Bumps in the Road!

The poem was written by a MARINE CORPS Officer 

THE BATTLING BOYS OF BENGHAZI

We're the battling 
boys of Benghazi  
 
No fame, no glory, no 
paparazzi.
Just a fiery death in 
a blazing hell
Defending our country 
we loved so well.
 
It wasn't our job, but 
we answered the  
call,
fought to the 
Consulate and scaled the wall. 
We pulled
twenty 
Countrymen from the jaws of fate 
Led them to safety, 
and stood at the gate. 
 
Just the two of us,
and foes by the score, 
But we stood fast to 
bar the door.
Three calls for 
reinforcement, but all were denied, 
So we fought, and we 
fought, and we fought 'til we died.
 
We gave our all for 
our Uncle
Sam,
But Barack Obama 
didn't give a damn.
Just two dead seals 
who carried the load 
No thanks to 
us.........
we 
were just "Bumps In The 
Road."

Moe, Larry & Curly!

Bill Neinast

IN PERSPECTIVE

Moe, Larry, and Curly are familiar names to senior citizens.  They were the Three Stooges of slapstick comedy fame on the vaudeville stage and in film during the first part of the last century.

Today, when Barack, Joe, and John are mentioned, the Three Stooges come to mind.  This modern day, real life version, however, is much too real to be laughed off

Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and John Kerry are the foreign affairs team of the U.S.  Although they are the laughing stock of the world, particularly of Russia and Iran, the consequences of their actions and utterances are too serious to be regarded as vaudeville.

The best description of this country’s current foreign relations is that it is abysmal.  No one in the triumvirate exhibits any awareness of geography, history, or geopolitics.  

 Unfortunately, this view of the world as you wish it were rather than the real world is prevalent among the lackeys and stooges in the ranks of media commentators.  They are the ones who harrumphed or shook their heads in disbelief when Mitt Romney stated during a debate with Obama that Russia is “our number one geopolitical foe.”

Romney recently restated that belief.  On March 17, he wrote in The Wall Street Journal:

“Able leaders anticipate events, prepare for them, and act in time to shape them. My career in business and politics has exposed me to scores of people in leadership positions, only a few of whom actually have these qualities. Some simply cannot envision the future and are thus unpleasantly surprised when it arrives. Some simply hope for the best. Others succumb to analysis paralysis, weighing trends and forecasts and choices beyond the time of opportunity.

“President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton traveled the world in pursuit of their promise to reset relations and to build friendships across the globe. Their failure has been painfully evident: It is hard to name even a single country that has more respect and admiration for America today than when President Obama took office, and now Russia is in Ukraine. Part of their failure, I submit, is due to their failure to act when action was possible, and needed.”

The current debacle of Russia expanding its borders, Iran moving full speed ahead on developing nuclear weapons, Syria maintaining its stockpile of chemical weapons (which are Saddam Hussein’s cache that some claim he never had), Iraq and Afghanistan refusing to allow American service personnel to remain in country under U.S. jurisdiction, is the sole responsibility of Barack, Joe, John, and, as noted by Romney, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton..

That may be an unfair criticism of Joe, John, and Hillary.  The basic cause is Barack.  He naively believes that the sheer force of his intellect and suave personality will cow any world leader into adoring agreement or submission.  His words, in his opinion, are more powerful than any weapons made by man.  In reality, however, as Romney noted, “We give.  Russia Gets.”

The way the rest of the world now views us, the former leaders of the free world, proves Barracks’s belief in his invincibility is as erroneous as his repeated promise that, “You can keep the insurance and doctors you have if you like them.”

If he had the understanding of world affairs of Mitt Romney and knew American history, he could have taken a page from President John F. Kennedy’s history and gotten serious attention from Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine.

 JFK told tSoviet Union Premier Nikita Khrushchev to keep his missiles out of Cuba.  To make sure the Soviets knew that we meant business, JFK quarantined Cuba with the U.S. Navy and began moving combat troops into Florida.  Very quickly, the Soviet ships carrying missiles to Cuba reversed course and the missile sites being built were abandoned.

Obama could have replicated that strategy in Ukraine. A replay of meaning what you say, would have been to quickly arrange for joint military maneuvers with the Ukrainian military.  Several U.S. Army and Marine battalions could have been airlifted to the Ukrainian military bases in Crimea.  The troops would have raised American flags to fly beside the Ukrainian flags in their new encampments.

As those flags were unfurled, the applause and nods of approval from the heads of various NATO nations might have gotten Putin’s attention as quickly as the JFK’s troop movements gave Khrushchev second thoughts.

Instead of acting JFK tough, however, Obama talked softly to the bully.  He said, “We are going to impose economic and travel sanctions like we are so effectively doing in Iran.”  The Russians’ reaction, when they got through laughing, was to impose similar sanctions on Americans like Speaker of the House John Boehner and other congressional personnel.

So here’s the perspective.

Comparing President Obama to one of The Three Stooges was not the best comparison to make.  A much better comparison might be to call him “Neville” after a former Prime Minister of Great Britain.

An appreciation of this comparison requires a review of the history of the Sudetenland, a German speaking province of France in the 1930s.  That history reads like a screen play for the Ukraine of 2014.   

When reading the chapter on British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain meeting Hitler in Munich in1938 and agreeing not to oppose Hitler’s absorption of the Sudetenland into Germany, visions of Ukraine dance over the pages.

On 30 September 1938, Chamberlain returned to London with the Munich Agreement in hand and announced that he was, “bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time.”  Instead of peace, however, the world exploded into WWII.

Sound familiar?  So is it Barack, Mo, or Neville?

Socialism, Communism, Fascism never work, Capitalism on the other hand always does!

The Difference is Perspective between a Strong America and a Weak America. Elections have Consequences!

Who rules us?

Amazing what you can have if you are the Queen of England living off the Government dole!

1947

Red Lines, not really effective unless you are willing to enforce the Terms

IN PERSPECTIVE

 by Bill Neinast

Blame President Obama if you have problems reading this column.  My computer  keyboard is shaking so much that it is difficult to keep my fingers in position.

You must have noticed it too.  The earth is shaking hard enough to jiggle every thing on it.  The President is the cause.

He has drawn another red line in the sand against Iran and warned Russian President Vladimir Putin that there will be consequences if he interferes in Ukraine.

The new threats from this man, just like the earlier ones from him, have the leaders of every nation in the world shaking in their boots.  The shivers are so hard that the whole earth is quivering.  That is the shaking you are feeling in your chairs.

Wait a minute, however.  There is really another cause for that shaking.  That is the rumble of the Russian tanks and other heavy military equipment rolling into Crimea.  Putin must not have heard Obama say there “would be costs” if he moved into Ukraine.

Those vehicles are all waving Russian flags.  Actually, those are not the national flags of Russia.  They are new caricature flags of Putin thumbing his nose at Obama.

This would be laughable if it were not so serious.  This is not a civil war or civil uprising like those in Egypt, Syria, Turkey and other countries in that area.  This is a threat of international war--one country invading another.

In response, Obama is showing his typical ineptness in foreign affairs.  There is, of course, no option for a direct military intervention by the U.S.  An experienced manager of international affairs or even one with a modicum of knowledge of history would react to this situation with something other than warnings of “cost.”

Instead of a 90 minute telephone conversation between Obama and Putin there should have been a highly publicized conversation between Obama and Ukraine’s interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk.  In this conversation, Obama could have committed the U.S. to strong and continuing support of the new democratic regime in Ukraine.

As proof of that support, a page from WWII history books could have been resurrected.  Obama could have suggested a renewal of the Lend-Lease Program under which the U.S. provided much needed military materiel to Russia and other allies in the war with Germany.  Now, of course, the support would go to Ukraine.

Obama could have made a show of promising Yatsenyuk things like some of our super effective fighter planes, drones, etc.  If there were no Ukrainian pilots capable of handling those modern fighters, a modern day Claire Chennault probably could be found to organize a replica of the Flying Tigers that helped the Chinese battle the Japanese air force before the U.S. entered WWII.

He could have added that he was also ordering the largest U.S. Navy fleet that could navigate the narrow, treacherous Bosporus or Istanbul Straits into the Black Sea.  This fleet was not to threaten direct military action, but would be the symbolic “big stick” of Theodore Roosevelt.  It would also be available for logistical support for the Lend-Lease materiel, hospital and medical assistance, safe haven under the U.S. flag for Ukrainian officials, etc.

Finally, instead of saying that the U.S. was suspending "upcoming participation in preparatory meetings" for the G8 summit scheduled for June in Sochi, Russia, Obama should have said that the U.S. would not participate in the June meeting if Putin invaded Ukraine.  He should have noted that, instead of such a meeting, he would be meeting with our NATO and EURO allies to plan financial aid to replace the Ukrainian treasury looted by Putin’s friend Viktor F. Yanukovych, Ukraine’s humiliated fugitive president now in Russia.

These actions probably would not have any more effect on Putin than Obama’s 90 minute plea with him or the threat of “costs.”  It would, however, have shown a president with the back bone of his predecessors.

Several years ago, pundits and comics humiliated and made fun of President George W. Bush as the Decider.  This was based on Bush’s own statement that he was the Decider, meaning he was the one who made the decisions in the White House.

When will those pundits and comics begin doing the same with Obama by calling him what he is, the Ditherer.  The only decisions he is known to make with speed and finality are the locations and times of his next golf games and which sycophants are to stand behind him while he makes a televised campaign appearance.

His relations with Putin since “hitting the reset button” on Russian relations shortly after taking office and agreeing not to place defense missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic are aptly described by Michigan’s Congressman Mike Rogers, Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.  He says, “Putin is playing chess; Obama is laying marbles.” 

So here’s the perspective.

President Obama’s foreign policy was summarized in a cartoon last week.  The drawing by Gorrell at 1014 Creators.com is entitled “Major Foreign Policy Triumphs of the Obama Administration.”  It is simply a blank sheet of paper.

The Media Just needs to be Motivated!

RIP Republicans!

Adds some Clarity to the Current State of Affairs in the World Doesn't it!

A Grand Compromise for consideration by the GOP

Offer up a bill that:

1. Eliminates the debt ceiling.  It is a false number anyway, provides no real control, is never enforced, and allows the idiots to aggravate themselves and the taxpayers with their stupidity.
2. Enact zero based budgeting effective immediately, no further automatic increases for anything.
3. Sunset all current legislation and government programs over the next five years.  All programs will have to be re-jusified every five years including welfare, food stamps, and income taxes.
4. Require every American and illegal immigrant, including those on government assistance (welfare, food stamps, AFDC, etc) pay a minimum 5% tax on all funds received from all sources.
5. Since the Democrats have yet to pass a budget, we revert to the 2006 budget levels upon passage of the bill.  
6. In future years require a firm budget to be passed prior to the start of the fiscal year.  If a new budget is not passed then the prior year budget, cut by 20%, automatically takes affect. If Congress fails to pass a budget automatic budget reductions will go into effect and no one in the House, Senate or White House (or their staffs) will be paid until the next budget cycle.  If they can't live with that, they can resign and get a real job!
7. Once a budget is set Congress & White House must live within the budget, no exceptions.  If extraordinary measures (direct attack on the US mainland by some idiotic nut cases) require a budget increase, Congress must pass a clean budget approval for the specific event.  No other amendments, special projects, ear marks or other non related attachments.
8. Stop all multi-topic bills.  One bill one topic, vote for or against.  Amendments related to the bills topic will be allowed but no none related amendments or ear marks!
9. Revoke all special provisions for Senators, Congressmen and the White House, and their staff members, starting with all Obamacare subsidies. Force them to live under the same laws, same benefits as our military.
10. Let Obamacare continue to evolve, let all delays and waivers put in place by the White House stay, except for the congressional subsidies (see 9 above).  Obamacare will fail on its on, once the low info voters realize they actually have to pay for healthcare.  Let next years congress take up the fate of Obamacare.

 Marc

Inarticulate Republicans!

"The Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, epitomized what has been wrong with the Republicans for decades when he emerged from a White House meeting last Wednesday, went over to the assembled microphones, briefly expressed his disgust with the Democrats’ intransigence, and walked on away. . . and yet, with multiple television-network cameras focused on Speaker Boehner as he emerged from the White House, he couldn’t be bothered to prepare a statement that would help clarify a confused situation, full of fallacies and lies.

If Republicans want to show some seriousness about articulating their case, they might start by deleting the abbreviation “CR” from their vocabulary. As has been said, “the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” That journey is long overdue."

The above is an excerpt of an article in National Review by Thomas Sowell, the most brilliant economist ever to have lived.  Read the entire article here! - Marc

Henny Penny or Chicken Little is at it again!

IN PERSPECTIVE

   by Bill Neinast

Henny Penny or Chicken Little is at it again.  This time, however, she has morphed into members of Congress and the TV networks.

Her message has changed too.  The sky is no longer falling but all the guns going off have her clucking that Armageddon is just around the corner.

Members of Congress are getting hours of free TV time bemoaning the spate of mass shootings in this country.  Their agitation, of course, is that the government must do something to prevent this from ever happening again.

Henny Penny did not convince anyone that the sky was falling.  Will Congress have better luck in panicking the country?   

This is not to belittle or treat lightly the tragedies of the Navy Yard, the theater killings in Aurora, Colorado, the Newtown school rampage, the Fort Hood terrorist attack, and similar incidents.  None should have happened.  None should happen again.

The task facing Congress, however, is much  simpler than the one faced by the chicken. Why can the hand wringers not see it?  

All that is needed is a law to prohibit such activity.  Just make it a crime for anyone to kill another person and impose a punishment of life in prison or execution for anyone who violates the law.

What?  You mean there are already laws on the books that do just that?

Well, then pass laws to keep guns out of the hands of individuals who might use them to kill someone.  Requiring back ground checks on anyone who wants to buy a rifle might be the answer.

What?  There are already laws requiring such checks?

Gee, this is harder than it first seemed.  Is there not a single new law that can be dreamed up to stop this slaughter?

What about prohibiting assault weapons with magazine clips that hold more than ten bullets?  That, at least, would prevent incidents like the one at the Navy Yard.

What?  Aaron Alexis did not use an assault weapon?  TV newscasters reported for 48 hours or more that the murder weapon was an assault weapon.

What?  You say he used a 12 gauge shot gun like the one quail and water fowl hunters use in their fall and winter outings?

Well, unless those things are plugged to the three shell limit, they can be loaded with six shells.  So why not ban all weapons that hold more than two or three bullets or shells?

What?  That would ban weapons like the old faithful “six shooters” that helped tame the west?

All of this seems to leave only one solution.  The possession of any weapon, regardless of size, shape, magazine size, and possible use, will have to be prohibited.  This is a law abiding country and every man, woman, and child with access to any prohibited weapon will certainly scamper to turn it in for scrap metal.

OK, it’s time to take my tongue out of my cheek.  The foregoing is a facetious attempt to illustrate the obvious.  Laws to prevent the rash of mass shootings were already in effect when the killings occurred.  In every case, the weapons were either legally acquired or stolen.

Unfortunately, also, the recent mass murders are nothing new in this country.  Grant Duwe’s  2007 book Mass Murder in the United States: A History chronicled 909 cases of mass murder between 1900 and 1999.

There is, however, one major difference between the murders of the 20th and 21st Centuries.  That difference is today’s instantaneous, mass communication, particularly TV coverage.  There is concern by some that flooding the airwaves with the repetition of what was done and how it was done may encourage copy cats or some who want to make a name for themselves.

Aggravating that weeklong repeating of the gruesome pictures and detail of each crime scene is the tendency for the news coverage to be slanted and inaccurate.

An example is the totally inaccurate reporting of the Navy Yards massacre for at least 48 hours.  That slanted reporting was that Alexis entered the facility with an AR 15 and several pistols. 

The facts that finally broke through are that he entered the installation where he worked with a 12 gauge shot gun that he had bought legally a few days previously and acquired the pistols from security guards that he killed or wounded during his shooting spree.

So here’s the perspective.

The loss of the innocent lives mentioned above is hard to understand and accept.  

The grieving surviving family members deserve our sincere sympathy and understanding.

The number of innocent lives lost is those massacres, however, pales in comparison with the number of lives lost in automobile accidents caused on highways every day by drunk driving, speeding, reckless driving, texting, inattention and negligence of every imaginable type.  

There are ample laws on the books to prevent every one of these deaths at the end of a gun, in an automobile, or under other circumstances.

Let’s send Henny Penny back to her cage.  Quit screaming about the lack of protection of life and begin enforcing existing laws.  One more law will not avert a single heinous act being hatched in the minds of sick individuals.

Politics

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.”

What makes me Laugh?

A President who was raised by Communists, who has never held a job that wasn't funded by donations (community organizer) or other people's tax money, who now lives opulently off of the American public, who has become wealthy through the deeds of others on his behalf, going around the country making speeches about how to grow the economy!

The Mushy Foreign Policy of the United States under Obama

IN PERSPECTIVE

by Bill Neinast

Commentator Charles Krauthammer and Power Line blogger Attorney Paul Mirengoff characterize President Obama’s foreign policy the same way.  They call it mush.

That may be a bit harsh, as mush is defined as a soft, wet, pulpy mass.

  Conversely, there may be some basis for the observation.   What can be deciphered from the conflicting signals emanating from the administration is a mess rather than a mass.

The difficulty in discussing the Obama foreign policy is determining the content of the policy.  The bed rock of foreign affairs is to protect the country from foreign invasion or control and to protect or promote our vital interests.

Currently, the primary vital interest of the country is the preservation and protection of access to energy, particularly from the Mid East.  Today, that interest is inextricably tied to the threat of foreign control or invasion, like the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York, from radical Muslims.

How much energy, i.e. oil, we have to import depends on how much of the need can be satisfied from domestic sources.  Because of significant improvements in recovery techniques in old fields and the development of new fields, experts in the oil patch believe that we can be close to self sufficiency in a few years.

Reaching that goal of self sufficiency, however, requires opening federal land for development, removing restrictions on improved methods of hydraulic fracturing (fracking), authorizing and completing the Keystone Pipeline, ending the war on coal, etc.

Each of these required actions is vehemently opposed by radical environmentalists who believe we should live and commune with nature as the earliest humans did.  As this group is a  major supporter of the class warriors, the chances of Obama crossing them is slim at best.

This means that we will have to continue to rely on oil from the Mid-east many years into the future.  This means, in turn, that we will continue to bow and kiss the rings of the Muslim potentates controlling that oil.

Dealing with the threat or possibility of a Muslim “invasion” is even trickier.    During his first months in office and before he had even a clue as to the complexities of foreign affairs, Obama made his apology throughout much of the world. 

He figuratively beat his chest and said, “We’re sorry.  We’re sorry we provided a shield for you through the years and funneled trillions of American taxpayer dollars into your coffers.  Forgive us and we will relinquish our spot as leader of the pack.”

If those speeches did anything, they established the United States as a severely weakened player on the international football field.

Heeding this new posture of the formerly strong country in North America, the Muslim Brotherhood openly took up arms against Hosni Mubarak.

Mubarak was the dictator of the largest Muslim country on the planet, but he was a staunch friend of the United States and was in the forefront of maintaining peace with Israel.  Barak’s response was to throw Mubarak under the bus by suggesting that he resign and to welcome the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood through the “democratic election” of Mohammed Morsi. 

When millions of Egyptians began to protest the movements of Morsi toward a Muslim dictatorship under Sharia law, Obama’s response was to suggest negotiations.  Then when the Egyptian military comes to the aid of the protestors,   we take no action to keep the Muslim Brotherhood in check, but suggest negotiations instead.

The Suez Canal is in Egypt.  Keeping that vital link in the supply line of oil from Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries in friendly hands seems to have no apparent effect on the Obama team’s involvement.

Similarly, in Libya when the rebels attempting to overthrow Mummer Gadaffi, a recognized enemy of the United States, requested assistance, Obama suggested a no fly zone, but then “led from behind” and let France and England do the work.

Possibly the worst wiggle in our Mid-east policies, however, was Obama’s bluster of establishing a “red line” in Syria.  Threatening involvement if President Basher al-Assad used chemical weapons against those intent on deposing him.  

The use of those weapons has finally been acknowledged by Obama, but where is his promised reaction?  

So here’s the perspective.

Say what you will about President George W. Bush.  There is no question, however, that he said what he meant and did what he said.

Other countries knew exactly what the United States wanted and that it would do what its leaders said under Bush.  

Today, the rest of the world has no clue as to what we expect or whether we will do what we say.

That’s a heck of a way to run a country.

The Difference Between the Good Guys and the Bad Guy!

Is who acts as the human shield. God Bless the US Military! 01:28 PM - 23 Jun 13  Reply  Retweet  Favorite

Do you live in a Country run by Idiots?

Food For Thought

If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for being in the country illegally ...you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If you have to get your parents’ permission to go on a field trip or take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If the only school curriculum allowed to explain how we got here is evolution, but the government stops a $15 million construction project to keep a rare spider from evolving to extinction ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If you have to show identification to board an airplane, cash a check, check in at the doctor's office, buy liquor, or check out a library book, but not to vote who runs the government ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If the government wants to ban stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines with more than ten rounds, but gives 20 F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If, in the largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not a 24-ounce soda because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If an 80-year-old woman can be stripped searched by the TSA but a woman in a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If a seven year old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher’s "cute," but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If children are forcibly removed from parents who discipline them with spankings while children of addicts are left in filth and drug infested “homes”... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government intrusion, while not working is rewarded with EBT cards, WIC checks, Medicaid, subsidized housing and free cell phones ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If the government's plan for getting people back to work is to incentivize NOT working with 99 weeks of unemployment checks and no requirement to prove they applied but can’t find work ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

If being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you more "safe" according to the government ... you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.