This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden

  • Anti-Obama video from Egypt

    According to our buddy, Gateway Pundit, this anti-Obama video made by some lady with tree trunks for legs and a voice like two cats with their tails tied together and slung over a tree branch is “wildly popular” in Egypt. Remember when we were told in 2008 that only Obama could restore the respect that the world had for us pre-9-11? Subtitle language warning. Screeching harpy warning (turn down your volume).

    So, I think we should all go burn down an embassy somewhere because of this video. Or maybe we should just act like civilized people in the 21st century.

  • MTFs cut services for furloughs

    The USAToday reports that military treatment facilities are cutting back their treatment of soldiers and their families because of furloughs;

    The Pentagon’s top medical official, Jonathan Woodson, assistant secretary of Defense for health affairs, called the cuts illogical and a significant threat.

    “We simply cannot continue to sustain the burdens placed on the military medical system if sequester remains the law of the land,” Woodson says. “The men and women who have fought tirelessly on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan … deserve much, much more than this.”

    Thomas said that by sending patients to a network of private doctors who contract with the government for services, the Pentagon will spend more money in order to compensate for the automatic spending cuts.

    “As we curtail … we will inevitably refer more care out to the network,” he says. “We’ll end up spending more money in the long run.”

    At Walter Reed, the primary care facility for troops wounded in Afghanistan, the number of operating rooms has been cut from 23 to 20 Monday through Thursday and to 10 on Friday, when most civilians take their weekly furlough day, according to a memo July 15 from Navy Capt. Philip Perdue, deputy chief of surgery.

    Of course, USAToday blames Congress, disregarding the fact that sequestration came out of a White House strategy session, also disregarding that the White House has threatened to veto a Defense budget because it doesn’t squeeze veterans enough, and threatens to veto any spending bill that contains any cuts to domestic spending. When Mitt Romney mentioned sequestration last year during the presidential debates, President Obama assured the American voters that sequestration “won’t happen”, yet here we are.

    While we’re at it, lets’ talk about millions of dollars spent on the recent trip to Africa, the millions that will be spent on the Obama family vacation later this month.

  • Hagel forecasts deep cuts in defense

    Remember the other day when we read at Fox News that the White House was not willing to discuss domestic spending cuts with Congress? Well, apparently, they’re not as reticent about implementing cuts to defense, according to Military.com;

    The Army would shrink to 380,000 troops, the Marines Corps to 150,000. The Navy would lose three carriers, and the Air Force would begin mothballing its B-52 bomber fleet under a worst-case budget scenario outlined Wednesday by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

    In addition, Tricare fees would go up, housing allowances would be slashed, pay raises would be scaled back, and commissary subsidies would be reduced, Hagel said — unless Congress and the White House can agree to lift the sequestration deficit-reduction process that is projected to take $500 billion out of defense budgets over the next 10 years.

    Yeah, it’s Congress fault because the White House won’t cut spending for buying votes from their constituency, but they’re fine with letting defense slide into a big black hole from which some future Conservative administration will have to dig us out.

  • CBC recommends Sheila Jackson Lee for DHS

    DSC_0010

    Yes, you read that right, the Congressional Black Caucus has recommended Sheila Jackson Lee to the President to fill the gap that will be left when Janet Napolitano leaves her post as the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, according to an article sent to us by ROS from the Washington Times;

    A letter dated July 25 and signed by Rep. Marcia Fudge, Ohio Democrat and caucus chairwoman, urges President Obama to consider Miss Jackson Lee for the position, calling the Democrat a “voice of reason” that the agency could stand to gain, the Houston Chronicle reported.

    “Representative Jackson Lee would serve as an effective DHS Secretary because she understands the importance of increasing border security and maintaining homeland security,” the letter reads.

    Yeah, because she thought her home planet, Mars, was where the Apollo mission left a flag, so she knows a lot about geography and borders and stuff. I think she complained because there weren’t any hurricanes with names of African-American women. Whatever that means. So she really has the important issues at the top of her agenda.

    Personally, I learned while living in DC, if a woman spent more time on her hair than she did in the gym, there’s some drama coming.

    By the way, the above photo is an actual TAH file photo. I took it when the IVAW was trying to convince Congress to defund the war in Iraq in 2008 – she was one of their greatest defenders, so yeah, she knows all about homeland security.

  • Obama won’t agree to Congress’ spending cuts

    Fox News reports that the President won’t agree to any budget that limits the government’s domestic spending nor will he negotiate with Congress’ proposals to cut spending;

    [Treasury Secretary Jack Lew] also said the president was not going to accept a budget in which domestic spending is further cut to soften the blow to Defense spending.

    “That’s unacceptable,” Lew, who appeared on three Sunday shows to re-enforce the president’s positions, told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “He won’t sign that.”

    Well, the president’s threats stand in stark contrast to his stance on raising healthcare costs on military retirees and reductions in military pay. He claims that he’ll veto any defense budget that doesn’t do both of those things, yet he’s immobile on domestic spending.

    And at the same time he says that he’s not going to balance the budget on the backs of veterans. So, I’m still wondering what all of my veteran friends out there who thought that Obama was good for veterans and defense have to say now.

  • Obama: The media tells me I’m smart

    This is from The Hill, I’ll write a little more after I stop laughing;

    “It’s interesting, in the run-up to this speech, a lot of reporters say that, well, Mr. President, these are all good ideas, but some of you’ve said before; some of them sound great, but you can’t get those through Congress. Republicans won’t agree with you,” Obama said.

    Obama argued some Republicans privately agree with a lot of his ideas.

    “I know because they’ve said so. But they worry they’ll face swift political retaliation for cooperating with me,” he said.

    Yeah, I wonder if these “reporters” will step up and identify themselves. For one thing, the only time I believe a reporter is when they write what I tell them to write (when they’re quoting me). Second, any “reporter” who would say that to the President obviously wants something. Third, most “reporters” can’t empty water from their shoes if the instructions were written on the sole. So what do they know about economics?

    I wouldn’t put a reporter on my résumé as a reference, I ceertainly wouldn’t use one as an authority for my economic plan. But, I’m not the president.

  • White House threatens to veto defense budget

    The Obama Administration is stomping it’s feet and holding it’s breath until it’s collective face turns blue because the Defense Budget doesn’t do what they want it to do – screw the troops and retirees, according to the Army Times;

    A veto of a $512.5 billion defense funding bill was threatened Monday by the White House budget office, not so much because of complaints about the level of defense spending but because the Obama administration doesn’t want military spending to rob money from other federal programs.

    Additionally, the White House complains the House version of the 2014 defense appropriations bill is too generous with military pay, not generous enough with pay for federal civilian workers, and doesn’t include administration-proposed cost-cutting measures such as base closing and raising Tricare health fees for military retirees.

    I’m sure there are things that could be cut out of the House bill, since it’s their practice to seed a bill with giveaways to certain Congressional districts, but instead of targeting those, the Administration is complaining about retiree health care and troops’ pay – mostly because there aren’t enough votes against them to have an impact. It’s easier to cut personnel costs than it is to tell a district they’re not getting any government-funded orders at the local defense manufacturer.

    The House bill, scheduled to be debated and passed this week, represents reduction of about $5.1 billion less than the pre-sequester defense budget for 2013 and is about $3.4 billion less than the Obama administration’s request. When sequestration is taken into account, the proposed budget is $28.1 billion more than current spending, according to the House Appropriations Committee.

    Also included in the bill is $85.8 billion for war-related contingency funds.

    War? What war?

  • Washington Post’s nation of victims

    The Washington Post‘s editorial board tries to influence the “stand your ground” discussion that’s going on in the country and of course they take the side of the criminals and criminalize the victim;

    Instead of requiring potential victims of crime to retreat if they have a safe escape route, these laws allow people to use deadly force without attempting to avoid a potentially lethal confrontation. They also often contain other generous protections for killers claiming self-defense.

    So the victims become “killers” in the space of two sentences.

    There is a reason that the duty to retreat is a concept respected by centuries of legal application. Setting a laxer standard encourages tragic mistakes, poor judgment and perhaps even vigilantism. A recent study from two Texas A&M University researchers found that “lowering the expected cost of lethal force causes there to be more of it.” Stand-your-ground states saw more homicides than their peers — about 600 more a year over the period they studied. One possible explanation is that stand-your-ground laws encourage people to escalate conflicts rather than withdraw.

    What about the criminals’ “duty to retreat”? I have no way to escape someone who has forcibly gained entrance to my residence because I can barely walk. So if a criminal doesn’t want to be shot, he should depart as soon as the Glock 30 comes off my night table, because it’s his duty to stop in the commission of his crime. I’m not going to shoot someone in the back who is making his escape from the ten rounds of .45 caliber ammunition. So, why is it my duty to retreat, something I’m physically incapable of doing anyway?

    Criminals have a duty to society to not commit their crimes, once they’ve violated their part of the social contract, they should expect whatever they’re dealt. And suppose that while I’m beating a hasty retreat, I get shot in the back? Do you think a criminal will respect my duty to retreat? They already broke into my house, so I’m sure they don’t want to leave witnesses to their crime. Who is going to protect my family when I’m laying bleeding on the floor after I fulfilled my duty to retreat?

    This is why we aren’t able to fight wars anymore, too. We’re supposed to be better than our enemies who kill us anytime, using any means necessary, but we have to play by our arbitrary rules, hoping the enemy will abide by the same rules after we’ve set the example for them. Of course, they never do, and our troops are put at a disadvantage which ends up costing lives and limbs. Remember after the Gulf War we had to stop destroying Iraqi equipment because we were being mean to the Iraqis. As soon as they made good their escape, they turned their weapons on their own unarmed minority groups while we stood and watched them do what we should have done to them.

    Now the left wants to turn us into a nation of victims by making it the law that we abandon our families and homes to the criminals hoping that those criminals will be better people for it. Every day we here at TAH post stories about folks who rescued their families from violent criminals by standing their ground and refusing to be victims.

    Yes, more criminals are killed than victims, why is the Washington post and the Obama Administration so convinced that is a bad thing?