Author: Poetrooper

  • Obama Makes Joe Look Presidential

    Obama Makes Joe Look Presidential

    unclejoe

    This has been a bad year for Barack Obama, and it’s getting continually worse. It has become especially bad when he gets upstaged by the selfsame moron he selected to be his vice president as impeachment insurance. At a time when many of those who voted their hopes for this new messiah twice are beginning to understand the underlying problem of a legislative voting record exceptional only for its “present” votes, up on the stage leaps the Democratic Party’s clown prince, who, with a few fiery words, makes his boss look like a dithering, tongue-tied equivocator of the worst degree, unworthy of his center-stage position in world affairs.

    You gotta hand it to old Joe, an opportunistic pol to his very core: he saw an opportunity to enhance his 2016 presidential chances and jumped right on it. Joe may suffer from chronic hoof-in-mouth disease, but he’s assuredly better at reading the mood of the country than his wavering boss and his shadow.

    Never mind that Joe doesn’t mean a word of his defiant declaration. Like everything else about the guy, it’s all for the news cameras, the networks, and the next two years.

    But for a few hours of the news cycle, Ol’ Joe, the sleazy ol’ pro, has made President Pinocchio and that Persian-borne puppeteer who is finally demonstrating to the world that she is not fit to be the first female American president, which is how she surely views herself, show that they just don’t have the grassroots instincts of a pol who has managed to stay in the Senate for decades with no meaningful accomplishments. Nope, Joe’s a pro; they’re just Chicago community organizers writ large on a stage so expansive that it dwindles them to diplomatic and patriotic speechlessness.

    The growing danger for Obama/Jarrett here is that Ol’ Joe, their carefully planned impeachment insurance policy, may be self-canceling. If he fires up American ardor for military action that the commander of the chiefs is not prepared to satisfy, look out, Hillary. Hey, it’s football season, so look at it this way: the administration fullback just delivered one helluva crack-back block on his own quarterback. And that block is just one of many the fool tool with the ball is getting from all sides in a game he’s simply and honestly not up to playing.

    As everything seemingly heads downhill for this subject of the world’s greatest affirmative action experiment, it must be particularly grating to Obo to realize that compared to him, Joe Biden looks good.

    Perhaps even presidential…

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • In the End, This Turduck’s Still a Damned Chicken

    In a turbulent world – where we would hope that our commander-in-chief would show some strength in his dealings with the thugs around the world by boldly declaring some no-fly zones to those powers who are aggressively moving their troops to their advantage – we get zip. On the other hand, here in America, we find ourselves with a leading-from-the-rear president who faces no-fly zones created by his own desperate party flacks.

    Why would an American president be denied fly-into privileges within his own nation? Perhaps it can be attributed to the fact that this president has been declared persona non grata in several states, where his Democrat supporters are doing everything possible to disassociate themselves from this clearly incompetent loser, whom they and their Democrat party foisted on the American people twice in eight years.

    What an unprecedented embarrassment that is. The wonder-boy of hope and change, the Democrat Messiah, has become such an embarrassment before this nation and the entire world that Democrats in tough re-election races don’t want this fusion of a lame duck and a turkey anywhere near their turf. Shall we call him a TurDuckey?

    Some people swear turkeys can’t fly, but as someone who recently had a flock of wild turkeys erupt into flight immediately in front of my speeding convertible on a forest highway, I can attest that those birds can damn well get off the ground, thank goodness. But they did all appear to be gliding down to the ditch on the far side of the road. Much like our national leader, they are capable of lift-off for short distances, but then it’s all gliding, and usually rough landings.

    But getting back to the issue at hand, we must ask, “Can our national TurDuckey really fly?” And of course, with the world having watched our national TurDuckey fly from one Democrat fundraiser to another at taxpayer expense, the next question is, why can’t the TurDurkey fly in Arkansas? Or Louisiana? Or any of those other states, like North Carolina and West Virginia, where the TurDuckey party is facing tough election campaigns?

    If you clicked on that hyperlink above, then you know that the Cajun creation of a Turducken involves stuffing a chicken into a duck and then that composite into the cavity of a turkey. I’d say that pretty well sums up our current administration: a true, always vote present chicken stuffed into a no-duck-out job by the all those fool turkeys in his party.

    And after all that effort, the end result turns out to be nothing more than an overstuffed turkey. But wait a minute, because some out there are claiming that this concoction tastes more like lame duck. But then the more perceptive political epicures will say, “You may well take a chicken and stuff it into a lame duck and then stuff that composite into a turkey, but what the hell – in the end, when you get down into the center of the damned thing…

    “What you have left is still a damned chicken.”

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • Laying a Brave Officer to Rest

    Laying a Brave Officer to Rest

    officer-shooting-k-9

    I’ve written multiple articles here at American Thinker questioning the militarization of our local police forces that have mostly met with agreement from those commenting. Something’s not quite right with the way America’s police departments are interacting with the folks in the communities they police. I say mostly with agreement because those opinions have generated some angry rebuttals from the law enforcement community that all seem to agree, “I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about.”

    Well, let’s put all that aside for the moment to honor a fallen Oklahoma City police officer killed in the line of duty last week. Officer K-9 Kye responded to a burglary call with his handler, Sergeant Ryan Stark. Apparently the burglar was armed with a knife and when Officer Kye engaged him, the criminal thug stabbed officer Kye inflicting a fatal wound. Sgt. Stark responded in what I believe most of America will agree was a justifiable response and sent that cop-killer burglar to Hell with his sidearm.

    The response of the Oklahoma City Police Department to Officer Kye’s death is in a series of funeral photos posted at the Washington Times. Some of you may consider the ceremony a bit overdone considering Officer Kye’s canine status. I find it altogether proper and fitting. My condolences to Officer Kye’s fellow officers, especially to Sergeant Stark and his family, who were Officer Kye’s family as well.

    Brave Officer Kye, R.I.P.

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • Why Those Damned Masks?

    Why Those Damned Masks?

    police balaclava

    Among the many disturbing trends we are faced with in the introductory decades of this new century is one that leaves me, as a former proud warrior in service to the United States of America, cold to my core. What the hell is going on with the warrior class around the world when the folks they protect can no longer see their faces? Compare photos from previous wars and what is going on now; in those 40’s pics we don’t see our military personnel wearing obscuring balaclavas or scarf wraps. Nope, those men and women who fought the biggest war in the history of this planet shoved their mugs right up there in a defiant, “Get this, photog!”

    Today it’s not just our military forces covering up but our police forces and that’s where my concern becomes more than just apprehension, it begins to speak to me in a small voice in the back of my mind that America is, without even considering the consequences, surrendering a key aspect of its liberty in allowing those who police us to become faceless enforcers, cloaked in both physical and political anonymity so that any means of policing those police becomes terribly problematic, if not impossible.

    I have previously expressed my opposition to the alarming militarization of our domestic police forces, in particular their expanding use of heavily-armed and extremely aggressive SWAT teams for what was formerly the job of a single police officer, carrying only his sidearm, the much desired duty of serving warrants that went to those officers in favor. It was considered a cushy gig, almost entirely free of the risks of normal patrolling. Now doors are kicked in and rooms are swarmed by screaming men tossing flash grenades, men as heavily armed as any in our military, domestic copies of real soldiers who actually do engage in truly deadly house to house urban warfare where the enemy is equally well-armed and dangerous.

    But serving a warrant? Working a civil protest? C’mon, guys, we who have been there and done that in terms of armed combat can’t help but be unamused by young, gung-ho police officers who feel the need to inject this level of combativeness and authority, with all its deadly consequences, into policing the quiet communities where we reside. And this business of hiding your faces instills absolutely no confidence in the populace you police. If you truly represent what is right and lawful in our society then why the need to hide your faces?

    I know, the standard response is fear of retaliation. Well why don’t you substantiate that fear for us by going back through the history of policing in this country and point out to us all the instances of retaliation against a police officer and/or his family because he carried out his duties as a sworn officer? No doubt there are some, but my bet is that they are damned few because any potential retaliators full well understand that if they harm or kill a police officer, or particularly his family, they are marked, by every law enforcement agency from coast to coast, for obliteration: the lesson being, you don’t ever screw with cops or their loved ones

    OK, I understand we live in an era of anonymous terrorism; can we please not make the situation worse by cloaking our cops in anonymity so that they further build the level of unease in whom we, the populace, are to believe and trust actually are operating for our benefit?

    The recent upheaval in Ferguson, Missouri, has served at least one good purpose and that is that Americans are not happy with the storm trooper image of local police we were treated to in the television coverage. Millions of Americans are asking “Why all the damned combat uniforms and gear?” Why armored military vehicles when we’re only dealing with angry citizens who have absolutely no way of ever taking on an armored vehicle? And last but not least:

    Why those damned masks?

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • Can’t Bomb Them into Submission?

    Can’t Bomb Them into Submission?

    Operation ArcLight

    Says who? In 1965-66 I huddled at night inside my dug-in defensive perimeter and watched the flickering lightning of the explosions of Operation Arc Light, an aggressive use of American heavy bombing capabilities against the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese enemies we faced. The sky-lighting flashes accompanied seconds later by muted rumbles gave only the barest hint of the unbelievable violence being unleashed upon our enemy a few kilometers distant.

    Days later, our ground patrolling into the bombed areas gave us an awed appreciation of the power of America’s Air Forces. The former jungle terrain was a scorched and scarred moonscape with the only visible life being the green shoots pressing an inch or two upward to the tropical sunlight, testament to the eternal renewability of life.

    But those green sprigs were it. Every other thing in that landscape was dead. Irregularly spaced craters, several yards across and several feet deep depending on what the original topography had been, covered the area where the bombs had impacted. There was the occasional indication that humans had once been there, small bits and pieces of weaponry and the various metal accouterments of any infantry force, helmets, canteens, and so forth. Of human remains my patrols found none, at least none that were recognizable as such, nor did we find the remains of the indigenous animals like monkeys and water buffalo that we knew had lived there, possibly even tigers.

    No, all mammalian life had been obliterated, reduced to particles of flesh and bone no longer visible to the human eye, blown into oblivion by a storm of fire and concussion that can never be fully described because no scribe who might be in the center of such events could ever survive to record them. Descriptions are left to the few of us who went in on the ground to survey the results of a B-52 carpet bombing campaign. I will wager that every trooper from the 327th Airborne Infantry who took part in those patrols will, to this day, tell you how he thanked his Maker that our enemies possessed no weapon equal to our Buffalos.

    That’s a long preface to get to the premise of my piece about the issues challenging America and other Western democracies today. We are facing Muslim insurgencies throughout the areas where the teachings of Mohammed have poisoned millions of minds into believing that the only way they can survive is to dominate the world. Because America represents the biggest challenge to such a conquest, we are naturally their primary target, probably not a problem as long as we have the courage and the fortitude to deal with it over there rather than over here.

    In order to become a fully functional cohesive military threat, capable of seizing territory and holding it, these ragtag jihadi revolutionaries must assemble their military assets into a cohesive force capable of effective offensive operations that result in the seizure and occupation of the sovereign territories needed to make up their Islamic caliphate. As every marauding tyrant in history has known, it requires concentrations of forces in key positions to attack, overrun, and then hold that portion of the world you intend to make part of your empire. That rule is indelible; it doesn’t change, as America, with her mighty air and naval armadas, has so recently learned; you cannot hold geography without sufficient forces in place on the ground.

    But, America is not interested in seizing and holding any Middle Eastern geography; our goal is to deny that capability to others by not allowing them to build and assemble forces sufficient to be dominant. To the naysayers, military and civilian, who claim on television and in op-ed pieces that a determined and unrelenting, heavy bombing campaign can’t reduce any assembled forces of ISIS to rubble, I say, talk to infantry veterans of Vietnam who surveyed the results of B-52 strikes in that battleground.

    With the intelligence capabilities we have today we most assuredly can monitor ISIS activities to determine when and where they are marshaling their forces for a major assault. When our intel indicates they are engaged in that process, we allow them sufficient time to gather as many of their forces as possible before their planned assault and then we send in the BUFFs at that critical moment to turn their marshaling areas and massed forces into nothing more than many, many large, smoking holes in the sand filled with nothing but memories of the atomized, wannabee soldiers of Allah. I guarantee you that any ISIS members who come in post-raid to assess the damages will gain a fresh understanding of what the term terror must truly mean, like my fellow troopers and I did fifty years ago.

    Sadly, like so many other unused capabilities this great nation possesses, our heavy bombing assets will probably be kept on a tight leash by this dithering, incompetent loser in the White House that the Democrat party foisted on this nation and the world, an act of political treachery for which they should never be forgiven.

    Crossposted on American Thinker

  • Don’t Condemn Hostages Who Denounce America

    I had an epiphany, an awakening moment today, regarding the issue of those hostages held by jihadist organizations as pawns in this expanding war of militant Islam versus the rest of the world. Like millions of others, I was disgusted with the jihadi mindset that would stage an on- camera beheading of a young American reporter. But I was also disgusted with the tragedy that this courageous young reporter would in his final moments denounce his country.

    My first response to that was more disgust and even contempt that in his last living moments, this young man could not show the courage to refuse to be a spokesman for the ruthless fanatics who were about to saw his head from his body. From an articulate young reporter, could we not expect the brave words of an earlier era: “Give me liberty or give me death?” That I did not hear such patriotic bravado disappointed me, as it did millions of other Americans, who leaped to denounce the unfortunate young man who died gruesomely right before us.

    I was wrong – totally and completely wrong.

    It took a commenter on a website discussion of the matter to open my eyes and make me realize how thoughtlessly wrong I, and millions of others, had been regarding this young man’s courage. That commenter pointed out that the jihadi captors had an evil and diabolic way of preventing such dying testaments of loyalty: they simply staged fake decapitation events to determine if a hostage would attempt a dying moment of defiance with a declaration of love for their country.

    If a subject attempts to make his last words a defiant declaration of love of and loyalty to America, the jihadis do not kill him. Instead, they return him to their imprisonment and fiercely torture him for his defiance. That diabolical cleverness puts hostages into an entirely no-win position: they can be defiant before the video cameras and live to suffer more torture, or they can spout the jihadi propaganda and hope that their sadistic masters will not choose that moment to saw off their heads.

    These people are in a position beyond hope, and for that reason I and the rest of this country should not ever again condemn a jihadist hostage for his dying words. We should instead put ourselves in his most unfortunate place and make no moral judgment – until we ourselves have walked some pain-filled steps in those terrible shoes…

    I would hope that the parents of James Foley could read this and accept my apology for too hurriedly passing judgment on their son. I would further hope that all those others who may have possibly pre-judged young Foley would read this and tender their respects to the Foley family. While I may not countenance his judgment, I can never question his courage in going into that never-land where so many fear to tread.

    James Foley…R.I.P.

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • Just What Is an Unarmed Man?

    Much of black America and the liberal media are making a huge issue of the Ferguson shooting of an unarmed black man by a white police officer. We are being treated to endless live reports of rioting and looting, some of them detailing inflows of black and leftist agitators from around the country to keep the Ferguson opportunity hot and in full media focus. All of this comes out of a neighborhood shooting where, if the parties involved had their races reversed, the incident would have been merely local.

    But what amazes me is the justification for all this upheaval: that a white police officer shot an unarmed black youth. I’m a white man who many decades ago was a military policeman – one who had frequent encounters with unarmed young black soldiers who all too frequently vigorously resisted arrest. Except that they weren’t unarmed for the simple reason that they were young and strong and possessed quick fighting reflexes honed on the hard streets where they were raised. Quite often they were larger than me or my partner, who also quite often was black – not that this racial relationship often meant anything at all to the perps we were trying to detain. And once detained, their usual fate was that we took them back to Fort Campbell and released them in the parking lots of their barracks without filing charges. It was not our mission to bring young soldiers more grief; the lives of enlisted soldiers were already hard enough back in the late ’50s. What we did try to do was to save them from their own bad actions.

    But occasionally we did come upon a subject whose size and aggressive militancy required stronger measures, such as the judicious application of a nightstick. In those situations, did I ever fear for my life? Damned straight I did. Facing a much larger man, both in height and weight, who is determined not to be detained, you are praying that he’ll come to his senses and submit to arrest. Your gun is there at your side, but that is the last thing you want to introduce into such an encounter. But – and that is a very large but – that call is his.

    And that is where I have tried to place myself in that officer’s situation in Ferguson.

    The officer has a seriously damaged eye from a very hard, crushing shot from a very large fist. That indicates that the perp in this situation had the opportunity to throw at least one clearly damaging punch at the officer and effectively connect before the officer even could exit his vehicle. The severity of the damage to the officer’s eye and cheekbone indicates what could be expected from a sucker-punch from a 6’4” almost 300-pound assailant. And because I’ve been there and done that as a young man, there lies my problem with this media meme of the assailant being unarmed. The shoulders and arms of a 6’4” 300-pound man driving a large clinched fist render that fist a lethal weapon. Ask anyone who’s ever been on the receiving end of one. People are regularly beaten to death all around the world by such fists. Add to that the widespread availability of martial arts training in today’s society, and you can never be sure that any human you go up against doesn’t possess the ability to kill you with his bare hands, regardless of size.

    And that, folks, constitutes a deadly threat against one’s person, which in most states nowadays justifies a deadly, defensive counter-response, whether you be a civilian or a law enforcement officer. Confronted by such a threat from any person – black white, brown, whatever – I’m going to defend myself with whatever means I have. If that means is a handgun, then I will discharge that handgun into that large oncoming mass, and I will continue to discharge that handgun until that large threatening mass is no longer oncoming and is very decidedly unthreatening. If that means dead, so be it, no matter how many times his family assures me he was a “good boy.”

    Now, I ask you, what is not commonsense about that?

    So, those of you so quick to condemn this Ferguson police officer for shooting an unarmed man might want to put yourselves in that scenario and wonder just what you might do with an exceptionally large, very angry, violently threatening man charging toward you with unknown intentions – plus the certain ability, by virtue of his size, to do you grave injury, even to beat you to death with nothing more than his large, hard fists.

    Again I ask: just what is an unarmed man?

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • Obese and ‘oppressed’ in Ferguson

    One comfort America and the world can take away from the Ferguson, Missouri protests is that contrary to the alarms raised by the Left that the black underclasses are malnourished and downtrodden, the visual images of the protest marchers from Ferguson most assuredly put this liberal assertion to the lie. Watch those people pass by the news network cameras and one observation that leaps out at you is the unrelenting human tonnage lending its literal weight to that procession. America overall is overweight, no question, but what is on parade here appears to signal that obesity, ranging from exceptional to deadly, is an accepted cultural norm in the black community.

    To hear the media and the advocacy organizations, this is a segment of society suffering from the depredations of poverty imposed upon them by a racist white America. Viewing these protest processions, what we see is a segment of American society that clearly eats plenteously if not healthily. The only examples of malnutrition visible would appear to be the shirtless, juvenile males eager to parade their six-pack abs before the network cameras. The older males demonstrate the inevitable and ultimate loss of that vanity, a reality that overtakes us all, regardless of race.

    Survey any group of young white liberals and I’ll wager they would heartily agree that blacks in America are malnourished as an automatic extension of their overall poverty rate. It is a liberal trope that the black community in America is deprived of the basics of existence by a cold, conservative, uncaring white majority; we heartless conservatives are starving those poor black folks for no other reason than the pigment in their skins.

    And then you see the protest parade where obesity appears to be the near norm among the female marchers of all ages and the older males. Malnourishment, missed meals due to racism? The visual evidence before us says quite clearly that we are being fed a line of bull by the lefty activists. While we cannot conclude that these folks are eating particularly well, we can most assuredly conclude that they are indeed eating more than enough to sustain them, and for many of them, far more than that.

    Sufficient nutrition is the cornerstone of freedom; nothing comes before that human right because if you can’t eat, you have no reason to be concerned about the follow-on freedoms of speech, free expression, assembly and so forth. If you’re starving, no other concern of human existence matters.

    But when you, as a political movement, put your marchers on the road of protest and with an unusual number of them wobbling and jiggling their expanded waistlines, bosoms and buttocks as they pass the media cameras, you must accept the reality that a large number of your fellow citizens viewing those video accounts are going to naturally respond with a sense of disbelief that we, as a nation, are depriving them of basic nourishment, which then leads all of us to question all the other liberal tropes fed to them by America’s media.

    Crossposted at American Thinker