Archive | FSP RSS feed for this section

Mark Caserta: Clinton presidency would put nation at risk

19 Aug

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot Editor

8.19.16

We are a nation of laws. Without them we would surely fall.

Take for example, our highway safety laws. A set of fairly universal laws regarding the privilege of driving have been set in place to protect us while traveling in our vehicles. A red light means stop. A green light means go. There are definitive right-of-ways established. You get my meaning.

Well, what happens if just one person refuses to follow these laws?

The governing laws of our land with regard to our nation’s leaders are no different. We have laws protecting information and guarding behaviors consequential to the safety of our nation and its citizens. And no person, indiscriminate of race, ethnicity, gender or stature can be above these laws.

And when these laws aren’t followed, it can be detrimental to our nation’s security and the safety of massive numbers of people.

And I submit that is precisely what Hillary Clinton has done.

The majority of Americans now believe Hillary is guilty of committing criminal acts compromising our national security, according to a recent ABC News poll.

Additionally, I believe she is essentially being granted immunity and illegal asylum within the confines of the Obama administration and liberal factions of major media sources, such as MSNBC, CNN and The New York Times.

During the recent House hearing on Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., a former prosecutor, grilled FBI Director James Comey regarding his findings of Hillary’s actions while Secretary of State.

Here is an excerpt of the exchange published by multiple news sources, including the New York Times.

You be the judge.

Gowdy: “Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails, either sent or received. Is that true?”

Comey: “That’s not true, there were a small number of portion markings on, I think, three of the documents.”

Gowdy: “Secretary Clinton said, ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email, there is no classified material.’ Was that true?”

Comey: “There was classified material emailed.”

Gowdy: “Secretary Clinton said she used just one device. Was that true?”

Comey: “She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as secretary of state.”

Gowdy: “Secretary Clinton said all work-related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?”

Comey: “No, we found work-related emails, thousands, that were not returned.”

So, has Hillary compromised our nation’s security?

A July column in the New York Times by David E. Sanger reports that while the FBI states it doesn’t have “direct” information that Hillary’s email account was hacked, cyber experts agree it’s indeed “likely.”

The implications of classified information and/or Clinton’s wrongdoings being privy to our enemies are vast in their scope. And we most likely wouldn’t know of it until “after” she became president.

By then, it would be too late.

Hillary’s disregard for our nation’s safety renders her unqualified to lead, much less become commander-in-chief.

A Hillary presidency places our nation and Americans at risk.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , ,

Doug Smith: The Clinton Coarsening

18 Aug

doug smith

 

 

 

 

Doug Smith: Author, historian and lead contributor to Free State Patriot

8.18.16

clinton 1

This is just one more example of the Clinton Effect on our society. It is a decidedly coarsening one. Bill Clinton testified under oath that he didn’t think a certain sexual act was truly sexual, and in the decades since the Clinton effect has made that a more common thing in our schools, as low as middle school, because “Bill Clinton said that s not really doing it”.

Not so long before Clinton, Gary Hart saw the end of his political career in a photo of his secretary sitting on his lap in a bathing suit. In the Clinton era, none of that seems to matter.

Clinton perjured himself. He was disbarred, but still gets hundreds of thousands for a speech, and millions for a no show job at a university. Lying, even under oath, is apparently now ok.

The net and long term result of the Clinton infection on the body politic and the society at large has been a coarser, less moral, less honest society. Standards have been pushed down to the level of “anything the Clintons do must be alright, because…”

Now there is the part I don’t quite put my arms around. Has the left in our society lowered standards for the Clintons because of their love for them, or are they simply the most blatant in pushing the limits downward? Perhaps the left prefers the lack of standards and a moral code, because they do not wish to be judged by any standard, so they let the Clintons take the lead in debauchery, dishonesty, avarice, and disregard for life. They defend them furiously, so they don t have to defend themselves. Then, once a Clinton has gotten away with it, it is forever ok for them. Perhaps that is the Clinton effect: a push of the left to eliminate all sense of morality and judgment in our society, so they can all live the life Libertine.

I confess I do not know the answer, although that one makes as much sense as any. I do know the Clinton effect has been a coarser, and worse place to live than before they came on the scene.

Donald Trump may be coarser in language and discourse, but he does not seem to lead the society into that direction. He says I am what I am, take me or leave me. Not so the Clintons. They say we are what we are. Love us. And follow us.

With Trump it is somewhat like having a large, boisterous dog that knocks things over in your house. With the Clintons, it is more like sleeping in a den of wolves, and wondering why you itch all the time and find you have a taste for sheep.

Trump is a unique phenomenon. I don’t expect to see another on the scene. But the Clintons want a dynasty. If Hillary is entitled to high office for putting up with Bill, then surely Chelsea is as well. She was entitled to a $ 600,000 starting salary at NBC.

Surely she is entitled to move her scamming, hedge fund husband into the White House someday.

clinton 2

Or perhaps. Just perhaps. We might say, a barbarian who is very good at war may win power, but ought not to drive the culture for generations. A coarse, uncultured lothario who is very good at politics may likewise win power, for a time. But should we let the vices of the Clintons drive our society for generations to come?

Perhaps it is time for a long corporate shower.

 

 

 

Tags: , , ,

Doug Smith: A brief history lesson, and a hard reality check

16 Aug

doug smith

 

 

 

 

 

Doug Smith:  Author, historian and lead contributor to Free State Patriot 

 

 

GTY_Clinton_Trump3_MEM_160808

 

So many people in this political cycle are opting for the magical approach. Donald Trump is, well, Donald, not your Daddy’s candidate. He has an irritating penchant for speaking directly from the mouth, sans the filters most of us put on our speech. He is not a comforting, traditional GOP candidate like President Dole, or President McCain, or even President Romney. (They didn’t? Really?) Without rehashing the septicemia of the Grand Old Party that has led in cascading sequence to The Tea Party, the Freedom Caucus, and The Donald, things just aren’t what they used to be.

There are a few approaches to this new and unsettling development in American politics.

  • Hold on tight. Don t worry, the folks will come back around when they realize that their GOP liars are better than the Democrat liars. A 20 year run of blatantly broken promises, ineffectual or non-existent opposition to Barack Obama’s ideas and decisions that are abhorrent to conservatives will fade if we just let the folks see how bad it is if liberal Democrats get the reins of power.

The problem with this approach is that the folks, after a while, get tired of being the butt of that awful joke, and wonder just what difference it really made when part of their party goes along to get along, a al McConnell, while part of it actively supports the lib/Dem agenda, a la McCain, Graham, and even wonder boy Rubio. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me for 20 years? Well, first you get the rebuke of the Tea Party. Then you get the rebuke of the Freedom Caucus, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee. Finally, you get the ”Up Yours” of Donald Trump.

  • The Magic approach. Well, magic worked in literature and everyone loved it. Wave a wand (unbind the delegates), speak magic words (Romney’s a Nice Guy! David French writes for NRO, wouldn’t HE be a great candidate.) And we can FIX this.

Well, the problems with that approach are numerous. Magic doesn’t work in the real world. (Sorry, but no Merlin, and no Harry Potter. An earlier generation was convinced that Sherlock Holmes was really solving crimes. Just a fantasy. ) Besides, coming up with a candidate acceptable to the Good Ole Boys network doesn’t change the reality that for all his ( Admitted!) faults, Trump got more people voting for him in the GOP primary than any previous candidate in history, including Lincoln and Reagan. You can fix attitudes and disappointment by putting in a pinch hitter. At this dance, we are “going to dance with the fella that brung ya. “

  • The White Knight. Somebody out there is so appealing to the folks that he can ride in, say, ok, I’m here    to save you, and the folks will dutifully swoon and fall in step behind him.

Well. If such a knight existed, why didn’t he run? We have to rule out the 16 who did run, because a plurality of the folks rejected all of them in favor of Trump. (This should again tell the GOP stalwarts just how much they have to fix. But it won’t. And they won’t. ) Nor can such a mythical creature just pop into existence and enter the fray. Politics being what it is, he just cannot get from myth to votes cast in November in time.

So for you who can vote in November, a brief history lesson and reality check. You are on the roller coaster. You might be regretting it and wishing you did not have to go over the big hill, but the bar is down, the chain is pulling you up the hill, and soon, very soon, you and I are going to plunge down the big dip.

So. How many times has a 3rd party candidate done more than sway the race to ( ALWAYS) the more liberal, progressive candidate?

One. Abraham Lincoln defeated the Whigs and the Democrats on a platform of national unity and opposition to slavery. It is worth noting that the result of that was the end of the Whig party, secession, and Civil War.

Since then, 3rd parties have ended up helping to sway the outcome to Woodrow Wilson and Bill Clinton, but they have never won. Not once in a century. So if your magical hopes are pinned on Gary Johnson, you are about to be disappointed.

That leaves us, as it has since 1860, at least, with a simple reality. Absent an act of God, one of the 2 major party candidates now running will become the next President.

Donald Trump has a lot of faults, though he is not without virtue. The first article I wrote about him at the start of his campaign is unchanged: I think he is something of an ass. He is hardly the ideal candidate I would build in my Weird Science experiment. He shoots his mouth off without thinking, is brash, often crude, and reminds us regularly that a builder may end up sounding like the construction workers wolf whistling at a pretty girl who walks by. We don t know how much his move to a more conservative position will affect his judgment and actions.

Still. He is not Hillary Clinton.

And we do know with certainty what she will do. She will appoint progressive liberal judges to SCOTUS and the federal bench. She will raise taxes. She will continue the Obama war on coal, and the economy. She will, as is the wont of progressives, continue to chip away at basic rights. She will lie consistently. She will, in collusion with her husband, sell the office of the President in unprecedented ways to enrich her family.

And this one deserves a line of its own.

She will certainly involve us in at least one major war.

She will not, most likely, do so with a reasoned approach about our national security interests. Instead she will muddle along, incompetently, making misstep after misstep, until one of them lands her, and us, squarely in a major conflict.

That is Hillary.

Wm F Buckley maintained we ought to support the most right leaning viable candidate for President. To support the most right leaning candidate around, who cannot get elected, ensures that the most left leaning will win. To support a candidate who could viably win, but is markedly to the left, ensures the same. Basic logic of politics

So if you are still crying in your milk that “If only” the GOP had nominated ANYONE else, you would NEVER support Hillary Clinton, because she is dishonest and incompetent, and far left, then wake up friend. Get over it.

“If only” lost the primary. “If only” is not running against Hillary.

There are 2 choices. President Hillary Clinton. Or President Donald Trump.

Don’t let yourself be saying in a year, if Only I had helped stop her.

I’m not crazy about Trump. He is not ideal. But he is the better of the only 2 choices available. So I’m going to vote for him.

And so should you.

 

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Caserta: America can’t win with Obama or Hillary

12 Aug

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

Just when you think the Obama administration couldn’t possibly do anything further to compromise our nation’s safety and security, it blazes a new trail of incompetence.

donald

As reported by The Wall Street Journal and multiple news agencies, the Obama administration “secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran” in a time frame that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Iran, according to officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.

Reportedly, the money was the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the administration reached with Iran to resolve a dispute over a 37-year-old arms deal.

Stories splattered the airwaves last week describing a covert operation in which wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown to Iran on an unmarked cargo plane. The U.S. reportedly obtained the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland, according to these officials.

Of course, serving up its usual course of intellectual dishonesty, the Obama administration promised the American people the window of the two transactions was a complete coincidence and they had absolutely nothing to do with each other.

During a press briefing, White House press secretary Josh Earnest even added the payment to Iran was delivered in cash on pallets because the two nations “do not have a banking relationship.”

I suppose loading up the cash and delivering it on an airplane was the next best answer for this administration – brilliant.

Now, I’m not going to waste my time trying to convince naysayers this wasn’t an obvious U.S. ransom payment to the mullahs of Iran for the release of four Americans. Anyone who believes otherwise has obviously been partaking of the liberal Kool-Aid libation for way too long to think clearly.

I’ll only add that we know the hostages were released literally the same day the cash arrived. And according to The National Review and other sources, one of the hostages even reported they were detained “an extra several hours” and not allowed to leave until the arrival of another plane, presumably carrying the ransom.

