About Me

Name:Dan@Minuteman1
Email: minuteman1blog@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Democrats are committed to a weaker America

Just how many times can the Democrats continue to make themselves known for exactly what they are before people finally see that what motivates them is not what is best for our country, but what is best for them? They do and say everything they can to exaggerate the condition of our economy relying on their friends in the media to take their lead and kick the rhetoric up a notch. People need to realize that we no longer have a "free press" as most of us have to believe the term. The mainstream news outlets, which is still where the majority of us get our news, has become nothing more than the Pravda, all be it on a much larger scale, of the old Soviet Union. The sole purpose of today’s media is to circulate, disseminate, advocate and perpetuate the Democrat propaganda regarding every issue from the economy, drilling for oil here at home to the war on terror. I’m sure you’ve all noticed that ever since things took a more positive turn in Iraq, there’s been less and less information about the war in the papers and on the nightly news shows. What, do you suppose the reason for that might be? I’ll give you a little hint. Because the Democrats with their policy of appeasement were wrong and that is simply not something the biased media wants to dwell on. The Democrats thrive on defeatism and pessimism. If you listen to them you would think that we are living in the Depression Era. They are literally doing their best to trash our economy at every turn. Think I’m kidding?

The Office of Thrift Supervision, that regulates entities like IndyMac, says "the immediate cause" of IndyMac's collapse was Senator Chuck Schumer.

In a written statement, the Office of Thrift Supervision, which regulated IndyMac, said "the immediate cause" of the failure was statements made by Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat. Mr. Schumer in late June publicly raised concerns about the bank's solvency.
"Although this institution was already in distress, I am troubled by any interference in the regulatory process," said OTS Director John Reich.

The economy is teetering on the brink, as oil hits record highs and no relief, in the form of increased supply, is in sight. Astonishingly, the Democrats are determined to allow no energy legislation to pass the Congress. This morning, the New York Times reported that Nancy Pelosi has dug in her heels in opposition to gas price relief:

According to accounts from those present, Ms. Pelosi said that if Democrats relented on drilling, "then we might as well pack it up and go home."

So that's what the Democrats will do: pack up and go home, rather than try to bring relief to consumers and businesses staggering under the weight of record energy prices.

The inevitable result will be economic hardship. It's hard to avoid the inference that the Democrats want the economy to get worse, in the expectation that hardship will help their prospects in November. Who knows, they could be right. But it is hard to imagine a more cynical calculation. In Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, we have as cynical a political gang as has ever been assembled.

The Democrats know the worse off the economy gets the better off they’re chances are going to be to win elections. They feed off misery so, therefore they must create as much of it as they possibly can. What people should be doing is throwing these bums out of office, and certainly not considering electing one of them as our President. Americans are not by nature a pessimist bunch, so I just can’t understand why so many buy into the Democrat drivel about what a bunch of losers we are. Democrats love to run down their little laundry list of all the things that, as Americans, we "CAN’T" do. America is the originator of the "CAN DO" spirit. Look back throughout our history at the events that have taken place even against what should have been insurmountable odds, and we have always prevailed. There is nothing this country cannot do. But if you listen to the Democrats there is hardly anything we can do, or at least can do right. They are quite simply the most pathetic bunch I have ever seen and they represent a very serious threat to this country and it’s ability to continue to be that last best hope of Earth. There is no other country, nor has there ever been another country, like these Unites States of America. And if we are to survive then the reins of power must be wrestled away from the Democrats and kept out of their hands for the foreseeable future, or at least until they come to their senses and see the error of their ways!

Tags: Politics  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama as Commander-in-Chief, NOT!!

As a veteran of 24 years in the Navy, to hear Obama’s claims that he considers himself qualified to be Commander-in-Chief makes me want to puke. The shear arrogance of the man never ceases to amaze me. If there is any person out there that should not be Commander-in-Chief it’s Obama. Let’s face it, Liberal Democrats just don’t make good military advocates, it’s just not in them. They hate the military and everything it stands for, and then pretend to care so much about our men and women in uniform. Today’s Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines aren’t stupid. They are the best and brightest this country has to offer. Obama cannot earn the respect of those he hopes to lead by making empty promises and pushing idiotic social experiments such as once again attempting to push the gay agenda by allowing gays to serve in the military. His rhetoric continually proves how little respect he has for those who have chosen to fight to defend their country.

"Precisely because I have not served in uniform, I am somebody who strongly believes I have to earn the trust of men and women in uniform," Obama said in a July 2 interview with Military Times as he contrasted his lack of service with that of Republican presidential candidate John McCain, a Navy retiree and Vietnam veteran who has years of experience in Congress working on national security issues.

"I do not presume that from the day I am sworn in, every single service man or woman suddenly says, ‘This guy knows what he is doing,‘" said Obama, a freshman U.S. senator from Illinois, in his most extensive interview to date on a wide range of military issues.

Obama said he hopes the military community will see him as "a guy looking out for us and not someone trying to score cheap political points."

Military members and their families deserve better pay and benefits, he said, and although money might be hard to find for a generous increase, he supports increasing basic pay to keep up with inflation and private-sector salaries, and he believes housing allowances need to be increased so young service members and their families can afford adequate places to live.

He also wants to spend more to improve veterans’ health care and reduce the wait for a disability claim to be processed.

"I don’t know a higher priority than making sure that the men and women who are putting themselves in harm’s way, day in and day out, are getting decent pay and decent benefits — so that when they return home as veterans, they don’t have to wait six months to get benefits that they’ve earned, that they’re not winding up homeless on the streets, that they’re being screened for post-traumatic stress disorder, that if a spouse is widowed, the benefits are sufficiently generous," he said. "These are just basic requirements of a grateful nation."

Obama said he did not want to be more specific because he did not want to make promises he might not be able to keep. "I think we can do a much better job than we’re doing right now," he said. But, he added, "I want to be honest: We are going to be in a tight budget situation. We’re not going to be able to do everything all at once."

"I have always said that as commander in chief, I would seek the advice and counsel of our generals," Obama said. But, in the end, "it is the job of commander in chief to set the strategy."

A strategic factor in the decision to keep forces in Iraq includes, for him, a question about the risk of not having enough combat-ready forces for other operations.

"If we have only one battle-ready brigade outside the Iraq rotation to respond to other risks, that’s not good strategic planning by the commander in chief," he said. "If we have a situation in Afghanistan where we are seeing more and more violence in the eastern portion of Afghanistan, at a time when we’ve actually increased the forces down there and we’ve got some of the best battle-tested operations deployed there, and we’re still seeing increases in violence, what that tells me is that we’ve got real problems."

Obama said he believes he would be a far better commander in chief than McCain.

"I believe that I have a better grasp of where we need to take the country, and how we should use the power of ... not just our military, but all of our power in order to achieve American security," Obama said. "I think I have a better sense than he does of where we need to go in the future.

"As somebody who has worked on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on critical issues like nuclear proliferation ... as somebody who has traveled widely and grew up traveling around the world, I think I have a clear sense of the nature of both the transnational threats and challenges but also the opportunities that are going to determine our safety and security for the foreseeable future. And that’s why I think I can be an effective commander in chief," Obama said.

"There are times during the course of this war where I felt that the military was blamed for bad planning on the civilian side, and that, I think, is unfortunate," he said.

He acknowledged, however, that sometimes it is important to hold military leaders responsible for their actions.

Obama also spoke of rocking the boat. In what seems certain to be one of his more controversial proposals for the military, Obama said he wants to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.

Equity and fairness are part of the reason for lifting the ban on acknowledged homosexuals serving in the military, Obama said, but there are practical reasons, too — like getting "all hands on deck" when the nation needs people in uniform. "If we can’t field enough Arab linguists, we shouldn’t be preventing an Arab linguist from serving his or her country because of what they do in private," he said, referring to the 2006 discharge of about 60 linguists for violating the military’s "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy on service by homosexuals.

"I want to make sure that we are doing it in a thoughtful and principled way. But I do believe that at a time when we are short-handed, that everybody who is willing to lay down their lives on behalf of the United States and can do so effectively, can perform critical functions, should have the opportunity to do so."

Asked how he would deal with opposition from within the Pentagon, Obama smiled and said: "Well, I’m a pretty persuasive guy." But he acknowledged that pushing such a legal change through Congress would be more challenging.

"We have to distinguish whether there are functional barriers to doing this and are people prepared for the political heat."

Another potential boat-rocking issue involves the use of private military companies to do work once performed by uniformed troops. Obama said he would seek to limit military-related work in combat zones that is turned over to private contractors.

"There is room for private contractors to work in the mess hall providing basic supplies and doing some logistical work that might have been done in-house in the past," he said. "I am troubled by the use of private contractors when it comes to potential armed engagements. I think it puts our troops in harm’s way."

Obama also said he is troubled by the long-term effect of such a policy. "Over time, you are, I believe, eroding the core of our military’s relationship to the nation and how accountability is structured," he said. "I think you are privatizing something that is what essentially sets a nation-state apart, which is a monopoly on violence."
 
This guy as Commander-in-Chief would make Bill Clinton look good!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »