Tag Archives: FSP

Doug Smith: Truth, Lies, and for goodness sake Harry, call it manure.

2 Jan

doug-for-fsp

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

1.2.17

lying-politician

 

“Abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society.”

John Adams

“I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.”

Justice Potter Stewart

“For goodness sake, Harry, can’t you call it manure?”

Bess Truman

 

Ok, admittedly, that last one is an assumption, borrowed from a quip by Ronald Reagan, to wit, that Bess had for years tried to get Harry to call a certain substance found in abundance around cattle and politicians “manure”. But to that point, this may be the year when truth suddenly mattered a lot more than it had for years.

Follow me down the path a bit, kind reader, and I’ll try not to get us lost. Some clever wag has noted ““If you want to make a Conservative mad, lie to him. If you want to make a Liberal mad, tell him the truth”. (Sometimes attributed to Teddy Roosevelt, but whoever said it, it makes me smile.)

Hillary Clinton gave a series of ever changing answers, redefinitions, and diversions to questions regarding her business and political dealings for the entirety of her 40 years in the public eye.

Bill Clinton famously told us:

“I want you to listen to me. I did not have sexual relations with that woman. Miss Lewinsky.

And, 8 months later;

“Indeed, I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate. In fact, it was wrong. It constituted a critical lapse in judgment and a personal failure on my part for which I am solely and completely responsible. I know that my public comments and my silence about this matter gave a false impression.”

Too bad he didn’t see fit to say it all on the same day.

So, to look at the truth from the underside (the preferred angle for the Clintons, and the progressives they have led for a generation) what, we might ask, is a lie?

Well, sir, Justice Potter to the rescue. In speaking of pornography, which was the issue before SCOTUS at the time of his famous quip, he noted that he might not be able to define it, but he could certainly recognize it when he saw it!

What exactly is a lie, coming from a politician? Well, we said in our millions, I might not be able to define it for you, but I can sure tell when somebody slaps me in the face with it like a dead fish. Parenthetically, the 2 smell largely the same.

Lest you assume that I am only able to see lies when perpetrated by Liberal Democrats like the Clintons, which is, as we used to say in the Navy, a “target rich environment”, I note that the leader for some years of my own exasperating, infuriating Grand Old Party, Mitch McConnell, had a pre-November and a post November side of his mouth in regards to repealing or defunding Obamacare. (We wait with baited breath, now that he has it all, both Houses of Congress, POTUS, and over 2/3 of statehouses firmly in GOP control, if he will finally, to quote, well, him, “repeal it, root and branch.”)

Now here is a curious phenomenon. I am (Ok, Bess, you could never tame Harry, but I’ll filter the Navy out of the boy) angry with Mitch for lying to me. The Democrats who stood in lock step supporting Bill on the steps of the Capitol were not angry with him in Aug when he admitted he had lied, and got them to swear to it. They were angry with Ken Starr. They were angry with the GOP for making a big deal about it. They were angry on an individual basis with conservatives who dared to say, See, I told you so. Bill Clinton is a liar. (Or moving forward, after Hillary contradicted her own story for the 4th or 5th time, HRC is a liar.) It did not matter that they lied, only that they gave at least lip service to the right ideas.

When Barack Obama promised most faithfully those “shovel ready jobs”, and then chuckled later, that oops, they were not as shovel ready as we thought, (in point of fact, they were nonexistent), when his lies on Obamacare unraveled, when he campaigned in favor of medical marijuana, then worked against it as POTUS, (now THAT one ought to have the lefts undies bunched up!), no Liberal Democrats were outraged and angry at him. Instead, they joined in merry chorus of RACIST! Against anyone who opposed him or pointed out his lies.

Now, in 2016, for better or worse, the truth became important. What Obama had done, instead of what he promised or took credit for, mattered. The constant lies of Hillary Clinton became too much to swallow for too many people. And it was part, if not all, of a political tidal wave.

And in all of it, conservatives and Republicans were outraged at the leaders of our party for lying to us, and gave rise to the year of the insurgency candidates Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. Trump may be far from perfect, but so many times he called the same things Bull… sorry, Bess, I m trying, manure, that we did. And it struck a chord.

Meanwhile, Democrats angrily, hysterically, denounced any who failed to kow tow to party orthodoxy, and many, too many, or enough, depending on your point of view, said, Nope, not this time.

The party outraged by the truth slid behind the ones outraged by the lies to its lowest ebb since Woodrow Wilson. The Progressive movement has been set back a generation, and the work of undoing their damage is about to begin.

Sophistry has about run its course. Truth is gaining ground.

Taking on the most extreme, out of touch, fringe elements of society, desperately waiting to be insulted or aggrieved, does not make you a major political influence, it makes you a fragmented party of wackos, who eventually, and finally, make it clear that my job, my housing value, my paycheck, my retirement, my life and safety and that of my children and grandchildren, is less important to you than wedding cakes and Kardashians.

Common sense folks, trying to live their lives, have been aware of these truths, if hesitant to say them for fear of the (Democrat) mob.

