Saturday, December 8, 2012

Never Forget

We remember the attack on Oahu that occurred this day 71 years ago. We as a family were fortunate enough to visit Hawaii this summer and pay our respects to the warriors who made the ultimate sacrifice for this nation at Pearl Harbor. I'll never forget standing on the Arizona watching the slow rising of fuel to the surface from a hull that is the final resting place for over 1000 sailors. The fuel continues to flow as the blood must have seemed to endlessly flow that day.
In 2004 while serving at the Naval Medical Center San Diego (NMCSD), I was asked by my good friend Gina Savini to check in on a veteran who had been admitted to my hospital. Gina had escorted LT John Finn the prior day at the dedication of the WWII Memorial in DC. Gina was a Navy LCDR and a White House Social Aide. Gina had the privilege of escorting the LT, who was 95 at the time, and had fallen the previous evening in his hotel room. The opinion of a hospital ER was that some muscles were strained and LT Finn was fitted with a wheelchair in order to attend the ceremony. Gina was concerned that there was more involved than a muscle strain. LT Finn needed to return home to San Diego but Gina arranged for his admission to NMCSD on arrival.

While Gina would have done this for anyone and certainly any veteran, LT Finn was no "regular" vet. LT Finn was the first man awarded the Medal of Honor in WWII. On Dec 7 1941, during the first attack by Japanese airplanes on the Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, LT Finn "secured and manned a .50 caliber machine gun mounted on an instruction stand in a completely exposed section of the parking ramp, which was under heavy enemy machine gun strafing fire. Although painfully wounded many times, he continued to man this gun and to return the enemy's fire vigorously and with telling effect throughout the enemy strafing and bombing attacks and with complete disregard for his own personal safety. It was only by specific orders that he was persuaded to leave his post to seek medical attention. Following first-aid treatment, although obviously suffering much pain and moving with great difficulty, he returned to the squadron area and actively supervised the rearming of returning planes."

The LT was admitted to NMCSD. Turns out he had a hairline hip fracture. The day he arrived I met him in his room. I knocked, was given permission to enter and remember a sense of unworthiness in sharing space with this man who had been willing to sacrifice so much for his country. After introducing myself and informing the LT why I was there, LT Finn asked that I call him John. He introduced me to a friend of his in the room, another John, John Baca. John Baca was perhaps a 5-10 years older than I. John Finn went on to recount the events at the WWII Memorial dedication, how much it had meant to him to be there, and how important it was to remember fallen comrades. I asked about the events of Dec 7th in 1941 and he described them in vivid detail. He reported the anger he felt when he realized what was happening that morning. He saw good friends die, he saw pilots burned alive as they tried to get their planes off the ground. John said it wasn't bravery that day. He was just determined to protect the men he served with and those trying to launch their aircraft. He described relocating his trusty .50 caliber machine gun, firing, reloading, firing again. He described seeing the faces of Japanese pilots, several of whom he directly fired upon and hit. John was adamant. He did what anyone else in his position that day would have done.

Then John Finn looked at me, pointed at John Baca, and said, "Now this guy here, he is one of the crazy, hero types. He's a hand grenade guy." I asked for clarification. "Hand grenade guy?" John Finn said, "Yes CAPT, John here was in Vietnam. Go ahead John, show him." John Baca smiled and lifted his shirt. His belly and chest were a mass of scar tissue. John Finn continued, "John here was out one night on a patrol. VC rolled a hand grenade into his position. He took his helemt off, covered it, and laid on the helmet. Saved 8 guys. Cost him two years of surgery here at Naval Hospital back in 1970. Amazing he lived. You guys did a good job. Go ahead John, tell him the story."

It was as John Finn had reported. John Baca recounted the events of that night in the Vietnam jungle back in 1970. Then Sp4c. Baca, of Company D, "was serving on a recoilless rifle team during a night ambush mission. A platoon from his company was sent to investigate the detonation of an automatic ambush device forward of his unit's main position and soon came under intense enemy fire from concealed positions along the trail. Hearing the heavy firing from the platoon position and realizing that his recoilless rifle team could assist the members of the besieged patrol, Sp4c. Baca led his team through the hail of enemy fire to a firing position within the patrol's defensive perimeter. As they prepared to engage the enemy, a fragmentation grenade was thrown into the midst of the patrol. Fully aware of the danger to his comrades, Sp4c. Baca unhesitatingly, and with complete disregard for his own safety, covered the grenade with his steel helmet and fell on it as the grenade exploded, thereby absorbing the lethal fragments and concussion with his body. His gallant action and total disregard for his personal well-being directly saved 8 men from certain serious injury or death."

I have never felt so insignificant and awestruck in my life. I was sitting in a Naval hospital room with two Medal of Honor winners. And never had I felt so proud in my life. The pride welled from the knowledge that I served in the uniform that these heroes had worn years ago. I instantly felt unworthy but also felt the unmistakeable, unspoken, well earned pride that comes from wearing the uniform of the United States military.

I thank God for the blessing of that day. I pray that on this day that should live in infamy, that none of us ever forgets that we live in one of the few nations on earth that can produce men and women like this. I further pray that none of us ever forgets the incredible sacrifice made every day by incredible men and women who volunteer to wear that uniform in order to provide the blanket of freedom which we sleep under every night.

Friday, November 23, 2012

Distorting Abortion

  Great News!!! The CDC abortion rate fell 5% in 2009
  This is great news, isn't it?

Well, you can't tell from the LA Times and CDC comments. The CDC concludes this drop in "abortion rates might be influenced by a lack of availability of abortion providers, state laws, the general economy and access to health services including contraception." Sure doesn't seem that the CDC sees abortion like Hillary Clinton does...something that should be safe, legal and rare. No mention by the CDC that this drop in abortion rates might be due to women, and men, exercising their right to not engage in risky sexual behavior. Wait, is that a right? I may be confused. It's possible that only engaging in risky sexual behavior without the "punishment" of a baby is a right.

Nevertheless, the CDC resists connecting two other salient facts from its own reporting. The LA times simply chooses to distort them. The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), sponsored by the CDC, the primary national source of data on unintended pregnancy in the United States, shows that from 2006–2010 NSFGs contraceptive use among women at risk for unintended pregnancy has decreased. During the same period the CDC reports that the the rate of teen pregnancies has dropped significantly. In fact, despite reports of less contraceptive use, the CDC reports that the rate of teen pregnancy dropped 10% from 2009-2010.
The LA Times presentation of this data is stunning. The Times reports the drop in abortion rates then goes on to cite the statistics from Mississippi which had the lowest state abortion rate, at 4 per 1,000 women of child-bearing age. The LA times states, "The state (Mississippi) also had only a couple of abortion providers and has the nation's highest teen birthrate." The LA times would, it seems, expect us to conclude that as a result of the lowest abortion rate in the country, teen pregnancy is raging in Mississippi. Amazingly, what the LA times deceptively fails to report is that the US has seen dramatic reductions in teen pregnancy over the last several years, and Mississippi is one of the CDC's top 16 states for reductions in teen pregnancy!! Yes, Mississippi has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the nation, but this rate has dropped 21% over the last three years!! I'm sure this truth was just an oversight by the fair and balanced staff of the LA Times.

Word to the disappointed purveyors and proponents of contraception and abortion, an objective view of CDC pregnancy data for the last decade suggests something amazing might be happening. Women, especially teenagers, are reducing the incidence of unwanted pregnancies, and it appears to be occurring in the face of a reduction of abortion services and the use of contraception. Could it be that increasing numbers of men and women, as a a result of education, spiritual enlightenment, the economy, legislation and other factors have seriously considered the choices they make regarding sexual activity? Wouldn't it be wonderful if increasing numbers of Americans, without the need for pills or a variety of contraceptive devices, abstained from sex until they were married, in a committed relationship or at least were in a position to financially support a child?

If the left really cared about the health and welfare of women, they would be rejoicing, not distorting the hopeful message of these statistics. That is not the case, however. Abortion and contraception are critical sacraments in a church whose survival rests on the degradation of traditional Western values. The family and marriage are cornerstones of a society whose foundation is built on belief in a Creator who has endowed us with unalienable rights. When we as a people are stripped of the security, hope and courage which unavoidably accompanies our faithful adherence to Judeo-Christian tradition, when we accept that men are their own gods, and then in our hours of need realize we are not gods and confront our frailty, and require external support, where will we turn? Having banished any notion of divine providence from the public square we will then be certified, card carrying parishioners in the Church of Liberalism. Then, in our time of distress, we will offer sacrifice and penance at the altar of the state. We will pray to the only god we know. We will implore the state shepherds to see us as respectable sheep worthy of their beneficence and generosity.

The LA times and CDC are doing their part to make certain we are all properly conditioned for the state sheepfold.


Monday, November 19, 2012

Letter to a Young Mom Asking For Another View After Conversation with a Liberal Acquaintance Rob (on the then Presidential candidacy of Barack Obama in 2008) Part IV of IV

Letter to a Young Mom Asking For Another View After Conversation with a Liberal Acquaintance Rob (on the then Presidential candidacy of Barack Obama in 2008) Part IV of IV


In the end Young Mom, this is a choice between support for individual liberty or increasing concentration of power in the state.  John McCain supports a government that recognizes its limitations in securing life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for its people.  Senator Obama believes that the government should be the source of that happiness.  The liberal fascism of Senator Obama is smiley face fascism.  Senator Obama sees the state as the principal force in the lives of American citizens.  He would have the state control your healthcare, education, energy production, and finances.  Senator McCain proposes a state that protects the right of an individual to life (certainly after they are born), ensures the security of the United States, and provides individuals the ability to make choices in their healthcare, finances, and education.  Senator Obama has built his campaign on class warfare, promising wealth redistribution through tax increases (on the “rich) and tax credits (for the 40% of Americans not paying taxes) which cannot be supported based on his proposed spending.  The last person to take an economy the likes which we are currently experiencing and employ the economic practices Senator Obama advocates was Herbert Hoover.  Hoover’s policies quickly thrust America into the Great Depression.

John McCain has served his nation nobly during war and peace.  His military service is well documented.  His legislative history is one of determination to form alliances and move legislation in a bipartisan manner.  Honestly, this has been much to my chagrin.  I have completely disagreed with him on some of these efforts…McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy and McCain-Lieberman.  His leadership on Iraq, however, has been impressive, and his commitment to reform spending in DC is critical at this time.  Barack Obama has no serious accomplishments to speak of.  He appears to have been at best a mediocre community organizer.  He rose through the ranks of Chicago politics through the mentorship of a number of unsavory sponsors, including Wright, Pfleger, Ayers, Dohrn, Rezko, and Meeks.  He was undistinguished as an Illinois legislator and remains so as a US Senator.  Despite lofty claims, he has never demonstrated a willingness to reach across the aisle on anything of significance.  Senator Obama votes with his party 97% of the time.  In addition he has the distinction of being the most liberal Senator in the Senate.  This is quite an accomplishment.  Senator Obama is even left of Bernie Sanders, the only avowed socialist in the Senate.  No doubt Senator Obama is capable of delivering soaring oratory and is a good debater, but what qualifies him for the Presidency Young Mom?    

While there are enough differences in core philosophy for most Americans to arrive at a preference amongst these two candidates, there is another critical factor at play here.  Character matters in choosing a President.   Neither McCain nor Obama is a perfect man.  However, there is a staggering lack of transparency on the part of the Obama candidacy.  Senator Obama has weaved a tangled web of radical associations over the course of his life.  How can it be that there is a twenty year gap in significant knowledge about the activities of Senator Obama from his time at Occidental to his time in the Illinois legislature?  This man wants to be President.  We have a right to know this history.

Rob reports words and deeds do matter.  Rob says, however, he has seen nor heard nothing from Senator Obama that “insinuates that his views on patriotism were informed by Ayers, or his views on race were informed by Jeremiah Wright, or his views on politics by ACORN.”  Senator Obama has attempted to make his own race an issue numerous times in this campaign, not John McCain.  Senator Obama has stated that "there's no doubt that when it comes to our treatment of Native Americans as well as other persons of color in this country, we've got some very sad and difficult things to account for," and he has described his grandmother as a “typical white person” regarding a comment she made which he felt was racist.  This is in addition to spending twenty years in a BLT church, giving ACORN $800,000 and describing our military efforts in Afghanistan as “air raiding villages and killing innocent civilians.”  That’s for starters.  I’m not exactly sure what would need to be said to Rob to provide evidence that Senator Obama has some serious explaining to do regarding radical tendencies and character concerns.  So what we do know is disturbing enough, and if there is nothing to hide, why will Senator Obama not fully detail and release records related to two decades of his life?  More importantly, why has the media not done its duty and properly vetted Senator Obama?  Added to character concerns is the thuggish conduct of the Obama campaign, including support of ACORN and questionable campaign financing practices.

Rob reports that Senator Obama is “visionary”, “even tempered”, “charismatic” and has a “transformative will on domestic and global issues”.  Where are the Obama accomplishments that support any of these assertions?  Rob offers no support for such lofty descriptors.  That said, it is somewhat disconcerting that the qualities noted by Rob have been shared by the great liberal fascist leaders of the past…Woodrow Wilson, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao.  All proposed state centered solutions which sacrificed individual liberty on the state altar, some literally, some figuratively. 

There is much to consider in this election, and the bias of mainstream media makes it essential that voters use all information sources available to them.  Cruising the candidate’s websites, as Rob recommends, is informative.  The thoughtful voter needs to do much more, however.  Liberal views are endlessly streamed in the mainstream media on newsstands, in airports, and on major networks.  If you want balance Young Mom,  add Fox News to your regular cable lineup.  Despite what liberal bloggers at Daily Kos and Huffington Post may say, Fox is balanced; it might appear relatively conservative to some when measured against the liberal skew from other media outlets.  Consider visiting some of the sites referenced in this letter.  My hope is that you have the opportunity to give your vote the consideration it deserves.  Time is short, however, and in this election voters will make a momentous judgment in the course they wish America to take.     

This election, Young Mom, is a contest between well defined ideologies, conservatism and socialism.  Both candidates have made their positions clear.  We all have a choice to make.  We may elect to reject the tradition that has made this nation great, a tradition committed to the pursuit of individual liberty, free society, free markets and a constitutional republic which recognizes limits of the power of government.  Some may choose a vision which views the state as the arbiter of all rights and societal well being.  History is replete with examples of what leaders of states do when afforded this opportunity.  When all power is handed to the state, although technically composed of individuals, the state takes on a life of its own.  The state reflexively seeks greater extremes of control. Young Mom, the socialist tendencies of Barrack Obama will find no modulation in potentially the most liberal Congress this nation has ever known.    Ultimately, socialism seeks the destruction of democracy.  It may come in the form of a smiley face, offering great oratory, but it seeks an absolute monarchy of power.

Senator Obama has framed his campaign as one that fights for legitimate aims, while the defenders of democracy and the republic are painted as repressive reactionaries.  He has attempted to picture his campaign as one with the forces of progress, legitimacy and even peace, while trying to discredit and paralyze the citizens who are only trying to preserve our tradition and heritage.  In Senator Obama we are offered a candidate with no executive accomplishments, no demonstrated leadership ability, a history of radical and anti-American relationships, a career built on old time, corrupt Chicago politics, a socialist vision for the United States and a worldview which minimizes or ignores the significant strategic challenges facing us today.       

Young Mom, as a conservative, I can tell you that John McCain was not my first choice for a Republican candidate.  He is a good and honest man though.  He has sacrificed much for his country.  He understands the foundation this nation was built on and he advocates principled solutions that are in keeping with that foundation.  John McCain is determined to make sure that our children continue to enjoy the same liberties and freedoms we have been blessed with in this greatest of nations.  In the challenging times before us America needs a leader who understands the difficult choices a democracy must make to sustain its existence.  Only a tiny minority of the human race has ever experienced democracy.  This grand experiment in our nation has only existed for a little over two hundred years, and is hardly a historical footnote.  My prayer is that conscientious voters will consider the internal and external threats to this great American experiment.  From Thomas Paine, “What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.”

As American citizens, we are the beneficiaries of a harvest reaped from the sacrifices of generations gone before us.  Should this dream be wagered on the bankrupt political philosophy of a mediocre community organizer?  Or should we entrust this dream to an American patriot whose life is built on service to his nation and a realization that the “cause of America is, in a great measure, the cause of all mankind?”

I pray we choose wisely.


Letter to a Young Mom Asking For Another View After Conversation with a Liberal Acquaintance Rob (on the then Presidential candidacy of Barack Obama in 2008) Part III

Energy and Healthcare

Young Mom, Rob did not review these issues in any detail.  They are, however, crucial.  The price of energy has enormous repercussions for each of us every day.  It is not just what we pay at the pump.  Fuel costs, like corporate tax rates, are part of businesses doing business and are passed down to us in increased cost for food, services and necessary items for daily living.  Energy is also a national security issue.  We send $800,000,000, 000 a year to oil producing nations, several of whom are sponsors of the Jihadist movement bent on our destruction.   

Senator McCain has outlined a realistic energy plan that supports all alternative fuel developments, but also realizes alternative energy is not an immediate answer to our problems.  McCain supports programs which will make it possible to build nuclear reactors ASAP.  Eighty percent (80%) of French electricity is supplied by nuclear reactors.  In the US, 20% of our energy is from nuclear.  This is because environmentalists have carried the day and despite the record of safety in nuclear power, they have convinced many of the American people and legislators that nuclear is not safe.  Similarly we have not built an oil refinery in this nation for twenty years and oil companies are unable to drill some of the lands they now have access to due to environmental regulation.  We have not built a nuclear reactor in this country since 1996.    

Senator McCain realizes that for the next 20 years at least, we will require oil to drive our economy.  Should we attempt to become oil independent?  Yes.  Both candidates agree on this.  Senator Obama says we can be “off oil” in ten years.  This means no gas powered transportation or home heating in ten years, but is this possible?  Denmark is perhaps the most advanced nation in pursuit of alternative energy.  Denmark has invested in wind technology for twenty years.  Despite enormous investment and the most vigorous wind industry on the planet, this small nation is only able to derive 20% of power from wind; and the wind power they have has been costly and it is very unreliable.  Denmark has not kicked the oil habit.  Based on population, consumes oil at half of the current level of US oil consumption.  Denmark remains dependent on oil, the difference is they do not import it, they drill for it.

Denmark aggressively drills for oil in the North Sea.  They have drastically cut their oil imports by building an oil industry which exports more than it consumes.  What are those of us out here seeing gas and food prices go up supposed to do Young Mom while President Obama attempts to force a green dream on us which has not been attainable in twenty years for an extremely small, committed European state?  Senator Obama has said he believes gas prices should go up, not too fast, but that we should pay more for oil and gas.  He has said this pain is necessary in order for us to become less dependent on oil.  He believes we should be paying more for gas.  In pursuit of his goal of weaning us from oil, Senator Obama has supported everything possible to make sure there is no chance the price of gas will drop.  He has opposed any domestic oil drilling legislation that would result in more oil coming out of the ground and he wants to institute a windfall profit tax oil companies.  The result of that will be the same as other corporate tax increases.  Oil companies will pass the tax on to us and ultimately, as happened under Jimmy Carter when he instituted a similar tax in 1980, oil production will drop.  In the meantime Senator Obama will levy taxes to support green energy sources.  This is part of Senator Obama’s vision to develop an energy industry supported by the state.

The problem is, Young Mom, the nation in the world most committed to this process has over twenty years only managed to generate twenty five percent total of its energy from non-carbon sources.  If this much smaller nation of 5 million people, totally committed to this process still needs oil, who in their right mind believes we, a nation of 300,000,000 will eliminate a need for oil in ten years?  Yes, we can and should try, but we need a leader who recognizes the realities of energy and who will build the bridges required in a thoughtful energy independence plan.  This means recognizing that we have tremendous untapped oil reserves and that irrational environmental concerns have severely limited our ability to pursue a variety of energy sources.  We can safely drill.  We can build a self reliant oil industry (as Denmark has done).  We need nuclear power and fast tracking of plants, not hesitation and double talk from Senator Obama on what we will do with reactor fuel.  France does this for goodness sake Young Mom!  We need clean coal, but despite what Nancy Pelosi thinks, this is a carbon fuel.  And yes, we need alternative sources, but it is socialist and tyrannical to presume that the state should punish citizens and the economy with unnecessary oil and gas costs in its pursuit of a utopian vision of energy which even the most determined European states have been unable to achieve.       

Exxon made 40 billion on sales of $404 billion dollars in 2007 Young Mom, roughly a 10% net profit on sales.  They are lots of costs which go into running an oil business, something those warring on big oil rarely talk about.  That said, 10% profit is not bad, though not as good as Microsoft.  Exxon didn't hit the lottery though, the government did.  For all the sales taxes, duties and income taxes collected, the government pulled in a $102 billion on Exxon's sales of $404 billion.  Young Mom, nearly 25% of all of Exxon's sales (not profit, sales!) goes to some governmental entity!  Increases or sustained elevations in the price of gas will have devastating effect during the economic tailspin many believe will result from Obama economic policies.  As we pump gas we cannot afford during a possible Obama Presidency, paying $5 or more a gallon, we all must remember that the government puts $1.00 in its pockets, the oil company keeps $0.50.

As a physician it is clear to me that the Obama health plan clearly puts us on the road to nationalized healthcare.  Some may disagree with the approach, I just wish the Senator would honestly state his intention.  He believes we need government control over the healthcare system.  Many agree.  The driver in this discussion is the oft repeated statement that 47,000,000 are uninsured.  First, this does not mean these people have no healthcare.  In fact, everyone in this country can show up at the emergency room and get healthcare.  When this group is analyzed one finds that a third are eligible for Medicaid but are not signed up, a third could possibly afford healthcare insurance but have made the decision not to purchase it and a third need real assistance in getting on an established  plan.

Senator McCain proposes giving individuals choice in choosing healthcare, and offers monetary assistance to do so.  He proposes a tax credit of $5000 for families purchasing healthcare on their own.  Senator Obama has been erroneously advertising that voters will lose health benefits and money under the McCain health plan.  Senator Obama is portraying the McCain move to consumer driven health as workers getting a $5,000 tax credit, health insurance costing $12,000 per family, and the worker getting stuck with a $7,000 bill.  Right?  Wrong!  Here’s how it would really work. Suppose a worker gets $50,000 in cash wages and $12,000 in health insurance. Right now, he pays federal income taxes on the wages but not the health insurance. Let’s assume, for reasons of simplicity, that the tax rate he is paying is a flat 25% on his wages. He therefore pays $12,500 in federal income taxes. His after-tax, after-health-care income is $37,500. Now, under the McCain plan, his employer keeps paying the premium, which is now counted as income to the worker. He therefore pays federal income taxes on $62,000, or $15,500.  But he also gets a tax credit of $5,000 for health insurance, which means that, all in all, he owes $10,500 in federal taxes, or $2,000 less than he does today. His after-tax, after-health-care income is $39,500. If the worker decides to buy his insurance in the open market instead of through the employer, the result will be the same. His employer is indifferent to how he pays his worker as long as total costs are the same. So instead of paying premiums, the employer pays his worker $62,000 in cash wages and does not pay anything toward insurance. The worker again owes $15,500 in taxes on this compensation, and he also must buy health insurance costing $12,000. So, his pre-tax income is $62,000, he owes $12,000 in health insurance premiums, and he owes $10,500 in federal taxes (after claiming his credit). His after-tax, after-health-care income is the same: $39,500 ($62,000 – $12,000 – $10,500), or $2,000 more than today.

This plan would be a break even or slight cost to wealthier taxpayers.  McCain would also eliminate restrictions on purchase of healthcare insurance across state lines.  Many states have enacted healthcare mandates for insurance policies which have driven the cost of insurance through the roof for all.  Perhaps you don’t want an insurance plan that covers the cost of cosmetic plastic surgery or artificial reproductive technologies.  You have the choice in the McCain system to purchase a plan which meets your needs.  You keep the amount of money left over and there will be money left over for most Americans.

Senator Obama proposes a National Health Insurance Exchange which will create a government mandated benefit for all.  He reports that you can keep your current plan and doctor, but follows on with reporting that those employers who do not offer the plan proposed by the Exchange will be fined.  He refuses to state what the fine, or “incentive” for employers to join the Insurance Exchange will be.  He most recently refused to discuss this issue in the last debate with John McCain.

Young Mom, as a healthcare provider I have great concern with Senator Obama’s healthcare plan.  It will force individuals and employers into a health care benefit managed by the government.  The results of such experiments in healthcare, socialized medicine adventures, are visible throughout Europe and in Canada.  Costs have continued to rise and cost containment, at the expense of quality, becomes the only course of action for governments committed to offering a one size fits all solution for individual health care.  The government approach presumes the government is best suited to determine   what health benefit everyone needs.  Senator Obama says that he simply wants all Americans to have the same benefit legislators have, the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program (FEHBP).  We need to discuss the FEHBP.

Young Mom, the FEHBP is not a described benefit, though that is how Senator Obama presents it.  This year, 283 plans are available through the FEHBP at the national and local levels. The benefit packages change from year to year— sometimes dramatically—depending on prevailing market conditions, consumer demand, and insur­ers' willingness to compete and offer different pack­ages through the FEHBP.  This wide range of personal choices and the intense competition among the various health plans are precisely what make the FEBHP both popular and successful. It is the closest thing that Americans—at least those Americans who work for the federal government—have to a functioning, consumer-driven national health insurance market.

The Obama plan has nothing to do with such choice and plan competition.  Despite Senator Obama's rhetoric of "choice and competition," his plan is a vehicle for new regula­tions and federal power that would leave ordinary Americans with even less control of their health care dollars than they exercise today.  As a parent and physician Young Mom, the Obama plan is bad medicine.

Instead of using the massive power of the federal government to impose a top-down change on the health care system, Senator Obama and other poli­cymakers would be wise to transfer direct control of health care dollars to individuals and families. Senator McCain’s plan recognizes that this would enable Americans to exercise real per­sonal choice of health plans and benefits while making health plans and providers compete directly for consumers' dollars by providing value to patients.

The War against Jihadism, National Security and Homeland Defense

Rob leaves on the table several other important topics which you as a Young Mom should consider carefully in selecting the next Commander in Chief.  We are currently engaged in a war with Jihadists and radical Muslims around the world.  Despite what Senator Obama says, we did not ask for this conflict.  The game was clearly on in 1979 with the taking of the American Embassy in Iran, but has roots even earlier than that.  Despite this, the United States has been the greatest provider of financial aid to developing Muslim nations worldwide.  I would suggest this has not always been wise policy but US economic aid to Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey dwarfs that supplied by any other nations.  We have been the savior for millions of Muslims worldwide not only through economic aid but through military support.  We have sacrificed our most precious treasure to protect Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan from control by tyrannical regimes bent not only on our destruction but the torture and destruction of their own people.

Senator Obama would have you look upon the military as a needy special interest group sacrificed in meaningless imperial adventures.  Talk to military members who have served in those arenas Young Mom.  Military members are proud of the service we have performed worldwide to ensure the safety of our nation.   In performing this duty we have also created safe space for people around the world to attempt the experiment which has been successful here.

The war we are engaged in now concerned mom has multiple fronts.  It is in Iraq, Afghanistan and may be elsewhere in the future.  Senator McCain recognizes the vicious enemy before us and the global conflict we are engaged in.  Senator Obama does not.  He sees separate individual conflicts.  Obama talks about ending the war in Iraq.  Well Young Mom, you would never know it from the cricket sounds in newsrooms, but we are winning and very likely have won the war there.  Camp Fallujah was closed this week.  You didn’t read it in the NY Times or hear about it on the nightly news.  There is nothing left for Marines and Army members to do in Anbar province.  We have begun bringing troops home.  This is happening because John McCain supported General Petraeus’ strategy of counterinsurgency and demanded the surge.  McCain defied the Bush administration, criticized war planning and demanded a different approach.  It has worked spectacularly.  Senator Obama said the surge would not work and would make things worse.  He demanded withdrawal on a timetable which would have given AQ in Iraq a light at the end of the tunnel.  There are many who would argue about whether we should have gone.  There were many good reasons; enough reasons in fact that the Senate authorized this conflict (77-23).  Senator Obama reports he was against the war.  Fact is, he was not in the Senate at the time.  It is easy to be in the State Senate and say such things.  Do you believe Senator Obama would have voted differently than Clinton, Kerry or his running mate Biden?  The fact is, like it or not, we remain at war with Islamofascism and we are in Iraq.

The approach advocated by John McCain took courage.  He defied his party in being critical of the war effort.  McCain knows we are engaged in a multi front war and that to lose the Iraq battle would have been a disaster for many.  The Obama approach would have been a victory for Islamofascism.  It has also been reported that on his recent world tour Senator Obama, while in Iraq, asked PM Maliki to delay US troop withdrawal. Per the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Senator Obama reportedly told Maliki that when a new administration came on board, they should be the ones to coordinate such a withdrawal.  If Senator Obama believes so firmly in withdrawal, shouldn’t he be celebrating the fact that it is safe to bring some troops home now?  The cynic would say no, he wants to take credit for that himself if he is elected.  The fact is that the only reason anyone will be coming home in an orderly fashion and the Iraqis have a chance at stability is that the Petraeus strategy has secured the country.  Such conversation by Senator Obama also displays a despicable disregard for the safety of our troops.  If it is safe to bring them home, do so.  Maintaining deployed forces, even if not actively engaged in battle, is a hardship on military members and families which is endured as long as it is required.  In addition, requesting that Maliki keep US forces in place until a possible Obama Presidency is realized puts military lives at risk.  

Young Mom, the world views of the two Presidential candidates men are polar opposites.  Senator Obama sees the United States as needing to assume its place in the larger world community as another member.  He sees the United States as a big part of the world’s problems.  Senator McCain sees the US as a world leader who must work with other nations, maintain alliances, but retain our ability to function independently in our best interests.  Senator McCain sees the United States as a big part of the solution to the world’s problems.  Obama believes, much as Neville Chamberlain did in the 1930s, that our enemies are reasonable people who can be talked with, or at least bought off.  While Senator Obama and the media would have us all believe the US has not spoken with rogue nations which concern us most, President Bush’s administration has held talks with Iran, North Korea and Venezuela.  We have encouraged European allies to take the lead on Iranian negotiations.  They asked for this responsibility.  The President of the United States should never walk into such dens of snakes without clear pre-conditions and expectations.  Senator Obama has stated clearly that he would meet “without preconditions” with top leaders in nations determined to destroy us and our allies.  McCain has made clear he will meet with anyone when the time and conditions are right.

Young Mom, the Senator Obama national security and worldview is na├»ve and  dangerous.  Leaders of the worst of nations and terrorist movements (Venezuela, Iran, Hamas, North Korea) have espoused their support for Senator Obama.  Do you think that is because he will insist that they conform to accepted standards of behavior for modern governments?  When Senator Obama says “Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us,” he reveals a staggering lack of understanding of the ideology of these nations’ leaders.  These rogue nations with emerging nuclear capability, have all demonstrated a commitment to supporting terrorism.  They are unstable and irrational, unlike the USSR, and have the potential to lethally impact democratic nations  crippled by political correctness with relatively open borders.  

In his note to you Young Mom, Rob does not even mention national security or the war on Jihadism as an issue which he feels will impact his family’s future.  Simply amazing in this day and age.  This is the world view, however, of those wearing liberal eyeshades. Despite the continual escalation of a war against the West over the last thirty years, liberals refuse to recognize the enemy.  Some of our allies do, however.  This is from Geert Wilders, Chairman of the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, speaking to America:  

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe? Patriots from around Europe risk their lives every day to prevent precisely this scenario form becoming a reality.

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe’s children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

This is not the first time our civilization is under threat. We have seen dangers before. We have been betrayed by our elites before. They have sided with our enemies before. And yet, then, freedom prevailed.

These are not times in which to take lessons from appeasement, capitulation, giving away, giving up or giving in. These are not times in which to draw lessons from Mr. Chamberlain. These are times calling us to draw lessons from Mr. Churchill and the words he spoke in 1942:

“Never give in, never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy”.

As you weigh your vote Young Mom, you must give serious thought to considering who should assume the role of Commander in Chief.  Joe Biden made some disturbing comments about what faces us in an Obama Presidency:

"Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. "And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

Joe Biden almost bluntly declares here that a President Obama will invite challenges from enemies abroad.  If Obama power diplomacy is going to be so effective, why will this happen?  Senator Obama tells us, “if America is willing to come to the table, the world will be more willing to rally behind American leadership to deal with challenges like terrorism, and Iran and North Korea's nuclear programs.”  I don’t know about you Young Mom, but Biden’s comments are shocking to me.  The VP on the Dem ticket, who in debates said about Obama and his ability to be President, "I think he can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training", warns us that a President Obama will react to the coming crisis in a way that demoralizes the country and which shatters public confidence in Obama.

 Young Mom, no one is suggesting this would happen under a President McCain.  There will be no rush by our enemies to challenge a President McCain.  Why, because he is committed to protecting our nation and our allies.  Why would thoughtful voters ever consider casting a ballot for a Senator Obama when his VP, someone familiar with foreign affairs, predicts a calamity within the first six months of an Obama Presidency?  Young Mom, I want to elect someone who will be equipped to prevent such an occurrence.  When even Joe Biden tells you that disaster awaits the first six months of an  Obama Presidency, we should listen.  There's no way to deny the reality of the defeatism and retreat represented by a vote for Obama and which our enemies see in a President Obama.

John McCain has led a thoroughly examined life which has been ruled by honor and what he has judged to be good sense.  He is not a man who wavers, not a man who will ever compromise the security of this nation to any enemy. Rob and most liberals believe the forces committed to the destruction of Western civilization are an exaggerated figment of Republicans’ imaginations.  You will have to form your own opinions about this Young Mom, but there is no doubt that the next President will have to make vital national security decisions that will have enormous repercussions for future generations.  

The Stealth Candidate

As you consider your next Commander in Chief Young Mom, you should be aware of an important fact.  Senator Obama, if he were a civilian applying for secret, or even top secret clearance, would be denied.  Senator Obama could not work as a civilian at Lockheed or at the White House.  I have been through the clearance drill and know others involved in this process at the White House.  Senator Obama would be denied not because he has a funny name and not because of his color.

The mainstream media has done this nation an enormous disservice in vetting Senator Obama.  I would highly recommend reading Senator Obama’s books, Dreams From My Father and Audacity of Hope.  They are fascinating reading and offer some interesting insights into Senator Obama’s thought process and his struggle for identity.  Perhaps most importantly, this is the only detailed accounting we have of the Senator’s activities over a twenty year period (1979-1999).  Senator McCain’s life is an open book.  During his twenties McCain was being tortured in a POW camp, Senator Obama by his own account (Dreams) was attending school, socializing with radicals at Occidental and then Columbia, and doing drugs.  Senator Obama has NEVER talked about why he went from Occidental to Columbia, what his relationship was with Pakistani students at Occidental, how same students influenced him to move to New York, why he took several extended trips to Pakistan while in school, what the details were of his decision to go to Chicago, did he meet Bill Ayers while at Columbia, how did a very average student got into Harvard Law first time around, and exactly how was all this paid for?

Senator Obama has a laundry list of documents he has either refused to produce or actively obstructed distribution of.  These include all transcripts from all colleges and law school, theses from all colleges and law school, birth certificate (not certificate of live birth...there are many stories from his Kenyan family that he was born in Kenya while his mom was there, not Hawaii), passports, college loan documents, selective service registration, Illinois state senate schedule and agendas, client list from his time at law firms in Chicago, and medical records.

So, no secret clearance would be granted without releasing all these records.  No secret clearance would be approved with a history illegal drug use.   No clearance with an established record of consorting with known criminals and terrorists.  Three strikes, and you don’t get three strikes when applying for secret clearance.  This might not mean much to those who have not been involved in the military or national security work.  To those who have spent time in these areas, the thought of a President who never served in the military (understood many future President’s will not), who will not produce his selective service registration (making one wonder if Senator Obama is registered) and who could not meet the requirements for clearance, is incomprehensible.

Rob, attempts to dismiss Senator Obama’s friendship with William Ayers as attempting to paint Senator Obama unfairly with the radical brush.  If one is to believe Rob, then Senator Obama is an absolute incompetent and imbecile.  Rob is asking for the willful suspension of disbelief.  He suggests that it is unreasonable to believe that two men share core values when Senator Obama took his first executive job from Ayers, served the Ayers project for six years, served with Ayers on other boards and decided to launch his first political campaign from the Ayers living room.

Rob is correct that Bill Ayers is only one part of the patchwork of mentors, friends and associates that form the Obama cloak of radicalism.  Jeremiah Wright, as the former pastor of Trinity United Church, a church Obama attended for twenty years, preached the gospel according to black liberation theology (BLT) from his pulpit.  BLT, according to James Cone (a mentor for Wright), one of its founders, has written, “Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”  Rob is not telling the truth Young Mom when he says this was never preached from the pulpit.  Pretty much all of the vile bile spewed by Jeremiah Wright was done from the pulpit, much like other Obama minister friends (Pfleger, Meeks).  Rob must not think you have access to You Tube, but check out this one of many videos of infamous Wright performances.  The word according to Rev. Wright:

 “The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.” (2003)

Most of the available tape of Jeremiah Wright is from the pulpit.  What is truly astounding is that Trinity has maintained its tax status as a non-profit organization.  That should have been stripped away years ago.  Rob says that Wright never preached hate from the pulpit.  He says that it is inconceivable that Trinity could be a racist anti-American institution.  In fact, looking at the tapes of Wright and the reaction of the crowd, it is not at all hard to imagine that what Rob denies is fact.  Rob describes Wright as the person who brought Obama to Christ.  Obama has written regarding his belief that the black churches would play a critical in developing a political power base.  From Obama::                                                                   

"Nowhere is the promise of organizing more apparent than in the traditional black churches. Possessing tremendous financial resources, membership and — most importantly — values and biblical traditions that call for empowerment and liberation, the black church is clearly a slumbering giant in the political and economic landscape of cities like Chicago. A fierce independence among black pastors and a preference for more traditional approaches to social involvement (supporting candidates for office, providing shelters for the homeless) have prevented the black church from bringing its full weight to bear on the political, social and economic arenas of the city."

Rob attempts to diminish any concerns you might reasonably have about Senator Obama and black liberation theology by stating that Obama has denounced Wright and that his close religious relationship with Wright might “understandably engender certain forgiveness that strangers would not indulge.”  Rob rationalizes such acceptance based on his recollection of the neighborhood priest he knew growing up who, outside of church, shared racist sentiments and smelled of whiskey.  Rob, however, did not come to this priest at twenty seven, listen to his sermons for twenty years, as an adult ask this man to bring him to Christ, preside at his wedding and baptize his daughters.  Senator Obama has also made it clear that he sees the black church as vital in furthering his hopes of developing a political action base in black communities.  So based on Senator Obama’s writings it is not absolutely clear at all that he found Christ.  What he did clearly find was another means to further his quest to solidify a political power base.   

There is great detail that can be found regarding other troubling Obama connections, including Rashid Khalidi, political fixer Antoin "Tony" Rezko, Nadhmi Auchi, Bernadine Dohrn, Rev. Meeks, Rev. Otis, Father Pfleger Louis Farrakhan, and Aiham Alsammarae.  I would be happy to supply or refer you to places for more detail about these relationships Young mom.  It appears to me that Senator Obama could make all these concerns about his past and personal relationships go away if he would answer questions and release documents.  The problem is that main stream media will not ask these questions, Obama will not spend time with anyone who will publicly put these questions to him and he is unwilling to release the pertinent documents.

Rob doesn’t mention any of the latter relationships but attempts to dismiss the Wright-Ayers connections as an unfortunate consequence of choosing work in public life.  According to Rob, such nasty characters will happen along on an ambitious individual’s career path.  Rob reports that John McCain has had associations with Roger Quinn and William Timmons.  Lets assume what Rob says is true about these men, which I don’t necessarily believe is the case.  There isn’t space to quibble over it.  These are hired hands, not mentors that have over decades guided McCain’s personal, religious and professional development.  Much like the priest Rob discussed, this is another effort to dismiss disturbing insights into the Obama character using laughable attempts at moral equivalence.                 

Running a Campaign

Lastly Young Mom, you should be aware of the strategies being employed by the Obama campaign to attempt to secure this election.  A principal weapon in the Democratic  election effort is ACORN, the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now. This group purports to be apolitical, committed to representing the interests of the underprivileged in a variety of underserved areas, mainly urban.  A review of ACORN’s history demonstrates that they are anything but that.  A complete primer on this band of thieves masquerading as community do-gooders can be found here.  With some diligence, you can find multiple reports from a variety of MSM sources, implicating ACORN in fraudulent voting activities in the upcoming election. In Cleveland. In Detroit. In New Mexico. In Las Vegas. And in Milwaukee the “community organizers” are hard at work, and it ain’t at removing asbestos from rundown housing or tutoring in school basements.  They are paying people to register to vote, sometimes with money, in other cases with cigarettes.  They are encouraging individuals to register multiple times to vote.   

There are too numerous to report past reminders of ACORN activities out there, but this one from 2007 in Seattle is representative of numerous others:

The Seattle Times adds that the announcement of criminal charges came after the King County Canvassing Board revoked 1,762 allegedly fraudulent voter registrations submitted by ACORN employees.  According to prosecutors, six ACORN workers “had admitted filling out registration forms with names they found in phone books last October. The canvassers filled out the forms while sitting around a table at the downtown Seattle Public Library.”

Senator Obama, is intimately linked to ACORN (has taught at ACORN leadership seminars, represented ACORN interests in motor voter registration).  From Senator Obama meeting with ACORN leaders last November, “I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drives in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”  ACORN is a supposedly non-partisan voter registration organization that has had many of its activists indicted and convicted of voter fraud violations.  Senator Obama has been involved with ACORN throughout his career and in turn, ACORN’s political arm has endorsed him while its non-political arm is pledging to spend $35 million this year registering voters— quoting John Fund, “most will be real but many fictional.” The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has details regarding the Senator’s willingness to provide less than transparent support for ACORN activities:

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports.

An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in “get-out-the-vote” projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.
Rob mentions in his note that Senator McCain has ties to ACORN, and attempts to dismiss the group as a non-sequitur in campaign discussions.  McCain did attend an immigration rally which ACORN co-sponsored.  That is the extent of McCain’s association with ACORN.  The group is perpetrating massive voter fraud across the country, is registering democrats mainly in cities, has had its offices raided by police in Las Vegas for suspicion of voter fraud, and has received $800,000 worth of support from the Obama campaign.    

The financing of the Obama campaign is equally troubling Young Mom.  Senator Obama has received historical records of donations under $200.  These donations now total greater than $220,000,000.  Donations less than $200 are not routinely monitored by the FEC and this might be a tribute to the amazing democratization of politics in the internet age.  These Newsmax and Spectator pieces report on known multiple illegal Obama campaign donations.

For example, a donor identified as “Pro, Doodad,” from “Nando, NY,” gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most for $25.  For most of the donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You.”   Mr. Doodad apparently has a “You” partner at the “Loving” named “Good Will”. Following FEC requests, the Obama campaign began refunding money to Doodad Pro in February 2008. In all, about $8,425 was charged back to a credit card. But that still left a net total of $11,165 as of Sept. 20, way over the individual limit of $4,600. Regarding Mr. Good Will, analysis of the 1.4 million individual contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered 1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25.  In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.  Following this and subsequent FEC requests, campaign records show that 330 contributions from Mr. Good Will were credited back to a credit card. But the most recent report, filed on Sept. 20, showed a net cumulative balance of $8,950 — still well over the $4,600 limit.

Let’s presume Mr. Doodad’s and Will’s donations originated in the US.  How about the possibility of illegal donations to Senator Obama from foreign nationals? This from the “The American Thinker”:

Despite dropping the groundbreaking bombshell  story of "Palestinian" brothers from the Rafah refugee camp in Gaza who donated $33,000 to Obama's campaign, no big media picked up the story. Jihadis donating to Obama from Gaza? Could there be a bigger story?  Foreign donations are illegal, but this story was all that and so much more. The "Palestinian" brothers were proud and vocal of their "love" for Obama. Their vocal support on behalf of "Palestinians" spoke volumes to Obama's campaign.

There has been no mainstream press or media interest on these subjects.  Honestly Young mom, would there be interest if John McCain got donations from Palestinian refugee camps?

Obama returned the Palestinian dollars, but never reported it to the FEC; and as above, Camp Obama has been much slower to return other illegal donations. For the doubters, observations can be corroborated by going to the FEC website.  All the campaign contribution data is there.  You can troll through it just as the above sources have done.  Other foreign contributors of small donations to the Obama campaign, with uncertain national status, come from France, Virgin Islands, Planegg, Vienna, Hague, Madrid, London, AE, IR, Geneva,Tokyo, Bangkok, Turin, Paris, Munich, Madrid, Roma, Zurich, Netherlands, Moscow, Ireland, Milan, Singapore, Bejing, Switzerland, Toronto, Vancouver, La Creche, Pak Chong, Dublin, Panama, Krabi, Berlin, Geneva, Buenos Aires, Prague, Nagoya, Budapest, Barcelona, Sweden, Taipei, Hong Kong, Rio de Janeiro, Sydney, Zurich, Ragusa, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Uganda, Mumbia, Nagoya, Tunis, Zacatecas, St, Croix, Mississauga, Laval, Nadi, Behchoko, Ragusa, DUBIA, Lima, Copenhagen, Quaama, Jeddah, Kabul, Cairo, Nassau and Luxembourg.

How about those small donations democratizing the election? Unmonitored and in the internet age, well, maybe not the democratization we might have hoped for.  This might all be a moot point.  While not specifically commented on at this time by the Senator, would an Obama administration consider election reform that would include legalizing foreign contributions?  This would conform to his worldview.  If just these reported observations, very possibly the tip of the Obama iceberg, were attributed to John McCain, would it make it above the fold of the NYT…for days?  Would McCain still be in the race Young Mom? 

So where is the national outrage over the conduct of the Obama campaign?  Is the actual activity itself OK, as well as the willingness of main stream media to look the other way and functionally serve as a cog in the Obama machine?  There are clear disagreements that many of us have on critical political issues, but most conservatives couldn’t support a Republican campaign built on such tactics.  Is it reasonable to assume that for most, at least in this country, political views are derived from core values that include courage, integrity, honesty and commitment?  If so, why are some of us willing to tolerate, and others actively support, a campaign and adulating media that promote goon tactics as standard operating procedure in pursuit of the Presidency?  If a fellow citizen fully accepts the Obama political solutions as best, fair enough, we can debate those points.  May the best plan win.  Where, however, is the anger from both sides of the aisle over the deceptive, deceitful, and thuggish conduct of the Obama campaign, with the traditional media as unindicted co-conspirators?  I expect this observation will elicit protests from Liberal friends but the Republican playbook is simply different.   John McCain is simply an honorable man who refuses to debase our political system this way.  If he had Young mom, you would have heard about it. 

Sunday, November 18, 2012

Benghazi: Tip of the Treason Iceberg

The whole Benghazi affair gets more putrid by the minute. We maintained a "Consulate" (or CIA base) in a hell hole known as Benghazi with an original security force that included an armed 16 man security team. The "Consulate" was attacked several times over the last six months, most notoriously in June when a hole was blown in the wall of the "Consulate" by an IED. During this same time period in Benghazi the Red Cross office was attacked with an RPG round, a UN convoy was targeted with an IED, and an RPG attack was launched on a British convoy escorting the British Ambassador. The  Brits closed their consulate and the Red Cross shuttered its doors. .

What was the US response to the violence in Benghazi? No one talked about it, apparently the President never knew, and we reduced the security force protecting our Consulate...despite the objections of the leader of the security team and Ambassador Chris Stevens. Sure, this all makes sense. Got it.

Fast forward to Sept, 11th when on a quiet night, the Ambassador entertains a Turkish emissary, and sees him off at the gate of the American Consulate...40 minutes before a multi-pronged attack is launched. All appears quiet. There are no crowds. There are no protests. Forty minutes later the silence is broken by gunfire and explosions. A coordinated assault unfolds which will include staged assaults with RPGs and mortar rounds. The State Department is immediately aware an attack is underway via emergency alerts sent to Tripoli and the State Department Command Center in DC.

This attack raged for nearly seven hours after the State Department was notified it was underway. Several pleas for help and assistance were made. Our only response was to send a State Department security team from Tripoli that arrived 5 hours into the fight, after being delayed by Libyan officials at the Benghazi airport! It remains absolutely unclear why in extremis teams from EUROCOM, assets that might have been floating in the Med, a nearby FAST team or armed drones were not employed to assist in defending Americans and American territory now under attack.

This attack was watched shortly after its inception in real time via a drone ordered overhead. Despite what is clearly a planned assault, and months of warning that the situation in Benghazi was unstable, the official explanation offered by the WH and its minions, for almost two weeks, is the lie that a video was responsible for Muslim outrage that triggered spontaneous outbursts of violence. The President, two weeks after the attacks, at the UN declared:

"In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others. That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world."

The Secretary of State told the father of slain ex-SEAL Ty Woods, who (with Glenn Doherty, also an ex-Navy SEAL) died attempting to defend the US Consulate, painting AQ mortar men with a laser hoping for supporting fire, "We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.” Susan Rice, the UN Secretary, went on five Sunday shows the weekend following the attack and repeated the same story blaming an unknown  video with 300 views as responsible for righteous Muslim outrage that led to a spontaneous attack on the Benghazi consulate.

Last week Gen. Petraeus, then CIA Director, testified that in his estimation he knew within 24 hours that the Benghazi events were a planned, terrorist assault. He reported that references to Al Qaeda organizations and terrorist coordination of these attacks was removed from "CIA talking points." Talking points! How about we all just decide to tell the truth and forget about talking points. We had been attacked, a consulate (US soil) in flames, destroyed, and four men dead, including our Ambassador. And what do these families, and the American people have for consolation? We all get a lying President, a lying Sec of State, a lying UN Ambassador, and a lying Sec Def. when the lie becomes increasingly unsupportable, we are treated to a Sec Def who educates us on the role of the military, “The basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place.” Excuse me Mr. Sec Def,  this is exactly the mission of the special ops community…you know, the warriors you bloviating, mendacious cowards in this administration always tell us you are committed to supporting! This lying sack of crap should be tarred, feathered and thrown into the Potomac.  The depth of deception and treason involved in Benghazi is staggering. This astonishing duplicity prompts multiple questions.

Why did our consulate remain open in Benghazi remain open given the security situation? Why did we reduce security in this unstable environment? Were we reclaiming weapons loosed by the Libyan "liberation" and sending them to Syrian rebels? Were we partnered with Al Qaeda elements in Libya to secure and run these weapons? Were we working with the Turks and Saudis on this project? Were we shipping these arms to Syrian "rebels" who are Al Qaeda in Syria? Was Ambassador Stevens the front man for a gun running operation? Was this the Mideast version of Fast and Furious...on steroids?

Regarding the attack, when did the President find out about this situation? Was it one hour after it began during his meetings scheduled with Sec Def Panetta and Gen. Dempsey? Despite multiple calls for help why were military asset options in the region not mobilized? Were theater commanders told to stand down in mobilizing these assets? Why have we not heard from key theater commanders who have either mysteriously retired or been removed from command since September 11th? What does Gen. Ham AFRICOM Commander have to say? Why was RADM Gauoette, Commander of the John Stennis Strike Group, on station in the Med on Sept 11th, relieved? What does he have to say? Were these men willing to stand up and send support to Benghazi in spite of orders from DC to stand down?

The last set of questions around Benghazi should focus on the fact that despite a horrific attack of a US "consulate", the "consulate" was never secured. CNN reporters, walking through the rubble three days after the event, found Ambassador Steven's diary! We were told endlessly by the President that after the attack he ordered forces to the scene to secure the consulate and personnel in Benghazi. I guess secure is a pretty relative term. We were also told that the FBI was being ordered to the scene of the violence. The FBI did not arrive in Benghazi until three weeks after the attack. Despite that copyboy for the Obama administration, Jay Carney was informing us that an active investigation was ongoing 10 days after the attack. Investigators were not on the ground in Benghazi until October! 

So an American Ambassador is murdered, three other Americans killed and a "consulate" sacked, but US investigators don't show up for three weeks? Why is this? This is inexplicable.    

Now enter Paula Broadwell and perhaps more interestingly, Jill Kelly. Broadwell apparently was Petraeus' paramour. Though we are told that the FBI learned of this relationship only later this summer, and the President only heard about it election eve, it is likely the General was involved with Ms. Broadwell when she began writing his biography in Afghanistan. Many know they had a relationship and it is likely so did the FBI and the WH. Why nominate such a man for CIA Director then? That is unclear, but Jill Kelly, a socialite who volunteered to lead social functions at home of CENTCOM, MacDill AFB in Tampa, began receiving threatening emails from Ms. Broadwell cautioning her to stay away from her guy, Gen. Petraeus.

Ms. Kelly is presented to us a socialite gadfly who served as a volunteer hostess for leadership at MacDill AFB, home of CENTCOM. Ms. Kelly resides with her husband in a posh Tampa bayside residence which hosted numerous affairs introducing influential members of Tampa society to the military leadership at MacDill. Ms. Kelly, however, appears to be more than just a Tampa socialite. Ms. Kelly was known to the WH, visiting the White House three times. Her social expertise in Tampa was in setting up events for Muslim interest groups seeking to gain influence at MacDill. Jill (formerly Khawam) Kelly is a Christian Arab of Lebanese descent, who was well known in the Muslim Arab embassies of Washington for doing their bidding and hosting their parties at and near MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa. From the Wall Street Journal:

"Middle Eastern diplomats in Washington also knew Ms. Kelley, who came from a Lebanese immigrant family and who helped arrange social activities when dignitaries from the region visited Tampa, diplomats said. She also sometimes attended parties at Washington embassies."

This might just be one more example of Islamic influence peddling, except it involves our military. While the American public might believe we are engaged in a war with Islamists, who represent the views of vast majority of Muslims in the Middle East, it appears some in our military leadership are more than willing to socialize with the enemy here in the US. This is old news for the Obama administration.  

The President’s most trusted adviser is Valerie Jarrett. Ms. Jarrett has no Congressional appointment yet sits at the right hand of the president with a taxpayer funded Secret Service detail and the title of Senior Adviser. Ms. Jarrett is well known on the Chicago political and social scene, but little discussed is the fact that she is Iranian born, to American parents. Less discussed is that her father in law was a Communist, Vernon Jarrett, who worked closely with the Communist mentor of President Obama, Frank Marshall Davis. Ms. Jarrett believes that the President has a mandate to radically transform US political institutions. While an amateur politician, she wields incredible power in the Obama White House. She was the force that led to the departure of two Obama Chiefs of Staff: Rahm Emmanuel and Bill Daley. In the weeks following Benghazi, Jarrett was sent to Qatar to negotiate with the Iranians regarding their nuclear program.  It is as unclear what Ms. Jarrett negotiated with the Iranians as it is why anyone would send this woman to conduct such negotiations.

The Department of State is also heavily infiltrated with Muslim influence, and not just at the Middle East desk. Secretary of State Clinton's most senior and trusted advisers is Huma Abedin. Abedin, Secretary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, is the wife of disgraced NY Congressman Anthony Wiener, She has extensive and irrefutable familial ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and an al-Qaeda financier named Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Prior US Presidents, including GW Bush, blazed the trail to the White House for Muslim influence. President Obama, however, has made "outreach" to the Muslim world a clear priority for his administration. Could we have envisioned the day where the NASA Director would be told a key mission for NASA was, “Find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering”? Does outreach mean we are actually partnered with nations and terrorist groups determined to destroy us? Learning the truth about Benghazi may answer this question. Does outreach mean partnering with Islamic elements at the highest levels of our government? Apparently so.

Based on the fraud and dishonesty of multiple senior officials in the Obama administration regarding Benghazi alone, resignations, raincoats and handcuffs, and criminal charges would be in order. Benghazi, however, is only the tip of a treacherous iceberg that seeks to sink the American ship of state. The barbarians are inside the gate and treason doesn’t begin to describe the reprehensible sedition and treachery of the Obama administration which allowed this to happen.