Monthly Archives: December 2012

The Benghazi Cover Up

Posted on by
Reply

On September 11, 2012, the eleventh anniversary of 9-11, two U.S. government facilities in Benghazi, Libya came under attack. This preplanned attack, carried out by Islamic terrorists, resulted in the murder of U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans: Sean Smith, a Foreign Service information officer, and Tyrone S. Woods and Glen A. Doherty, two former Navy SEALs working as security personnel at our consulate.

According to the bi-partisan report released yesterday by the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,

“Senior officials from the IC (Intelligence Community), the Department of State, and the FBI who participated in briefings and interviews with the Committee said they believed the attack on the mission facility in Benghazi to be a terrorist attack immediately or almost immediately after it occurred.”

Furthermore, the Senate report states that, “there was never any doubt among key officials, including officials in the IC and the Department of State, that the attack in Benghazi was an act of terrorism.”

So why did Administration officials, Susan Rice, Jay Carney, Hillary Clinton and even President Obama himself mislead the American people to believe that the murder of four Americans in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9-11 was merely the result of a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Mohammed video? Only a naïve person would ask such a question.

The Senate report demonstrates facts that show the Obama Administration did not adequately protect our brave public servants in Benghazi from terrorist threats even though there were clear warnings that our consulate was in great danger. The Administration allowed a dangerous situation to get out of hand and then it got caught with its hands down. As a result four Americans were needlessly murdered by Islamic extremists.

At the time the Obama campaign was trumpeting the false narrative that our tough-as- nails commander-in-chief had nearly eradicated the terrorist threat by focusing the country’s attention on the killing of Bin Laden. The murder of our people in Benghazi threatened that narrative and jeopardized the re-election of President Obama. Therefore, instead of telling the American people the truth, the Obama spin team went into damage control. After all, there was a campaign to be won.

Here is what U.S. ambassador Susan Rice said on national TV while a guest on ABC’s This Week on September 16th, a full five days after the attack,

“First of all, let’s be clear about what transpired here. What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region was a result, a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the U.S. government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting.”

If high-ranking officials in the Obama Administration knew almost immediately that terrorists were involved in the murder of four Americans at Benghazi then why was our ambassador Susan Rice giving the American people a different version of events? There can be only one explanation. It was decided by Team Obama that the inconvenient truth behind the murder of four American public servants in Benghazi by Islamic extremists had to be suppressed.

The truth about Benghazi was trumped by Obama’s need to get re-elected. The ugly reality of the Benghazi affair is that when Team Obama was faced with a choice, it put its own needs ahead of the interests of the American people. Hail to the Chief!

P.S. – OK. So the Administration hid the truth from the American people. Some rationalize this by saying, “Obama is my guy” or “it’s no big deal – happens all the time.” I say, when our national security is at stake, when there are Islamic extremists plotting the destruction of America – then it is a big deal. If our political leaders allow the American people to become complacent for any reason it will increase the likelihood of another murderous, 9-11-like attack on American lives.

An American

Think About It!

Posted on by
Reply

Where you find the laws most numerous, there you will find also the greatest injustice.
–Arcesilaus

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
–Aesop (620 BC – 560 BC)

No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted.
–Aesop, The Lion and the Mouse

What an absurd thing it is to pass over all the valuable parts of a man, and fix our attention on his infirmities.
–Joseph Addison

Content thyself to be obscurely good. When vice prevails, and impious men bear sway, the post of honor is a private station.
–Joseph Addison, Cato

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
–Lord Acton, Lecture, February 26, 1877

When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
–Edmund Burke (1729 – 1797) Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents

A man who works beyond the surface of things, though he may be wrong himself, yet he clears the way for others and may make even his errors subservient to the cause of truth.
–Edmund Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry Into The Sublime and Beautiful

When ancient opinions and rules of life are taken away, the loss cannot possibly be estimated. From that moment we have no compass to govern us; nor can we know distinctly to what port we steer.
–Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France

You can observe a lot just by watching.
–Yogi Berra, US baseball player, coach, manager, businessman, Berra’s Law

A smile is the shortest distance between two people.
— Victor Borge (1909-2000), Classical pianist, entertainer, comedian

A love for tradition has never weakened a nation, indeed it has strengthened nations in their hour of peril.
–Sir Winston Churchill Sir Winston Churchill (1874 – 1965), British politician

All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.
–Sir Winston Churchill

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.
–Sir Winston Churchill

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.
–Sir Winston Churchill

Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm.
–Sir Winston Churchill

Happy Chanukah !

Posted on by
Reply

I would like to take this opportunity to wish all of my Jewish friends and relatives a Happy Chanukah. We may not always agree on matters of state, but we have never let our opinions get in the way of our love and respect for one another. One thing I think we all agree upon however, is the fact that we are blessed to live in a country where there is religious freedom; where Jews, Christians and people of all faiths are able to live and work together side by side in relative peace. Unfortunately, this blessing is not shared equally among the nations of the earth. So how is it that we Americans have been blessed in this way and how do we preserve what we have?

I would like to share with you an excerpt from a letter written by one of my personal heroes (yes, I still do have heroes).  These words were written in 1790 in response to the kind words expressed by the Congregation Yeshuat Israel of Newport, Rhode Island:

“The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy—a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship.”

“It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”

“May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants—while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.”

G. Washington

Myth as Distraction

Posted on by
Reply

Marc Lamont Hill, an Associate Professor at Teachers College, Columbia University recently said on the O’Reilly Factor that “Right now the wrong people are paying taxes, so a wealth tax would target people who may not have a ton of income but have substantial wealth….that would probably make the tax burden of most Americans lower.” Mr. Hill, Paul Krugman, Warren Buffet and many other folks have been perpetuating the myth that the selfishly rich have rigged the system by transferring the tax burden from themselves to the middle class and the poor. I will leave it to the reader to judge whether they are simply misinformed or if they are up to something else.

The following tax statistics were gathered directly from the IRS’ own website, so no spin from me here. They are for 2009, the most recent year with available data. The facts show that the top 1% of earners, who on average had an adjusted gross income of $960,000, paid 37% of all federal income taxes. The top 5% of earners paid 59% of all federal income taxes. The top 10% of earners, who averaged $245,000 in earnings, paid 70% of all federal income taxes. The top 25% of earners paid 87% of all federal income taxes, and the top 50% of earners paid 98% of all federal income taxes. In contrast, the bottom 50% of wage earners paid only 2% of all federal income taxes. (Source: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/09inratesnap.pdf ).

These figures speak for themselves and prove that the popular claim that the “wrong people” (meaning the poor and middle class) pay the bulk of federal taxes or that the rich do not pay their “fair share” is just utterly ridiculous. The people perpetuating this myth should be embarrassed. As a wise lawyer once said, “facts are stubborn things.”

This brings me around to the real issue. The U.S. government is heading towards financial bankruptcy. When countries like Japan and China stop lending us money because they decide we are a bad risk the U. S. Treasury will stop sending out checks every month and there will be enormous human suffering in this country. The problem cannot be solved by raising taxes on “rich people.” The problem is spending. We must reduce federal spending. That is the only answer. That means everything must be cut. If we don’t reduce the size and scope of the federal government the coming fiscal implosion will make the financial crisis of 2008 seem like small peanuts.

(Note: If you are one of those people who thinks that all Federal spending is essential, you are not paying attention. Washington wastes a lot of taxpayer money. We’ll give you several examples in a future post.)

Canutus

Geithner’s Chutzpah

Posted on by
Reply

Today on CNBC’s Closing Bell, US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said, “What we’re trying to do is put in place a comprehensive, balanced set of fiscal reforms that put us back on the path of living within our means.” My reaction: Oh my God – WHAT CHUTZPAH !

Is there an honest person out there who seriously believes that Timothy Geithner and the Obama administration have been working to make the federal government live within its means? These rascal politicians say the most outrageous things. Geithner is the same guy who said publicly on November 19th that Congress should eliminate the federal debt ceiling, which sets a limit on borrowing. (Reminder: The U.S. Treasury already owes over $16 trillion in debt).

So which is it Mr. Geithner, do you want unlimited borrowing power to feed the beast or do you want the federal government to live within its means? Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth. You are an embarrassment to all good and honest people. And if you had an honest boss, he would fire you.

Canutus

Subverting the Constitution

Posted on by
Reply

Should the U.S. Constitution be considered a “living, breathing” document?

There is a group called People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals or PETA. You may have heard of them. Last year PETA filed a lawsuit that, if successful, would have given new powers to the 13th Amendment that were never intended by its authors. They argued that the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which abolished the enslavement of human beings in the U.S., applies to animals as well. PETA’s argument was a gross misrepresentation of an important law. Their specific claim was that SeaWorld was in violation of the 13th Amendment because it was holding wild orca whales in captivity. PETA wanted to use the 13th Amendment to force SeaWorld to return the orcas back to their natural habitat.

Section one of the 13th Amendment reads: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

What perceived flaw in the wording of the 13th Amendment encouraged PETA to file this lawsuit? Jeffrey Kerr, PETA’s lawyer, argued that the text of the 13th Amendment does not specify who or what is a slave. Although he is right about that, it is disingenuous for Kerr to deny that the authors and original supporters of the 13th Amendment understood it to apply to anything other than human beings.

When commenting about PETA’s lawsuit on TV Kerr argued that there are two equally valid ways to interpret the Constitution. The first way to interpret it is to assign to it the meaning its authors assigned to it. The second way to interpret the meaning of the Constitution, Kerr argued, is to give it the meaning that he desires to give to it. He is dead wrong on this second count. The consequence of viewing the law this way is that laws can be twisted to mean anything and thus will come to mean nothing.

Those like Kerr, who act on the claim that the Constitution is a “living” or “breathing” document are trying to undermine the rule of law. For them, the rule of law is flexible, it exists only so that it can be molded and shaped to fit their purposes. If those who share Kerr’s views, and they are numerous, are successful, it will eventually lead to chaos and anarchy in our society. So while PETA’s argument may seem silly and frivolous to us, the general idea behind it is dangerous. If we cherish the relative peace and prosperity we enjoy in this country, then we have our laws and our Constitution to thank. But when we allow those laws to be twisted to mean things they do not, we will begin to see the ruin of our nation.

Thankfully, this time, PETA’s lawsuit was thrown out of court. But this fight between those who believe that our laws and Constitution should be ignored or twisted to fit their agendas and those who do not will continue for a long time. For those of us who wish to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” we had better start teaching our children again about the meaning and importance of our founding documents and the ideas that made the founding of this great nation possible.

Frotho Canutus

“To avoid therefore the evils of inconstancy and versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have consecrated the state, that no man should approach to look into its defects or corruptions but with due caution; that he should never dream of beginning its reformation by its subversion.” – Edmund Burke: Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790.

Thoughts on Freedom

Posted on by
Reply

Bill of RightsMany Americans seem much confused about the intent and meaning of our founding documents. For example the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This expression of our right clearly states that the people, not a militia have the right to bear arms. It is because the people are guaranteed the right to defend themselves with arms that made militias possible. The militia was the people! Until the Second Amendment to the Constitution is amended or abolished by three-quarters of our 50 states, we the people will continue to have a constitutional right to bear arms. Don’t believe anyone who tells you otherwise.

Another thing the current generation seems confused about is the so-called “separation of church and state.” Some may be surprised to learn that his phrase does not appear in any of the founding documents or any law. The first amendment to the Constitution, however does address very clearly the issue of religion in relation to the federal government, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Therefore, if people in a community want to erect a Christmas crèche in their local town square, our Constitution does not prevent them from doing so. Erecting a Christmas tree or a menorah or any other religious symbol on public property is not Congressional establishment of religion. This notion that public displays of religion are unconstitutional is only believed by those who are misinformed about our laws or pushed by those attempting to either suppress or destroy the sacred beliefs held by others with whom they disagree. The good people of all faiths in this country need to understand that our constitutional right to “the free exercise” of religion is under attack. We need to stand up to this vocal minority of bossy troublemakers who show so much disdain for Constitutional law and who heap scorn upon our cherished traditions. If we don’t organize and stand up to them now the day will surely come when all sublime and beautiful religious traditions as well as some secular ones are forced into hiding. If we let that happen we will all be poorer for it. If you think me too focused on holiday traditions look at this issue from a broader perspective. This war on religion and tradition in our country is just one example of how our rights are being slowly chipped away. If we cherish our freedom, we must defend it wherever it is under attack.

I will leave you with an unrelated, random thought:

Why is it that President Bush was unfairly blamed by the media for the poor federal response to Hurricane Katrina, while President Obama gets a pass on Hurricane Sandy? Surely the people of New York and New Jersey have endured the same sufferings as the people of Louisiana.

Do the people in media, the great majority of whom are liberal, manipulate the thoughts and feelings of the people for their own political agenda?

Frotho Canutus