So, here’s another bit of truth: that is all about to change.

The last time the Democrat party was this weak, Babe Ruth hit 138 home runs, The Republic of Ireland was formed, a famine began in Russia, FDR developed polio, and John Glenn was born.

If you are a Democrat, perhaps you need to find a safe place and make some playdough Unicorns.

Because the Lions are back.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Caserta: What path will the liberals take in 2017?

30 Dec

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

12.30.16

As we prepare to move into arguably one of the most important first years of any U.S. presidency, I have but one question for liberal Democrats.

Will you consider the resolution to unify with the Trump administration and the “principled” members of the GOP to make America great again?

Regrettably, rather than learn from the election, liberals have been busy lamenting over their November loss and exhausting every excuse possible for the landslide electoral college defeat of Hillary Clinton.

 It began with the charge that the Russian government hacked into the Democratic National Committee and provided WikiLeaks with thousands of emails designed to boost Trump’s chance of victory over Hillary.

Aside from the fact that no definitive evidence has ever been offered proving this allegation, I simply offer a common-sense rebuttal.

First, Hillary’s unethical standards created her own email nightmare. She alone is to blame.

Second, as reported by multiple news outlets, Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, firmly denies the assertion that Russia provided the emails.

Third, given the fact that Vladimir Putin has, for all intents and purposes, moved at will against Hillary and the Obama administration, with whom do you suppose he would rather confront, Trump or Clinton?

Subsequently, as the hacking allegation began to lose steam, Hillary supporters started blaming “angry white men” for the loss. Her hubby, Bill Clinton, offered his boisterous perspective on Trump’s win at a New York bookstore earlier this month per Politico.

“He doesn’t know much,” Clinton said when asked if Trump was smart. “One thing he does know is how to get angry white men to vote for him.”

Have you looked in the mirror lately, Willy?

Actually, based on Pew Research Center data, Trump won white voters by a margin “almost identical” to that of Mitt Romney, who lost the popular vote to Obama in 2012. Trump also fared better among blacks and Hispanics than Romney did four years ago.

This same report shows Trump carried 42 percent of the female demographic, despite liberals attempting to tarnish Trump’s history with women using dated audio-video clips.

But I believe the “coup de grace” ensuring Trump a victory over Hillary was the evangelical vote.

 Christians came out in droves to support the millionaire businessman, who often honored them and promised to stand with Israel during his campaign.

But progressives sought to play every card in their blame game.

Some were even willing to blame the defining element of our Republic, the Electoral College system, for stacking the odds against the “judicious” election of Hillary to the presidency. In their view, apparently, crippling the Constitution would be a small price to pay for a liberal victory.

But despite the tenacious efforts of the left, Donald J. Trump will be sworn into office as the 45th president of the United States on Jan. 20th, 2017.

So, what path will liberal Democrats take in 2017?

Will they continue to pursue a debilitating progressive agenda? Or will they join the new administration in putting Americans and our country first?

Future voters will be watching very closely.

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

Tags: , , ,

Mark Caserta: Let’s celebrate Jesus’ birth, life this Christmas

23 Dec
me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor

  • 12.23.16

jesus

Throughout history, no event has ever influenced mankind like the birth of our savior, Jesus.

And just as wise men sought Him long ago, may we all use this Christmas season to reflect upon His life and seek understanding of His purpose for leaving the “comfort and joy” of His Heavenly Father to live on earth as a man.

The most astounding revelation of His life for me, is that as the Son of God, Jesus had immediate access to all the powers of heaven. Yet He chose to live his life in humility, serving His fellow man. What an example for us all!

 Born in humble circumstances, of the virgin Mary, Jesus was raised a carpenter’s son. Now, carpentry, at the time was a rough job and demanded a great deal of strength, endurance and skill.

I’ve often wished I could have witnessed some of the work of Jesus’ hands! I believe everything he crafted was of the finest quality. In fact, I picture Him as probably being one of the finest finish carpenters of that time!

No doubt, He spent much of his time fabricating the necessities of the day, like plows, animal yokes, furniture and building materials, like doors, windows and flooring. The tools of His time were crude and certainly required much time and effort to use.

Now, I don’t claim to be a theologian, but I personally believe every experience in Jesus’ life was purposeful for His ministry.

As a carpenter and builder, Jesus would have a unique understanding of the importance of building a solid foundation. The stronger the foundation, the more stable the structure.

I believe Jesus had an affinity for water. He spent a great deal of time with fishermen and seemed to have a superb understanding of the trade. He may have even helped construct some of the fishermen’s boats.

Jesus also had to have effective leadership skills. Remember, during a period when it sometimes took months for information to travel the globe, Jesus took 12 men and shook the world!

But Jesus’ most redeeming quality was His incomprehensible love for others.

It was this love and understanding of His purpose that prompted Him to leave His family (albeit earthly) for a “second time” and devote His final years on earth to His Heavenly Father’s business.

 Jesus was born into this world to serve and gain understanding of mankind’s frailties. And while He committed no sin, he surely understood it.

