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

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden

  • Fighting on My Behalf?

    Barack Obama is in favor of gay marriage. This week. Who knows how his position may evolve once he’s cashed all those Hollywood and entertainment industry checks that are now pouring in due to our president’s adoption of a new wide stance. If all those in the gay, lesbian, blah, blah, blah society think they have this guy in their pocket, they’d better count their fingers before they think they’ve won this fight. Based upon what Barack Obama has so often done to those who are no longer useful to him, they may spend the next four years politically flattened out on the road to sexual liberation, covered with massive tire treads. The possibility exists of roadside IED’s.

    But for now, Obama’s for gay marriage and based on details in his announcement, that includes our military. Now that, folks, should provide for some interesting situations in base housing. How do you suppose the sergeants major and master sergeants and sergeants first class are all going to respond when a couple of gay specialists throw a wine and cheese tasting pool party at their quarters right in the midst of enlisted housing, inviting all their civilian acquaintances from the local gay bars and bath houses? One who has served can only imagine the response, worse even for gay lieutenants in officers’ housing.
    But for now, we must understand that Barack Obama is taking this courageous wide stance for all those gay people in the military who are out there fighting on his behalf. Three immediate questions come to mind: First, is it only the gay military folks who are fighting on his behalf? Second, if it’s all our troops fighting on his behalf, does that now mean they are no longer serving the nation at large? Has, under the imperious Obama administration, the United States military become some sort of Praetorian Guard, whose allegiances belong only to Dear Leader? The third and most important question is this: When you take away his teleprompter, just how big a fumbling fool is this demonstratively failed product of affirmative action?

    Good grief, even the rawest buck sergeant knows that his troops are first loyal to themselves, meaning the immediate, cohesive unit, starting with their squad, moving up through platoon and company to a tenuous battalion loyalty; then to the mission, and as a distant last, to flag and country. In six years of active duty in the Army, most of one of those in ground combat, I never once heard a soldier express the belief that he was serving on behalf of John Kennedy or Lyndon Johnson, the presidents of the time. Not once. Had any trooper done so, he would have immediately become suspect by his entire chain of command. For this inept commander in chief to reference the troops as fighting on his behalf can only lead to one conclusion:

    Obama’s been staring at his own image in the golf course pond for far too long and far too often.

  • GOP moves to spare defense, Democrats whine

    Fox News reports that the House Republicans are finally stirring their lazy asses to spare the Defense Department from shouldering the entire burden of the $1/2 trillion in cuts they’ll endure because the super committee couldn’t be super last year. And of course, the Republicans are targeting “entitlements” – you know the same kind of things that veterans are expected to take in the ass from the Defense Department’s Panetta Hatchet Brigade. And just as expected, the Democrats are popping smoke to protect their constituency;

    “They have a totally lopsided approach,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., accusing Republicans of protecting special interests at the expense of the poor. “The result is they whack everybody else.”

    So I guess now veterans are a “special interest group” and the Democrats want to pit us against the people who are expecting their benefits having accomplished nothing except successfully navigating the birth canal.

    And the White House has issued a veto threat over the Republican bill.

    An administration statement released Wednesday evening said the bill “would impose deep budget cuts that cost jobs and hurt middle-class and vulnerable Americans.”

    But, what about the ‘deep budget cuts” in our defense budget in a time of war? Not to mention the veterans who are subjected to increased costs on fixed incomes so someone who hasn’t worked a day in their lives can afford their cable bill for their big screen TV? Of course, having not seen anything from the Republicans, I have no doubt that they’re willing to subject veterans to those increases anyway – the difference being that I don’t hear anyone coming to our defense like that shrieking moron Van Hollen is rushing to the defense of welfare checks and food stamps.

  • On whose behalf?

    I read this earlier today, but i wanted to think about it for a bit, but the Weekly Standard quoted the president during an interview with ABC yesterday, which the media tells me to think was a “watershed moment” in American history when the President decided to come out of the closet and declare that, suddenly he’s all for gay marriage, after saying since before the 2008 election that he wasn’t so much. But, it’s the way he framed his sashay out of the closet that sticks in my craw. here, you read it;

    “I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I talked to friends and family and neighbors, when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together; when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.”

    Now, why would he want to drag the troops into a discussion that has little to do with them? How many gays are the service who want to marry some-damn-body? There certainly aren’t legions of them, but it’s like the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was supposed to solve our non-existent manpower problems in the military, they need victims and bloody shirts to wave in our faces. Yeah, someone will trot out a few as examples, but seriously, how many can there really be? 10? 20? Even a hundred would be statistically insignificant.

    But let’s get to the most egregious part of that quote; “…those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf….” I remember that my oath of enlistment said something about defending the Constitution, not any particular politician, and certainly not the President. This isn’t a “…for King and Country” kind of nation. Now I swore that I would follow the orders of my superiors, but there was nothing in the oath about fighting on anyone’s behalf. Unless he considers their salaries a “commutation fee” for them to fight in his place.

    But, in my opinion, it was just a way for him to remind the country that he’s commander-in-chief and to stand on the broad shoulders of our fighting forces to campaign for office. I’m pretty sure they don’t like being dragged into this campaign, whether it’s by Obama or Ron Paul, especially when it’s on the gay marriage question. Just like abortion in this country, the Defense of Marriage Act is law, whether you agree with it or not, and unless they want to mount a campaign in Congress to change the law, it doesn’t really matter what the President thinks about it. But the last thing the President and Commander-in-Chief should be doing is dragging the troops into the discussion to illustrate an ill-considered point.

  • Hypocrisy thy name is Richard Klass

    Daniel sent us a link from Huffington Post written by retired Air Force Colonel about the video we discussed the other day from Veterans For A Strong America. Daniel tells us that the Rhodes scholar, Col. Klass, can’t read apparently because while trying to link to Veterans For A Strong America, he instead, while quoting from the wrong website links to Veterans 4 A Strong America.

    Yeah, I see the similarity, and although Veterans 4 A Strong America popped up in my google search first, I went to the entry below it for the people who could spell “For”. But, then I’m not a Rhodes scholar, so that might explain my confusion to want to get things right.

    But I also read Klass’ article and his name sounded familiar, so I checked our archives and it turns out that TSO tore him up in the last presidential election for the same things he’s complaining about Veterans For A Strong America.

    Links to TSO’s work are here, here and here. Maybe when he gets back next week, he’ll take up the Klass banner again.

    Apparently, Klass hid the fact that he was chairman of “Vets For Obama” while he was proselytizing on Huffington Post. And when TSO emailed him about his disingenuous misrepresentation, Klass quoted from the IAVA scorecard to explain his support for Obama. And he supported Murtha.

    So, he’s a turd, and it looks like he plans on being a turd through this election year, too.

  • Texas inmate closes in on Obama in WV primary

    Yeah, even my Democrat neighbors don’t like Obama, apparently. A guy serving a term in prison, Keith Judd, in Texas won 40% of West Virginians’ votes in yesterday’s Democrat primary according to UK’s Daily Mail;

    Judd is housed at the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) in Texarkana, a low-security facility for male prisoners. It is located in northeast Texas near the Arkansas border, 175 miles east of Dallas.

    Attracting at least 15 per cent of the vote would normally qualify a candidate for a delegate to the Democratic National Convention.

    But state Democratic Party Executive Director Derek Scarbro said no one has filed to be a delegate for Judd.

    Yeah, I know, it’s West Virginia and it’s not an indicator of a national trend. My neighbors are generally dumber than a post (they think I reverse-engineer alien technology for our missile program), but they’re also scared that someone is going to come for their guns. My weapons training class last year was like an Obama hate fest. We’re only five electoral votes, but I’m pretty confident that they’ll all go to Romney.

    But I might be voting for a Democrat for the first time since Jimmy Carter for a national office. I’m pretty happy with Joe Manchin, somewhat. He introduced the National CCW bill to the Senate which probably has about as much chance as me running for Manchin’s seat. We’ll see.

  • Bite Me; Iran is Bush’s fault

    I swear, I’m going to miss that bumbling imbecile, Joe Biden, when he’s gone in January. But yesterday, he blamed the Bush Administration for Iran’s nuclear program, according to Fox News;

    “By going the extra diplomatic mile, presenting Iran with a clear choice, we demonstrated to the region and the world that Iran is the problem, not the United States,” Biden said at the Rabbinical Assembly’s annual convention in Atlanta.

    “When we took office, let me remind you, there was virtually no international pressure on Iran,” Biden continued. “We were the problem, we were diplomatically isolated in the world, in the region, in Europe. We were neither fully respected by our friends nor feared by our opponents. Today it is starkly, starkly different.”

    So, yeah, the Iranians really fear us now, huh? That’s why they’re cloning our drones and they’ve all but ceased work on their nuclear program. They’re smuggling formed explosive projectiles into Afghanistan, smuggling rockets into Lebanon and Palestine and there’s evidence that they’re training Taliban in Pakistan. So, yeah they’re shaking in their boots.

    And, how did all of that pressure from allies work out? Well the international community says that the inspections they foisted on Iran have failed.

    A visit by international nuclear inspectors to Iran ended in failure Tuesday. Tehran not only blocked access to a site the inspectors believe could have been used for tests on how to produce a nuclear weapon, they reported, but it also refused to agree to a process for resolving questions about other “possible military dimensions” to its nuclear program.

    And the Washington Post reports that Iran has stepped up it’s development of enriched uranium;

    IAEA officials who visited Iran’s main uranium processing plant near the city of Natanz confirmed that Iran is operating more advanced centrifuge machines for making enriched uranium.

    But, since Biden was the first decision that Obama made in his presidential career, Obama should be fired for that decision alone. How does hiring the biggest dunce on the planet do anyone any good?

  • Mukasey; Panetta had a “highly lawyered” memo to protect Obama if the raid had failed

    Chief Tango sends us a link to the Daily Caller which reports from the Hannity Show that former U.S. Attorney Michael Mukasey reveals that Leon Panetta, then CIA director, had a memo drafted that would have absolved the President of any blame if the bin Laden raid had failed for some reason;

    “There was a memo from Leon Panetta that described the authority that was given to McCraven,” Mukasey explained. “And it was to proceed according to the risks, only according to the risks that had been outlined to the president. And if he encountered anything else, he had to check back. And you better believe that if anything else had been encountered and the mission had failed, then the blame would have fallen on McCraven. That’s what that’s about.”

    Remember the note that Eisenhower drafted before the D-Day invasion, the one in which he took complete blame for what might be a failure? That’s because that’s what a real leader does.

    On top of that revelation, our buddy, Aunty Brat has the story of an actual Navy SEAL’s open letter to the President asking him to stop taking credit for the operation. You should read it.

  • Swiftboating SEALs

    A few of you sent me the video last week from Veterans For A Strong America, but Blackfive beat us to getting it up, so I didn’t bother since most of you go over there, anyway. But apparently the video has had it’s desired effect. The Obama Administration is backing away from taking credit for the bin Laden raid. First here’s the video, in case you forgot;

    I watched the Leftists blow up over the video, first at Mother Jones with that pretend veteran, Adam Weinstein who wrote “Meet the Astroturfer Planning to Swift Boat Obama“. Weinstein also has changed his profile picture over there to show him in his dixie cup, so we all know he’s a veteran, because you can’t tell by the way he throws veterans under the bus;

    It’s impossible to know how many of America’s 22 million veterans are actually represented by VFSA’s political activities. “We don’t pretend to speak for all veterans,” Arends says. There is no doubt that Arends, a decorated Iraq War vet and longtime Army Reserve and National Guard member, cares deeply about his comrades in arms. But there’s little evidence that VFSA is more than a dark-money group with connections to the Republican Party, the tea party group Americans for Prosperity, and Islamophobic activists.

    Yeah, when I asked him why he wasn’t concerned about the “dark money” at IAVA and VoteVets, Weinstein started calling me names, so I guess that’s not as important as Obama opponents.

    Think Progress also calls the video “Swiftboating”; What Everyone Should Know About The Secretive Group Trying To Swift Boat Barack Obama, but of course, you can’t “swiftboat” someone who has no military service, can you?

    Think Progress’ huge revelation is that Joel Arends was also a member of that subversive “dark money” organization “Vets For Freedom”…GASP!!! Um, TSO is one of the founders of VFF – does he look rich from all of that dark money?

    Yeah, “Swiftboating” as used against the Kerry campaign, means outing a lying little prick about their military service, and it brings out some strong feelings on both sides…mostly because Americans believed veterans who spoke out against Kerry, and the Left is sorely afraid that it will happen again, so ABC is reporting, in a link sent to us by Tman, that the Obama Administration is toning down the smack they were talking last week;

    A backlash against President Obama’s politicization of the killing of Osama bin Laden may be having an effect on how the president and his campaign advisers refer to the accomplishment.

    Namely – the president taking first-person credit last week has turned into expressions of collective achievement this week.

    “Our greatest enemy brought to justice by our greatest heroes,” says the narrator in a new Obama campaign TV ad released today.

    The president’s top campaign adviser, David Axelrod , used similar language on a conference call with reporters: “We’re proud of our service people and all they’ve accomplished.”

    Yeah, too late, gumball.