But let’s give the Obama administration the benefit of the doubt for a moment.

Suppose these Iranian deals, the payment of the $400 million and the release of the hostages were indeed “unrelated.” Then how stupid can they possibly be?

It isn’t nearly as important whether it was or wasn’t a ransom payment as it is how the world and Iran perceive it! Wouldn’t one have considered separating the two deals in an effort to avoid the appearance of impropriety?

So either this is a ransom payment to terrorists or another case of poor judgment by this administration emboldening terrorists and endangering U.S. citizens.

America simply doesn’t win with Barack Obama’s deals.

And Hillary Clinton will be more of the same.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Now is the time to play political defense

5 Aug

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

 

tri·an·gle
ˈtrīˌaNGɡəl/
noun
noun: triangle; plural noun: triangles
  1. a plane figure with three straight sides and three angles.
    “an equilateral triangle”

With the nominees for the respective political parties having been chosen and nominations accepted, the campaign season for the presidency has officially begun. Just as the primary season was, it’s sure to be chock full of political caterwaul between pundits and candidates alike.

Interestingly, voters are faced with a political “triad” of sorts, with three sides, three points and three angles. They’re certainly not equilateral, and opposite sides have never been further apart.

On one side, we have the liberal left. These are individuals who would vote for Hillary Clinton even if she had committed multiple crimes and told numerous lies. In fact, she’s done exactly that! Yet, her supporters are willing to look beyond her nefarious character simply to advance their progressive agenda.

The point: These people couldn’t care less about the America of our founding fathers. They’re frankly willing to sacrifice God and country for the continued fundamental transformation of our nation.

The angle: The majority of these voters are satisfied to cast their lots with big government and their nets toward promised entitlements.

Then we have the side bolstering the Trump “revolution.” These ruffled rebels are primarily moderate to conservative individuals who’ve simply had enough of lying politicians more concerned with keeping their jobs than with serving their constituencies.

The point: These folks are looking to “kick political backside” and take names in an effort to return their country to both sanity and sovereignty.

The angle: They’re so starved for a commander-in-chief with leadership qualities they’re willing to take a chance with someone who values haughtiness over humility and coarseness over congeniality.

And then we have the “cynical” side, with those determined “not” to vote for either Hillary or Trump, regardless of the clear and present danger facing our nation. These individuals are content knowing they refused to “cave” to the political pressures around them and are satisfied to pull the lever for a third party candidate or just stay home.

The point: I believe these are people who have already carved a path in life. They typically have their feet planted firmly, with a clear direction and the means to survive.

The angle: They feel they can comfortably “ride out” the consequences of their choice until the next election cycle.

It’s this “third” side of the triad I wish to address.

History will never record your “noble” choice at the polls. It will, however, show that you helped elect not only Hillary Clinton, but helped appoint liberal Supreme Court justices for generations!

Hillary Clinton has proven her intent is to give us more of Barack Obama’s failed policies.

I can’t promise what we’ll get with a President Trump, but I can certainly promise what we’ll get with Hillary Clinton.

They say the game is often won with good defense. Now is the time for patriots to “dig in, bow your backs” and make a final stand for freedom.

And we need every vote possible to keep Hillary out of the White House.

Mark Caserta is a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , , , , ,

Mark Caserta: Liberals use ancient approach to advance ideology

29 Jul

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

Do liberals believe in morality? If so, what’s the standard?

While this is a very provocative question, it’s a legitimate one nevertheless.

Conservatives have the Bible as our moral compass. We believe it’s the authoritative, Holy Spirit-inspired Word of God and is therefore inerrant in content and direction for how we should live our lives.

But liberals don’t believe God’s Word on its face value. They either question its accuracy or its relevance to our present day. And they use this methodology to separate man from the boundaries and precepts of God’s Word in order to advance their progressive ideology.

And frankly, they didn’t invent this approach.

eve

After God had finished six days of work, creating the heavens and the earth, he rested. He blessed the seventh day and made it a holy example for His people for setting aside time to reverence and worship their Heavenly Father.

The heavens and the earth had been completed in their magnificent array.

But God desired relationship. So from the dust of the ground he formed man and breathed into his nostrils the “breath of life.” Man was transformed into a living being and became a friend to God.

God placed the man into His “Garden of Eden” to enjoy and care for it. What a wonderful place it must have been! Can you imagine God’s vision of “paradise” for his children? The Bible even says God took time to walk through it during “the cool of the day.”

But even in paradise, The Almighty knew there must be principles by which to live, so He instituted the very first “rule of law.”

God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

In His infinite wisdom, God concluded that man needed a helper, one suitable for sharing earthly life experiences. So he created woman.

Now, God wanted loyalty in relationship, out of choice, just as He does today. So He allowed Satan, who had been cast down from heaven due to his rebellious nature, to approach the woman.

Genesis Chapter 3 shares the encounter.

Satan’s goal was to create doubt in the woman’s mind as to the veracity of God’s command. He knew he must detach her from the edicts of God’s Word if he was to succeed in his earthly kingdom.

The rest is history. From that point, sin began its progressive evolution into the hearts and minds of God’s greatest creation – mankind.

Today, liberals are using the same methodology, originally used by Satan, to question God’s Word and remove His principles from our lives.

Only then, will they be successful.

Let’s choose wisely not to partake of the liberal fruit.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , , , ,

HERE IT IS=> Detailed List of Findings in Wikileaks DNC Document Dump

25 Jul

Originally printed in The Gateway Pundit

 

Jul 24th, 2016 4:28 pm 

hillary dnc 

On Friday Wikileaks released nearly 20,000 hacked emails it says are from the accounts of Democratic National Committee officials.

The documents were released just days before the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia.

The hacked emails revealed the DNC’s hatred for Bernie Sanders and his movement. The documents reveal the party’s hidden ties with the liberal media. The emails reveal the heights of dishonesty of the party infrastructure.

Now there is a list of a few of the most shocking emails released by Wikileaks.
The list was compiled thanks to the work of Reddit Bernie Sander supporters and Donald Trump supporters: 
Hat Tip Steve A.

DNC member killing horses for insurance money.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/578
DNC making fun of black womans name.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/17942
DNC telling each other, “I love you too. no homo.”
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/425
DNC requesting a pull an MSNBC commentary segment.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6107
DNC controlling the narrative with time released stories.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12450
DNC conspiring to create false Trump information and release with Reuters.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7102
DNC Hillary supporters infiltrated Sanders campaign.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4776
DNC members going to complain to Morning Joe producers about his mentioning of a “rigged system.”
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8806
DNC discussing their relationship with NBC/MSNBC/CNN and how to get better treatment.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13762
Super PAC paying young voters to push back online Sanders supporters. Paid shills.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351

wasserman schultz socialism

DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz having an off the record meeting in MSNBC President Phil Griffin’s office.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8867
DNC being messed with by the Washington Examiner.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5304
DNC discussing Hillary’s policies as unfeasible.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/519
$200k for a private dinner with Hillary.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/17287
Offering to send interns out to fake a protest against the RNC.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366
Faking outrage and pasting in a video later.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7102
A mole working inside of the Sanders campaign.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7793
Bringing up Sanders religion to scare the southern voters.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/11508
Possible money laundering by moving money back and forth to bypass legal limits.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6230
Politico writer sending his stories to the DNC before he sends them to his editor.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10808
DNC feeding CNN the questions they want to be asked in interviews.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4077
Creating a fake job ad for a Trump business to paint him as a sexist.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12803
Hillary funding 2 million dollars in a cooridanted campaign in battleground states to win back the Senate.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7784
DNC is upset that their “allies” didn’t send in protestors so they sent out interns.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366
“Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general.”
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351
$50,000 – Lawrence Benenson.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/14700
Daily Fundraising Report for the DNC.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2875
Content & Social Strategy Discussion.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7512
Re: BuzzFeed and DNC connection.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10933
Draft linking news articles about trump to use as negative press.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7586
Fwd: State Dinner Countdown.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/1901
Some chick is angry she hasn’t been given more stuff from the Obama administration…might be interesting to follow up.
Re: State Dinner Countdown.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2946
Tim O’Brien: Trump’s Fixation on Inflating his Net Worth is a Cause for Concern.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4496
RE: May Fundraising Numbers.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5615
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7720
Hillary for America Raised $26.4 Million in April, Began May with More than $30 Million Cash on Hand.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13986
Re: For approval: Trump supporter graphics.
https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/788
Press talking points, states Hillary is their candidate, dated May 5, 2016. More of a smoking gun than the ambiguous talk in the emails themselves.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/fileid/5254/2728
Consultant calling megyn kelly a bimbo. Has PDF attached that says the same.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6087
DNC trying to get away with violating the Hatch Act.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/20148
Democrats using interns to organize fake “protests.”
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13830
RE: Action on DNC tomorrow (Immigration Raids).
https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/9736

 Gateway Pundit

Tags: ,

Mark Caserta: Steps to proactively prepare for future domestic terrorist attacks

23 Jul

This could save your life…

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

  • Jul 22, 2016

It’s a colossal understatement to say the world in which we live has taken a dramatic turn for the worse. It seems every day now, we hear stories of domestic and foreign terrorist attacks where the most innocent among us are murdered – including children.

And it’s simply incredibly reckless for Barack Obama to tell us “The world has never been less violent”.

What planet has this man been on?

In the wake of recent terrorist attacks and horrific law enforcement massacres, there’s a disconcerting sense of vulnerability all around us – and justifiably so.

As our desperation for leadership and action escalates, it’s time for responsible citizens to take measures to individually prepare for disaster.

Terrorism experts and security professionals say there are steps the public can take to reduce the risk of an attack and to increase chances of survival if one occurs.

The Sinclair Broadcast Group has compiled this information into six steps that could save your life and those around you.

1. See something, say something. As cliche as it’s become, security experts constantly return to this principle. Look for something out of place, such as an unattended backpack or suitcase, or any sort of suspicious activity.

As for this writer, this is where political correctness goes out the door! I’m constantly in tune with the nationality of those around me! Be the eyes and ears for law enforcement!

2. Don’t under-react. Experts agree that under-reacting to suspicious activity is a far bigger problem than overreacting. People often assume there is a reasonable explanation for something that seems suspicious or they may have inhibitions about getting involved. But let the police decide whether or not something is a true threat.

3. Trust your gut. People often do subconscious risk assessments in potentially dangerous situations. Don’t ignore that instinct! It could prevent an attack from happening. Take an extra moment and think “security and safety”.

4. Know your exits. As in movie theaters and airplanes, it’s always good advice to know where the exits are in any location. If possible, you want to figure out how to get yourself and your family out if something bad happens.

6. Finally, live your life. You never know when or where a terrorist event is going to happen. Staying away from a popular or populated area is no guarantee of safety. An attack on a random theater or restaurant may even be more effective in creating a sense of vulnerability and fear.

Our world is forever changed. We now have an obligation to maintain heightened awareness of our surroundings and premeditated diligence in protecting our loved ones and fellow man.

Let’s be proactive to these attacks and save lives.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , ,

Doug Smith: Words Matter

20 Jul

doug smith

Doug Smith:  Author, historian and lead contributor for Free State Patriot

“Don’t tell me words don’t matter.”

Barack Obama, Feb 2008

barack

Truly, they do. Would you rather have the desiccated muscle tissue of a bovine mammal which had to have feces washed off its deceased carcass before slicing it away, or a nicely marbled, juicy steak? Both statements reflect the truth, but how and what was said makes a difference.

One must marvel at Barak Obama’s fluid association with words, meanings, and truth. Hillary’s association with the truth is like that of the parents of a child who never knew his father: a brief and forgettable encounter, never to be repeated, but with lasting ramifications.

So, words. When Cassius Clay changed his name to Muhammad Ali, it was pretty clear to him and the world that he had adopted Islam as his religion. The words were a clear statement of where his allegiance and sympathies lay. Barry Soweto changed his name to Barak Hussein Obama, but insists he is not a Muslim, but a Christian. Perhaps he is. But the words matter: the name he uses sends a clear message to the world that his sympathies and a romantic attachment for all things Muslim characterizes him.

When the latest Islamic terrorist shoots/runs over/blows up innocent people in a murderous rage while shouting what the entire world recognizes as the Muslim battle cry, the entire world knows who and what the murderer was. But not Barak Obama. He agonizes over what the motivation might have been. He calls them radical extremists. He calls them bad Muslims who do not truly embrace Islam. While of course the Islamic State of Syria calls them Muslim martyrs, as they call themselves.

When a Muslim extremist government arises, having had their one and only election, complete with armed terrorists to ensure the vote goes the right way, and then begins moving toward a repressive Sharia regime, Barack Obama latches onto the fact that they voted once and calls them Democratic. He supports them with money and weapons. He ignores pro liberty protestors to the Ayatollahs of Iran and permits then to be slaughtered, while making deals with Iran to ensure they get a Nuclear weapon.

With a civil war fraught with repression of Kurds, and Coptic Christians, and the genocide of Syrian Christians rages, Obama makes no provision for the Christian victims of genocide by Isis or Assad to receive asylum, nor does he press regional Muslim nations to provide safe havens close at hand. Instead he proposes to bring thousands of Muslims from Syria to the US, ignoring the terrorists sure to come with them.

Now when I was a sailor, my language could be colorfully described as salty. There is the oft told story of a young sailor coming home and asking Grandma for the mashed potatoes using his newly learned salty language to everyone’s chagrin. Some of the salt never goes away. And my language reflected my work, and my life as a sailor, and what I was. (Not just the salty and blue terms, but no sailor goes to the bathroom: we make a Head call.) So words matter. I could deny being a sailor, but it would be obvious that my words matter and that they were influenced by my time at sea. As were my actions and my choices.

They say you can take the boy out of the Navy, but you can never get the Navy out of the boy. How I thought and how I would act was reflected by my language.

So words matter.

For me.

And for Barack Obama. I don’t presume to know if he is a Muslim or not.

But his words make it clear that for him, it is Muslims first, and America far behind.

And that matters, a great deal.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: Obama presidency inflames racial tensions

16 Jul

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot Editor

  • Jul 15, 2016

Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream had seemingly come to fruition. America had finally sought to look beyond the color of a man’s skin and see into his character.

The United States had elected its first black president – not once, but twice.

And as the first black U.S. president, Barack Obama had opportunity to bridge the racial divide in our country as no other commander-in-chief in our nation’s history. His bully pulpit was the highest office in the land and held the attention of the entire civilized world.

“Progressively,” we would learn that rather foster healing to our nation, Obama would become the “divider-in-chief,” with contentious words that would help revive racial tensions of the past.

And the black community would, once again, feel compelled to remind America that “black lives matter.”

Throughout the Obama presidency, we’ve seen him rush to judgment in incidents in a manner that incites racial unrest rather than supports our nation’s laws.

Following the 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin, Obama failed miserably in this regard.

In fact, he made it personal.

“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” Obama said. “When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids.”

Martin, reportedly unarmed, was shot by George Zimmerman, a man on neighborhood watch, who apparently had an altercation with the young black man. Following weeks of investigation, Zimmerman was acquitted of any wrongdoing.

Following the controversial verdict, rather than offer sobering perspective in support of the decision, Obama chose to castigate a “flawed” judicial system.

Speaking during a daily briefing, Obama blamed a history of “racial disparity” in our judicial system and a lingering social prejudice in America for contributing to unrest in the black community over the verdict.

Following the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, President Obama asserted the event had awakened Americans to a reality the black community has never forgotten.

“Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement – guilty of walking while black or driving while black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness.”

Soon after the shooting, video surfaced showing Brown stealing “cigarillos” from a nearby convenience store and assaulting the store clerk. Subsequent investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice concluded the officer called to the scene shot Brown in self-defense.

Most recently, following the deaths of two black men killed in separate shootings, Alton Sterling and Philando Castile, Obama once again blamed racial disparity in our judicial system.

“All of us as Americans should be troubled by these shootings. These are not isolated incidents. They’re symptomatic of a broader set of racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system.”

The failure of Barack Obama to use his presidency to foster the healing of racial inequality in our nation will go down as one of the greatest travesties in history.

But the fact that he made it worse may be the greatest shame of all.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Tags: , , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →