Monthly Archives: January 2013

Ryan: ‘Sequester is going to happen’

Paul RyanOn NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis) said, “I think the sequester is going to happen.”

Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, said that the $1.2 Trillion in automatic spending cuts is likely to happen because Democrats have opposed every replacement spending plan the Republicans put forward while offering no alternatives of their own.

The President and Congressional Democrats have signaled that they expect more tax increases and are not planning to cut federal spending in any appreciable way. GOP leadership has taken a strong stance against additional revenues.

Having failed to secure any actual spending cuts in the recent “fiscal cliff” deal, Ryan says that “the president got his additional revenues. So that’s behind us” indicating that more tax increases or other revenue generation proposals will be rejected and that only spending cuts will be considered going forward.

Sequestration was a device put forward by the White House that focused on $1.2 trillion in forced spending cuts over ten years to defense and domestic spending beginning with $110 billion in cuts in 2013.

Social Security, Medicaid, supplemental security income, refundable tax credits, the children’s health insurance program, the food stamp program and veterans’ benefits will all be spared from cuts – everything else is going to get hit.

 

“What Difference Does it Make?”

What difference does it make demanded Hilly of Johnson

Uttering the tragic words that rang across the room into the hearts of all Americans

 

What difference does it make indeed

Four American heroes are dead and the hearts of their families still bleed

 

What difference does it make

Whether Americans vote or eat government cake

 

What difference does it make if people must use healthcare that kills

As long as the government can tell you how to pay the insurance bills

 

What difference does it make to crucify Christ again

There are plenty of trees to hug and earth to freeze all in vain

 

What difference does it make if innocent children are dead

A crisis must not be wasted but used to squash the rights of Americans under the guise of moving ahead

 

What difference does it make if they trample the Constitution all over

So long, as the liberals have hope to give it a new makeover

 

What difference does it make that women head to the front lines while men remain behind

As long as we go forward and change the course of humankind

 

What difference does it make that our children forget their history

Even as the politicians in Washington, remain obscure to our misery

 

What difference does it make that our enemies scoff and laugh at us

So long as we can help them and negotiate our future with the one who is most preposterous

 

What difference does it make when the economy collapses

Hope and change will still have moved the masses

 

What difference does it make you say?

It makes a big difference to me and to all those who still believe in the USA.

 

 

Follow on Twitter:  @AKFielding

BLOG:  Average American Woman:  http://akfielding.blogspot.com/

Married to the Game 26 January 2013

AiAviWhen:     January 26th at 10pm East Coast / 7pm West Coast

Where:    Married to the Game with @AiPolitics on BlogTalkRadio

Topics to be discussed:   Tonight will be a smorgasbord of philosophical nuggets such as:  Why you should consider making babies.  Why it might not be practical to perpetuate Twitter Beefs.  The pros and cons of using “shame” as a motivating factor.  And how the media uses our own litmus tests against us to make us look foolish.   We’ll also probably talk about Apple (aka the world’s most profitable company) and their stock losing value.

Newsman publicly thanks God ex-girlfriend had abortion

There are plenty of negative traits one can ascribe to MSNBC host Toure – a penchant for making irrationally racist comments, for instance – but recent comments about the prenatal death of his child show callousness not often broadcast to the public.

In a disturbing celebration of Roe V. Wade’s 40th anniversary, Toure shared a personal experience from about 15 years ago. His ex-girlfriend, who he declared “wasn’t the one,” had just had an abortion and he described his own child’s legal murder as one of the highlights of his life.

“I thank God and country,” he said, “that when I fell into a bad situation, abortion was there to save me.”

His arrogance and lack of compassion are on full display in that one statement. On top of openly being more concerned about his comfort than a child’s life, Toure has the audacity to thank God for such an atrocious act.

This self-centered clown used his platform, however limited that may be on MSNBC, to share a view much of this country considers to be utterly inexcusable. Nonetheless, he spewed the nonsense that, had the abortion not happened, the resulting pregnancy would have made “a mess of three lives.”

To avoid that, he and his ex-girlfriend simply decided to eliminate the one life that did not have a vote.

Click here to get B. Christopher Agee’s latest book for less than $5! Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

 


Obama’s Treason: Update

talibanCDN was kind enough to publish “Obama Flagrantly Commits Treason” on January 13, 2013. The article highlighted how Obama approved, with Mohammed Karzai’s acquiescence, the Taliban to open an office in Kabul, Afghanistan. The office is supposedly, in “Dear Leader” Barack Hussein Obama’s own words, “… to facilitate talks.”

But, the Taliban doesn’t appear ready to talk. Afghan police say a suicide car bomber targeted a convoy of NATO supply trucks on January 25, but failed to hit them. A spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force said no NATO troops were killed or injured in the attack for which the Taliban have claimed responsibility.The Taliban have claimed responsibility for the attack.

“… to facilitate talks.”

That’s well and good, but actions speak much louder than words. You would think that Obama would have learned that fact with the Taliban. But, to quote John Belushi on SNL, “Nooooooooooooooooooo.” It seems that the Taliban, in 2011, targeted an American consulate convoy, and that two Americans were “slightly wounded.” But the fact that Americans were “slightly wounded” is beside the point. The Taliban attacked an American convoy, and continues to attack American ally convoys.Yet, Obama somehow saw fit to reward them.

Did Obama’s reward end the attacks? “Nooooooooooooooooooo.”

But that’s just my opinion.
Please visit RWNO, my personal web site.

Anonymous takes credit for attack on DOJ website

As a show of support for recently deceased Reddit founder Aaron Swartz, hacker group Anonymous has claimed responsibility for hacking into the Department of Justice’s Sentencing Commission website.

The DOJ Sentencing Commission website, www.ussc.gov went dark Saturday morning after a hacking attack by a group of hackers identifying themselves as Anonymous. The group has taken credit for several online attacks and this latest effort was intended to show their anger over Swartz’ suicide earlier this month.

Aaron Swartz was facing up to 30 years imprisonment and $1 million in fines for allegedly using MIT computers and networks to steal millions of articles from online archival and journal distribution service JSTOR.

The attack on the DOJ website is under criminal investigation by the FBI.

Obama, The Gift That Keeps Giving?

We have seen the missteps and the successes of the Obama administration. We have seen the worst, seemingly having each “accomplishment” being worse and worse than the previous one. The country is now subject to a namesake piece of legislation, in Obamacare, and we have seen Obama’s revolving door of big-government, tax-and-spend Keynesians spin like a dynamo.

We have seen the confident Obama boast that, “We won” when talking about his party, and their misreading of elections results. Most recently, the country has seen the administration’s misunderstanding of the Middle East, and their finger-pointing ability when they sought to make the Benghazi fiasco go away. We were witness to a massive fall in the president’s support among his former voters too (although it was not enough to overcome the lack of support for Mitt Romney among conservatives).

So, how does all this make Obama a hero of the right? Simply, he has given us on the right ample opportunity to call him on the carpet, to point to his lackadaisical leadership style, and undermine his party’s claims that the right is the party of the corporations and “big money”. At times, Obama seems like a political version of the “Teflon Don”, John Gotti – nothing seems to stick to the guy.

So, what has happened? All these opportunities for the right, and a shrinking advantage in Congress, and a lost presidency, are all we have to show from Obama’s continual failures. Excused away were things that would have sunk a Nixon, a Reagan, even a Bill Clinton presidency, and they were lost amid a maelstrom of personnel shuffling, which the administration claims is their holding people responsible.

Forget a president who goes through so many people so quickly, any anonymous person who acted as Obama does would have no friends left at this point. Obama has thrown Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, and even his own grandmother, under various buses. There is no end to his cadre of useful idiots. New scandal? New idiots.

If it were not for his left-wing charisma, which holds his supporters hanging on his every word, Obama’s election would have gone to Mitt Romney. The media, who not only parrots Obama’s words, also happily defends him from critical guests on talk shows and news channels. Soledad O’Brien, Piers Morgan, and others, not only defend his administration’s mistakes, but in Soledad’s case, attempt to give Obama excuses and explanation for former associations with racists and terrorists.

So – with the overwhelming evidence of media collusion, associations with enemies of the state, and other tawdry actions – how on the earth is he a hero to the right? Simply put, he has given the right everything it could hope for, to ensure landslide elections in both 2014 and 2016. Having involvement with his administration has tainted virtually everyone with a sort of “stain of Obama”.

Obama has either forced Congressmen to swallow bitter pills (as with Obamacare), or he has outed them as having agendas that run counter to their constituents’ concerns. The issues that cost Democrats Congressional seats in the 2010 elections may still have juice that can be wrested from them – especially after Americans saw their paychecks affected by mainly left-wing budget issues. Receipts showing Obamacare’s new medical excise taxes have popped up online too, posted by people angry at already tight purse-strings becoming tighter. The American people have finally begun showing an interest and concern regarding the way their government is functioning (or malfunctioning).

The Republicans may have never had it so good. They seem to only have the media to overcome (which I will agree is a giant mountain to climb). For anyone paying attention, the Obama-touch is enough for them to vote for any candidate who is not Obama or Obama endorsed. We saw in the last election how cool Democratic candidates were to an Obama endorsement.

The ways that the right must capitalize are threefold:

  1.  Stop allowing the talk show circuit to reframe subjects and terms. The right seems to fail more and more on this subject. The effects of ignoring the media’s word-redefining-ways last long beyond the initial interviews, stretching at times into month-long disasters. Adding to that the fact that if a GOP candidate verbally missteps, and his footage recycled repeatedly, and the Republicans not only weaken the current campaign, they accept the dings that the gaffe provides for any future campaigns as well. That means that the candidate’s campaign is over before it takes off. If solving this means giving a week-long class on oratory and rhetoric for prospective candidates – do it. The pay off will show such actions as invaluable. Call the left-wing fear mongers exactly what they are, and reiterate that America’s had enough scaring in place of actual results/budgets/legislation.
  2. Make the products of the current administration and current candidates very personal. The aforementioned excise tax? Use that receipt as a prop for all budget talks. Make it as conspicuous as a pocket Constitution. Make it plain for all Americans to understand they do have skin in the game, and that the left wants even more. Pin that receipt and those small, numerous taxes on the left. Make it their brand. Paint the left as the never satiated, taxing, spending, over-bearing beast that it is. When the left attempts to re-frame the argument that “only certain income levels are effected”, fire back with more questions intended to build your own point on the sarcastic  order of, “…like this year’s taxes only affected a few people?” Put the skills that the politicians learned in tactic one to good use.
  3. Finally, as much as possible, have the GOP stress how disastrous conservatives staying home on election day was for the last election. If it evolves to nothing more than a massive guilt trip, place much of the onus for the next four years’ policy in the laps of people who stayed home instead of voting in November, 2012. After so much work to unseat Congressmen who voted contrary to Tea Party, libertarian, and other conservatives ‘ concerns, to have sat home on Election Day, with an opportunity to unseat the most progressive president of our lifetimes, was a tremendous overestimation of the gains made. It was akin to driving with a pedal through the floorboards, and expecting to coast successfully for the final 1/2 lap.

So, reviewing quickly, that is “enunciate, elaborate, and motivate”. The right has no excuse remaining for faltering at this point. Right-wing voters must get over the party in-fighting (which should have evaporated with the revelations of just how far Obama leans to the left). They must get over the one issue that they have a firm, unrelenting hold of, the one sticking issue that prevents them from getting off their duffs and voting, so that they may actually win the positions in government that would allow issues to be changed. And before you think that is a poor way to manage a movement, or it sound impossible to sustain such measures – look at the deluge of awful legislation and regulation we have seen from the organized left in four short years.

Redefining America’s Founding Principles

Historically, Presidential Inaugural Addresses have sought to inspire and unite the nation, and provide directional leadership for the next presidential term. Perhaps to some, Monday’s speech did that. But to adherents of American exceptionalism, it was disconcerting. The president’s speech was laced with references to our founding principles, but their meaning twisted, misrepresented, and stripped of their historical and definitional significance.

God was mentioned seven times in the address, which may exceed the number of times the Almighty has been invoked by him over the past four years, which made their invocation seem superficial. The Constitution was mentioned once, at the very beginning, citing his second term as evidence of its “enduring strength,” in spite of the fact that he has stretched and distorted that document’s limitations on the executive branch beyond recognition of the founding fathers so dramatically during his first term.

Even the Declaration of Independence was cited, and those eternal classical-liberal ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that led to the severance of our relationship with Great Britain, and the perceived tyranny of King George. It was no surprise that he was reticent regarding the breadth and scope of our current federal government, which arguably wields immensely more tyranny over the American people than the British crown held over colonial America.

Even free market economics were mentioned, although it was in the context that the omnipotent and omniscient federal government must constrain and control it.

Clearly, through artistry and manipulation, precept-by-precept, the principles upon which the American republic was established were being redefined. Those tenets, which are distinctly and singularly American, which once were the pillars that the nation stood upon, were going through a historical revision right before our eyes. They were being reframed, redefined, and reshaped to fit a new progressive lexicon of American patriotic buzzwords that vitiate their original meanings.

The Constitution seems to have relevance since it returned him to power for another four years. But in terms of governance, it seems that to him it has lost its applicability to 21st century American politics since he can issue Executive and Administrative Orders that circumvent the very document he moments earlier swore he would uphold and defend.

God has no relevance in the godless, morally relativistic, and warped values of the ideology that seeks to make omnipotent government the central component in every American life, replacing an omnipotent deity. As the president’s campaign website so proudly portrays with its “Life of Julia,” the government is to be there at every turn and juncture in the life of the average American; governing, regulating, “helping,” and “supporting.”

And perhaps most invidious of all, a perverted sense of “liberty.” No spurious redefinition of liberty could be more antithetical to the founder’s intent than, “being true to our founding documents … does not mean we all define liberty in exactly the same way.”

In any language and any culture, liberty is synonymous with freedom. Not just a freedom “to,” as in “to do something,” but also a freedom “from,” as in freedom from control, repression, and tyranny. Each time liberty or freedom were mentioned, the words rang increasingly hollow and meaningless. For freedom to, and freedom from, have an inverse relationship to government growth, government power, and government control, which have dramatically increased over the past four years.

With each incremental Executive Order or legislative Act that broadens and expands central governmental authority, and with every dollar taken out of the pockets of Americans to fund the insatiable spending appetite of government, individual liberty and freedom are disproportionately diminished. As government grows, individual liberty decreases. No wonder, then, that he would frame the concept of individual freedom in the context of “collective action.” The progressive statist agenda is always based on collectivism, not individuality.

It’s difficult to separate the causation, or at least correlation, of the massive expansion of governmental power, and alarming growth of government debt of the past four years, from the perceived elusiveness of the American Dream. Four years ago, over 52% of Americans still believed the “American Dream” was attainable. That has now dropped to less than 40%, according to pollsters at Zogby.

And regrettably the perception seems accurate. Between legislative Act, presidential declarations, and bureaucratic regulatory expansion, Investor’s Business Daily now calculates that the government has direct or indirect control of more than 60% of the entire U.S. economy. Energy production, oil production and distribution, banking and finance, manufacturing, logging, mining, health care, insurance, automobile manufacturing and more, are all now controlled by the central government. A strict political classification of such an economy is clearly fascistic, where government controls, not necessarily owns, the means of production. Individual and collective freedoms are sacrificed when government wields so much power over the entire economy.

Clearly typifying the moral relativism of our dysfunctional culture, the phrase “We cannot mistake absolutism for principle,” perverts the very meaning of principle. After all, a principle is  “a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.” As such a principle is definitionally absolute. When they are no longer absolute, they are no longer principles, they’re simply good ideas. Such facile application of relativism to fundamental tenets like individual freedom and liberty diminishes the principled foundation of our republic.

The implications for the next four years are indeed ominous if this Inaugural Address represents the ideologically tortured state of our founding principles. With fundamental precepts marginalized through redefinition, token relevance accorded the Constitution, and free markets only viable with governmental control of the means of production, we are well on our way to the president’s desired “fundamental transformation of America.”

AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with a BA in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board.  He can be reached at [email protected].

Prevention Would Have Been Better Than Trials

“Politicians brought the Nazis to power and started the war. They are the ones who brought about these disgusting crimes.”

– Karl Doenitz, German admiral and would-be fuehrer after Hitler

On Nov. 20, 1945, the Nuremberg Trials began, bringing Hitler’s Nazi criminals to justice. By this time, several countries were destroyed, and 50 million people, 2.5 percent of the world’s population, lost their lives – including 12 million Jews, German dissidents, political opposition, intellectuals and others who were exterminated in Nazi concentration camps.

The world watched in horror as in the courtroom filled with Nazi criminals video footage was played of famished men, women and children who were mercilessly shot, starved and/or tortured, and then thrown carelessly into mass graves, all because they did not fall in line with the ideology of Adolf Hitler.

During the opening of the court proceedings, it is important to note that the prosecutor said, “The laws of God and man have been violated, and the guilty must not go unpunished.”

Just imagine if the Nuremberg Trials, per se, would have taken place at the first unconstitutional acts of Hitler’s wicked regime. Hitler could have easily been stopped in the 1920s with relative ease by the German people who still had the freedom to do the right thing, and did it not.

Instead, they acted as if Hitler had nothing to do with their personal lives.

Friends, as no one took Mussolini, Mao or Stalin seriously at first, many fellow Germans thought Hitler was an average run-of-the-mill wacko who posed no threat.

Horrifically, they were dead wrong.

One of Hitler’s first moves when he rose to power was to attack his own Reichstag, only to blame it on his political opposition. He then proceeded to eradicate the Constitution of Germany in only six years.

Hitler no longer abided by the law, but instead promulgated his agenda by force.

Where were the 80 million people in Germany to stand up against this monster?

As Karl Doenitz blurted out, it was the politicians (and the people) who were responsible for bringing the Nazis to power.

On a daily basis the crimes of Hitler and his regime were evident. So obvious were the atrocities that after church the Germans were wiping the ashes of the incinerated victims off their cars.

Their lack of action turned them from victims to accomplices.

What does this have to do with America today?

Everything.

It is clear to see that over the last four administrations, America’s government is emulating many aspects of German history – likewise setting itself at war with God, abusing power and trampling on the Constitution.

Where are the 312 million Americans to stand up and magnify the laws of our republic?

Have Americans today forgotten the price of their blood-bought freedoms, paid for by hundreds of thousands of veterans who laid down their lives, fortunes and sacred honor?

In the 1800s, after much bloodshed through the Civil War, President Andrew Johnson made one wrong move, causing him to be tried for impeachment.

Johnson simply removed the secretary of war from office without the consent of Congress. Americans were so protective over their liberties that they would not tolerate the least offense.

It would do us well to follow in our forefathers’ footsteps, lest we, like Germany, become accomplices to America’s overthrow through our apathy and lack of repentance – to our own demise.

As it says on the Supreme Court Building, “Justice (is) the guardian of liberty,” right under Moses holding the Ten Commandments. We must follow the preamble of our Constitution and “establish justice” (Isaiah 51) in order to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

America: Simply put, prevention is better than cure.

Interestingly, Time magazine merited the murderous dictator Adolf Hitler “Man of the Year” in 1938. Josef Stalin was also declared Time’s “Man of the Year” in 1939 and 1942, who, like Hitler, was responsible for committing heinous crimes against his own people. This brings one to ask what other criminals have been labeled “Man of the Year” by Time magazine. You may be surprised.

Study the past. History tends to repeat itself:

Unloaded Guns Can Kill!

No, you didn’t misread that title. Yes, there are leftists out there that think unloaded guns can hurt people. And yes, unfortunately, those leftists are in office!

If this doesn’t go viral……

Well, all I can say is that I hope this California Councilwoman doesn’t have any aspirations to move up in the political world. Here’s hoping she can continue to afford her botox bills without moving up, shall we?

H/T ConservativeVideos

FEMA: Burned Out Family Can’t Rebuild

Meet the Taylors, a Sacramento family whose home burned down last August. After dealing with the devastation and emotional trauma the family discovered that FEMA had changed the rules for their area and now would require their home be built 20 feet above ground in order to meet the new flood zone designation. While the fire damage was covered by their insurance the new building requirements were not.

“The city won’t let me fix my house because of FEMA regulations,” Jennifer Taylor said in an interview to Fox News in November. “This is so wrong.”

We bought this home in 1998 because FEMA had certified the levees as 100-year flood protection,” Taylor told FoxNews.com. “Homes are just not being fixed here. … There’s at least a handful of us in this situation.”

In 2008 FEMA revisited flood prone areas and decertified the levee.

Watch their documentary and understand their frustration with the government.

Follow the Taylor’s challenge on Facebook: BurnedOutInNatomas

Drones Would Have Aided Americans in Benghazi if Cows Were Involved

 

Cow drone

When four dying Americans in Benghazi needed fire-powered drones to take out Islamic militants firing mortars, those hovering drones controlled by Obama’s D.C. administration never fired on the enemy. Maybe the Americans inside the Benghazi Consulate should have kept cows at the Embassy. It’s obvious our spying government holds a deeper grudge against cow manure than terrorists massacring Americans.

According to reports: 

The EPA is using drones to spy on cattle ranchers in Nebraska and Iowa in order to make sure that farmers dispose of waste properly.

That’s right Americans, if you are a farmer and your cow manure is disposed of improperly, the Fourth Amendment-breaking, photographing spy drones flying over your farms will tell Washington. And then you and your cows will be sorry!

Since it’s lawful for the government to “monitor real estate to assure itself that the occupier of the lands is not adversely affecting the natural habitat,” perhaps the Americans in Benghazi should have told Obama and Hillary that the Taliban mortars were filled with cow dung that would “adversely affect Libya’s natural habitat.”  That might have moved the administration to save Americans and completely annihilate the Taliban.

Obama has no problem using drones to kill terrorists and spy on American farmers, but he has great difficulty when aiding our military begging for help.

Look at the laws Obama uses to conduct the War on Terror he vowed to end and ask why he ignored four men, in his service, fighting for their lives.

Obama uses Article 51 of the UN Charter  (the UN has declared it is against the drone war)  which “includes the targeted killing of persons such as high-level al-Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks” to conduct drone strikes: 371 of the 424 drone strikes since 2002 have been conducted by Obama.

There is no doubt drones eliminate threats to overseas military and the United States.  So, if taking out the enemy is vital to U.S. security, why didn’t Obama (who wrongfully entered Libya without Congressional consent) or Hillary use weaponized drones to aid four Americans fighting and dying inside an American Consulate?

Then there is the National Defense Authorization Act.

Do readers remember why President Obama signed the controversial law on December 31, 2011 (full explanation he on law language here)? This law that detains Guantanamo Bay terrorists indefinitely, and stipulates unconstitutional detention and assassination of any American citizen suspected of terror, is supposed to protect military and their families overseas. That would include aiding those who died in Benghazi. Or one would reason it to be so.

Obama  said he had reservations about signing the law (which gives unconstitutional provisions to the president), but did so:

chiefly because it authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed.

 

Apparently those services were never “crucial” enough to extend any “interest” or “security” to Americans being massacred by brutal terrorists in Benghazi.

American farmers with filthy barnyards better look out!

 

obama spy drone

 

But forget the NDAA, the president has Special Operations Teams readily available to him at all times, in all places, including the Middle East and Mediterranean, who are prepared for capture and kill raids, such as the one that took out Osama bin Laden.

The president also has:

 [T]he 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), which the U.S. Congress passed just days after 9/11. The statute empowers the president ‘to use all necessary and appropriate force’ in pursuit of those responsible for the terrorist attacks.

 

Where was that protection for those men fighting for their lives in the Benghazi Consulate? Those men fought for seven hours, Ambassador Stevens was gang-raped and tortured to death, Ty Woods begged Washington for help, but was told “stand down,” even as fire-powered drones, meant to provide security, hovered overhead, but were never given orders to fire on the enemy.

What the hell is the point of the NDAA, AUMF, UN Charters, or any special operation teams if the president refuses to utilize military power to bring terrorists attacking Americans to their end?

Why bother signing controversial laws you claim protect overseas military if you tell them to stand down when they must fight?

Why send American troops overseas to fight the enemy if they are not allowed to battle without asking permission, denied help during combat, and told “stand down?”

And why are American drones used to take out terrorists in Islamic countries and spy on America’s cows, but those drones were never used to help U.S. military personnel in Benghazi who begged  for help on September 11th?

Obama orders spy drones to fly over American farms, photograph evidence of cow poop, yet refused to order weaponized drones to fire on Taliban terrorists killing Americans in Benghazi. Why?

Answer: Because controlling the constitutional rights of Americans, and our cow manure, rather than aiding our military when it needs help, is what is “necessary and appropriate” “responsibility” to “pursuit” a well-kept and deodorized America.

Maybe our men in Benghazi should have told Obama and Hillary that the terrorists were spewing cow dung all over Benghazi’s streets. Then perhaps the two would have said “Don’t stand down! Fire on those terrorists! It will make all the difference for the environment”