Ryan/Biden 'debate': What in the world was that?

Joe Biden and Paul Ryan faced off in their only debate for the 2012 campaign last night. Calling it a debate is a bit of a stretch though, because Biden was combative, rude, arrogant, dismissive, inappropriate, condescending ...you pick your adjective.

Biden interrupted Paul Ryan some 80+ times and the moderator, Martha Raddatz, who did little to moderate, and in fact often helped Biden by cutting Ryan short as he was making a point, did nothing to structure the conversation. It was a very one sided free for all (Biden and Raddatz, that is). The whole thing disgusted me.

Ben Shapiro summarized it this way, "Biden interrupted Ryan repeatedly. He would not allow Ryan to finish an answer; where he stopped interrupting for even a few moments, his moderator ally, Martha Raddatz, jumped in to help him cut Ryan short."

Paul Ryan kept a cool head and stuck to the facts.

Most disturbing to me was Biden's smirks, and almost laughter, while Ryan was talking about serious issues such as Iran getting nuclear weapons or the embassy deaths. It was bizarre. What? he thinks a nuclear Iran is funny?

Biden was totally inappropriate in his responses and in his demeanor, hardly Vice Presidential, not to mention Presidential, should the need ever arise. All I could think of was this was the man Barack Obama picked as his running mate, to give his ticket some gravitas--especially on foreign policy. (Biden still insisted they weren't aware that more security was needed in Libya.)

Maybe the debate should have begun with the familiar campaign ad intro: I am Barack Obama, and I approve this Vice President.




CNN Poll: Ryan 48%, Biden 44%

Chris Wallace: I've never seen a candidate as disrespectful as Biden...
Borger: Biden Came Off As Condescending...
Hume: Biden Came Off As Rude And A 'Cranky Old Man'...
Noonan: Confusing Strength With Aggression
AP: Body Language:..it was all Joe 'Laugh, chuckle, grimace, grin, smirk, goofy face'...
CNN: Who won? Martha Raddatz...

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

'Big Bird' joins AARP in telling Obama, Don't mention us

In last week's Romney/Obama debate, President Obama proudly referred to AARP* as supportive to his ObamaCare plan. After the debate, AARP promptly said, 'don't mention us again': "“While we respect the rights of each campaign to make its case to voters, AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign,” the group posted in a statement. “AARP is a nonpartisan organization and we do not endorse political candidates nor coordinate with any candidate or political party.”"

Now that statement is pretty remarkable, since AARP sold out its members by supporting ObamaCare in the first place! But now that the bloom is clearly off the ObamaCare rose and Obama presidency, AARP is requesting Obama not to refer to them again. Thanks a lot, AARP. You pushed for the legislation, got the equivalent of a waiver for yourself, and now you don't want to be associated with Obama and ObamaCare?

In that same debate, when talking about how to deal with Obama's unbridled spending, adding a trillion+ dollars to the debt a year, Romney gave the example of cutting unnecessary spending. Since PBS's Jim Lehrer was the moderator, Mitt Romney mentioned discontinuing taxpayer subsidies to PBS, as one example of wasteful spending.

Romney said, "I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to — I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That's number one."

Well, after that debate, President Obama jumped on Romney's nixing Big Bird as a campaign issue. He talked about it on the stump. His campaign quickly cooked up an absurd campaign ad featuring Big Bird! Trouble is, like AARP, "Big Bird, it seems, isn't thrilled about his cameo in the presidential race."

In fact, "The folks at Sesame Street are asking the Obama campaign to pull down a TV ad released Tuesday that mocks Mitt Romney for vowing to yank the subsidy to PBS." the "Sesame Workshop, a nonprofit educational organization that produces and owns the show, issued a statement Tuesday saying [like AARP], “we do not endorse candidates or participate in political campaigns. We have approved no campaign ads, and as is our general practice, have requested that the ad be taken down.”

The CEO of Sesame Workshop, Sherrie Westin, stated on CNN that "the Sesame Workshop receives very little funding from PBS".  Apparently, they are able to fund their programing through selling licensed products, donors, and corporate underwriting/sponsorship. Westin does not like Big Bird being the poster child bird for public funding.

The bigger picture here is why is President Obama and his campaign fixating on Big Bird and not the real issues crippling our economy and threatening our nation?

Romney summed it up nicely yesterday,  ""You have to scratch your head when the president spends the last week talking about saving Big Bird," he said. "I actually think we need to have a president who talks about saving the American people and saving good jobs.""

Maybe Obama is hoping you will be thinking about Big Bird instead of why the White House's Benghazi narrative differs so from the under oath State Department testimony. (You mean the attack wasn't a spontaneous response to that anti-Muslim video?)



*Many people, in the past, joined AARP so they could enjoy the travel-related discounts, however, there are many other organizations that provide the same benefits. I am a AAA member; others have joined organizations such as AMAC, a conservative alternative to AARP

1st Debate Transcript 
1st Debate: Romney Presidential, capable, Obama? ...clearly 'a drag'


AARP to Obama: Don't mention us again
How AARP's support for ObamaCare was bought and paid for
After AARP gets 'waiver' from Obamacare, conservative groups fight for information, answers "“It’s payoff time to the AARP (some call it bribery) for selling out seniors and endorsing Obamacare, an awful proposal which makes no sense to seniors who know it’s bad medicine for them,” Martin said in a statement."

Big Bird Wants Out of Campaign Ad

State Department reveals new details of Benghazi attack
Middle East unrest: Romney? presidential, Obama? busy campaigning

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

"Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?"

Last September, I had the privilege of visiting the Reagan Library in California. At the time I snapped this picture, I answered his question with a resounding, NO. Little did I know how much worse off our country and the world would be in the span of just one year.

Most think of this question in terms of the economy. After all, Reagan was running against President Jimmy Carter. But there was also the Iran hostage crisis hanging over our country like a national pall. So Foreign Policy was also a concern.

If we go back to 2008, our country would be about $10.6 trillion in debt, instead of the $16+ trillion we're at now. Obama increased it by 50% in less than 4 years! That works out to $111,414 per taxpayer and counting. And Obama was the one, who in Feb. 2009, pledged he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term!

As Obama inferred in his 2009 pledge, the interest on the debt would increasingly become unmanageable. How unmanageable? Take a look at this: Brother, Can You Spare a Trillion? 




To make matters worse, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke embarked on QE3 to stimulate Obama's flagging economy, at the rate of $40 billion a month, for the election. (QE3 is the 3rd round of quantitative easing: a fancy term for pumping up the money supply or buying our own debt) This bit of insanity earned us another downgrade to our already downgraded credit rating from AA to AA-.

There are so many other aspects of this question to consider besides the economy. There is the disdain and disregard of our Constitution by our president, the bypassing congress by executive order, the loss of liberties, etc. And then, like the Carter years, the weak, apologetic tone of our foreign policy.

So what do you say to Ronald Reagan's question? And what are you going to do about it on November 6th?
 
More Reading:
Morning Bell: National Debt Hits $16 Trillion
Fed Pulls Trigger, to Buy Mortgages
Egan-Jones analyst Hints at US Rating Downgrade Post QE3

US Credit Rating Cut by Egan-Jones ...Again

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Middle East unrest: Romney? presidential, Obama? busy campaigning

On Sept. 11th, a statement on Obama's State Department website agreed with the U.S.Embassy in Cairo's 9/11 apology for "hurt Muslim feelings". Then violent protests sprang up at the embassies in Egypt and Libya, resulting in Ambassador Stevens' death (along with 3 others) in Libya.

A very Presidential Mitt Romney, rightly condemned the attacks on the U.S. Embassies in Egypt and Libya. He said, "I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."

Before dashing off to Las Vegas, at 10:43am, on Sept. 12th, the President made a statement, that was about as dynamic as a bowl of cold oatmeal.  He included this curious statement: "Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans.  Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they carried Ambassador Stevens’s body to the hospital, where we tragically learned that he had died."

In another story, it would seem it was the same Libyan security personnel who told the protesters where the officials were taken!

And where did Obama get that information that Libyans helped carry Stevens to the hospital? Because if you look at, Muslims Execute US Ambassador Christ Stevens, the pictures (graphic) depict a battered man being dragged, not an injured man being carried. The post also includes a very positive YouTube introducing us to Ambassador Stevens when he took his post. What a tragedy.

Now keep in mind there has been controversy swirling over whether or not Obama has been attending his 'Presidential Daily Brief' intelligence meetings. In that article, National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor didn't dispute the Govt. Accountability Institute's numbers that tabulated Obama's attendance record in the last 2 years at just 38%. For contrast, President George W. Bush "almost never missed his daily intelligence meeting".

The White House denies this accusation and says that if Obama doesn't attend the PDB, he at least reads the briefing book (crib sheet) every day. I think it is clear that with this latest Middle East unrest, Obama needs to stop just reading the Cliff Notes on intelligence briefings and meet face to face with those involved. 

And speaking of face to face meetings, as our world moves closer to Armageddon, why is it our President Obama has no time to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, our only true ally in the Middle East? He has time to do a radio interview with a hip-hopper in Florida, fly off to Las Vegas for a big fundraiser (what ever happened to avoiding Las Vegas?), or make plans to do the David Letterman show?

The Middle East is a volatile region, made even more volatile by Obama administration policies: "The Obama administration has played a central role in overthrowing U.S.-aligned regimes and replacing them with regimes that are hostile to the U.S. and its strategic interests".

You might say some of Obama's policies' chickens are coming home to roost.

Remember Hillary Clinton giddily proclaiming that in Libya, We came, we saw, he [Gaddafi] died? And in Egypt, Obama supported the Arab Spring revolt. Then in August, after the new regime got rid of Hosni Mubarak, opponents (some Christian), who were against the U.S. supported Morsi, were crucified  by the Arab Spring 'Brotherhood'.

Morsi has also refused to condemn Tuesday's 9/11 Cairo Embassy attack.


And let's not make the mistake of thinking this violence is all about a movie. Some of the protesters yelled, “'Obama! Obama! We are all Osama!' went one chant, referring to Osama bin Laden, the late head of Al Qaeda"  That ire was addressed directly to Obama. Why? Possibly because killing Osama was touted 20+ times at the DNC convention?

Anti-American violence is now spreading to other counties in the Middle East, and our President is too busy being the Campaigner in Chief, hip-hopping around the country, to be Commander in Chief.

At least there is one candidate in the 2012 election acting Presidential: Mitt Romney.

More Reading: 
Fatal Arab Spring 

Romney campaign links embassy attacks to Obama's failed Middle East policies 
Michelle Malkin: Obama, Clinton, Romney deliver Egypt, Libya remarks &
Egyptian faux-rage, deadly American dhimmitude...US Ambassador & Marines dead
Arab Spring Run Amok: 'Brotherhood' Starts Crucificxions "The Arab Spring takeover of Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood has run amok, ...radical Muslims have begun crucifying opponents of newly installed President Mohammed Morsi."

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

On Sept. 11th, my first thank you goes to God

Eleven years have passed since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, and in those 11 years, our world has become a much more dangerous place: Iran is working on becoming a nuclear power, the Arab Spring is now controlling once tourist friendly Egypt, the entire middle east is in upheaval. Yet despite this increased unrest, our nation has been kept safe from additional terrorist attacks.

Today, Gov. Walker, Mayor Tom Barrett and other area officials gathered at the War Memorial to honor the Sept. 11 victims, which is appropriate. Similar gatherings all across our nation will occur today.

A September 11th radio ad this year samples Americans and what they plan to do to in remembrance of this day. One says they will say thanks to a firefighter, another a policeman, etc. Volunteering is another option. These are all well and good, but for me there is one glaring omission: thanking God for His blessing of protection.

A verse from Psalm 127:1 comes to mind:

 ...Unless the LORD watches over the city, the guards stand watch in vain. 

As I wrote in 2008, reflecting on our Sept. 11th experience out in South Dakota, "Our nation held its collective breath, waiting for something else to happen after those first 4 plane crashes. Thank God, it didn't.

"After a few days, we started our trek home. Just as there are no atheists in foxholes, we saw "God Bless America" signs pop up everywhere--from gas stations, to fast food restaurants, to city hall marquis. People instinctively knew we needed divine intervention.

"I really thought we could be in for a string of attacks. That life in America would come to resemble life in Israel, where attacks and explosions are commonplace.

"But amazingly, we have been incident free...

"Almost every politician ends their speech with, God bless America. I know God has. May He continue to shed His grace on our nation.

"America! America!
God shed His grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!"

"This is a day to remember and a time to pray for our nation, leaders, and families that lost loved ones."

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Mr. Obama, illegal immigration isn't funny in southwest

This week, President Obama visited El Paso, Texas, and in his typical say anything manner, proclaimed the border fence basically complete. Of course, the people of southwestern states know this is not true, for only 5% of the mandated 700 mile double fence has been constructed: 32 miles under Pres. Bush and 4.3 miles of it built under Pres. Obama. (The entire border is nearly 2,000 miles in length.)

Obama went on to quip about Republicans never being satisfied on securing the border--that if he built the fence, they would want a moat and alligators. He treated this very serious subject as if it were a joke.

Well, to the people of the southwest, who live with this constant threat, illegal immigration is not at all a laughing matter. The people living in the southern portion of the border states are reminded of the gravity of their situation every day. With news stories of illegal drug traffickers, helicopters sweeping certain areas as far north as Phoenix, Border Patrol SUVs cruising their highways, and roadblocks with drug sniffing dogs, they know the problem of illegal immigration is far from solved.

We recently spent a few weeks in New Mexico and Arizona, visiting most of the National Parks and Monuments these states had to offer. But there were some we avoided on the border of Mexico and Arizona and others because of the safety warnings from the U.S. Department of Interior that the parks have become "drug smuggling routes".

This is America and we have to avoid 1,000s of acres of our own land because they have been taken over by criminal illegals? Sen. Jim DeMint stated it well, "Our nation’s borders are fundamental to our national security and sovereignty. Americans shouldn’t be forced to live under the threat of kidnappings, drug violence, and gang activity because of political posturing in Washington. Security must be at the crux of any credible immigration policy."

We also encountered traffic stops by the border patrol, while traveling on US 70 to Las Cruces, NM, and on AZ 80 coming back from Tombstone, AZ. Both times the patrol was hoping to turn back Mexican illegals entering the U.S. via wilderness areas.

So if that fence is so complete, Mr. President, why the road blocks? And by the way, during our stops, I didn't observe anyone laughing.

Speeches and Summits Won't Secure the Border by Sen. Jim DeMint

Arizona seeks cash for border fence "Arizona lawmakers want more fence along the border with Mexico - whether the federal government thinks it's necessary or not. They've got a plan that could get a project started using online donations and prison labor. "

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Red flags all over the place with Faisal the Ferti-Bomber

The more we hear about Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square fertilizer bomber, the more I have to wonder: What exactly is the NO FLY LIST for, and what exactly does Homeland Security Secretary, The System Worked Janet Napolitano do?

All the red flags were waving with Faisal: 1. Ticket purchased on the same day 2. Ticket paid for with CASH (Cost, a few thousand? Did he stop at the money machine?) 3. Was put on the NO FLY LIST. 4. Ticket was ONE WAY with ultimate destination of Islamabad, Pakistan. The only thing I don't know is, did he have any luggage? (Flying without luggage is a red flag.)

So did all those annoying jump-through-the-hoops airline security measures that we all must comply with do any good?

No, "In the end, it was secret Army intelligence planes that did him in. Armed with his cell phone number, they circled the skies over the New York area, intercepting a call to Emirates Airlines reservations, before scrambling to catch him at John F. Kennedy International Airport. " They caught what airport security and the NO FLY LIST let through!

Why? Because the airport was still working off of yesterday's list. They had failed to "act on an electronic message sent to all airlines at midday on Monday--more than eight hours before Mr. Shahzad boarded his plane--notifying them that his name had been added to the no-fly list".

I am not the only one wondering how he nearly got away. From the briefing,

• "QUESTION: How was he able to still get on the plane and have the plane depart from the gate when he was placed on the no-fly list?

• JANET NAPOLITANO, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: I won't get into details of timing at no-fly. But the way he was apprehended was that -- particularly since Christmas, CBP has been instituting a number of rules that enable us to further check against new data or information that is provided, even very recent information, against passenger manifests on planes."

Lest you think this guy was picked up by mistake, "Agents raiding his Bridgeport home found components for the bomb device, including firecrackers and the boxes for the alarm clocks. They also reportedly found a hand-drawn map of potential targets, including the 4, 5, and 6 trains and the Staten Island ferry. There was also evidence of his ties to Pakistan, including a Karachi ID and residency papers. " We also learned he was schooled in bomb making in his home country.

"In the end, it took officials just 53 hours and 20 minutes to solve the case. " Something the first security person at the airport could have solved in 1 minute--if they had the latest list.

I can't help but think of the verse from Psalm 127:1, Unless the LORD watches over the city, the watchmen stand guard in vain. Thank you, LORD. In this, as in so many other near miss cases, it seems we don't even have a watchman!


Links: Practically Speaking, Betterbrookfield, RandyMelchert, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, The Right View Wisconsin, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

You mean Times Square bomber wasn't a Tea Partier angry about ObamaCare?

The Left has really been trying to paint the Tea Party movement members as violent. Remember the accusations that rocks were thrown through a Congressman's home office window in Cincinnati on ObamaCare weekend? (The weekend ObamaCare passed back in March.) Trouble was the office was on the 30th floor! I bet the Cincinnati Reds and Bengals scouts are still looking for that rock thrower. After all, anyone who can toss one that far would make a heck of a pitcher or quarterback! ;-)

The other hard to swallow accusation from ObamaCare weekend was that Tea Partiers hurled verbal assaults at Democrats. Pretty unusual that no one had their cell phone there to capture those epitaphs on video. Andrew Breitbart even offered a $10,000 reward to anyone providing incriminating video, but thus far, I don't think anyone collected it. (Video is of protesters shouting, Kill the bill!)

But last weekend's Times Square bomber incident escalates the accusations regarding disgruntlement over ObamaCare to a new level. This time there was a real event that involved a potentially life threatening explosion, and Mayor Bloomberg guesses "twenty-five cents" it is "somebody with a political agenda who doesn't like the health care bill or something"?

Who would that be? Someone "homegrown" as the mayor suggested? Bloomberg wouldn't be insinuating the bomber was a Tea Partier, would he?

Today's big news is that the perpetrator, Faisal Shahzad, was taken off a plane heading to Dubai and arrested. And gasp, he wasn't homegrown; he was a Pakistani born, recently naturalized U.S. Citizen.

There are unconfirmed reports that others were involved. On the news early this morning they mentioned Dubai reported 3 people were taken off the plane.

So maybe Bloomberg will be proven right? Maybe they will find a couple matching the description of Ma and Pa Kettle with tea bags stapled to their hats were involved too?

Maybe. But I don't think so.


Remember the National Day of Prayer is this Thursday from Noon to 12:30pm. Thanking God for His protection certainly should be on our prayer list.

Links: Practically Speaking, Betterbrookfield, RandyMelchert, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, The Right View Wisconsin, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Obama on nuclear weapons: Speak softly and carry NO stick

Children born in the 1950s grew up during the height of the cold war. I was one of them. We were issued stainless steel I.D. bracelets--complete with religious preference...just in case? Besides fire drills, we had numerous duck and cover drills at our grade school, practice runs for evacuating the school, and once were told to go home during the school day and rehearse going into our basements or wherever we planned to hide out if we were nuked.

All of this weighed heavy on my young psyche. But at least we knew if we were attacked, we had President Kennedy who had the will and the means to retaliate. His will and means gave an enemy pause before pushing the button.

President Kennedy had the Minuteman Missile, the Ace in the Hole, technology that was begun under President Eisenhower in 1958 and completed just 8 days after the Cuban Missile Crisis began in 1962, as a deterrent. President Kennedy embraced the space race and developing weapon technology.

Nearly 50 years after those troubling years, is the United States still on top of their nuclear and counter anti-missile technology? Are we still developing more defensive Star Wars type anti missile shields and weaponry?

No. Instead we have a President who seems bent on destroying any lead we had in the space race by de-funding NASA's new Constellation moon project in favor of researching and monitoring climate change for now, and a "heavy-lift" rocket--10 years or more away. Unlike President Kennedy, Obama spurns our position of superiority and technical strength.

President Obama recently announced a US and Russia nuclear arms reduction treaty, which will limit both sides to 1,550 warheads, as if Russia is our only opponent that has nukes. (Countries with nuclear weapons, going from friendly to hostile to suspected, include the UK, France, India, Russia, China, North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, Iran, and Syria.) Remember that Russia is helping Iran build a nuclear power plant, a partnership that makes the "United States uncomfortable", and is also cozying up to Venezuela by selling $5B in other weapons.

Just last month an aide said "the administration [has] rejected proposals that the United States declare it would never be the first to use nuclear weapons."

But Obama announced yesterday that he "was revamping American nuclear strategy to substantially narrow the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons, even in self-defense... ...For the first time, the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons or launched a crippling cyberattack." (My emphasis)

I always thought the best strategy in warding off conflict was to speak from a position of power, not outline specifically what you would or wouldn't do. You know, Speak softly and carry a BIG stick.

Considering Obama's new direction of "...developing no new nuclear weapons, including the nuclear bunker-busters advocated by the Bush administration", we have a very weak president who likes to Speak softly, and carry NO stick. That position can only be called, "naïve and dangerous."

More Reading: The Cuban Missile Crisis
Heritage Foundation: The Road to a New Nuclear Arms Race, "Unfortunately for Americans, President Obama’s new strategy will have the exact opposite result of its intended effect. Instead of incentivizing countries to give up nuclear ambitions, it creates new incentives for them to maintain or develop their own nuclear programs. First look at the Russians, who clearly still see their nuclear weapons as the cornerstone of their defense, no matter how much President Obama wishes it were otherwise. Moscow has no interest in diminishing its own nuclear arsenal, but it is perfectly happy to allow the Obama administration to weaken the U.S. deterrent until it is on equal footing with Russia’s currently mediocre might. ...A country like Iran is equally unimpressed with President Obama’s unilateral disarmament strategy." (My emphasis)

Past Posts: Obama, JFK, technology, & the Cuban Missile Crisis...chilling
Dangerous month, dangerous world, dangerous ideas

Links: Practically Speaking, Betterbrookfield, RandyMelchert, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, The Right View Wisconsin, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Dangerous month, dangerous world, dangerous ideas

There were 2 terrorist arrests last week in the United States. One was an illegal alien, a young Jordanian who attempted to blow up a downtown Dallas skyscraper. The other was an Illinois man, a convert to Islam, who tried to blow up a federal building in the state capital, Springfield.

But that is not all, "The Justice Department said the case was unrelated to another suspected terrorism plot in New York, where an Afghan-born man was charged with conspiring to launch a bombing attack in the United States..."

That would be the "Bomb plot suspect said to have eyed 9/11 attack" case. "The Afghan-born man at the center of an anti-terrorism probe was determined to make a bomb and perhaps detonate it in New York City on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks, before he was thwarted by authorities, a U.S. prosecutor said on Friday."

And there was the planned assault on the Marine Corps base in Quantico, Virginia, by 2 of the 7 suspects arrested for overseas terrorist attacks. One of the men was a US citizen, the other from Kosovo, but here legally.

The point of all this? We live in dangerous times. September 11, 2001 may have been 8 years ago, but the terrorist threats and plots are still there, despite the U.S. electing President Barack Obama. It doesn't seem the terrorists love us any more than they did under President Bush.

As for our dangerous world, today Iran conducted its 3rd round of missile tests. Venezuela is exploring uranium deposits with Russia and China will display their missiles in their 60th anniversary parade, to name a few more examples of weapon expansion.

Just last week we learned that Iran admitted the existence of a 2nd Uranium enrichment plant. "'Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow,' Obama said Friday, detailing how the facility near Qom had been under construction for years without being disclosed, as required, to the International Atomic Energy Agency. 'International law is not an empty promise.'"

But who is to say Iran must follow those rules? President Obama just addressed the UN, "But make no mistake: this [world's problems] cannot be solely America's endeavor. Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems alone. We have sought - in word and deed - a new era of engagement with the world. Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges"

Obama wants a nuke free world. "First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them. ...For decades, we averted disaster, even under the shadow of a super-power stand-off. But today, the threat of proliferation is growing in scope and complexity. If we fail to act, we will invite nuclear arms races in every region, and the prospect of wars and acts of terror on a scale that we can hardly imagine."

And the action needed? Disarm.

"America will keep our end of the bargain. We will pursue a new agreement with Russia to substantially reduce our strategic warheads and launchers. ...We will complete a Nuclear Posture Review that opens the door to deeper cuts, and reduces the role of nuclear weapons. And we will call upon countries to begin negotiations in January on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for weapons."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/obama-un-speech-text_n_296017.htm

So far, foreign relations under President Obama have not been stellar: Washington Times Editorial: Worst foreign policy ever.

The President's ideas of a nuclear free world are naive and dangerous. Seems French President Sarkozy agrees: "President Obama dreams of a world without weapons ...but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite," Sarkozy said. "...what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map."

Our president wants us all to sing Nuclear Kumbaya but "...French and British leaders were quietly seething on stage, annoyed by America's handling of the [2nd Iranian bomb-grade fuel facility]announcement." ( French Atomic Pique, WSJ Sept 29, 2009)

We know we are out of touch when "the President of France shows more resolve" than we do!

Past Posts: Obama, JFK, Techology, & The Cuban Missile Crisis...Chilling
Obama's vision of nuke free world shot down by N. Korea missile

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, RandyMelchert, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, The Right View Wisconsin, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation