Monthly Archives: August 2013

Vice President Biden Threatens To Impeach The President

Back in 2011, I wrote this brief post, entitled, “The UN Commits The American Military To Libya,” in which I noted some serious Constitutional problems with The President, unilaterally, without the consent of Congress, and without an imminent threat of an attack on The United States, taking our military to war. I started the post by saying, “Well, sadly, here we go again”! And, here we are, a little over two years later, and sadly (in regards to Syria), here we go again!

While, it is a rare moment that I agree with Vice President Biden, I must say, we are in complete agreement that, if a President takes our military to war, without the threat of an imminent attack on The United States, and without the “consent” of Congress, then, it is, most certainly, a highly Impeachable offense.

In a recent post, by Breitbart.com, is the below video of now, Vice President Joe Biden, in an interview, back in 2007, threatening to impeach President Bush if he took our military to war, in Iran, without an imminent threat to The United States, and Congressional authorization. Also, are the below excerpts from the interview:

Continue reading

Hypocrisy and Discrimination at the MLK Commemoration

The dream that Martin Luther King, Jr. envisioned for America 50 years ago this week has mostly been achieved. But regrettably, those who attempted to honor him on the anniversary of his iconic “I Have A Dream” speech, rather than honoring him, tarnished his memory with a new kind of segregation and discrimination, based on ideology.

Dr. King declared, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” With a black president, and several black congressmen and civic leaders in attendance, clearly the racial glass ceiling is shattered. And while there may be still a few pockets of actual racism around the country, electoral evidence on its own clearly signals the demise of racial discrimination in any systemic form.

2013-08-30-digest-cartoonBut what was in evidence this week in Washington was a new version of discrimination, based on ideology. Where were the only black U.S. Senator, and the only black Supreme Court Justice? They were unceremoniously not invited to speak. It clearly is not based on race, but based on ideology. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina is a Republican, and is the only black senator, and is one of only eight in history. Clarence Thomas is a conservative jurist, was appointed by a Republican president, and is only the second in history to hold that position. The only conceivable explanation for their exclusion is based on ideological alignment.

So let’s see if we understand this correctly. It’s not enough to be a minority and stand as evidence, based on station in life, that skin color no longer has relevance in today’s society. Rather, what’s most important is that one subscribes to liberalism, pay homage to their Party, and then skin color no longer matters. In other words, what the organizers of this week’s event honoring Rev. King did, was engage in exactly the kind of conduct King himself denounced. They discriminated.

In fact, of the three dozen speakers at the event, not one was a Republican, a conservative, or anything but a died-in-the-wool Democrat. Clearly we witnessed a gross and blatant example of discrimination. Why would they intentionally discriminate against the party of Lincoln, the party and ideology that pushed through the 13th and 14th Amendments ending slavery, and the party that pushed through the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1871, 1875, 1957, 1960, and 1964? None of those would’ve been possible without Republican support, and in most cases, ardently advocating for them.

It would appear that issues regarding race in the 21st century, are not about race at all, but about using race as a political tool for liberalism and advancing the cause of their party. How else could one possibly justify that the party of Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd, and Jim Crow Laws, would be the arbiters of all arguments alleging racism? The hypocrisy and duplicity are unsurpassed! Especially when we realize that the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. was himself a Republican.

Confirming this observation, King’s speech 50 years ago cited the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Amendments to the Constitution referring to our individual liberties as citizens. Yet the administration of the first black president, proving in part by his position that King’s dream has been realized, officially classifies the types of persons who quote those documents as terrorists, potential terrorists, or right-wing extremists. Based on that alone, Obama would’ve had to recognize in King a threat to national security. How’s that for an ideological conundrum?

It becomes painfully more clear all the time that the left’s concept of diversity, in a racial context, really has nothing to do with ethnicity, but everything to do with an ideological homogeneity, exclusivity and purity. The line of demarcation is purely ideological. If you’re a conservative or a Republican, expect no tolerance, no inclusion, no attempts at understanding, and no seat at the table of acceptable political speech. Such should be rather segregated from the mainstream of societal discourse, branded as possible terrorists, and classified as extremists.

Some of the idiocy that passed for lofty elocution at the rally this week confirms this observation further. Martin Luther King III claimed that some still use race as a “license to profile, to arrest and even to murder,” obviously referencing the Trayvon Martin case. Julian Bond, former chairman of the NAACP, claimed the Supreme Court had “eviscerated” the voting Rights Act by making it possible for states to pass voter ID laws. Melanie Campbell, president of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, apparently referencing the same Supreme Court decision, claimed that even though Klansmen in white sheets are no longer a menace, that judges in black robes pose as great a threat.

And then President Obama, in his inexorable role as salesman for his unpopular Obamacare, made a failed attempt at convincing us that MLK would’ve approved of it. Apparently the President has not read anything that MLK wrote or spoke of, since everything he said was based on the principle of freedom, which is sacrificed at the altar of the Affordable Care Act.

The Party that sponsored this week’s rally is ideologically and politically the least qualified to heap accolades on Rev. King. They have, after all, replaced their Jim Crow laws, forced segregation, and slavery, with government handouts and party loyalty that have made minorities slaves to new masters: the government, and the Party that controls it.

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 degrees in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board.  He can be reached at [email protected]

Saturday Night Cigar Lounge, August 31st

When:Saturday, August 31st, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Saturday Night Cigar Lounge with Taylor on Blog Talk Radiosncl_logocdn

What: Saturday nights were meant for cigars and politics.

Hear Taylor and his co-host Liz Harrison talk about everything from the past week – from politics, to news, to books, and entertainment. Whatever comes to mind, and of course, sobriety is not likely.

Tonight: Sean Venkman guests to discuss Syria, Syria, Texas unions and the NSA.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

An Obama Scheme

So, today, as Secretary of State, John Kerry, reeled off the reasons that the United States should find itself embroiled in a civil war in the Middle East, as Vladimir Putin weighs his responses, and as Obama declares that the U.S. will go it alone if they have to, the world waits. The world seems to split into a few different camps .

Some wonder who actually used the poison gas that killed thousands of Syrians (despite Kerry’s swearing that he is positive it was Assad’s men, not rebels). Some wonder, why now? Suddenly, gas is a thousand deaths too far? Yet others may wonder why there is not more pressure on the U.N. to provide peacekeepers, or to investigate if it was actually gas used, or to hold a vote, in the face of an assured Russian veto, to allow nations to intervene.

Here at home, there are any number of Obama administration scandals that a person could point to, that would easily take a backseat to a brand new war. While the country is war-weary, the men that do the fighting are fathers, sons, and brothers, and using them as some sort of executive strike force would lose far more respect for the president than allowing most of the scandals to run their course. Of course, that takes for granted that this administration still has respect left to lose.

As it seems now, any Syrian actions will revolve around the use of tomahawk cruise missiles, which cost around $1.4 million per launch. The odd thing about a new attack (or kinetic military action, as they are now known), is that the president may have waited so long to act, he has excuses no matter the outcome. Perhaps that is what the delay was all about – coming up with explanations to describe what has happened, no matter what happens.

Plan A: Obama orders $140 million worth of missile strikes (probably a very low total estimate of what strikes would actually cost), and they will have little to no effect on the man who Obama intends to punish, Bashir Assad. Assad has already had plenty of time to move the missiles and other weapons that Obama would ostensibly target. So, the missile strikes would amount to little more than another giant waste of money and manpower, and accomplishes nothing…Except anger Russia and Iran. For his part, Obama stresses how he only had the most positive outcome in mind. He was trying to do the right thing.

Plan B: Obama orders his strikes, and through either bad intelligence or some other missile snafu, a strike hits a Russian or Iranian-owned building or other concern. In that scenario, I would anticipate a quick reaction of the administration to be to throw money at the problem, to quickly make it go away. For Russia or Iran’s part, they could probably take the issue to the United Nations, and seek to shame the United States. As a result, the U.S.’s standing in the world gets tarnished again. Obama says it was an unfortunate event, (and without mentioning the payoff) he is glad that the country who suffered the loss decided against any “rushed actions”, and that the countries have something to build on now.

Plan C: Obama orders more extensive actions than just a missile strike. This not only entails aircraft, both fighters and bombers, it also risks pilots’ lives – something that missiles do not do. One can only guess how an angry Assad, unjustly attacked (in his eyes) would treat a downed American pilot. In that case, who does Obama turn to, being allied with Al-Qaeda elements and France, for diplomatic channels to get the pilot released? Once he figures out the magic word (or amount) I would expect Obama to spin the achievement of his State Department.

When you are a Teflon president, there is little worry of having a scandal or war failure attach to you. With the ongoing scandals having little effect on Obama so far, it may have only emboldened him to act more brazenly than he might have previously. With so many yes-men in place, willing to fall on a sword for you, what is the your source of critical thought or reflection of your actions? Having only been told positive things about your actions, while having a press that minimizes negativity, warranted or not, is not good for a leader. Of the many things that Barack Obama has done, and has taken upon himself to enact via executive order, this should truly bear the title of Obama’s War, regardless of outcome.

Adventures in Syria

If there is any indication that Obama’s lack of leadership has hurt the US, it is the current situation with Syria. 

He is unable to build a coalition the way Bush did. He may have had British PM David Cameron convinced action needs to be taken in the wake of Assad’s chemical attacks against his enemies (ie, his own people), but Parliament told him no. This is the first time in a long time where a PM has been told no by Parliament regarding usage of the military. You can chalk this up to two reasons:

One: Bush and Iraq. Apparently the Brits are still upset that Bush fabricated intelligence from MI6 to justify action in Iraq. (Fool me once, shame on me; fool me twice….um….well….you’re not going to fool me again.)

Two: The Brits know Obama won’t do anything except shake his fist before he says, “Oh, never mind,” and returns to the golf course.

It’s likely a combination of both, but with more emphasis on the second. Do they really think Obama means what he says, or can pull it off? Probably not, so why waste the time and money?

In the wake of the British vote, the haughty John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, made a speech where he praised France, our “oldest ally”, for (verbally) supporting military action. Yeah, France helped us beat Britain 237 years ago, and have been surrendering ever since, but I suppose the “oldest” title still applies. I’m sure the British are stunned by the remark, and they may have even stopped laughing by the time you read this.

So, instead, Obama, as he searches the golf course for a solution, is tossing around the idea that the U.S. will go it alone on this one. ‘Merica, heck yeah! Get ‘er done!

Obviously this “no confidence” vote does not sit well with the administration, nor does it make us look good. There was a time, not so long ago, when this wouldn’t have happened.

There is a third reason, I suppose, and it’s certainly an unspoken one. 

Is it really a crisis when Arabs kill Arabs? Are we really worse off because there are now less Arabs in the world? The CIA says just over 1400 people were killed in the chemical attack. That means there are 1400 less Arabs to fly planes into buildings. The media and the politicos are trying to make a case that we need to do something, but I’m not sure the public cares. Maybe we’re all still upset about Iraq.

It’s a disaster all around. But Obama drew a red line, said, “Don’t y’all cross this, I mean it,” and now he has to follow through.

Ultimately the president is going to launch a missile off the deck of a ship, hit a camel in the butt, and declare victory. He’ll go on a national speaking tour and tell us how he, alone, gave Syria the what-for just like when he killed bin Laden and the rest of the world better remember not to mess with the U.S. See how that rhymed?



BRIAN DRAKE is a broadcaster in California and the author of The Rogue Gentleman, a thriller in the tradition of Vince Flynn and Brad Thor. Follow him on Twitter.

Getting Hammered Radio – Friday, August 30, 2013

photo

 

When: Friday, August 30, 2013 at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific

Where: Getting Hammered with Steve Hamilton and Stevie J West

Tonight: We are live in Orlando, FL at Defending the Dream / RightOnline. The show starts a little later tonight due to conference activities, but we’re still looking forward to Getting Hammered eith everyone. So, join Stevie, Elisha, and Steve for a great show at 11:00 pm EDT. We have no idea who the guests may be, pretty much anyone that stops by.

So get your drinks and join us at the bar…it’s Friday night….and we’re Getting Hammered :)

A Criminal Matter

The seven individuals apprehended for trespassing at the Quabbin Water Reserve in Belchertown, Massachusetts, just after midnight May 14, 2013 are part of an “on-going criminal matter,” according to the Massachusetts State Police.

In response to a Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request for names, addresses, court dates, and charges filed against the seven individuals, the Office of Chief Legal Counsel for the Massachusetts State Police cited several state statutes exempting the release of information requested.

“Please be advised G.L. c. 4, XXSSXX 7 cl. 26(a) exempts from public disclosure any records that are “specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by statute.” In this instance, your request falls within this exemption since releasing the requested information would violate… the Criminal Offender Record Information (“CORI”) statute.”

The letter comes more than 3 months following an incident whereby 5 men and 2 women were apprehended for trespassing at the largest drinking water supply for the greater Boston area in the middle of the night. The 7 individuals of Singaporean, Pakistani, and Saudi Arabian decent claimed to be chemical engineering students, according to local news reports. No other information has been made public about the identities of the individuals involved.

The response letter revealed ties to a larger criminal investigation.

“…according to information provided to this office, this incident remains the subject of an on-going criminal matter.”

The Massachusetts State Police recently shared publicly their discontent with a Clerk Magistrate’s decision not to proceed with the criminal investigation of the seven individuals.
________________________________________________________
To see scans of the FOIA request & additional information, click here: Refusal to Answer

Follow me on Twitter!

A New Defense Strategy for America

ReaganPeaceQuote

The American people have been treated to many “new” defense strategies, military force postures, nuclear strategies, and other policy proposals – mostly from the anti-military Left – over the last few decades. Most of these “new” policy proposals were aimed at cutting and gutting the US military while lulling the American people into a false sense of security by claiming that the policy proposals were “new” and thus somehow better, while the previous (and contemporary) policies, strategies, and force structure are supposedly bad per se and obsolete. This is, of course, utter nonsense.

By contrast, what my new defense strategy aims to do is to provide a framework for preserving US military strength to the greatest extent possible, protect crucial US national interests and key allies, and keep the peace while steering America out of unwise military adventures and reshaping the US military for the threats and wars of the future.

My strategy is based on the following simple principles:

  • The US must have the strongest military, including the largest and most survivable arsenal, in the world, and invest whatever amount of money is necessary to accomplish that. No ifs, buts, or ands.
  • The US must completely reject the ridiculous notion that the world would be more peaceful and more secure if the US just disarmed itself, or scrapped its nuclear arsenal. It wouldn’t. Accordingly, NO further cuts in America’s nuclear deterrent should EVER be made. EVER.
  • The US must also completely reject the equally ridiculous notion that there will ever be a world without nuclear weapons, short of even more powerful weapons being invented. Nuclear weapons’ importance, and therefore the need for a large American nuclear deterrent, is growing, not shrinking. As CSBA’s Barry Watts and Jim Thomas, and other scholars, have pointed out, the world is now in a Second Nuclear Age.
  • The US should protect its national interests at home and around the world, and protect key allies, but not useless allies or freeriders. A bad alliance is worse than no alliance at all. At the same time, Washington needs to remember that executing any strategy or military campaign successfully in any region of the world requires strong, secure allies.
  • The US should intervene militarily only where and when necessary – not everywhere. Humanitarian crisis are deplorable, but they are not a threat to America’s interests. If, repeat if, the US does intervene militarily somewhere, it needs to observe the principles set out by Reagan Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger in 1984. It needs to apply overwhelming force to defeat the enemy decisively and then bring the troops home. No nationbuilding and no prolonged wars with no end in sight. As Sun Tzu taught, “There is no instance of any country having benefitted from prolonged warfare.”
  • Foreign aid, except to Israel, should be ended.
  • The DOD should not be in the “soft power”/”development assistance” business. Its sole role is protection and warfighting. It’s supposed to be the coercive stick accompanying US diplomacy.

Based on those principles, I propose the following strategy.

The world’s center of gravity is in the Asia-Pacific region, and that’s where the US should concentrate its military and nonmilitary assets. The largest threat to America’s (and other countries’) security is an increasingly aggressive, militaristic, hegemony-minded China, which has a dangerous combination of the historical grudges of a Weimar Republic, the militant nationalism of an Arab state, and an expansionist binge like the Soviet Union. It promises a “hand-to-hand” fight with the US, claims the entire South China Sea as its internal lake, and has supplied ICBM launcher vehicles to North Korea.

The US must therefore counter China militarily, economically, and diplomatically, in the ways advised below.

In the Persian Gulf, the US should continue to keep its option to bomb Iran to stop its military program open, as it is highly unlikely that diplomacy and sanctions will stop that program – Iran is already the world’s pariah (along with North Korea) and one of the most isolated countries in the world, but its leaders don’t care about that one iota, and its nuclear program continues unabated. As in the Asia-Pacific, the US should provide a large, modern nuclear umbrella to its allies in the Gulf to discourage them from going nuclear.

In Europe, the US should close the vast majority of its bases and withdraw all 4 Army BCTs, along with the tanker wing, the 4 USN missile defense capable ships, and one of the fighter wings, currently based there. Those assets should all be dedicated to the Asia-Pacific region. The US should retain only one fighter wing, tactical nuclear weapons, and the most important (strategically important) bases there, such as Ramstein and Lakenheath.

The Europeans should be told, in no uncertain terms, that they’re essentially on their own now and must start providing for their own defense; that the US will continue to provide a nuclear and missile defense umbrella for them, but they must provide for their own conventional defense and pay part of the cost of deploying US BMD systems in Europe.

In Cuba, the US should resume working towards the overthrow of the regime of the Castro brothers, and also aim to overthrow Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua.

The US also needs to revitalize its alliance with the United Kingdom, which could be repaired e.g. by recognizing Britain’s claim to the Falklands if the UK allows the US to use the Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean in any contingency with China or Iran. Ties with France should also be improved.

As for reshaping the US military itself, the US should move the military away from weapons and capabilities design for counterinsurgency wars and theaters, and for other theaters where the only opponents are insurgents or primitive states unable to contest control of the air. The military should instead shift quickly towards weapons and capabilities useful in highly-contested environments – where the opponents are nation states equipped with e.g. advanced fighters and air defense systems and thus able to contest control of the air.

This means setting priorities within the defense budget. Any real strategy is about setting these, and not everything can be a priority – because when everything is a priority, nothing is. A failure to set priorities would essentially be the same thing as sequestration.

This means the military should divest itself of Predator and Reaper drones, other nonstealthy drones, Littoral Combat Ships, aircraft carriers, nonstealthy fighters and bombers, nonstealthy or short-range missiles, and other unsurvivable weapons as soon as possible.

Instead, it should quickly field, in large numbers, weapons such as stealthy bombers and carrier-capable drones, stealthy long-range cruise missiles, submarines (including guided missile submarines), conventional prompt global strike weapons (such as FALCON aircraft), missile defense equipment, anti-submarine weapons (aircraft, sonar, torpedoes, ships), demining ships and equipment (including demining drones), ASAT weapons, hardened satellites, base dispersal and hardening, and cyberweapons – both defensive and offensive. That is where the vast majority of defense R&D and procurement spending should be focused.

Of course, none of those investments, and indeed, maintaining US military power in general, won’t be possible unless Congress drops its knee-jerk opposition to authorizing long overdue reforms of the military’s pay, healthcare, retirement, and other personnel programs, as well as base closure and the retirement of excess Global Hawk and C-27J aircraft. That must include increasing, at least somewhat, TRICARE program premiums for military retirees (these premius are already almost 10 times less what the average American pays in premiums) and increasing the number of years required for a military pension from 20 to 25, so that people have an incentive to stay in the military for longer, when they’re still in their prime, in their 40s or early 50s, and still able to give the nation at least 5 years of service.

The DOD has repeatedly asked Congress, year after year, for authorization of such reforms, yet Congress has repeatedly refused to do so, or to acknowledge that these costs are unsustainable. The defense authorization bill recently produced by the House Armed Services Committee continues that dishonorable trend.

This must change. Without these crucial reforms – which virtually all think-tanks across the political spectrum, from the right to the left, support – the DOD will become, within a few decades, nothing more but a benefit-administering agency. To prevent that from happening, these and other, sometimes painful, personnel program reforms and base closures, must be enacted.

Annex: How US foreign policy and defense posture should be reshaped

In the diplomatic arena, the US should:

  • Seek cordial relations with all of China’s neighbors and try to form an “Asian NATO” with them. It should include Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Singapore, Australia, India, Thailand, and any other willing country – as long as these countries maintain sufficient military capabilities to back the US up. South Korea should also be invited, but Seoul is currently unwilling to challenge Chinese hegemonic aspirations.
  • Reaffirm its commitment to Taiwan’s defense and sell any weapons Taiwan may need or want – including submarines, missile defense systems, and F-35 jets. Taiwan should be used as a form of pressure on China to rein in North Korea. (Likewise, the US should sell all of its other allies any weapons they may need or want.)
  • Inform South Korea that the US will, from now on, provide only a nuclear umbrella to South Korea, but not conventional defense. South Korea has twice the population and 40 times the GDP of North Korea. It is time for Seoul to take exclusive responsibility for its conventional defense.
  • Endorse India’s territorial claim to Kashmir.
  • Cancel the European Phased Adaptive Approach and recognize Kosovo as a part of Serbia if Russia, in turn, redeploys its tactical nuclear weapons to Asia, agrees to limit their number, stops violating the INF treaty, allows the US military to use Russian airspace and bases in case of America finding itself in conflict with China, and signs a firm, verifiable commitment not to sell any military equipment of any kind, nor any energy resources, to China, Iran, or Venezuela.

In terms of military deployments and America’s overseas military posture:

  • All US troops except nuclear-capable aircraft squadrons and the Ramstein wing should be withdrawn from Europe.
  • Cancel the plan to deploy 2,500 Marines in Australia. There, they will be too far from any potential hotspot. The plan to move some Marines out of Okinawa should be cancelled.
  • Disperse its units, ships, and aircraft across a larger number of bases and harden at least the most important ones. Also, the runways at Andersen AFB on Guam should be repaired.
  • Cancel the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) to missile defense, which is essentially a gift from American taxpayers to Europe. It won’t protect the US, only Europe. The Europeans should provide for their own missile defense.
  • Deploy more ships, aircraft, and military units to allied countries in the Asia-Pacific, but not deploy them within 1000 kms of China to avoid putting them in the range of China’s short-range ballistic missiles. Okinawa should be the only exception to this rule. (One ship forward-deployed abroad, e.g. in Japan, is worth four warships based in the US.)
  • Deploy missile defense systems at Guam, in the Philippines, and in Texas.
  • The SBX radar should be permanently present in the Asia-Pacific to monitor China and North Korea.
  • The US should permanently base 1-2 frigates or other surface combatants (not LCSes) in Singapore to close the Malacca Strait (and thus deny China its oil supply) in case of war with China.
  • No bombers should be permanently based at Guam, as that island is already a target for both China’s and North Korea’s ballistic missiles.
  • All US troops based within 1,800 kms of Iran should be withdrawn from such bases.

In terms of weapon inventories and programs, the US should:

  • Maintain a large nuclear deterrent (no fewer than 5,000 warheads in total, including no fewer than 1,700 operationally deployed) to discourage Japan, South Korea, and other allies from going nuclear. The US also needs to publicly acknowledge the fact that China has at least 1,600-1,800, and quite possibly up to 3,000, nuclear warheads and 3,000 miles of tunnels in which to hide them and their delivery systems.
  • Speed up the development of the Next Gen Bomber, of a stealthy UCLASS carrier-capable drone, of the F/A-XX 6th generation fighter, and of the next-gen cruise missile (which should have a range of at least 2,000 kms). Also develop an electronic warfare/jamming variant of the UCLASS drone. Build at least 200 Next Gen Bombers. Retire the B-1 bomber as soon as possible.
  • Cut the carrier fleet to 9 while significantly increasing the submarine fleet and its missile launch capacity, and increasing its cruise missile inventory. All future Virginia class subs should be fitted with the Virginia Payload Module. USN subs and surface ships should also become able of rearming at sea.
  • Zero-time and structurally strengthen all P-3 Orion ASW aircraft, procure more P-8 Poseidon ASW planes if budgets allow, and equip all surface combatants with towed array sonar. Practice ASW hunting, including against advanced subs such as those of the Gotland, Scorpene, and Type 212 classes, frequently.
  • Field laser missile defense systems and EM railguns on surface combatants ASAP.
  • Stop procuring JASSM-ER missiles.
  • Develop a next-gen long-range air to air missile and equip it with active radar, IR-guided, and passive anti-radar homing seekers.
  • Retire all nonstealthy drones, as well as Global Hawk drones and C-27J cargo aircraft.
  • Make China the highest priority for the US intel community, collect whatever information can be gathered on it by any means, and routinely conduct cyberattacks against Chinese government networks, including and especially those of the PLA.

Atheist Penn Jillette Makes The Case For Sharing Your Faith

Penn Jillette shares an experience he had with a Christian man who was proselytizing, and the man gave him a Bible, even though he knows Penn Jillette is an atheist.

You can see that he is physically processing all that happened. You can see how moved he was by this experience.

If you are a believer, this is an eye opening video. God’s gift is for everyone! Share the good news! All it takes is a seed! God will do the rest!

A Renewal of Spirit

rightonline
More than speeches, Right Online and the Defending the Dream Summit offer a chance for renewal.

With so much stacked against constitutional capitalists; media bias, Hollywood culture, anti-capitalist agenda in our schools; it’s easy to get discouraged and feel like we are fighting a losing battle. But remember this is #WAR, as the late Andrew Breitbart would say, and it will be fought one battle at a time.

Americans For Prosperity is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to education and promotion of the free market that has resulted in America being the most prosperous, most healthy, and most environmentally conscious nation the world has ever known. And for the first time, AFP and AFP Foundation have joined forces to organize hundreds of activists together in one place for both the Right Online conference and the Defending the Dream Summit.

With speakers like Michelle Malkin, Greg Gutfeld, and Senator Ted Cruz, the events are sure to grab media attention, but with breakout educational sessions and networking opportunities too numerous to count, activists from across the country will have the chance to learn the latest strategies for action and be inspired to TAKE ACTION when they return home.

For those unable to make it to Orlando, fear not. You can follow the action online via the Right Online website, CSpan, and of course Twitter, where you will no doubt find live tweeting from your favorite bloggers and radio hosts. Look for the hashtag #RO13 for details.

When you attend, read about, and watch online this weekend’s events in Orlando, allow yourself to be renewed. Renew your spirit. Renew your love of America. And renew your efforts in the fight for freedom and prosperity for all!

Syria: A Theraputic Strike?

In 2007 then Senator Obam said “The president does not have the power under the constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual imminent threat to the nation” in response to Bush’s decision to go into Iraq. Sen. Joe Biden echoed that sentiment that same year saying he would call for a president’s impeachment if that were to happen. Therefore if we are to go by their words what they are doing is unconstitutional.
The left criticized Bush to no end for going into Iraq and Afghanistan. Now it is the right who is criticizing the left and Obama for Syria. The fighting in Syria has been going on for 30 months with 100,000 dead. If they were so interested in helping out they should have gone in then and not now. Maybe more lives might have been saved. Obama wants UN approval to have strikes in Syria when lawmakers are saying he should be going to congress first as they have the power to declare war. Bush went to congress first for Iraq and got approval, but then again since when does Obama go by the constitution anyway.
The problem with Syria will be exactly like Egypt where we helped push out a pro-American leader with Mubarek who at least honored the peace with Isreal and replaced him with Morsi and the muslim brotherhood. If they overthrow Assad, a radical muslim leadership will no doubt take over and our alley in Isreal will be at greater risk of being annihilated. By supporting the rebels we are supporting Al Queda who make up seven out of ten factions of the rebels. Our air force would become their air force. Obama said any attack would only last hours and not days but by helping the rebels Obama will be helping Al Queda get in power there. By bombing Syria Obama can say he held up his end of the threat. Who’s side is he on anyway? He didn’t help our ambassador and embassy people in Benghazi when they called for help and the muslims took over and now he will be helping Al Queda. Never forget his famous words “I will support the muslims if the winds take a different direction” and that’s just what he is doing. He’s supporting radical muslims. Because of his weak leadership, our allies don’t trust us and enemies don’t fear us. China, Japan and Great Britain as well as others are looking on him as irrelevant.
John Kerry gave a public speech condemning the gassing of civilians and in great detail calling what is going on in Syria “a moral obscenity.” If you listen to it and listen to his anti-Vietnam speech before congress in 1968 they are eerily similar.
It is not sure who really used gas the rebels or Assad. Assad says the rebels are using it because why would he use gas where his troops are and we say it is Assad doing it.

“Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day,” the Syrian President told the pro-Kremlin Izvestia newspaper in an interview published on Monday, which the Russian daily said was conducted in Damascus.

Mr Assad said Syrian government forces had been close to the area, in suburbs of Damascus, where rebel forces accused his troops of firing poison gas projectiles last week, and there was no clear front line there.

“Would any state use chemical or any other weapons of mass destruction in a place where its own forces are concentrated? That would go against elementary logic,” Mr Assad told Izvestia. “So, accusations of this kind are entirely political and the reason for them is the government forces’ series of victories over the terrorists,” he said, referring to rebels fighting in the two-year-old civil war.

During the Iraq war I remember reading that Saddam shipped his WMD’s out to Syria during and before the war which included nerve gas. This is where Assad is getting it from. As a quote from a responder to an article I saw said, “From what I see, the events of the world are simply happening too fast for Mr. Obama to cope. Add to that his naive ideological outlook, and we are seeing a foreign policy train wreck in process.” We need strength in leadership where we have none now.

Russia warns US of ‘catastrophic consequences’… *

Israelis Rush For Gas Masks, Brace For Retaliation Ahead of Strike on Syria...
Syrian PM warns country will become a 'graveyard for invaders'...
DOES OBAMA KNOW HE'S FIGHTING ON AL QAEDA'S SIDE?
Iran: 'Thousands of missiles' to rain on Israel...
REPORT: Calls intercepted 'prove' nerve gas...
Jordan: We won't help...
CLAIM: Al Qaeda-linked group behind Benghazi trains jihadists for Syria...
UN: Wait 4 Days...

REPORT: Calls intercepted 'prove' nerve gas...

Oil Reaches Two-Year High...

Saddam’s WMD Moved to Syria, An Israeli Says – The New York Sun

Evidence: Syria gas attack work of U.S. allies

Bashar al-Assad warns America that military intervention in Syria will end in

 

 

Grit and Grace on CDN – August 29th

gritandgraceCDN2
When: Thursday, August 29th, 9pm Eastern/6pm Pacific

Where: Grit and Grace on CDN on Blog Talk Radio

What: What does a Jewish Conservative originally from New Jersey and a former liberal turned Conservative Southern Baptist from Mississippi have in common? A whole lot of Grit and Grace! Please Join Jennifer Meadows and Josh Bernstein for one of the most content rich Conservative talk shows that takes an honest and raw look at the issues affecting or nation. The Grit and Grace show is one of a kind and we promise our listeners no talking points, just real solutions.

Tonight: Only 20,000 people showed for “MLK’s March on Washington” yesterday. Much less than the 100,000 that were expected. We’ll discuss
this and all the details of the event.

Both France and Britain change their tone on the Syrian conflict. Is a diplomatic solution the answer in Syria? …and WHY are we in this
war with Syria to begin with? What purpose does this serve for the Obama Administration?

At 9:30 pm Eastern our guest is Dr. Gordon Klingenschmitt, a former Navy Chaplain, who will tell his incredible personal story. He was
court-Martialed for praying in Jesus name at the White House several years ago. His continued fight for free speech and religious freedom
for the military eventually cost him his career, and a million dollar pension. He’s still an outspoken voice fighting for 1st Amendment rights
for our military men and women.

After 10:00 pm Eastern our own contributor, Joe Newby, and writer for the Examiner, will be with us to talk about Jesse Jackson’s recent
comments about the Tea Party and his comparison to the “resurrection of the Confederacy”. Also, Obama continues to blame others for his
political failures. He blames Rush Limbaugh for Washington gridlock. Privately, Obama claims that Republicans have expressed their fear
of Limbaugh!!! Goooo, RUSH!!!!!!

~ Join us from 8:00 to 10:00 pm Central/ 9:00 to 11:00 Eastern.

**Callers welcome after 10:00 pm Eastern** # 424.220.1807

The Grit & Grace Radio Show ~ “talk radio without talking points”

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio