What’s Going On Between Obama and Iran?

Posted on March 28, 2015 by admin

What’s going on with the Obama administration and Iran? On its face it makes absolutely no sense at all! Here we have Iranian leadership in Ayatollah Khomeini who’s promising death to America while at the same time the White House actively engages in talks that will ultimately lead to the loosening of all sanctions on Iran and its gaining of the nuclear bomb. According to the White House and the State Department, they don’t really mean it. “Death to America” and “erasing Israel off the map” is “nonnegotiable,” are just hyperbole meant to appease the Iranian people. They are amazing statements and lead to only one of two possibilities; either the Administration is brazenly lying and they know that Iran intends to destroy the United States and Israel, or it actually believes that the Iranian leadership is only saying “Of course, yes, death to America” because their people want to hear it. So which is more likely?

The answer lies in domestic policy, not just of the White House, but also of Democrat politicians in general. Hardly a day goes by when some Democrat, whether it’s Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton or all the above accuse a conservative or Republican of being a racist, bigot, or homophobe for opposing a liberal progressive policy, in particular those coming from Pres. Obama. The level of rhetoric that progressive and liberal politicians in the far left Democrat party spew is nothing short of hyperbole as well. They cry racism so frequently now that the word itself has lost all impact. Like the boy who cried wolf, racism has been charged so many times that now when actual racism occurs many don’t pay attention. Most recently, the incident in Ferguson Missouri, the “hands up don’t shoot” mantra took on near legendary status. Cries of racism, bigotry and murder by a police officer were claimed for months, but the officer was completely vindicated by both the grand jury and the Eric Holder’s Justice Department. Could it be that these cries, which happen so frequently, these extreme and gross examples comparing Republicans to terrorists or any other of 1000 disgusting comparisons are done for show?

Could the Democratic political machine make extreme accusations just because they’re effective, and because they rile up the Democratic base and increase fundraising? Given the mounting examples, it’s likely so and under this reality, could President Obama and his leftist State Department supporters be projecting their behavior and their motivations onto the Iranian Ayatollah and his minions? The answer to this perplexing and dangerous foreign policy could be no more complex than Democrats are so used to exaggeration that they blindly assume the Iranians are to, when in a tragic irony, the Iranian’s really mean exactly what they’re saying…Death to America and death to Israel!

How the House Budget Committee Aims to Save America’s Future

Posted on March 22, 2015 by admin

The House Budget Committee released its fiscal year 2016 blueprint, A Balanced Budget for a Stronger America for returning to a balanced federal budget within 10 years. The House annually proposes balancing the budget and this year is no different. What is different, however, is that Republicans now also run the Senate.

The evidence clearly shows that the United States is headed for a fiscal disaster if we don’t balance our budget. So how does the House budget proposal plan to accomplish this?

It claims to tackle big challenges while restoring accountability.
It balances the federal budget in less than 10 years by reducing $5.5 trillion in spending versus Pres. Obama’s FY 16 budget proposal.
It would also stave off a severe fiscal crisis that would certainly hit in the future while reforming vital safety net programs.
It claims to provide for the defense of our nation fulfilling the first most critical responsibility of our government.
It claims to build a foundation for an economy that rewards hard work ingenuity and entrepreneurship while respecting and restoring the principle of federalism.
It also aims to reform the Congressional budgetary process, which is designed to reward spending more instead of spending wisely.
It recognizes that interest payments on the current path will swamp other spending priorities in the budget if they are not dealt with.

I’ve shown in previous blogs how massive interest becomes as a part of our federal budget:

–Top-10 Winners in President Obama’s FY2016 Budget

–More Frightening CBO Forecasts from The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2015 To 2025

–US Defense Budget vs Interest on Debt

It aims to cut out inefficiencies while keeping interest payments from drowning out key priorities.
Obama has presided over nearly $2,000,000,000,000 in tax increases in the past six years. The House plan intends to fix the tax code so it is simplified (currently costing America $160 billion annually to comply) and fair for families and businesses.
It means to streamline or repeal inefficient, ineffective or counterproductive regulations pouring from agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Labor Relations Board.
It looks to expand US domestic energy production while stopping wasteful government spending on programs that fail to deliver, like Solyndra, while also addressing some of the worst cases of corporate welfare.
Across the board the proposal looks to reduce or eliminate duplication among federal programs. Few Americans know about the most recent federal agency created in 2010 called the Corporation for Travel Promotion. One thing the United States does not need is to advertise how wonderful a country we are in order to get people to come here. Our problem involves slowing down the title wave of people every year who attempt to get into America.
It proposes complete repeal of Obamacare while saving, strengthening and securing Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security essential entitlement programs that on their current path will bust the budget and the American taxpayers.

In summary, the House plan is meant to balance the budget, reform the tax code, strengthen defense while reforming and saving the major entitlement programs which constitute the Giants in the federal budget. Failure to address these programs now as wisely suggested in the proposal, will force draconian federal budget cuts down the road and further rob our children of their financial futures and God given freedoms.

Considering the admirable goals of the House Budget Committee proposal, it only makes sense that Democrat politicians hate it. Their alternative, like socialism in general, is completely unaffordable!

– Alan Greenspan’s Comments On Exploding Entitlements

The Missing Question in the Hillary Email Scandal?

Posted on March 15, 2015 by admin

Example SECRET Coversheet Required for Every US Government SECRET Document

Washington is abuzz with stories involving Hillary Clinton and the private Chappaqua email server she used during her tenure as Secretary of State. Note that I did not write, as many mistakenly do, a “secret email server”. The definition of ‘SECRET’ is precise, and involves a server set up and cleared to handle up to the SECRET level of classified information.

Hillary’s server was “private”, not SECRET.

During her press conference Clinton stated that under absolutely no circumstance had she emailed classified information in fact arrogantly stating that she knew what classified was and there is no way that she would transmit classified data.

Hillary made several revealing statements at her 10 March 15 press conference.

CLINTON: “Well, the system we used was set up for President Clinton’s office. And it had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches.”

CLINTON: “So, I think that the, the use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure.”

Secure and certified to hold classified information are two very different things. Also, it may have been secure from a burglar stealing it, but secure from hacking, is not likely.

CLINTON: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

Hillary Clinton’s statements appear specific to obviously classified documents. These are identified with cover sheets that mark them as:

CONFIDENTIAL: Unauthorized release of which would cause “Damage to National Security”

SECRET: Unauthorized release of which would cause “Serious Damage to National Security”

TOP-SECRET: Unauthorized release of which would cause “Exceptionally Grave Damage to National Security”

In addition to covers sheets, they contain stamps, headers and footers on every page and paragraph to clearly denote the existing classification level. One would expect that Hillary Clinton would know not to transmit that information or receive it on an unclassified server in her home, as that would be a violation of US law.

But there’s another type of classified that is not nearly so obvious as a document that has a stamp on it and a red or blue cover.

Information in an email or a document by itself may not be classified, but if that information is put together with other emails or documents in such a way that the whole of the information exposes/composes CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET or TOP-SECRET information then in aggregate those emails/documents themselves become classified. This USDA White Paper provides a clear discussion on the complexities of protecting classified information.

I challenge Hillary Clinton’s assertion that she in fact knows what classified information is. I spent most of my adult life holding a security clearance and having to deal with the rules, regulations, forms and training involving protection classified information and faced with the dangers and penalties of compromising classified information.

Considering that Hillary Clinton was forced to release over 50,000 emails to the State Department from her private server, was Secretary of State for over four years, and on a daily basis discussed and handled large amounts of CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET and TOP-SECRET information, it defies all rational belief that the sum total of those 30,000+ emails would not be in aggregate at least SECRET if not TOP-SECRET.

Given that fact, the classification of Hillary’s server itself would then become classified at the same SECRET or TOP-SECRET level, and every email or document that went in and every one that she sent from it would be tainted by that classification. You can bet that of those 30,000+ emails released to the State Department, some are going to be withheld from the general public because of their sensitive and or classified nature. For example, how many FOIA requests are made to Obama’s Government each year where the responses contain no redactions, or withheld documents declared protected by executive privilege?

What also remains to be seen is how many critical emails Hillary Clinton deleted, destroyed or erased before deciding upon the 30,000+ that she did send to the State Department. Congressman Trey Gowdey stated that there are significant gaps in the timelines of her emails that drives great doubt into her statement that she released all but her private emails. Those would certainly be high candidates for classification.

The bottom line is that in my professional opinion there’s a 100% probability that the sum total of information on that drive is actually SECRET or TOP-SECRET. Given that no claim has been made that it was a classified server set up by the federal government with the associated firewalls, protections, and backups required to protect such information, Hillary Clinton violated the classification requirements of her security clearance and the law.

UPDATE:

– It took 4 months, but I’ve been proven correct. Hillary DID Send classified information, hundreds of emails now under IG investigation.

Yes, Hillary’s emails did contain classified information

Hypocrisy, Obama and Israel

Posted on March 8, 2015 by admin

Barack Obama is well know for having returned the honored bust of Winston Churchill to England, which was proudly displayed in the White House when he took office. Obama returned it because he is also known for disdaining colonialism, and that starts with England. He does not respect America’s past either, believing that our prosperity was illegitimate, gained by taking from smaller countries, which could not resist our pillaging ways.

It’s fascinating then to look at the way that the President is treating Israel and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. The President is using the very power that he despises from the colonial era to bully Israel into supporting Obama’s Iranian policy, and treaty negotiations. In this case, Israel’s very survival is at stake, where Obama is worried about padding his legacy.

Another ironic hypocrisy playing out involves President Obama’s Middle East philosophy. He would not allow American leadership in Libya, saying that it wasn’t our place in the world and that other countries should stand up. He insists that the Iraqis step forward and lead the defense of their country against ISIS, and yet when Israel tries to defend itself, he tells them to sit down and allow America to dictate the terms of Israel’s security.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Obama!

Obama: Why He’s Losing on the Global Stage

Posted on March 5, 2015 by admin

Capital Building, Washington D.C.

President Obama largely gets a pass on his domestic policy. He receives near unlimited top cover from the American “Minion media” and pop culture who restate and reframe his mistakes, and distort legitimate policy and ideological criticism. Why are things so different on the foreign policy stage?

First, the fawning adulation President Obama receives from the domestic media is largely missing in the rest of the world. In fact it’s often the case that you’re better off following BBC reports to get accurate coverage of U.S. domestic news than reading the NY Times or watching CNNNBCCBSABC…

Second, President Obama and his foreign policy team are out classed. President Obama learned his leadership skills at ACORN. He’s up against people like Vladimir Putin who were schooled by the KGB, or the Iranian Ayatollahs. This is the equivalent of pitting a pop warner football team against the super bowl champions. President Obama has a ruthless streak, but it only comes out when dealing with the GOP, conservatives, TEA Party Patriots, police or America’s allies. The latest embarrassing example is the President’s bullying attacks on Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. When it come’s to America’s enemies, his ruthless streak is Missing In Action.

Third, President Obama’s domestic adversaries play by the rules. They obey the laws and adhere to basic rules of decorum. Obama is more and more unilaterally re-writing laws, ignoring those that he doesn’t like and using executive orders and regulations to create laws when he can’t get them through Congress. His latest power grabs include using the FCC to control the Internet, and ATF preparation to ban ammunition, in violation of the 2nd Amendment. America’s international adversaries don’t play by the rules, and it seems that Obama can’t keep up, anticipate or deal effectively as a result.

Progressivism is a kindred ideology to communism that seeks a lesser degree of the same, authoritarian government.

Latest: