The best measure of a man is how he treats others when he thinks no one is looking  George W. Bush was a classy individual who often put other’s interests above his own.  Barack Obama is Barack Obama.

A CHRISTMAS CAROL

Twas the night before Christmas

And all through the land

No one was working,

Not one single man

Except on the Oahu

Obama’s hometown

Secret Service agents

Were scurrying around

While Obama was playing

And just having fun

For the staff and the agents

The job wasn’t done.

Twas another night before Christmas

And all through the land

No one was working

Not one single man

Including the White House

And Washington DC

Because President Bush

And his family

Stayed at Camp David

Without much ado

So the staff and the agents

Could be at home too.

TDM

Henry Wadworth Longfellow wrote “I heard the bells on Christmas Day” on Christmas Day in 1863.  He wife had died and his son had been severely wounded.  The Civil War was raging with no end in sight:

I heard the bells on Christmas Day
Their old, familiar carols play,

and wild and sweet

The words repeat

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

And thought how, as the day had come,
The belfries of all Christendom

Had rolled along

The unbroken song

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

Till ringing, singing on its way,
The world revolved from night to day,

A voice, a chime,

A chant sublime

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

Then from each black, accursed mouth
The cannon thundered in the South,

And with the sound

The carols drowned

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

It was as if an earthquake rent
The hearth-stones of a continent,

And made forlorn

The households born

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

And in despair I bowed my head;
“There is no peace on earth,” I said;

“For hate is strong,

And mocks the song

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!”

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;

The Wrong shall fail,

The Right prevail,

With peace on earth, good-will to men.”

This was true in 1863 and it is true now. As we celebrate the birth of the Savior, may we all take hope and courage in the firm knowledge that; yes indeed the wrong shall fail and yes indeed the right will prevail.

Merry Christmas

TDM

On September 11, 2012 there was a terrorist attack on our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  The Obama administration immediately responded by blaming this attack on some obscure video.  They were lying.  They knew it was a terrorist attack with no visible connection to the video.  So far, a lot of attention has been focused on the deliberate lie and subsequent cover-up.  But we may missed a far more serious issue. The real problem is that this administration was so willing to abandon freedom of speech if the wrong person (actually religion) is offended.

In addition, the United States sent a clear message to the world that we were easily intimidated by even the threat of violence. The U.S. Embassy in Cairo began apologizing for the video almost immediately.  This was followed closely with public comments condemning the video by both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. According to the following report, Hillary Clinton promised the father of Tyrone Woods that the person who made the video would be arrested and prosecuted. Obviously there was far less concern about punishing the terrorists:

http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/filmmaker-blamed-for-benghazi-out-of-jail-and-talking/

This seems accurate, because Mark Basseley Yousself was arrested and held without bail for allegedly violating his probation.  Everyone knew he was actually arrested for making the movie.  There is no evidence that he violated any law in producing the movie.  Neither President Obama nor Hillary Clinton even mentioned that in this country we honor freedom of speech:

http://search.aol.com/aol/search?enabled_terms=&s_it=client97_searchbox&q=benghazi+video+producer+arrested

This means you can thank Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the cyber-attack on Sony. This is what happens when an administration is so easily intimidated.   I fear this is only the first of many. Congratulations to both of you.  I hope you get the credit you deserve.

TDM

Liberals believe they are the smartest people on the planet, but in reality they are often incredibly stupid.  We all know someone like this.  They may be brilliant, academically, but they don’t have a shred of common sense.  People like this can thrive in a protected environment, like a university or a news room, because they are surrounded by people who actually do have street smarts protecting them. But if they ever encounter the real world, the results are often catastrophic.

Alan Colmes asked why Officer Wilson couldn’t have shown more restraint in dealing with Michael Brown.  I can pretty much guarantee that Alan Colmes has never had a personal encounter with a 6’5” 350 angry man determined to kill him. He hasn’t had that experience because there are people, like Officer Wilson, who protect him against this. Most of us are fortunate enough to never have to deal with something like that. Even most police officers usually don’t run into someone who is ready, willing and able to kill them.  Those that do often end up dead. The others shoot the bad guy first.

Even fewer people encounter a real terrorist. Only an incredibly evil person would be willing to plan an attack designed to kill 3,000 innocent people for no good reason. When you capture such a person, it would be incredibly stupid to pretend that they are just like everyone else. These people are not persuaded by moral arguments. They give no consideration to doing the right thing. Yet obviously these people have information about future attacks that is vital to our national security.

This reminds me of the decision by Churchill and FDR to bomb cities in Germany. Prior to the war and even earlier during the war they both said bombing civilians would be unthinkable. So why did they change their mind? The answer is that the most unethical decision they could have made would have been to not do whatever it took to defeat Adolph Hitler.

George W. Bush had a similar moment.  He decided that the most unethical thing he could do would be to allow thousands and potentially millions of people die because we were afraid to treat people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed harshly.

There is a huge backlash to the idiotic decision by Diane Feinstein to release the CIA torture report. No logical person believes her theory that nothing was learned as a result of these interrogations. That is absurd. But in addition, most people aren’t even appalled at how these guys were treated. I suspect a lot of people feel the same way Nancy Pelosi did when she first learned about this.  She asked if we couldn’t do more.  The most unethical way to treat a captured terrorist with firsthand information about an imminent threat to national security would be to stop before you get the results you need.

To put this in perspective, suppose the police capture a guy who they knew had kidnapped a little girl. It was obvious that if they did not find her in the next couple of hours she would have no chance to survive. How much restraint would you want the police to show toward this guy? Would you be willing to just let the little girl die because it was more important to treat the kidnapper with dignity and respect?

How about the Barack Obama approach?  Rather than capture the guy, you send in a drone to bomb the crap out of him killing anyone else in the vicinity.  Then you hold a news conference explaining that you did this because it would be so unfair to ask him tough questions.

Stupid is as stupid does.

TDM

Today, Diane Feinstein tried to throw the CIA under the bus so that she and other top Democrats could avoid personal accountability for the CIA enhanced interrogations. It is a shameless attempt to rewrite history. I doubt that it will do much for Diane Feinstein’s legacy.  One can only hope that the damage from this pathetic display of self-righteousness can be minimalized.

After 9-11 there were rumors that al Qaeda already had a “suitcase nuclear” bomb in the U.S. That rumor turned out to be nonsense. But ask yourself a question.  What would you want a President of the United States to do if there was any risk of a nuclear bomb getting set off in the U.S? What do you think Democratic leaders in Washington wanted Bush to do?  Would you expect him to order the CIA to question terrorists according to the Army Field manual to avoid being unfair?  Or would you want him to do whatever it took to end the threat? Remember all those Democrats joining arms with Republicans on the steps of the Capital singing God Bless America?  Obviously, the Democrats don’t.

It is well documented that Democrats were briefed on the CIA enhanced interrogation techniques and they supported them. There is nothing new here. There is at least one report that when Nancy Pelosi was briefed about this she asked whether or not we could do more. Democrats are trying to claim the CIA misled Bush too, because then the CIA takes all the blame.  But George W. Bush is not a Democratic politician, he is a man of honor and he refused to play the game:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/us/politics/bush-and-cia-ex-officials-rebut-torture-report.html

“We’re fortunate to have men and women who work hard at the C.I.A. serving on our behalf,” he told CNN’s Candy Crowley. “These are patriots and whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base.”

These are “really good people and we’re lucky as a nation to have them,” he said.

Bush is an example of what we should expect from a President of the United States. He made the decision and he is not about to let someone else take the blame. It is, however, not what one can hope to expect from Democratic leaders in congress and certainly not from the current occupant of the Oval office.

TDM

If you have the stomach for it, check out the new ‘I Stand With Hillary” music video.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2014/12/04/stand-with-hillary-releases-awesomely-bad-country-song-video-n1927484

Stupid stuff like this is why Hillary will never be President of the United States. This is beyond pathetic.  The lyrics:

Looking back in time, learning hindsight’s always right. We came together in ‘08, a defining moment we all can celebrate. And now it’s 20-16 and this time I’m a thinking, Guys, put your boots on and let’s smash this ceiling.

Oh I been thinkin’ about one great lady Like the women in my life, She’s a mother, a daughter, and through it all she’s a loving wife.

Oh, there is something about her…this great lady. Caring, hard working once a First lady She fights for country n my family. Now it’s time for us to Stand Up with Hillary Hillary. Stand with Hillary

This is classic Hillary. She has a long history of grossly exaggerating her personal experience. The truth is never enough for Hillary.  For example for years she claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary and she stuck to that story even after people pointed out that this was impossible. People who actually have a solid resume never bother to inflate it. That is only done by those who know the truth is inadequate.

Hillary spent a fortune preparing for the 2008 Presidential campaign. Her plan was to suck the air out of the room so no other candidate would have a chance. It worked brilliantly with regard to people like Joe Biden, but Obama took her out of the election before she knew what hit her. Never in the history of American politics has one person spent so much money to so little effect.

Hillary learned nothing from the failed 2008 campaign. She is making the same mistakes this time.  Once again she is spending a fortune trying desperately to eliminate any potential opponent before they even get started. Once again she is hyping her personal experience to the point of insanity. Only this time she is sliding in the polls before she even announced her decision to run.  Now we have this awful music video.

Within hours we can expect to see parodies and they are guaranteed to be hysterical. There is far too much ammunition here to ignore.  There is a real risk that in an incredibly naïve and stupid effort to self-promote Hillary ends up becoming the ultimate laughing stock. Ok.  I admit it. I am typing this with a big smile.

TDM

At a time when the world is focused on Ferguson, Missouri and Michael Brown, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama, it is good to remember that there are some other black men who are outstanding role models.  The following story is about one of them, Houston Texan wide receiver Andre Johnson:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/03/andre-johnson-shopping-spree_n_6259722.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl27%7Csec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D575029

For the past eight years, Johnson has funded a shopping spree for at-risk children at the local Toys R Us store.  Since he wears number 80, he gives the kids 80 seconds to grab everything they can and put it in a shopping cart.  It appears as though the kids could give him a run for the money, because this year they managed to gather up over $16,000 worth of toys.  Johnson was glad to pay the bill.  His quote says it all:

“I’m in a blessed situation so I’m able to help other people.  That ‘s all that matters.”

I wish the main stream media would spend more time covering people like Andre Johnson and tell the Al Sharpton’s of this world to take a hike.

TDM

There is a real risk in this country that people will lose faith in the ability or even willingness of the government to protect us.  The Lieutenant Governor of Kansas wondered if Governor Nixon did not hold back the National Guard, at the request of the White House, from intervening in Ferguson on the night of the heaviest rioting. It certainly would not surprise anyone familiar with this administration if that did happen. What we know for sure is that the National Guard was there, that the Governor had declared a state of emergency and they were not used.

That is when, according to this article, the Oath Keepers stepped in:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/police-shut-down-mysterious-oath-keepers-guarding-rooftops-in-downtown/article_f90b6edd-acf8-52e3-a020-3a78db286194.html

We know that somebody showed up and they apparently had a positive impact.  There are numerous reports of heavily armed and trained civilians deploying on roof tops defending property.  We are fortunate that in this case that apparently the people who showed up had training and more importantly demonstrated discipline. If the wrong people had showed up this the results could have been very ugly.

The police, who were not there in time to protect property, were there to in time to order the armed civilians off the premises.  The following article provides more information about the “Oath Keepers:”

http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/02/the-oath-keepers-in-ferguson-three-update

It was interested to note that the National Guard was only deployed to protect government buildings, not private property. I do not know anyone from Oath Keepers and don’t even know anyone who claims to know someone from Oath Keepers.  My only source of information is the internet.  It was my understanding that they were primarily a group of U.S. Military people who made an Oath to refuse to obey an order they considered illegal under the U.S. Constitution to deploy our military against civilians. At first I could not reconcile that goal with them showing up in Ferguson.  However, the following quotes by Steven Rhodes who founded Oath Keepers puts that in perspective:

“In Ferguson, what they’re being told is you only have two choices: 1) a hyper-militarized police state to stop violence, including arson, or 2) let it go and burn the town down. Twenty different buildings have burned to the ground. That’s a false choice.

For Ferguson in particular if…they don’t believe that the police department is legitimate, they should be protecting themselves and secure themselves because the more they secure themselves, the less reason there is for the police to be in their neighborhoods and communities. So they should take care of themselves for both reasons—to be secure, but also to be more free.”

Obviously somebody showed up in Ferguson, with arms. If it wasn’t the Oath Keepers it was someone else.  Regardless of whether one agrees with the Oath Keepers or not, at least they appear to have been a positive influence. The problem is that this is more evidence of people losing faith in our most important institutions. If that happens we may see other people involved and they are very unlikely to be helpful.

TDM

There is good reason for outrage by the black community.  However, this has nothing to do with the Michael Brown case.  The reality is that it is extremely rare for police to shoot anyone and even more rare for them to shoot an unarmed black teenager. There are a lot of black kids getting killed, just not by police.  The most dangerous place for a black child is in his mother’s womb:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/nyc-78-abortions-were-black-and-hispanic-babies

These numbers are nothing short of genocide.  In 2011 there were 76,521 abortions in New York City.  $35,188 or 46.1% of the abortions were for black babies.  Yet blacks only make up 25.5% of the population in New York City.  If you want to look for people who place a lower value on the life of a black child, start with Planned Parenthood.

Another very dangerous place is living in a black neighborhood.  If black men want to stay alive, they need to fear other black men more than they fear the police.  The black homicide rate is 4 times higher than the national average and over 5 times the average for white Americans.  About 80% of the time the murder is committed with a gun. Anyone want to guess on what percentage of those guns were purchased legally?  It is very simple, honest citizens buy guns from licensed dealers.  Felons buy them on the black market.

The real tragedy of Michael Brown is that while Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are hyperventilating about an incident that may not even involve excessive force, they are ignoring far more serious problems.  Yes, black people should be outraged at the callous disregard for the value of black lives.  Yes we all should be concerned about police using excessive force.  But how about reserving some of that anger for those people who are responsible for most of the carnage?

TDM

In his interview with Charley Rose last week Chuck Hagel warned about the dangerous reduction in our defense budget:

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=5544

Hagel specifically said that the new congress needs to understand the seriousness of the problem:

“I’ve never been criticized for not being forthright and honest, and the Congress needs to know this. They need to understand it. Our leaders have been very clear on this.

The Hagel says that Chairman Dempsey and every other leader in the Defense Department are worried:

I am worried about it. I am concerned about it. Chairman Dempsey is, the chiefs are — every leader of this institution.  

He said that the American people need to know about this problem:

The technological edge that we have had, our people are better trained, better equipped, better motivated and better led than ever before — it is being threatened. It is being threatened, Charlie, and the American people got to know that.

I have never been a fan of Chuck Hagel.  He is the worst kind of RINO Republican.  He claimed to be opposed to the war in Iraq, but he actually voted for S.R. 46, which authorized military action subject to UN resolution. So, he kind of sort of was for the war before he was against it. Hagel opposed the surge calling it the most dangerous foreign policy blunder since Vietnam.  He opposed the Iran counter-Proliferation Act.  He was on record as saying that he thought “the Pentagon needed to be paired down.”  That is probably why Obama chose Hagel.  In some ways his position on defense was to the left of Obama. That makes these comments all the more frightening. When someone like Chuck Hagel is worried, we should all be worried.

If Hagel is right, then all of our military commanders are concerned.  There have been other times when some top military commanders tried to warn the country. But this time we have similar warnings from Leon Panetta, Robert Gates and Chuck Hagel. That means a Democrat, a Republican and a Libertarian, who probably disagree about nearly everything, are united in the opinion that our national security is at risk. That is remarkable.

The only good news here is that Hagel’s warning will not be ignored by the new Republican congress. I suspect this is one topic where Republicans will have little difficulty over turning any veto by Obama. There is also good news in that the top candidate, Michelle Flournoy, appears to be a great choice. Following is an interview of here on September 25, 2014:

http://www.cnas.org/audio/michele-flournoy-npr-isil-strategy#.VHPTLT8uscM

TDM