Here, You can use my piece of chalk!

More from Newt

Obama’s Right -- He Has “No Strategy”

President Obama is being widely criticized for his remark at a press conference yesterday that “we don’t have a strategy yet” for how to deal with the rise of the Islamic State. But even if it was an accidental slip, it was perhaps the most candid statement of his second term.

Americans might be inclined to roll their eyes at this admission from their president given that he spent weeks on vacation while a terrorist group swept away eleven years of work to stabilize Iraq.

As I wrote in this newsletter last week, however, the problem has never been the rounds of golf President Obama is playing. It is what has been happening--or rather, what has not been happening--between them.

If a month’s vacation in Martha’s Vineyard was the price of our Commander-in-Chief realizing at last that we do not have a strategy for fighting radical Islamism, it was well worth the cost. Certainly it would have been better if he’d recognized that fact six years ago, but the first step is admitting you have a problem--or in this case, that you don’t have a strategy.

President Obama is right to say he “doesn't want to put the cart before the horse.” We need a complete rethinking of our strategy for dealing with radical Islamism. We have needed one for several decades.

The Islamic State--with its brutal killings of innocent men, women and children, its horrific beheadings, its forced conversions, and its stunning seizure of much of Syria and Iraq--has made this fact impossible to ignore. It would be hard to imagine a more dramatic repudiation of the President’s withdrawal of American leadership in the world.

Instead of criticizing the politics of his “we don’t have a strategy” comment, however, Republicans should embrace the substance of it and invite him to examine with them the key facts that must underlie any serious rethinking.

The President’s fellow world leader, British Prime Minister David Cameron, did an admirable job of outlining these facts in his own press conference today. It is clear he is plagued by none of the self-delusion that has characterized the Obama administration’s foreign policy.

"This is not some foreign conflict thousands of miles away that we can hope to ignore," he said. "The ambition to create an extremist caliphate in the heart of Iraq and Syria is a threat to our own security...And that is in addition to the many other Al Qaeda-inspired terrorist groups that exist in that region. The first ISIL terrorist attacks on the continent of Europe have already taken place."

Of our struggle with “Islamist extremism,” the Prime Minister said that “we are in the middle of a generational struggle between a poisonous and extremist ideology that I believe that we'll be fighting for years, and probably decades.”

"We cannot appease this ideology,” he continued. “We have to confront it at home and abroad. To do this we need a tough, intelligent, patient, comprehensive approach to defeat the terrorist threat at its source.”
In other words, while Obama speaks of curtailing the Islamic State’s gains in Iraq, Cameron speaks of fighting the worldwide threat of an ideology.

And it certainly is worldwide: More than 12,000 foreign fighters have traveled to the Middle East to join the Islamic State. A thousand or more are from Great Britain. Hundreds of American passport holders have gone too.

 

Source

There are undoubtedly tens of thousands more sympathizers in Western countries. If you don’t believe me, listen to the words a London-based Muslim cleric spoke on Sean Hannity’s show yesterday. He is a religious leader living in Britain’s largest city and pledging allegiance to the Islamic State. At the end of the segment he promises Sean that Sharia law is “coming to a place near you.”

The President may want to contain his thinking to Iraq and Syria, but the threat will not be contained there. This fact is fundamental to formulating a strategy and should be at the heart of President Obama’s analysis.

Let’s hope that President Obama understood how right he was when he said that we “don’t have a strategy,” and that he was listening to Prime Minister Cameron’s remarks today. Perhaps then his next press conference will sound a little less academic and a little more like a Commander-in-Chief.


Your Friend,
Newt 

A "perfect fit."

TJOC: I just had to post "this one" from wiredright.com

I don't believe that Obama is an idiot in any way. He knows exactly what he's he's been told to do by his advisers. He has become the most divisive President this country has ever had.

B. S. from Our Government

Last week Hamas executed, without a trail, 18 Palestinians for allegedly collaborating with the Israelis. 

Now tell me again that Hamas is not a barbaric organization and that it is equivalent to Israel.

Today's Conundrum

You are driving down the road in your car on a wild, stormy night, when
you pass by a bus stop and you see three people waiting for the bus:

1. An old lady who looks as if she is about to die. 

2. An old friend who once savedyour life. 

3. The perfect partner you have been dreaming about. 

Which one would you choose to offer a ride to, knowing that there could 
only be one passenger in your car? 

Think before you continue reading. 

This is a moral/ethical dilemma that was once actually used as part of a 
job application.. You could pick up the old lady, because she is going 
to die, and thus you should save her first.. Or you could take the old 
friend because he once saved your life, and this would be the perfect 
chance to pay him back. However, you may never be able to find your 
perfect mate again. 

YOU WON'T BELIEVE THIS..................... 

The candidate who was hired (out of 200 applicants) had no trouble 
coming up with his answer. He simply answered: 'I would give the car 
keys to my old friend and let him take the lady to the hospital. I would 
stay behind and wait for the bus with the partner of my dreams.' 

Sometimes, we gain more if we are able to give up our stubborn thought 
limitations. 

Never forget to 'Think Outside of the Box.' 

HOWEVER...., The _correct answer_ is to run the old lady over and put 
her out of her misery,have sex with the perfect partner on the bonnet of 
the car, then drive off with the old friend for a few beers. 

I just love happy endings, don't you?

Thanks to Biene Vallee at her blog valleetrails. AND to Robert Janicki at his blog Wired Right Commentary

BUCKLE-UP FOR SAFETY!

TJOC: I'm being serious here!

Congress Needs an Exit Interview with General Flynn

TJOC: "Or is this the real truth ("Faultily called wrong - by the current Administration - under the guidance of the President, also called "Father of Thugs.")

Outgoing director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, gave an extraordinary exit interview last week with James Kitfield of the publication Breaking Defense.

The interview revealed assessments about the dangers facing the United States that are so unlike what we hear from President Obama or his national security team that relevant Congressional committees should conduct their own exit interview in public hearings with General Flynn when they return from the August recess.

For example, General Flynn says plainly the United States is not safer today than it was before 9/11:

[I]n 2004, there were 21 total Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 18 countries. Today, there are 41 Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 24 countries. A lot of these groups have the intention to attack Western interests, to include Western embassies and in some cases Western countries. Some have both the intention and some capability to attack the United States homeland…

We know they [Islamic terrorists in Syria] are trying to get their hands on chemical weapons and use what they already have to create a chemical weapons capability. Remember anthrax was used in 2001 [killing five people] and pretty much paralyzed Capitol Hill. If that anthrax had been dispersed more efficiently, it could have killed a quarter million people.

General Flynn describes an increasingly dangerous and chaotic world in which the American withdrawal of combat troops from Afghanistan does not end the danger to America:

[W]hat I see each day is the most uncertain, chaotic and confused international environment that I’ve witnessed in my entire [33 year] career. There were probably more dangerous times such as when the Nazis and [Japanese] Imperialists were trying to dominate the world, but we’re in another very dangerous era. We rightfully talk about the last decade being the longest war in American history, for instance, but when we pull combat troops out of Afghanistan at the end of this year, it’s not going to feel like that war is over. To me, it feels like we’ll be facing a familiar threat and heightened uncertainty for a long time yet.

General Flynn defines “core al-Qaeda” much differently than the Obama administration, emphasizing that core al-Qaeda is its ideological belief of perpetual jihad rather than its terrorists leaders:

[T]he core ideology and belief system [of al-Qaeda] is spreading, not shrinking. Look at the unbelievably violent videos [of beheadings, executions and the destruction of religious places] coming out of Iraq just in recent days. I’ve physically interrogated some of these guys, and I’ve had the opportunity to hear them talking about their organizations and beliefs. These are people who have a very deeply-rooted belief system that is just difficult for Americans to comprehend.

In contrast, President Obama and his team consistently repeat that core al-Qaeda is “on a path to defeat”.

In June 2011, President Obama proclaimed that the “tide of war is receding” and has based his foreign policy on that conclusion.

In that same month, President Obama’s adviser for Homeland Security (and current CIA Director) John Brennan described America’s counter terrorism strategy in these terms:

Our strategy is…shaped by a deeper understanding of al Qaeda’s goals, strategy, and tactics,” Brennan claimed. “I’m not talking about al Qaeda’s grandiose vision of global domination through a violent Islamic caliphate. That vision is absurd, and we are not going to organize our counterterrorism policies against a feckless delusion that is never going to happen. We are not going to elevate these thugs and their murderous aspirations into something larger than they are.

Three years later, the al-Qaeda vision of a violent caliphate that Brennan dismissed as a feckless delusion was declared, not by al-Qaeda, but by the barbaric Islamic State of Levant, which is claiming authority over an area the size of Great Britain.

When asked whether he ever felt like a “lone voice in the administration warning that the terrorist threat was growing, not receding,” General Flynn responded that “when asked if the terrorists were on the run, we couldn’t respond with any answer but ‘no.’ When asked if the terrorists were defeated, we had to say ‘no.’ Anyone who answers ‘yes’ to either of those questions either doesn’t know what they are talking about, they are misinformed, or they are flat out lying.”

General Flynn has served his country for 33 years. Prior to leading the DIA, he served as intelligence chief for Joint Special Operations Command in Iraq and Afghanistan. He probably knows the threats facing the United States better than almost anybody else in the Obama administration.

His description of the threats facing America is starkly different from what the American people are hearing from their elected leaders. That may explain why he was apparently forced out as DIA director and into retirement one year earlier than planned.

America needs a new strategy for global affairs. But as long as our leaders refuse to understand the emerging world as it is, not as how they want it to be, we will be stuck with a floundering foreign policy of wishful thinking. Congress can help meet this challenge by inviting General Flynn to expand on his candid thoughts in Congressional testimony about the threats we are facing and how we can keep America safe. After his 33 years of service, the American people would do well to hear his exit interview.

Your Friend,
Newt

Colonel Allen West

The only plausible explanation for many actions taken by President Obama and his administration is that they are working counter to the security of the United States of America. How else can one rationalize the following:

1. The unilateral release of five senior Taliban back to the enemy while the enemy is still fighting us.

2. Providing weapons of support to the Muslim Brotherhood-led Egyptian government — F-16s and M1A1 Abrams tanks — but not to the Egyptian government after the Islamist group has been removed.

3. Negotiations with Qatar and Turkey, two Islamist-supporting countries.

4. Negotiations with Hamas, a terrorist group.

5. Returning sanction money, to the tune of billions of dollars, back to the theocratic regime led by Iran’s ayatollahs and allowing them to march on towards nuclear capability.

6. Obama’s evident support of Islamists in Libya.
  
In an operation that was again unilateral with no Congressional approval, U.S. military support and resources were given to Islamist groups fighting against Moammar Qaddafy — and we know the results of that action. 

Not long after, one of the groups this administration armed, Ansar al-Sharia, took responsibility for the terrorist attack and murder of our U.S .Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Ty Woods, and Glenn Doherty at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound (SMC). Oh, and that same group claims it has established an Islamic caliphate in eastern Libya, based in Benghazi. Just two weeks ago, the United States of America evacuated the Libyan embassy in Tripoli due to security concerns.

But I guess it’s all hunky-dory there now, because according to the Washington Free Beacon, “The Obama administration has lifted longtime restrictions on Libyans attending flight schools in the United States and training here in nuclear science, according to a final amendment of the ban recently approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).” 

“Less than two years after the deadly terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is poised to sign off on an amendment reversing the ban, which was enacted following a wave or terrorist attacks in 1980s and prevents Libyans from studying these sensitive trades in the United States.” 

We just evacuated Libya due to security concerns. There can be no doubt that Libya is an Islamic terrorist sanctuary state, thanks in no uncertain terms to Obama, and now he wants them to come here and learn how to fly planes and understand nuclear science?

Ok Lucy, ‘splain this to me:

The Free Beacon says “the original law effectively disqualified all Libyan nationals and those “acting on behalf of Libyan entities” from training in “aviation maintenance, flight operations, or nuclear-related fields,” according to the ban. “The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is amending its regulations by rescinding the regulatory provisions promulgated in 1983 that terminated the nonimmigrant status and barred the granting of certain immigration benefits to Libyan nationals and foreign nationals acting on behalf of Libyan entities who are engaging in or seeking to obtain studies or training in,” the amendment states.”

DHS spokesperson S.Y. Lee who told the Free Beacon that the Obama administration is reviewing its policies towards Libya “to see how they might be updated to better align with U.S. interests” in light of its revolution.” 
If I may interject here, Libya is not a stable country and there can be no alignment with U.S. interests as long as there are al-Qaida affiliated groups freely operating in that country.

Of course this action is taken when the House and Senate is away on a five-week hiatus from D.C. but at least the House Judiciary Committee responded by acknowledging, “The terror threat continues and numerous news reports document recent terror-related activities coming from Libya.” 
Why wouldn’t the Obama administration allow Kurdish Peshmerga members to come to America and receive flight training so they could be given quality helicopter gunships and destroy ISIS? Can anyone explain what the strategy and objective is here in lifting this ban with a nation that is or should be on the terrorist watch list?

Sorry, but I can only explain this one way: Barack Hussein Obama is an Islamist in his foreign policy perspectives and supports their cause. You can go back and listen to his 2009 speech in Cairo, where Muslim Brotherhood associates were seated front and center. 

All the circumstantial and anecdotal evidence points to that conclusion. The pivot away from the Middle East seems to be nothing more than an opportunity to enable Islamists and their goals. Anyone supporting this Libyan ban being lifted is indeed an enemy of this state.

The Obama administration’s foreign policy doctrine is self-described as “don’t do stupid s@#t”. But I guess that all depends on what your ultimate goal is.

Colonel Allen West

More Boombox

Apparently Most Americans DON'T GET IT EITHER!

I was instrumental in establishing the "Israeli National Skin Bank", which is the largest in the world. The National Skin Bank stores skin for every day needs as well as for war time or mass casualty situations.

This skin bank is hosted at  the Hadassah Ein Kerem University hospital in Jerusalem where I was the Chairman of plastic surgery.

This is how I was asked to supply skin for an Arab woman from Gaza , who was hospitalized in Soroka Hospital in Beersheva, after her family burned her.

Usually, such atrocities happen among Arab families when the women are suspected of having an affair.

We supplied all the needed Homo-grafts for her treatment. She was successfully treated by my friend and colleague, Prof. Lior Rosenberg and discharged to return to Gaza .

She was invited for regular follow-up visits to the outpatient clinic in Beersheva.

One day she was caught at a border crossing wearing a suicide belt. She meant to explode herself in the outpatient clinic of the hospital where they saved her life.

It seems that her family promised her that if she did that, they would forgive her.

This is only one example of the war between Jews and Muslims in the Land of Israel . It is not a territorial conflict. This is a  civilization conflict, or rather a war between civilization & barbarism.

Bibi (Netanyahu) gets it, Barack Hussein Obama does not.

I have never written before asking everyone to please forward onwards so that as many as possible can understand radical Islam and what awaits the world if it is not stopped.

Dr. Arieh Eldad, M.D. at the Hadassah Hospital in Israel

TJOC: Hopefully they are starting to pay attention based upon what the ISIL is currently doing. America - WAKE THE HECK UP - Especially you spineless extreme lefty liberals and righty "stick your head in the sand" twits!

Don't hold your breath on this one

TJOC: Taken from 'wiredright.com. Thanks Robert!

The Conservative Summit - 2013

TJOC: More Bill Whittle, "The Virtual President" (30-minutes). Yet very worth your time (Why else would I put it here?).

What's a "Liberal"? What's their agenda? What are they doing/teaching our children? How to fight back!

AND for your further viewing pleasure

-

Paul Weston - Admitting he's a "Racist"

TJOC: An interesting take from a Great Briton citizen (England for those you that don't know the real name).

Environmental (Justice) Injustice

EPA elitism, exploitation

by James Rust
August 13, 2014, MasterResource.org
 

Some Christian organizations have jumped onto the ban of fossil fuels in the name of environmental justice.  It is hard to reconcile this type of reasoning when a basic principle of Christianity is to help the less fortunate.

The words “environmental justice“ were coined years ago to help stop low-income living areas from being selected for unwanted property additions such as landfills and industrial plants. Now, this term is used by environmentalists to enlist minority groups such as African-Americans and Latinos to help them in their goals to stop fossil fuel use.

The claim is that minorities suffer more from health effects due to fossil-fuel use because they live closer to power plants or refineries. Thus we need to replace such facilities with renewable energies such as solar and wind. No thought is given to higher priced electricity from these energy sources and how this impacts minority communities. And concerns about sprawl are forgotten since this solution is really a call for energy sprawl.

Based on faulty science, environmental movements have called for banning the following with disproportionate effects on minorities:
 

1. DDT is banned for alleged weakening of bird eggshells.
2. Genetic modified foods, such as corn and rice, must be banned for alleged health effects.
3. Nuclear power should be banned because it is unsafe and causes nuclear weapons proliferation.
4. Greenpeace wants to ban chlorine.
5. Fossil fuel use should be banned because of health effects and carbon dioxide combustion products causing global warming with catastrophic effects.

These bans could be said to be in the name of “environmental justice.”

The banning of DDT in Africa has allowed the spread of malaria throughout Africa with hundreds of millions sickened and annual deaths estimated at over 600,000. …

Read the full article at MasterResource.org.
 

Making A Baby - "Hilarious!

TJOC: Thanks to Keith

There is not one dirty word in it -

The Smiths were unable to conceive children and decided to use a surrogate father to start their family. On the day the proxy father was to arrive, Mr. Smith kissed his wife goodbye and said, 'Well, I'm off now. The man should be here soon.' 

Half an hour later, just by chance, a door-to-door baby photographer happened to ring the doorbell, hoping to make a sale. 'Good morning, Ma'am', he said, 'I've come to...' 

'Oh, no need to explain,' Mrs. Smith cut in, embarrassed, 'I've been expecting you.' 

'Have you really?' said the photographer. 'Well, that's good. Did you know babies are my specialty?' 

'Well that's what my husband and I had hoped. Please come in and have a seat !.

After a moment she asked, blushing, 'Well, where do we start?' 

'Leave everything to me. I usually try two in the bathtub, one on the couch, and perhaps a couple on the bed. And sometimes the living room floor is fun. You can really spread out there.' 

'Bathtub, living room floor? No wonder it didn't work out for Harry and me!' 

'Well, Ma'am, none of us can guarantee a good one every time. But if we try several different positions and I shoot from six or seven angles, I'm sure you'll be pleased with the results.' 

 

'My, that's a lot!', gasped Mrs. Smith. 

'Ma'am, in my line of work a man has to take his time. I'd love to be In and out in five minutes, but I'm sure you'd be disappointed with that.' 

'Don't I know it,' said Mrs. Smith quietly.

The photographer opened his briefcase and pulled out a portfolio of his baby pictures. 'This was done on the top of a bus,' he said. 

 

'Oh, my God!' Mrs. Smith exclaimed, grasping at her throat. 

'And these twins turned out exceptionally well - when you consider their mother was so difficult to work with.' 

'She was difficult?' asked Mrs. Smith.

'Yes, I'm afraid so. I finally had to take her to the park to get the job done right. People were crowding around four and five deep to get a good look.' 'Four and five deep?' said Mrs. Smith, her eyes wide with amazement. 

'Yes', the photographer replied. 'And for more than three hours, too. The mother was constantly squealing and yelling - I could hardly  concentrate, and when darkness approached I had to rush my shots. Finally, when the squirrels began nibbling on my equipment, I just had to pack it all in.' 

Mrs. Smith leaned forward. 'Do you mean they actually chewed on your, uh...equipment?' 

'It's true, Ma'am, yes... Well, if you're ready, I'll set-up my tripod and we can get to work right away.' 

'Tripod?'

'Oh yes, Ma'am. I need to use a tripod to rest my Canon on. It's much too big to be held in the hand very long.'

Mrs. Smith fainted.

Pathological Liar

This article was originally published at Capitalist Preservation on July 2, 2014.  I invite you to visit the site for more commentary and news.

Once again, Hillary Clinton lies and the truth dies a slow death, while ignorant Democrats parrot her lies and obfuscations about the owners of Hobby Lobby.

[...] On Monday evening, Hillary Clinton said that she found the Supreme Court's ruling in the Hobby Lobbycase "deeply disturbing." Clinton added that "it’s very troubling that a salesclerk at Hobby Lobby who needs contraception, which is pretty expensive, is not going to get that service through her employer’s health care plan because her employer doesn’t think she should be using contraception.” [..

This was a complete lie from beginning to end and Hillary knew it before it even left her mouth.  The facts speak for themselves.

[...] Contrary to Clinton's assertion Hobby Lobby's owner "doesn't think [women] should be using contraception," the family-owned business covers the entire cost of 16 out of 20 FDA-approved contraceptives under its insurance plan. The company's owners simply objected to covering pills or devices that may cause the death of a human embryo. [...]

It's not good enough for Clinton and her sick band of liberal miscreants that 16 out 20 FDA approved contraceptives are provided in Hobby Lobby's insurance for employees.  Anything short of all methods of contraception amounts to an abomination to liberals and according to these ethically and morally challenged liberals this is patently a war on women waged by Republicans and that scourge on all of humanity, the Tea Party.  Only in a liberal's world of self delusion is there a war on women.  It's absolutely an insane idea, but, among the ignorant and cognitively challenged Democrats it is an emotional rallying cry.

[...] Following the Court's ruling, Hobby Lobby, like almost all employers in the United States, will continue to cover contraception under its insurance plan. The federal government will also continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year providing contraception to poor and low-income women through Medicaid and the Title X program.

Although Clinton, who commands a $225,000 speaking fee, claimed that contraception is "pretty expensive," a month's supply of birth control pills may be purchased at Target for as little as $9 per month. [...]

So much for Clinton's congenital lying.  It begs the question if. there ever can be a reasonable dialog between liberals and those on the political right, since liberals cannot be held to the truth and the facts on any issue.

TJOC: AND un-educated idiots; traitors to our Countries philosophy; those criminals that live off others work ethic - will all vote for this person.

All You Need To Know About HAMAS

Congressional Doctors Warn EPA’s CO2 Rule Threatens Public Health

August 13, 2014–The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claims that its new rule restricting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants will improve Americans’ health.

Yet carbon dioxide (CO2) isn’t poisonous at levels more than 20 times what they now are—levels we wouldn’t likely reach for a thousand years or more even without restrictions on emissions, and even if we didn’t run out of or find better replacements for fossil fuels first.

So why does EPA claim reducing its emissions will improve Americans’ health?

Not because of its impact on global temperature, which EPA admits would be undetectable (under 0.02˚C in a century) and would have no measurable health benefits.

Why, then?

Because, EPA claims, reducing CO2 emissions will have the side effect of reducing emissions of conventional pollutants.

But medical doctors who are Members of Congress repudiate that notion. In a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, they say:
 

[C]onventional emissions from coal-fired utilities measured on a per-kilowatt hour basis, have declined by almost 90 percent over the last several decades. Should the EPA choose to make additional claims, it is worth noting that the Agency has already attempted to justify a vast array of other regulations on addressing precisely the same concerns—from the air toxics rule to regional haze to ambient air quality standards …. The American public should not tolerate perpetual re-claiming of the same health benefits in order to justify more substantial expansions of EPA regulations.

The doctors also point out that “if the EPA were to succeed in forcing coal out of the marketplace by confiscatory regulations—certainly the objective of some in the activist community demanding stronger action—the result would be the loss of some 600,000 jobs, loss of manufacturing base, aggregated loss of some $2.23 trillion in gross domestic product, and a loss of family income of some $1,200 per household per year.”

Higher prices for energy and all other goods and services, coupled with lower incomes and job losses, all driven by the new regulation, would themselves harm Americans’ health.

“Our colleague, Senator John Barrasso, also a medical doctor, published a recent report based on a literature search and specific testimony taken before the US Congress that demonstrated that extraordinary costs due to EPA regulation have profound negative impacts on public health. The report found that unemployment due to EPA regulation:

• “Increases the likelihood of hospital visits, illnesses, and premature deaths in communities due to joblessness.
• “Raises healthcare costs, raising questions about the claimed health savings of EPA’s regulations.
• “Hurt’s children’s health and family well-being.”

The Congressmen/medical doctors also point out that reduced reliability of the electrical grid, caused by the unpredictable intermittency of wind and solar energy, would also threaten public health through more frequent, widespread, and intense brownouts and blackouts, like the Great Northeast Blackout of 2003 (set off by a computer failure), which killed at least 11 people, interrupted water supply, transportation, communication, and industry, and cost between $7 and $10 billion.

For the sake of Americans’ health, EPA’s proposed new carbon dioxide regulation should be scrapped.

TJOC: See more at Cornwall Alliance webpage.

Irritation is the Best Policy

TJOC: That should be I've read and understand the "Constitution."

The Architect of Destruction

Barack Obama appears to be a tormented man filled with resentment, anger, and disdain for anyone of an opinion or view other than his. He acts in the most hateful, spiteful, malevolent, vindictive ways in order to manipulate and maintain power and control over others.  Perhaps, because, as a child, he grew up harboring an abiding bitterness toward the U.S.  That was instilled in him by his family and mentors… it seems to have never left him.

It is not the color of his skin that is a problem in America.  Rather it is the blackness that fills his soul and the hollowness in his heart where there should be abiding pride and love for this country.

Think: Have we ever heard Obama speak lovingly of the U.S. or its people, with deep appreciation and genuine respect for our history, our customs, our sufferings and our blessings?  Has he ever revealed that, like most patriotic Americans, he gets "goose bumps" when a band plays "The Star Spangled Banner," or sheds a tear when he hears a beautiful rendition of " America the Beautiful?"  Does his heart burst with pride when millions of American flags wave on a National holiday or someone plays "taps" on a trumpet?

Has he ever shared the admiration of the military, as we as lovers of those who keep us free, feel when soldiers march-by?  It is doubtful because Obama did not grow up sharing our experiences or our values. He did not sit at the knee of a Grandfather or Uncle who showed us his medals and told us about the bravery of his fellow troops as they tramped through foreign lands to keep us free.

He didn't have grandparents who told stories of suffering and then coming to America, penniless, and the opportunities they had for building a business and life for their children.

Away from this country as a young child, Obama didn't delight in being part of America and its greatness.  He wasn't singing our patriotic songs in kindergarten, or standing on the roadside for a holiday parade and eating a hot dog, or lighting sparklers around a campfire on July 4th as fireworks exploded over head, or placing flags on the grave sites of fallen and beloved American heroes.

Rather he was separated from all of these experiences and doesn't really understand us and what it means to be an American. He is void of the basic emotions that most feel regarding this country and insensitive to the instinctive pride we have in our national heritage. His opinions were formed by those who either envied us or wanted him to devalue the United States and the traditions and patriotism that unites us.

He has never given a speech that is filled with calm, reassuring, complimentary, heartfelt statements about all the people in the U.S.  Or one that inspires us to be better and grateful and proud that in a short time our country became a leader, and a protector of many.

Quite the contrary, his speeches always degenerate into mocking, ridiculing tirades as he faults our achievements as well as any critics or opposition for the sake of a laugh, or to bolster his ego.

He uses his Office to threaten and create fear while demeaning and degrading any American who opposes his policies and actions. A secure leader, who has noble self-esteem and not false confidence, refrains from showing such dread of critics and displaying a cocky, haughty attitude.

Mostly, his time seems to be spent causing dissension, unrest, and anxiety among the people of America, rather than uniting us (even though he was presented to us as the "Great Uniter").

He creates chaos for the sake of keeping people separated, envious, aggrieved and ready to argue. Under his leadership Americans have been kept on edge, rather than in a state of comfort and security. He incites people to be aggressive toward, and disrespectful of, those of differing opinions.

And through such behavior, Obama has lowered the standards for self-control and mature restraint to the level of street-fighting gangs, when he should be raising the bar for people to strive toward becoming more considerate, tolerant, self-disciplined, self-sustaining, and self-assured.

Not a day goes by that he is not attempting to defy our laws, remove our rights, over-ride established procedures, install controversial appointees, enact divisive mandates, and assert a dictatorial form of power.

Never has there been a leader of this great land who used such tactics to harm and hurt the people and this country.

Never have we had a President who spoke with a caustic, evil tongue against the citizenry rather than present himself as a soothing, calming and trustworthy force.

Never, in this country, have we experienced how much stress one man can cause a nation of people - on a daily basis!

Obama has promoted the degeneration of peace, civility, and quality of cooperation between us. He thrives on tearing us down, rather than building us up. He is the Architect of the decline of America, and the epitome of a Demagogue.

Contributed by John Keady, Edited by Adrian Vance; re-edited by TJOC.