He loved us so much, he chose to freely give His life to become the atoning sacrifice for our sins and our advocate before His Father. Those who’ve accepted God’s simple plan of salvation are now “sons” and “daughters” and part of God’s family.

So, while Christmas is the time we celebrate Jesus’ birth, let’s not forget to celebrate His sacrifice and the eternal hope we have because of Him.

May 2017 see many more people joining God’s family and gaining a deeper understanding of why we celebrate this season.

Merry Christmas everyone! May God’s blessings overtake you!

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

Tags: , , , ,

Doug Smith: If the Russians were hacking the U.S.

20 Dec

doug-for-fsp

Doug Smith:  Author, historian, patriot and lead contributor to FSP

12.20.16

russian-flaghillary-and-trumpnews-logos

 

 

 

 

 

If the Russians were or are hacking into our computers, we ought to take offense. If, mind you.  Of course, it is hard for the guy who said, Tell Vlad I ll have more flexibility after the election, and If Syria uses chemical weapons, that would be a red line in the sand, and Golly, Crimea? Really? Well, stuff happens, to be the one to take them on.

However, I note with interest that so far all I have seen is pundits and talking heads saying The CIA director said, or, more specifically, the Media reports that CIA employees said, that in a memo which we can’t see, read by employees who are not named, the CIA director said, that the FBI and NSA directors said, that we are all in agreement.

How’s that again?

However, we still refuse to brief the House Intelligence Committee.

Say what?

Not once have I seen and CIA spokesman or director make a statement to the public, or to Congress. Everything I have seen, and can look up online, cites reporters talking about what unnamed sources said Clapper said that Comey said.

Given that mainstream reporters tend to be among the biggest liars around, (Dan Rather, Brian Williams, to name a few), and have often put forth a story based on either a lie, or partial or misinformation to further their narrative, I ll reserve judgment on that aspect of things until we hear something definitive, like, oh, I don’t know, proof, or testimony from the Director of Central Intelligence.

However, in the broader sense, can we agree that we ought to have a sense that government officials ought not to interfere with the elections of foreign countries?

So we object in principle to the idea that Russia might try to influence or cast doubt on our elections. But if we follow that principle, we must equally object to Obama sending money and political operatives to Israel to actively work with an opponent of Netanyahu to try and defeat him, because he does not like him. That is materially worse, and principally the same as what is alleged now, to wit, a leader of one country did not like a candidate in another country and so worked actively to try and defeat them in an election.

Goose, meet Gander.  If you are going to say I object to Russian interference in our elections, regardless the degree of effectiveness, then, if you are consistent, you must equally condemn Obama s failed attempt to unseat the Israeli Prime Minister.

Let us go a step further. Both Ted Kennedy , as a Senator and Presidential hopeful, and Jimmy Carter, as a sitting President, directly contacted officials within the Soviet government to ask their help in creating events and military postures that would help them defeat Ronald Reagan, judging, correctly, that the Soviets would vastly prefer either of them to Reagan. And so they should have, for Reagan put the final nail in their coffin.

Now, these things did not come out as 2 Democrat politicians actively tried to solicit help from the Soviets for partisan political purposes during the Cold War, but some years later as documents were made public after the fall of the Soviet Union.

John Walker, who American sailors justly reviled, was convicted of espionage for selling secrets (which I was charged with protecting as well as he was, and still would not divulge to you) to the Soviets for money. He died in Federal Prison in 2014. What he did was very similar in tone and potential damage to what Kennedy and Carter tried to do. How much did the Soviets adjust their posture toward the US in the 80’s at the behest of those 2?  We will likely never know.

We can be utterly certain that the Soviet leadership was far, far more upset with Ronald Reagan than Shirtless Vlad is with Hillary (Easy Button Reset) Clinton.  After all, she didn’t stop them at anything. In fact, her claim that Vlad is Mad (angry, not nuts) is a little specious since she signed off on a deal for control of US Uranium that helped make him the wealthiest man in the world, and did not hurt her pocketbook either.

I think a reasonable case can be made that both Carter and Kennedy should have been charged with espionage , if they gave US state secrets to the Soviets in part of their request for internal political help, or perhaps treason, for dealing with our primary  enemy to further their own political ambitions.

Now, Kennedy is dead, and Carter is 90, although he still has a penchant for working actively against the interests of the US in his words and actions abroad.  He has the record at this point, for the worst, most meddlesome, most anti American ex-President ever. But he can take heart. He also once looked to be the worst President on record.

Then along came Obama.

Tags: , , ,

Mark Caserta: Obama leaving behind wounds that require healing

17 Dec

me

Mark Caserta: FSP editor

  • Dec 16, 2016

 

policemen

 

God breathed the same breath of life into all human beings. And certainly we have the right to be outraged over the shedding of innocent blood.

All life matters.

But where is the outrage over the murders of innocent police officers sworn to uphold standards of integrity, bravery and honor to the community and the law?

Any law enforcement officer will attest to the fact that answering a domestic dispute call is arguably one of the most dangerous and unpredictable calls a police officer can face.

But it’s getting worse.

In what appears to be an increasing number of incidents, police officers are being premeditatively attacked.

One such incident happened last week when two police officers were fatally shot while answering a call about a domestic dispute in southwest Georgia.

Twenty-five-year-old Nicholas Smarr, an Americus, Georgia, police officer, along with Southwestern State University campus policeman Jody Smith were shot while responding to a domestic disturbance in a nearby apartment complex, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.

Upon arriving at the complex, Minguell Lembrick opened fire on the officers, killing Smarr and critically wounding Smith, who later died.

Lembrick was later found dead, from a self-inflicted gunshot, following a standoff outside his home, authorities said at a press conference.

 

Data from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund show these attacks are on the rise. Statistics show 63 law enforcement officers in the United States were fatally shot while on duty in 2016, 66 percent higher than the year before.

So why the increase in attacks?

A little over two years ago, Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson fatally shot unarmed teenager Michael Brown. Video and witness testimony clearly revealed Brown had unlawfully assaulted a store clerk while robbing a convenient store and attempted to wrest Wilson’s gun away while being taken into custody.

But, despite the facts, the Obama administration demonstrated an incredulous lack of support for law enforcement, even sending representatives to the Brown funeral.

Officer Wilson was eventually found innocent of any wrongdoing, but birthed from the ordeal was the “Black Lives Matter” (BLM) movement against police.

Chants from BLM activists like “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want ’em? Now!” were heard at protests and riots, invigorating enmity throughout cities across the nation.

To this day, activists erroneously honor Brown’s memory by holding up two hands in a “don’t shoot” manner despite this portion of witnesses’ testimony being proven false.

Now, our nation has endured racial animosity before, but it’s never resulted in this type of radical, sustained retaliation against police.

I believe one of history’s greatest tragedy’s will be President Obama’s failure to seize the opportunity to be the most racially unifying president in our nation’s history.

Frankly, I believe the hope that our first black president would champion this cause helped get him elected.

But rather than becoming a unifying voice of reason, his administration’s actions amplified racial dissent. And people are dying.

And now our nation has all new wounds that require healing.

Let the healing begin with the new administration.

 

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

Tags: , ,

Doug Smith: Shared power and dealing with the Democrats

13 Dec

doug-for-fsp

Doug Smith:  Author, historian, patriot and lead contributor to FSP.

 

“When you’re in command, Command!”

Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz

 

This idea is trotted out from time to time by the Democrats when they are out of power.

Remember 2000?  We had a Republican President, and a 50-50 split in the Senate. Now our Constitution provides for such an arrangement: the (White) House wins all ties. (Just like in blackjack). The Vice President is President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and may, at need, vote to break all ties. This means, 50 plus the White House is a majority. But the Democrats in 2000 made the point that such a close house should mean a sharing of power, a sharing of committee assignments and heads. The Republicans, more fools they, agreed and began an odd and short lived experiment in such shared government. It lived until the Harry Reid was able to convince Jumpin’ Jim Jeffords to become an Independent, and vote with the Dems) which made it 51 49.

(But wait, what about our shared Senate agreement, Harry? moaned the GOP.  And, laughing with maniacal glee, Harry Reid took over as Senate MAJORITY leader. )

Fast forward 16 years. Donald Trump is POTUS presumptive. (Actually President Elect after the 19th when the Electoral College meets.) The GOP is poised to take massive majorities of power: State Houses, Governors, The Senate, The House, POTUS, the Scalia SCOTUS seat, ( and, Kennedy, Ginsberg, and Breyer all being of advanced years, likely at least one more, maybe 2, so we may have a 7-3 Conservative Court in 4 years.) But the Dems are urging him, since he only won the Presidency, and not the nonexistent popularity contest of the most raw votes, which neither he, nor HRC, nor Obama, nor Bush, nor Billy, nor Algore, nor any other President has ever competed in, because, listen carefully: “Popular vote is not how we elect a President. “Not to govern like he has a mandate, but bashfully, like he just barely one. Perhaps he should share power with the world class losers of the Democrat party.

Have you seen Donald Trump? I think we can be sure of one thing: he is NOT going to be a bashful President. Whether due to the wisdom of others ( like BOTH President Bushes, who found, to their dismay, that making a deal with the Dems is like making a deal with the Devil, all except for the smoke and signing in blood), or due to his own nature, is not going to act like someone who just barely won.  He is not going to ask Hillary to be Secretary of State again, because she just barely lost.  He is going to say, I won, and the folks have spoken, and I’m going to do things the way I want to. He may make mistakes, and he may screw up. He will not do so out of wishy-washy, weak willed, spineless indecision (al la Jimmy Carter.) He is going to lead!

Now the Dems, who have given us riots and, the murders in failed cities, the failed economies, identity politics, the snowflake generation of Harvard and Wellesley grads with Degrees in Thinking Deep Thoughts, who can nevertheless not balance their checkbooks, pass the DC bar exam, or run a lunch counter, seem not to have the ability to convince folks that their way is the best way. Yes, we are all puzzled at that little quirk.  They are at their weakest point politically since Woodrow Wilson was POTUS, at the beginning of the Progressive era. What a repudiation of the ruins those make up the progressive movement. They have just been set back a century! And they are looking at an administration that unabashedly intends to unwind as much of their destructive nonsense as possible, as quickly as possible.   They have lost, in favor of falling on their swords for the Clintons, and Obama, and the march to the Left of admirers of the Soviet Union and Fidel Castro, thousands of political seats. West Virginia and Kentucky, of all places, have GOP legislatures. KY has a GOP governor, and WV has a Dem Governor elect, who happens to be a businessman. The last one we had like that was Joe Manchin, who governed more like a Republican. I suspect Justice will not be the traditional good ole boy Dem WV has been used to.

It is little wonder the progressives are in a hysterical tizzy. Death threats! We couldn’t win in an election, we couldn’t win with recounts, we couldn’t get the courts to throw out the election, so, in typical progressive fashion, and they are using the tried and true mob rule approach: threaten duly elected electors if they don’t break the law and disenfranchise the voters who chose Donald Trump. Curious, how often the progressives want mob rule, right up till a mob comes for them, at which point they become staunch law and order people.

No, Trump and the GOP won. The GOP has not been used to winning, and even when they won, quickly acted embarrassed at the fact, and backed off governing like winners. They compromised with the folks to the left, who would only compromise when they were out of power.  They caved in so their adversaries would call them nice guys, which they only did when they lost. They did not understand the use and exercise of power.

Now, enter Donald Trump. He has known failure, and had to endure businesses bankrupting. He has known success, and parlayed a successful business into a billion dollar Empire. When you have built Stark Tower, Iron Man is not likely to be a shrinking violet. No, I don t expect President Trump will emulate the (Progressive Democrat) Mayor of Baltimore and “give the rioters room to burn and destroy. “  I’m pretty sure the professional rioters know that as well.

So, our new and unlikely team of Avengers, ( Say, Stan, is it ok if I make a Marvel reference here, since you are getting the traditional Stan Lee cameo?) may just learn to fight like they won, flex their muscles like they have some, and take a real, no nonsense look around and conclude: Dang. These guys have really screwed things up. No, thanks but I don t think we will be asking for your help. We have been to Chicago, and Detroit, and San Francisco. We have seen what affordable means in your lexicon. We have seen how you approach National Security. We have seen what passes as the best economy we can hope for in your eyes. So, no, we will not be sharing power. We will not be asking for your input, since we have the ruins of 8 years of that to clean up. We will not need your ideas, since we know what those are. So, apparently, do a lot of other people, and since they just yelled a resounding ENOUGH! why so will we.

So you folks go find yourselves a nice safe place, free from microagressions, or harsh words, or real people.

Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz had another quote which I admire, and will, I think, characterize the Trump years.

Leadership consists of picking good men and helping them do their best.

That he is working on now.

Let us hope he combines that with the Shepherd’s Prayer. Alan Shepherd, while perched on top of his Mercury Space capsule , ready to become the 1st American in space, pleaded into a hot mike, Dear Lord, please don’t let me “expletive” this up.

Amen.

Tags: , , ,

Doug Smith: Obama, “Elections have consequences.” Now, it’s up to the GOP to provide one for Obamacare!

27 Nov

doug-for-fsp

Doug Smith:  Author, historian, patriot and lead contributor to FSP.

 

What a chuckle!

Have you listened to the pundits, press, Democrats, and most especially Obama offering sage advice to Trump and the (GOP majority) Congress on how tough it might be to repeal Obamacare?  And what a political price they might pay for doing so? And how they cannot just repeal it, they MUST have a viable replacement.

Well, just for fun, while I am busy laughing at the pundits, press, Democrats, and Obama, all of whom were so wrong about all of 2016 s politics, let’s examine those claims.

 

  1. In 2008, the Democrat Majority Congress pushed bills through without any input from the GOP at all. When it came down to it, and even with their majorities, the death of Ted Kennedy left the final vote to overcome a filibuster, Massachusetts, (Massachusetts!) elected Scott Brown, a Republican to succeed a Kennedy in Mass., solely on his promise to be the vote that killed Obamacare.
  2. When it became obvious the majority of Americans did not want the bill passed after that loss, the Democrats resorted to a fast one: approving a Senate version not yet reconciled with the House, and therefore not constitutionally sound, as all bills involving spending must originate in the House. No matter, in order to get something the Senate had voted for, Harry Reid took a non-related bill, and cut and pasted the entire text of the bill into it, even though that had never been approved by both houses, and sent it to Obama.  Obama, desperate to pass anything, signed it.
  3. Think the loss of the “Kennedy” seat was bad? Since the passage of Obamacare, the Democrats have lost 13 Senate seats (and control of the Senate), 69 House seats (and control of the House) 12 Governors, 900 state legislative seats (leaving them with only 5 states under Democrat control.) Indeed, in my own state of WV, we have a GOP controlled legislature for the 1st time in 80 years, and in my neighboring state of KY, the GOP controls all three for the first time since Harding (R) was President.
  4. Obamacare, despite some who are fans because they benefitted from it, has remained overwhelmingly the most unpopular law in US history; never enjoying majority support. Most Democrats refuse to run for office on its merits, and Republicans do well running on a promise to repeal it. (More on that below.)
  5. Obamacare mandates by law that everyone sign up, but cannot even yet, after 6 years, meet its enrollment goals.
  6. Has broken promise after promise, keep your Doctor, keep your plan, lower your premiums,
  7. Obamacare has cost jobs and hurt business competitiveness in the most anemic “recovery” in US history. Medical device manufacturers were hit with an extra tax just to help pay for it, which cost jobs. Employers who saw the trip points which would make them participate avoided expansion and did not hire people they otherwise would have.  Many saw their jobs become part time because the alternative to 39 hour employees was to go broke and have no employees.
  8. Now, as to the Grand Old Party, after 6 years of promise after promise to “repeal it, root and branch, “followed time after time by caving when they had the leverage, the passing “sure to be vetoed” bills which were rendered meaningless, and without risk, they saw the result in 2015 in the person of Donald Trump. (Ted Cruz could be included in that revolt against the status quo and the lies and broken promises of the GOP leadership with respect to Obama, but Trump won, so he makes the point)

 

So, let me see. The political cost of supporting Obama and Obamacare has been a decimated Democrat party, reduced to a powerlessness not seen since the Roaring Twenties.

The political cost of waffling on fighting Obamacare has been the Tea Party, anti-establishment insurrection within the GOP.  Ask John Boehner and Eric Cantor if that mattered.

The cost to Donald Trump of opposing Obama s agenda, including Obamacare, which he promised to repeal, was being elected President.

All things considered, if I am President Trump and the GOP, I must say, along with Brer Rabbit, “Throw me in that briar patch!”

Repeal it! On day one, and pay the cost. The record of the last 6 years suggests that “price” will be veto proof majorities in both houses of Congress in 2019.

As for the ridiculous claim that because the Democrats unilaterally, and against the will of the electorate, forced through Obamacare, it is incumbent on the GOP to come up with an alternative plan before they can repeal it, nonsense!

As Dr. Ben Carson noted “”Everything that these programs were supposed to fix has gotten worse,”.  If a vandal breaks your window, you don’t have to get a replacement window before you patch the hole with plastic or plywood or whatever you have at hand.

The Dems and Obama were in such a hurry to achieve their decades long dream of controlling healthcare that they rammed the most flawed bill in history through to law. There may have been gaps in the greatest healthcare system in the world in 2008, and improvements that could be made. But the Premier of Newfoundland, Canada, (with socialized medicine) did not fly to Cuba (with socialized medicine that Obama touts as an example) to get heart surgery.

As Premier Danny Williams said ““I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics.”  So, he flew to Mt. Sinai in Miami, to be treated on his own dime, by an American cardiac surgeon.

Well, he said a mouthful, didn’t he?

Obama and crew broke it, big time. We don’t have to go back and fix what was wrong then before we clean up the mess that they made.

Repeal the turkey.

Then take an unrushed, and less secretive and coerced look at what improvements can be made. Then watch things get better as markets take over; employment improves, and work on fixing what is broken, not scrapping everything in a system 90% excellent in a vain quest for that final 10%.

But, just as it was rammed down our throats, forget the filibuster, unless you have Joe Manchin and a bevy of Dems who are not anxious to be the next to fall on the Obama/Clinton sword.

They rammed it through on budget reconciliation, with a simple majority, and told us to like it, it was law. They told us we would like it once we knew what was in it.

They were wrong. We know it. And we don’t like it. It has been a huge budget buster.

So, reconcile it out of existence, and tell them to learn to like it.

Or tell them elections have consequences, we won, deal with it.

 

Tags: , , , ,

The Digital Arms Race: NSA Preps America for Future Battle

18 Jan

Future wars will be fought in cyberspace;  Soldiers may look like gamers!

By Jacob Appelbaum, Aaron Gibson, Claudio Guarnieri, Andy Müller-Maguhn, Laura Poitras, , Leif Ryge, and

Photo Gallery: 'Controlled Escalation' 

The NSA’s mass surveillance is just the beginning. Documents from Edward Snowden show that the intelligence agency is arming America for future digital wars — a struggle for control of the Internet that is already well underway.

Normally, internship applicants need to have polished resumes, with volunteer work on social projects considered a plus. But at Politerain, the job posting calls for candidates with significantly different skill sets. We are, the ad says, “looking for interns who want to break things.”

 Politerain is not a project associated with a conventional company. It is run by a US government intelligence organization, the National Security Agency (NSA). More precisely, it’s operated by the NSA’s digital snipers with Tailored Access Operations (TAO), the department responsible for breaking into computers.

Potential interns are also told that research into third party computers might include plans to “remotely degrade or destroy opponent computers, routers, servers and network enabled devices by attacking the hardware.” Using a program called Passionatepolka, for example, they may be asked to “remotely brick network cards.” With programs like Berserkr they would implant “persistent backdoors” and “parasitic drivers”. Using another piece of software called Barnfire, they would “erase the BIOS on a brand of servers that act as a backbone to many rival governments.”

An intern’s tasks might also include remotely destroying the functionality of hard drives. Ultimately, the goal of the internship program was “developing an attacker’s mindset.”

The internship listing is eight years old, but the attacker’s mindset has since become a kind of doctrine for the NSA’s data spies. And the intelligence service isn’t just trying to achieve mass surveillance of Internet communication, either. The digital spies of the Five Eyes alliance — comprised of the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand — want more.

The Birth of D Weapons

According to top secret documents from the archive of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden seen exclusively by SPIEGEL, they are planning for wars of the future in which the Internet will play a critical role, with the aim of being able to use the net to paralyze computer networks and, by doing so, potentially all the infrastructure they control, including power and water supplies, factories, airports or the flow of money.

During the 20th century, scientists developed so-called ABC weapons — atomic, biological and chemical. It took decades before their deployment could be regulated and, at least partly, outlawed. New digital weapons have now been developed for the war on the Internet. But there are almost no international conventions or supervisory authorities for these D weapons, and the only law that applies is the survival of the fittest.

Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan foresaw these developments decades ago. In 1970, he wrote, “World War III is a guerrilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation.” That’s precisely the reality that spies are preparing for today.

The US Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force have already established their own cyber forces, but it is the NSA, also officially a military agency, that is taking the lead. It’s no coincidence that the director of the NSA also serves as the head of the US Cyber Command. The country’s leading data spy, Admiral Michael Rogers, is also its chief cyber warrior and his close to 40,000 employees are responsible for both digital spying and destructive network attacks.

Surveillance only ‘Phase 0’

From a military perspective, surveillance of the Internet is merely “Phase 0” in the US digital war strategy. Internal NSA documents indicate that it is the prerequisite for everything that follows. They show that the aim of the surveillance is to detect vulnerabilities in enemy systems. Once “stealthy implants” have been placed to infiltrate enemy systems, thus allowing “permanent accesses,” then Phase Three has been achieved — a phase headed by the word “dominate” in the documents. This enables them to “control/destroy critical systems & networks at will through pre-positioned accesses (laid in Phase 0).” Critical infrastructure is considered by the agency to be anything that is important in keeping a society running: energy, communications and transportation. The internal documents state that the ultimate goal is “real time controlled escalation”.

One NSA presentation proclaims that “the next major conflict will start in cyberspace.” To that end, the US government is currently undertaking a massive effort to digitally arm itself for network warfare. For the 2013 secret intelligence budget, the NSA projected it would need around $1 billion in order to increase the strength of its computer network attack operations. The budget included an increase of some $32 million for “unconventional solutions” alone.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: Progressives never cry ‘Christianophobia’

15 Jan

Islamophobia is a myth…

mark 2

 
FSP editorial
Jan. 15, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

Last week, in the editorial offices of French magazine Charlie Hebdo, Islamic terrorists echoed President Obama’s 2012 message to the United Nations that, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

The drama, which played out on live TV and social media, began with brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi methodically massacring 12 individuals before stopping to shoot an unarmed, wounded police officer in the head and then escaping by car. And while these deviants have now been located and killed, their mission was a success.

cf3

In fairness to the president’s remarks, Obama went on to say, “Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied.”

But that simply isn’t the case in America. The progressive voices propagating the bigotry of “Islamophobia” as slander against Allah are the same voices championing the blasphemous “art” of such artists as Andres Serrano, whose 1987 photo depicted a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist’s urine. The piece received a visual art award in a National Endowment of the Arts competition sponsored in part by your tax dollars.

cf1

While there may be some who’ve become “Islamophobic” due to the reality of Islamic extremism, the bigotry of “Christianophobia” is widely accepted as part of the progressive movement to remove God from our society. And it’s the epitome of hypocrisy for liberals to rise after such attacks as the one in Paris to wave a banner protecting the Muslim religion while charging the complexion of Christianity violates their First Amendment Rights.

It would seem liberals are selective with their bigotry.

Even before the bodies of the dead French cartoonists had been removed from the scene of the slaughter, Muslim apologists were proactively taking to their cameras and keyboards to ensure political correctness with regard to Americans associating such Islamic terrorist attacks with the “peaceful” Muslim religion.

cf2

But facts are facts. A website called “The Religion of Peace,” a non-partisan site concerned with Islam’s true political and religious teachings according to the Quran, reveals that somewhere around the world a Muslim is carrying out a fatal jihadist attack every five hours. The website documents more than 20,000 religion-oriented attacks since 9/11 in which someone has died at the hand of a member of the “religion of peace.”

The site explains the Quran has at least 109 verses that “call Muslims to war with non-believers for the sake of Islamic rule.” Many of these are quite graphic, with commands to “chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding.”

When was the last time you heard of a terrorist attack in the name of Hinduism, Buddhism or Christianity? Have you ever heard a liberal cry “Christianophobia”?

Americans are cognizant of radical Islam not because they have a phobia of the Muslim faith. Some are simply wise enough to understand which faith values their belief over the lives of those who don’t.

cf5

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

Tags: , ,

Doug Smith: I’m not impressed with apologists for our enemies

14 Jan
“Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.”

doug smith

I heard it from the left throughout the Cold War regarding the Russians.  If we understood them a little better, we would see what nice folks they really are. After all, they are just failed Communists. They really are not doing it right, you see. If WE were doing Communism, we would get it right and it would really be a worker’s paradise.  There are no Gulags, no mass starvation, and no Russian troops fomenting wars on 3 continents.  Khrushchev was misquoted when he said “We will bury you. “

In the 1960s, many of these folks said “We can work with the Soviets.” President Kennedy’s response to them was “Let them come to Berlin!”

ds 1

It is easy, cheap, and cowardly to empathize and memorialize victims, while avoiding confrontation with the barbarian aggressors.  It costs little to pile flowers and candles at a makeshift shrine. It costs a bit more to go after murderers and kill them.

Now the current enemy, and the current apology du jour, are for Muslim terrorists.

Now, the apologists try to make the argument that anyone who commits an act of violence in the guise of a Muslim terrorist is just a bad Muslim.  Never mind that they tell us loudly that they are Muslims. Never mind that they are venerated by Muslims in the street after their noisy demise. If the apologists, who are usually not Muslims, could only explain it to them, things would be fine.  That is not what they are really about.

I am reminded of the scholar who argued passionately that the Odyssey was not written by Homer, but by another Greek of the same name.

ds 2

People can argue themselves into the most absurd points of view, laying all common sense aside.

The other talking point is that Muslims practice a philosophy of peace, and we should never fight back against it. Charles Martel would be amused at that point of view.

Charles Martel was the bastard son of a minor politician, who by virtue of his strength and military ability , rose to power in 8th century( what would become, )  France.  In his time, Muslim conquest, begun just after the death of Mohammed in the late 7th Century, had spread for 100 years to include most of the Middle East, North Africa, and Spain.   The depredations were brutal, and Martel looked at the situation in Iberia (Spain) with alarm.

In his judgment, it would not be possible to hold back this coming invasion of the Frankish kingdoms with the usual Middle Ages response of calling the men up for service after the harvest. He would need a standing army; trained, fed and supported, and ready at a moment’s notice. He could supplement it with call ups, but either he would have his standing Army, or Gaul would fall to the Saracens (Muslims.)

(Indeed, from the hindsight of history, it is likely that had Martel not prevailed, the Muslim conquest would have swept across Europe, even into England.  In fact, the Reconquista of Iberia, i.e. the retaking of Spain from the Muslim conquerors, took 7 centuries.  It was finally completed early in 1492. Now where have I heard that date before? )

ds 3

However, Charles Martel did not fail. He confiscated properties of the Church, and used it to feed his soldiers.  (This got him in a bit of hot water with the Church, but since he subsequently stopped the invading Muslims, all was forgiven.) By the time of the Battle of Tours, Oct 10, 732, he had 80,000 heavy infantry under his command. He soundly defeated the invading Abdul Rahman, leaving over 10,000 dead, including Rahman himself. This was the high water point of the Muslim advance into Europe until Suleiman in 1529.

So, what is the point of this brief history lesson?  In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris last week, it has become fashionable to march with arms linked, and wear a T shirt that says, I am Charlie Hebdo.  Empathy with the victims. If you attack them, you attack me.  That has a certain “We are the World “appeal to some, I suppose.  Still, Charles did not wander around Tours wearing a tunic emblazoned with “I am Bordeaux.” (A city the Muslim invaders sacked and looted, just prior to meeting Charles) Instead, he earned the appellation “Martel” (The Hammer) for the way he hammered his enemy, and drove them back, and out of France.

He did not wear a black arm band, nor did he stand with his head held high and defy the attackers with flowers.  Instead, he recognized the coming threat, took steps to prepare for them, and met them at Tours and shattered them.  Even he was surprised that after the 1st day of battle, the survivors simply dropped all their loot and ran for home.  But run they did, and the Battle of Tours ranks as one of the 15 most important battles in history.  The history of Europe for the next 1500 years, and the history of America turned on the outcome of that battle, and the deeds and life of that one man, who was supposed to have faded into obscurity.

So, I’ll empathize with the French.  (For all the jokes about the French Army surrendering every morning, just in case there is an enemy close enough to hear them, I’m glad they came in the 1700s to help us.) I’ll empathize with a brave and bold Frenchman as well

ds 4 ds 5

But I don’t want to say to the French, or the terrorists, “Hey, I’m just as brave as the last victims.”  I want to say, if your choice is to be barbarians, then look to your lives.

We are not Charlie Hebdo.

We are Charles Martel.

Tags: ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →