect what some simply do NOT have or some will find 'ways' to hide their true income...and lastly, and this is major, with two-thirds of every one's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the federal debt and by federal government contributions to transfer payments. 
In other words, all the monies raised by increasing our taxes will be gone before one bloody dime is spent on the services we taxpayers normally would expect from our government when they raise our taxes.
Bottom line...the new tax increases placed on 'We the People' will be used to pay down the interest on the debt we owe to other countries and NOTHING else...debt that Barack HUSSEIN Obama increases by the day with his wanton spending. Obama has set-up a fiat money system where no surplus can ever exist, where America is a nation mired in debt, and he has NO problem with that as his allegiance is NOT to this country.

So what's the best that can happen as we count down the days to January 1st...a patch job...a stalling of the inevitable...there will be NO last minute compromise that stops the tax increases and spending cuts (especially to the defense budget). The best 'We the People' can hope for is some temporary stop-gap measure that prevents the most painful tax increases and spending cuts that will impact the poor and middle class. 

I think Congressman Allen West sums up this entire phony fiscal cliff fiasco quite well when he says, “What the president is proposing is not pragmatic whatsoever and it really is a reflection of him, I suppose, living in some type of fantasy world”...“We’re telling the American people that they have to tighten their bootstraps, but we don’t seem to want to do that in Washington, D.C.”

NO truer words spoken...and so the game continues with 'We the People' the losers.

To a great General…


General Schwarzkopf was our Coalition Force Commander in Operation Desert Shield/Storm. He was a true warrior and not a political General. He helped restore our country’s pride in our military and removed the public specter that had loomed since Vietnam. The victory parade after the First Gulf War was as much for “Stormin’ Norman” and my brother’s generation who had served in those jungles than for us.

I will never forget when our Brigade Task Force, 2d Bde 1st Inf Div, under the Command of COL Tony Moreno was tasked to secure the Safwan Airfield for the surrender talks. I was a young Captain assigned to TF 2-16 Inf, part of 2Bde, as the Fire Support Officer. I and others strained to get a glimpse of the towering stature of the man, General Schwarzkopf. I remember, even though we were not close, when Gen Schwarzkopf turned our way, gave us a thumbs up, to which we stood tall and rendered salutes.

To a great General who led us to victory in what was our first combat operation, I offer a salute.

No mission too difficult, No sacrifice too great.

Duty First Sir!