Tuesday, February 19, 2013

IT IS TIME FOR THESE DINOSAURS TO JOIN THEIR RELATIVES IN THE MUSEUM

!!!!



Sen. John McCain (Photo by Frank Plitt)
















FEBRUARY 19, 2013

A march up the hill and down again

BY WES PRUDEN


Nobody does tough-talking better than a Republican senator. It’s not easy talking tough, and the follow-through can be even harder.



Last week John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina roasted and toasted Chuck Hagel, as if the republic would be in deadly peril if he were confirmed as secretary of defense. This week they’re assuring the White House that, well, they were just kidding. (“Can’t you guys take a joke?”)



Mr. McCain, a key Republican wise man on defense issues, insists he still thinks Mr. Hagel is not qualified to be the main man of the U.S. military, “but I don’t believe that we should hold up his nomination any further, because I think [we’ve had] a reasonable amount of time to have questions answered.”



Right on cue, Mr. Graham, who describes Mr. Hagel as not only “unqualified” but “radical,” said he had at last received a letter from Mr. Hagel in response to the questions he asked during the confirmation hearings, and he’ll take Mr. Hagel’s word that he didn’t mean all that nice stuff he said about Iran and the nasty stuff he said about the war in Iraq, the Jews and Israel.



Senators are tigers about process, less concerned about content. Standing tall when all about him, fairies and elves are losing their heads, makes a senator’s chin whiskers ache and his teeth itch. The Constitution assigns to the Senate the unique duty to “advise and consent,” but it’s a lot easier in Gasbag City to “advise and submit.” The idea behind “advise and consent” was that sometimes a president’s nominee would be so dreadful that consent must be withheld to nudge a president to reconsider his sin and repent with another nominee.



To listen to the Republicans at the Hagel hearing, you would think that both John McCain and Lindsey Graham were sure this was one of those occasions – and that the reasons were so important and so obvious that every weapon at hand, including the filibuster, must be employed to keep “one of the most unqualified, radical choices for secretary of defense in a long time” as far from the Pentagon as possible.



Maybe these worthies were just blowing smoke at the president and his choice. Maybe it was partisan scorn at a rogue and turncoat. Maybe they just didn’t like the cut of his jib. But if they really, really think Mr. Hagel is not qualified to serve, then withholding consent, even if the withholding requires parliamentary tricks and schemes, is a bounden duty.



Just why the president wants the rambling, bumbling, stumbling Chuck Hagel as his secretary of defense is a puzzle. He already has Joe Biden for comic relief. Unless it’s true, as many in Washington believe it is, that the president is determined to substitute squish for strength and Mr. Hagel shares his dream of dismantling the nation’s defenses and trusting the nation’s defense to international organizations like the United Nations. Who needs the Army, the Navy and the Marines when U.N. peacekeepers from both Upper and Lower Slobbovia could be called in to man the ramparts?



The military chiefs are doing their part, sounding the usual threats to close the orphanage and throw the kids into the cold, rainy streets unless they get the money they want. There’s enough unsequestered money for the Navy to pay a $2 billion bonus to run its ships on biofuels, instead of conventional fuel, and for the Army to continue funding a $28 billion “battlefield intelligence processor,” but not enough to send the new carrier Harry S. Truman to sea. The president thinks decisions like these will be right up Chuck Hagel’s street.



The Republican senators who sounded so fit to fight only a week ago may think they’re standing on principle and process now, but to the rest of us it looks like the same old Washington game of endless palaver and expensive pretense. Why did these guys make such a big deal of something they knew they wouldn't get genuinely excited about in the end?


Messrs McCain and Graham should now lead a chorus of that old English folk song about the Duke of York, who sounds a lot like a Republican senator: “Oh, the grand old Duke of York, he had ten thousand men; He marched them up to the top of the hill, and he marched them down again.”




Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.

Monday, February 18, 2013

THE WORLD CONTINUES TO MAKE GREAT PROGRESS UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ISLAM

!!!!





Happy Warrior   •
 
February 25, 2013, Issue

Ghost Cities

By Mark Steyn

https://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/articles/340075/ghost-cities?pg=1


In a dispute between Hamas and Fatah, it’s tempting to take the old Kissinger line re the Iran–Iraq War: It’s a shame they can’t both lose. But, in fact, only one side wins: In Gaza, al-Aqsa University has just announced that female students will be required to attend in proper Muslim garb from head to toe — i.e., the full body bag. At present, some still wear headscarf, trousers, and a long coat, but that’s too revealing for the new Gaza, so time to get fitted for your burka, niqab, or abaya. Al-Aqsa University is funded by the Palestinian Authority — i.e., Yasser Arafat’s old Fatah — but it’s controlled by Hamas. The higher-education minister, Ali Jarbawi, fumed impotently from Ramallah that the new dress code is illegal and must not be implemented, but the hard men on the ground in the Gaza Strip regard him as just another irrelevant member of a shriveling personality cult for a dead kleptocrat with a taste for Aryan rent boys.




And so it goes across the region: Regimes that represented nothing but their Swiss bank accounts have fallen, and in their stead arises the only alternative — an Islam purified by decades in opposition to the secularists and distilled to a scorching 175o proof. What else is left?



Some years ago, for a telly documentary, the BBC sent the novelist Lawrence Durrell back to Alexandria, the setting of his eponymous Alexandria Quartet, his “prose poem to one of the great capitals of the heart.” Durrell had lived in Egypt during the war years, and did not enjoy his return. “The city seemed to him listless and spiritless, its harbor a mere cemetery, its famous cafés no longer twinkling with music and lights,” wrote Michael Haag in Alexandria, City of Memory. “His favourite bookshop, Cité du Livre on the rue Fuad, had gone, and in others he found a lamentable stock.”



Only on the Western fringe of the Ummah, in a few Moroccan redoubts, can you still discern the flickers of the way it was. Otherwise, to anyone who knew the “Muslim world” of the mid–20th century, today’s Maghreb and Levant are dull places, drained of everything but Islam. And Durrell was returning in 1977: Another third of a century on, and Alexandria’s stock is even more lamentable. Indeed, his cast of characters would be entirely bewildering to contemporary Alexandrians: an English writer (of course), a Greek good-time girl, a homosexual Jew, a wealthy Copt. In the old days, Alexandria bustled with Britons, Italians, and lots and lots of Greeks. All gone. So are the Jews, homo- and hetero-, from a community 50,000 strong down to some four dozen greybeards keeping their heads down. I got an e-mail a year or so back from the great-grandson of Joseph Cattaui, a Jew and Egypt’s finance minister back in the Twenties: These days, the family lives in France — because it’s not just that in Egypt a Jew can no longer be finance minister, but that in Egypt a Jew can no longer be. Now, in the absence of any other demographic groups to cleanse, it’s the Copts’ turn to head for the exits — as in Tripoli and Benghazi it’s the blacks’. In the once-cosmopolitan cities of the Arab world, the minority communities are confined to the old graveyards, like the rubbish-strewn Jewish cemetery of broken headstones, squawking chickens, and hanging laundry I wandered through in Tangiers a while back. Islam is king on a field of corpses.



Nowadays, for the cosmopolitan café society Durrell enjoyed, you have to go to the cities of multicultural Europe, where “diversity” is not a quirk of fate but the cardinal virtue. At Westminster, the House of Commons has just voted in favor of same-sex marriage. Almost simultaneously, a group calling itself the Muslim London Patrol posted a YouTube video of its members abusing a young man for “walking in a Muslim area dressed like a fag.” Another Londoner is made to empty his beer can: “No drink in this area.” An insufficiently covered woman is warned, “This is not so Great Britain. This is a Muslim area.”



The “moderate Muslim” Maajid Nawaz writes in the New York Times that his youthful European-born coreligionists, back from Islamic adventuring during the Arab Spring, are anxious to apply the lessons learned abroad. The Danish group Kaldet til Islam (Call to Islam) has introduced “Sharia-controlled zones” in which “morality patrols” of young bearded men crack down on underdressed and bibulous blondes. In the Balearic Islands, Muslims took against the local meter maids, and forced the government to withdraw them. In Dagenham, 20-year-old Naomi Oni, a black Londoner, suffered horrific burns after a woman in a niqab hurled acid in her face. She was returning home from her job at Victoria’s Secret. Not secret enough.



Meanwhile, the BBC reports that February 1 was the first World Hijab Day, in which non-Muslim women from 50 countries took a stand against “Islamophobia” and covered themselves to show how much they objected to society’s prejudice against veiled women. From Gaza to Alexandria to Copenhagen to London, I don’t think we’ll have to worry about that. As Balthazar, Durrell’s homosexual Jew, muses, “Narouz once said to me that he loved the desert because there ‘the wind blew out one’s footsteps like candle-flames.’ So it seems to me does reality” — for the footsteps of Copts in Egypt, meter maids in Majorca, and Victoria’s Secret clerks on the streets of the East End.



– Mr. Steyn blogs at SteynOnline (www.steynonline.com).

LET'S GET THE DINOSAURS OUT OF OUR GOVERNMENT

!!!!



Mother American and Uncle Sam

Term limits.

 www.ricantotheright.blogspot.com


Why doesn't the entire government have term limits. The president does, thank goodness. Every sector of the government including the judiciary should have an expiration date.



The majority of our problems are with multiple bodies of the government staying in power way too long. The whole idea of being a life long politician doesn't make sense for a republic like ours. The only systems you see these life time appointments are in totalitarian states and monarchy's. What does a man know about his constituents if he spends the majority of his time in the capitol, or in Senator Menendez case Santo Domingo. This entrenchment leads to stagnation then to corruption.



Our citizens should be the makers of our rules and regulations, not a politician. Politics should not even be a profession, it should be a hobby or temporary duty like jury duty. You're called, you serve, your out.



 If you have been under a rock for the past forty years, you may have not noticed how the federal government is slowly centralizing it power. The states are losing their independence and autonomy by being blackmailed by federal funding. The federal government gives itself more and more of the power that our founding fathers believed were the states.


The nanny state has been in place for about thirty years, we are now coming into the era of "Mother America". This is a dysfunctional and codependent relationship that is evolving since the arrival of his majesty BHO. "Mother America" will do everything for you. Feed you, clothed you, medicate you and bury you if needed. Your new mother will watch you from the sky, over your computer, and will take you weapons so you can't hurt yourself. Your mother will never let you grow up and take a risk by fending for yourself. I suspect that like a mother of old "Russia", our new American mother will tell you where and when to work.



See what we need is our good old Uncle Sam back. We all had that uncle. The uncle that would hear your mom tell you something, then he'd tell you about real life and the real world. The uncle who'd teach you how to ride a bike without training wheels because you'd learn faster if you knew you where going to fall. Years later you had scars on your knees that were like war medals and you were proud you succeeded. Uncle Sam would let you work along side of him, but you'd better work hard and earn your keep. The harder you worked the more you made. As you got older he'd rarely interfere, but if you came to him in a pinch, he would straighten you out then send you back out on your own. Uncle Sam we need you more than ever.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS A HISTORY OF TRYING TO TAKE GUNS AWAY FROM PEOPLE

!!!!


A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TO THINK ABOUT…

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/217807_415816715167232_173576720_n.jpg

A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TO THINK ABOUT.......


December 29, 2012 marked the 122nd Anniversary of the murder of 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota . These 297 people, in their winter camp, were murdered by federal agents and members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms “for their own safety and protection”. 


The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. 200 of the 297 victims were women and children. About 40 members of the 7th Cavalry were killed, but over half of them were victims of fratricide from the Hotchkiss guns of their overzealous comrades-in-arms. Twenty members of the 7th Cavalry's death squad, were deemed “National Heroes” and were awarded the Medal of Honor for their acts of [cowardice] heroism.



We hear very little of Wounded Knee today. It is usually not mentioned in our history classes or books. What little that does exist about Wounded Knee is normally a sanitized “Official Government Explanation”. And there are several historically inaccurate depictions of the events leading up to the massacre which appear in movie scripts and are not the least bit representative of the actual events that took place that day.

 


Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

 


Before you jump on the emotionally charged bandwagon for gun-control, take a moment to reflect on the real purpose of the Second Amendment, the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government. 



The argument that the Second Amendment only applies to hunting and target shooting is asinine. When the United States Constitution was drafted, “hunting” was an everyday chore carried out by men and women to put meat on the table each night, and “target shooting” was an unheard of concept. Musket balls were a precious commodity and were certainly not wasted on “target shooting”. 



The Second Amendment was written by people who had fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States



As time goes forward, the average citizen in the United States continually loses little chunks of personal freedom or “liberty”. Far too many times, unjust gun control bills were passed and signed into law under the guise of “for your safety” or “for protection”. The Patriot Act signed into law by G.W. Bush, was expanded and continues under Barack Obama. It is just one of many examples of American citizens being stripped of their rights and privacy for “safety”. Now, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is on the table and will most likely be attacked to facilitate the path for the removal of our firearms, all in the name of “our safety”.

 


Before any American citizen blindly accepts whatever new firearms legislation that is about to be doled out, they should stop and think about something for just one minute-
Evil does exist in our world. It always has and always will. Throughout history, evil people have committed evil acts. In the Bible, one of the first stories is that of Cain killing Abel. We cannot legislate “evil” into extinction. Good people will abide by the law, and the criminal element will always find a way around it.

 


Evil exists all around us, but looking back at the historical record of the past 200 years, across the globe, where is “evil” and “malevolence” most often found? In the hands of those with the power, the governments. The greatest human tragedies on record and the largest loss of innocent human life can be attributed to governments. Who do the governments always target? “Scapegoats” and “enemies” within their own borders…but only after they have been disarmed to the point where they are no longer a threat. Ask any Native American, and they will tell you it was inferior technology and lack of arms that contributed to their demise. Ask any Armenian why it was so easy for the Turks to exterminate millions of them, and they will answer “We were disarmed before it happened”. Ask any Jew what Hitler’s first step prior to the mass murders of the Holocaust was - confiscation of firearms from the people.

 


Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment, we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families



 General George Armstrong Custer
Commander of the Seventh Calvary




Saturday, February 16, 2013

REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT TURNS ON TEXAS SENATOR TED CRUZ

!!!!


The Republican establishment in Washington has turned against U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX).

In a string of stories published this week by the Washington Post, POLITICO, and the New York Times, Republican senators joined liberal Democrats in openly criticizing the Texan.

One Republican -- who lacked the courage to identify himself -- said Cruz should keep quiet and "get to know the Senate." He said Cruz's outspoken approach "takes away from his ability to be an influential legislator."

Another Republican lectured that if Cruz wants to be respected by the Senate, he needs to prove that he can "do a deal" -- as if cutting deals that compromise his principles is respectable.

These senators want Ted Cruz to keep quiet and play the Washington game. They think he'll back down if they publicly smear him.

We predicted this would happen last week when stories began to emerge about Cruz's willingness to stand strong. We knew his colleagues in the clubby Senate would be threatened.

This isn't the first time the establishment has launched an effort to smear a conservative. They also did it to Jim DeMint (R-SC), Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Ron Johnson (R-WI).

During the 2012 campaign, Ted Cruz said, "The reason I’m running is not merely to vote right. What we have a desperate need for is real leadership to stand up and defend free-market principles. And if I am not helping lead the fight, standing there with arrows in my torso, I will not be doing my job.”

Ted Cruz is now taking arrows from the Washington Post, POLITICO, the New York Times, and many of his own Republican colleagues.

Ted Cruz is keeping his word.

We want you to know about these attacks because many of you supported his campaign. If you want to thank Senator Cruz for standing strong, you can write to him by clicking here.

Thank you for helping us change the Senate.

Best regards,

Matt Hoskins
Executive Director
Senate Conservatives Fund

ENGLAND PROVIDES A PREVIEW OF OBAMACARE

!!!!







by Michael Cook | Feb 16, 2013 |

http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/site






tags: NHS, Stafford Hospital, UK

Doctors, nurses, politicians, bureaucrats, patients and the public, in short, everyone in the UK, have been stunned by the results of two inquiries into dreadful conditions at a hospital in the Midlands.



A report in 2010 into Stafford Hospital found that hundreds of patients had died unnecessarily and that conditions were sometimes unspeakably bad. Some patients were left in excrement-soaked sheets and some had to drink from dirty flower vases because nurses failed to bring them water.



A second report by a leading barrister, Robert Francis, into the causes of this disaster makes depressing reading. He found that there had been a total collapse of the system at the Mid Staffordshire NHS [National Health Service] Foundation Trust, which is responsible for running the hospital. In the report, which was released earlier this month, Mr Francis writes:




"This is a story of appalling and unnecessary suffering of hundreds of people. They were failed by a system which ignored the warning signs and put corporate self-interest and cost control ahead of patients and their safety. Patients were let down by the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust. There was a lack of care, compassion, humanity and leadership. The most basic standards of care were not observed, and fundamental rights to dignity were not respected."



Mr Francis's brief was to identity the reasons for the breakdown in care. He made 290 recommendations to change the toxic culture at the hospital and to make sure that patient care comes first, ahead of financial targets.



Some of the more important recommendations are that failure to comply with standards should be a criminal offence if death or serious injury results; misleading patients, the public or regulators should be a criminal offence; nursing staff should be trained to give compassionate care; and a NHS leadership college should be established to ensure high standards.



The reaction of the UK government was entirely predictable. Prime Minister David Cameron denounced the enormity of the failure, apologised to patients and their families and promised root and branch reform. However, the scepticism of Mr Francis about whether this will actually happen is frightening.




"The experience of many previous inquiries is that, following the initial courtesy of a welcome and an indication that its recommendations will be accepted or viewed favourably, progress in implementation becomes slow or non-existent...
"Stafford was not an event of such rarity or improbability that it would be safe to assume that it has not been and will not be repeated or that the risk of a recurrence was so low that major preventative measures would be disproportionate. The consequences for patients are such that it would be quite wrong to use a belief that it was unique or very rare to justify inaction."




The reports can be downloaded at the Inquiry's website.



Friday, February 15, 2013

JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS NOW NEED TO SPEAK OUT FORCEFULLY AGAINST THE HAGEL NOMINATION

!!!!


Contentions

Jewish Groups Must End Silence on Hagel



To the shock of many Democrats who just days ago thought Chuck Hagel’s confirmation was a cinch, the effort to force a cloture vote on his nomination failed this afternoon in the Senate. That puts the Hagel nomination on ice for at least another 10 days until after the President’s Day Congressional recess.


Had the White House been forthcoming with more information about the president’s actions during the terror attack in Benghazi, this might have been avoided. Several Republicans said the delay of the vote on Hagel would be lifted as soon as the administration relented on that point but it refused to do so and Majority Leader Harry Reid forced a vote that he knew he would lose.


It is possible that during the intervening week, the president will surrender the data that the Republicans want and that the vote on Hagel will take place later this month and, following the party line vote in the committee, he will be confirmed. But the delay will also allow senators more time to ruminate on the nominee’s hapless performance at his confirmation hearing as well as to digest other information that is coming out about even more disturbing comments that Hagel has made about Israel. As I wrote earlier today, our former colleague Alana Goodman’s reporting at the Washington Free Beacon uncovered an account of a 2007 speech given by Hagel at Rutgers University during which he claimed the U.S. State Department was being run by the Israeli Foreign Ministry.


This hateful statement is actually worse than Hagel’s infamous complaint about the “Jewish lobby” intimidating Congress. It is not only absurd since the State Department has always been a stronghold of Arabists but a rehash of the old anti-Semitic myths about foreign Jews manipulating American policy. The only question now is whether the same Jewish groups that have been conspicuous by their silence about Hagel’s nomination will find their voices and help kill this unfortunate nomination once and for all.



As I noted earlier this month, the reluctance of most major Jewish organizations, including the influential Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee and AIPAC to take a stand on Hagel was rooted in their unwillingness to step into what had become a partisan fight. Though all had misgivings about the elevation of a man who had been an open antagonist of the pro-Israel community, opposing him meant picking a fight with the administration and the groups were not happy about risking their access to the White House on behalf of a fight that few thought Hagel would lose.


But with this latest proof of Hagel’s hateful mindset about Israel and the fact that the nomination no longer seems quite so inevitable ought to cause the organized Jewish world to reassess their silence. This is especially true since some pro-Israel Democrats have used this failure of the Jewish groups to speak out as cover for their own decision to go along with the president’s poor choice.


There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind that had a Republican president nominated a man to lead the Pentagon who had been quoted saying the things that Hagel has said and who had such a poor record on Israel and Iran, the Democratic donors to major Jewish groups would be screaming for the organizations to pull out the stops to prevent that person from taking office. But Hagel’s crack about the Israeli foreign ministry should convince even the most partisan liberal Democrats that they can’t give their party a pass on this issue.


If Jewish groups speak out now in the aftermath of the cloture vote the Hagel nomination will collapse.  The president may not like it but the longer this goes on the less defensible his choice for the Pentagon has proved to be. The time is now for Jewish Democrats to end this farce and send Hagel back into retirement where he can say as many hateful things about Jews and Israel either on or off the record as he likes.



Topics: ,

POLICE CHIEF IN PENNSYLVANIA CALLS FOR VOLUNTEERS TO FORM A RESERVE TO RESIST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

!!!!


kessler



My friends, there is hope. Law enforcement officers at the local level are making their stand and they want you to be a part of that. While I’ve written on various sheriffs that have made their own stance to protect their citizens from anyone attempting to confiscate guns, I recently ran across Police Chief Mark Kessler of the Gilberton Borough Police Department in Pennsylvania. He wants citizens to join with his police department in building a “reserve force” that will aid his police force should the need arise to resist Federal authorities when it comes to the Second Amendment.


I spoke with Chief Kessler and he is most definitely a patriot and a Constitutionalist. The police force is quite small in his town and, much like my own town, criminal activity is not rampant.


The reserve force will be made up of volunteers, they can be past or current police officers with act 120 training, along with non law enforcement personnel interested in joining the reserve force. All non law enforcement personnel won’t have any powers to arrest, but will be required to go through a background check, supply their own duty gear, uniform (military BDU, etc), weapons, ammunition.

Everyone will be required to attend a firearms certification course to qualify with both long gun and hand gun at a rate set by the firearm instructor. There will also be hand to hand combat training, knife fighting training, urban combat training, sniper courses, search and rescue etc. The reserve force would only be called upon in the event of a Federal invasion or foreign invasion of the jurisdiction. They would not be called on in ordinary police work nor would they have arrest powers. This reserve force would be distinct from militia, according to Kessler.


From his website:
ALERT! Anyone interested in joining a reserve force with the Gilberton Borough Police Department ,contact Chief Kessler immediately for details! Due to our Country’s current situation I’m compelled to form an auxiliary force, DHS ( Department of Home Land Security ) is stock piling ammunition , Stock Piling Machine guns at a alarming rate! I believe we have no choice for what MAY OR MAY NOT happen shortly!, Ask yourself this one question, can you walk into any sporting good store and purchase 22LR, 9mm, 45ACP , 40 caliber,, 5.56/223 , 7.62×51 or 308 ammunition in quantity’s more then a box or two ? (OR ANY AT ALL) if you answer No, ask yourself why ???? I’ll tell you why because the GOVERNMENT is STOCKPILING BILLIONS of rounds of ammunition! (for what ????) even the police can’t get ammo ! DHS has enough weapons and ammo to wage a 30 year GROUND war, ( BUT ON WHO and WHY ) what is wrong with this picture???, Maybe the tyrants want to take as much ammo off the civilian market AS POSSIBLE! either way it’s very disturbing!

Chief Kessler doesn’t make a lot of money and informed me that even ammunition and weapons he obtains are purchased by him. While the budget of the police force there is enough to provide them a salary, Kessler funnels some of his own money back into the force.
 
 Kessler is a law enforcement officer who is looking to honor his father who honorably served during the Vietnam war. “If not for him, I would not be the man I am today,” he said. He’s also an Oath Keeper.


The Chief is active in his community, apart from being a Police Chief. On January 3, 2013 he drafted a piece of legislation called The 2nd Amendment Preservation Resolution so he could introduce it to local elected officials in Gilberton Borough, Pennsylvania for consideration. The legislation was to reaffirm the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution which reads:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Along with the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves or that of a free state shall not be questioned.


Gilberton Borough Police Chief Mark Kessler
 
 
“I wanted to draw my line in the sand,” Kessler writes. “I wanted to ask my elected officials to stand with freedom, stand with the oath they took to defend freedom, to stand with so many great Americans that shed their blood or gave the ultimate sacrifice defending.”

His resolution was adopted on January 24, 2013 by the Gilberton Borough Council.
Chief Kessler said, “For those of you who think no one has a right to keep and bear arms I suggest you buy a one-way ticket to the nearest dictatorship country! Cuba is close, the weather is beautiful all year round!”


He rightly identifies the Founders intentions concerning the Second Amendment. “First,” he begins, “our founding fathers learned from their experiences! Coming from a tyrannical dictatorship country that looked down on the people as peasants, often killing thousands, taking property, raping wives/daughters and much more.”


“Our founding fathers came to America to start a new life free from tyranny, oppression and dictatorship, to live free and express freedom without reprisals from Dictators,” he continues. “They drafted the constitution specifically adding the 2nd Amendment to protect themselves from the government, period! The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or sporting purposes whatsoever.”


Kessler also has a message for the “bleeding heart liberals.”
“If by some chance you didn’t buy your tickets to Cuba, let me state ‘I will never disarm. I will never give up my high capacity magazines, firearm accessories or ammunition. I will never give up my freedoms. I will never retreat. I’m proud to be an American. I’m proud to serve my country. I’m proud of our military personnel that sides with freedom!’ Just because a mentally ill person commits a horrific crime does not mean I lose my rights.”

 Chief Kessler says that he will stand on the side of freedom, rather than siding with “tyrannical thugs.”


He also has a word for those “law enforcement personnel standing on ‘Bozo’s’ stage, who are condemning firearm owners: “You disgust me.”


Chief Kessler also has several videos of his on his site.


If you wish to be a part of his “reserve force,” or if you are not in the area and wish to donate to the Gilberton Borough Police Department, you can contact Chief Kessler via snail mail, email or phone.


Attn: Chief Of Police
Gilberton Borough Police Department
2710 Main street
Mahanoy Plane, Pa 17949
chiefkessler[at]gmail.com
570-874-4790



UPDATE: Kessler will be interviewed on Arising Republic Radio on Friday, February 22, 2013 at 9pm EST. Calls will be taken.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

OBAMA'S CONTRIBUTION TO RAISE THE LEVEL OF THE BLACK UNEMPLOYED

!!!!






Minimum Expectations

 

BY JASON L. RILEY

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE

 


There is something sadly ironic about watching the nation's first black president call for an increase in the federal minimum wage during his State of the Union address Tuesday.

Minimum-wage laws date to the 1930s, and supporters in Congress at the time were explicit about using them to stop blacks from displacing whites in the labor force by working for less money. Milton Friedman regarded the minimum wage as "one of the most, if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books."

When you artificially increase the cost of labor, you wind up with surplus labor, which takes the form of unemployment. Younger and less-experienced workers—a disproportionate number of whom are black—are more likely to be priced out of the labor force when the cost of hiring someone goes up. Prior to the passage of minimum-wage laws—and in an era of open and rampant racial discrimination in the U.S.—the unemployment rate for black men was much lower than it is now and similar to that of whites in the same age group.

Today, unemployment stands at 7.9% overall but is 13.8% among blacks (versus 7% among whites), 14.5% among black men (versus 7.2% among white men) and 37.8% among black teens (versus 20.8% among white teens). Yet Mr. Obama has proposed increasing the minimum wage by 24% to $9 an hour to placate his union supporters who want less competition for their members. A higher minimum wage might lift earnings for existing workers—provided they keep their jobs—but it also reduces job opportunities for millions of people out of work.

Out of political expediency, Mr. Obama is putting the interests of Big Labor ahead of the urban poor. He's hardly the first politician to do so, and the reality is that Republican and Democratic presidents alike have raised the minimum wage. It's also true that Mr. Obama is president of the entire country, not just its black inhabitants. But is it too much to ask that he not support policies, however well-intentioned by current advocates, that were anti-black in origin and have a long history of depressing black employment?

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

THE SWEETEST MUSIC THIS SIDE OF HEAVEN

!!!!


 
 President Obama and John Brennan




ALL THE PRESIDENT'S GOOGLY MEN

by Wes Pruden


Barack Obama says he’s not a Muslim, but a Christian. That’s his business, between the president and God.


The president clearly has a soft spot in his heart for Islam. He once described the call to evening prayer, which he first heard as a child in a Muslim school in Indonesia, as “one of the prettiest of sounds on Earth at the sunset.”


He’s entitled to a soft spot in his heart for whatever and whomever he pleases, and it’s none of anybody’s else’s business. But a soft spot in his head, that’s another matter. No president is entitled to a soft spot in his head (even though there are precedents).


Nevertheless, Mr. Obama’s appointments to the two highest national-defense positions, Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense and John Brennan to be the director of the CIA, raise questions about the location of this soft spot. Only a pathologist could say for sure.


The kindest description of the appointments is that Mr. Obama, his heart forever seeking hope and change, can’t resist indulging incompetence and corruption of conscience. The realistic explanation is that the president defers to the soft spot in his head.


Chuck Hagel shares the president’s weakness for the music of Islam, and John Brennan is willing to say he does if that is the price of getting a job.


Mr. Hagel, who redefines the Washington definition of bumbler and stumbler, seemed to have been awakened from a deep sleep just before his confirmation hearing began and never quite remembered what he had been saying about the world and America’s place in it. Like the president himself in the first of the three presidential debates, Mr. Hagel appeared to be suffering an Ambien hangover.


Mr. Brennan, on the other hand, was lively and wide awake, the better to maneuver the U-turns through his conscience, renouncing many of the things he had been so confidently saying about the threats to the West from the perversions of Islam. It was if he had waterboarded his conscience.
Mr. Brennan once energetically defended the “enhanced interrogation techniques” that extracted crucial information from evil-doers, information that prevented further harm to Americans. “There [has] been a lot of information that has come out from these interrogation procedures that the agency has in fact used agains the real hard-core terrorists,” he told CBS News in 2007. “It has saved lives. And let’s not forget, these are hardened terrorists who had been responsible for 9/11, who have shown no remorse at all for the deaths of 3,000 innocents.”


This so infuriated Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee that they commissioned a partisan “study,” no Republicans allowed, not to determine whether the enhanced interrogation techniques actually worked, but to conclude that they didn’t. (Alice ran across this kind of “study” from the queen in Wonderland: “Sentence first, verdict afterwards.”) The “study” concluded, 350 pages of argle-bargle later, that the EITs did not work.


Mr. Brennan was thoroughly housebroken when the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence asked him just the other day what he thought about all that now. “I must tell you,” he said, contrition puddling around his ankles, “that reading this report from the committee raises serious questions about the information that I was given at the time and the impression I had at that time. Now I have to determine what, based on that information as well as what the CIA says, what the truth is.” Rarely has anyone so clearly expressed the Washington code, that conviction and conscience are important, subject only to the prevailing wind.


Mr. Brennan is eager to embrace the company line, tough on al Qaeda during the Bush years, soft on al Qaeda now that he serves a president with a soft spot in his head. It’s not that the president and his men want to go easy on terrorists – his drones have killed terrorists, even when accompanied by women and children, by the dozens. He just can’t call terrorists for who they are. The terrorist who tried to blow up an airliner over Detroit was “an isolated extremist.” When a terrorist tried to blow up Times Square, his homeland security secretary called it a “one-off.” Those evil-doers, in their telling of it, had nothing to do with radical Islam. The White House still hasn’t got its stories straight on what happened at Benghazi.


When the president hears “the sweetest music this side of heaven” (apologies to Guy Lombardo), his heart goes all googly at the sight of the crescent moon. He wants acolytes who can share the googly.



Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

NO SKEETS WERE HARMED IN THIS PHOTO-SHOPPED SKEET SHOOT

!!!!








Secret Plumbers and Shooting Skeets

by garnet92

http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/secret-plumbers-and-shooting-skeets/



Three men and one woman were ushered from one of the black SUVs into Building R-uh by a half-dozen Secret Service bodyguards. They were Obama’s plumbers, a covert team of Photoshop experts, called up for another project: Obama had to be shown shooting a skeet (whatever that was).
All of them were wearing fake Groucho Marx glasses with fake nose, eyebrows, and moustache attached to hide their identities.



They were an elite team, the best of the best when it came to creating or editing any kind of document or photograph. They could work miracles, and their work defied detection (except when other experts dissected it).



They were guarded 24/7 and had sworn fealty to their lord and master, B. Hussein Obama. In exchange, they were handsomely paid and lived in palatial comfort, but were not allowed to communicate with the outside world – that was verboten. The main enticement was that their families also lived like kings. Even if some freaky “accident” were to befall them, their families would be taken care of – it was like a fabulous living insurance policy.



They were the elite of the specious document world, living like rock stars or professional athletes, but only in the controlled surroundings of Stalag Barack.



The compound’s only identification was a simple sign showing it to be a Cook County Correctional Center, and it looked just like you’d expect a prison to look (from the outside), complete with razor wire topping high masonry walls and guard towers at strategic points surrounding the facility.
Multiple guards and a ram-proof vehicle gate was the only entry point into the compound. It was a fortress.



It was also the plumber’s home.



They were initially recruited (ostensibly) to correct discrepancies in commercial imaging and to create complex legal documents for a fictitious company. Competition was fierce and testing was stringent – only the best survived. The few who passed all of the functional tests were then subject to security testing.



They were required to pass a Sigma level of security (absent his election, Obama couldn’t even pass a Confidential level). The Sigma level was created specifically for the plumbers unit. It surpassed all other levels of security, even those granted to members of Obama’s cabinet and the Joint Chiefs. That was not surprising, since the public exposure of any of the unit’s projects could literally bring down the Presidency.



In the end, each was offered an iron-clad, lifetime contract – it was not unlike selling one’s soul to the devil. A leak of any kind was considered a traitorous act (an Obama Executive Order says so), punishable by life in prison, or death.



They would work directly for the Office of the President and answer to no one but Valerie Jarret. She was the EIC (Executive in Charge) and set out the particulars of what they were to do and when.
Today, they were tasked with creating several pictures of the President shooting at skeets (whatever they were) while at Camp David. Jarret had decided that several pictures of the president confidently blasting away with a shotgun would endear him to gun enthusiasts and soften their opposition to his new gun control measures.



Perhaps they’d even show the president holding up several skeets he’d bagged. She wondered if it was appropriate to mount a skeet – perhaps they could show one mounted on the wall in the president’s quarters? Did skeets have horns? Could they be mounted to appear vicious; mouth open showing fangs? Did they run in packs? Prides? Pods? She needed to know more about the elusive creatures.



When Valerie had first approached the president about his “skeet shooting all the time” remark, she suggested that they should validate the remark by actually staging some pictures of the president really shooting a skeet. Otherwise, real skeet hunters would want to see some hard evidence that Obama truly went skeet hunting often and sometimes even skinned and gutted the animals himself. Without pictures as proof, he’d be ridiculed (again) and be called a liar (again).
Unfortunately, our fearless leader didn’t react well. “Are you shittin’ me?” “Ain’t no way Ahm gettin’ close to a gun, I might shoot mah eye out.”



Later it was learned that Obama’s mama was scared by fireworks the night before he was born (it was at one of those typical Kenyan celebrations), and to this day, he loses control of his bladder whenever he hears a big BANG nearby. So, actually operating any kind of thing that went BOOM was vetoed.
So Barry wee-wee’d out and refused to hoist a shotgun, that pretty much shot Plan A to hell. On to



Plan B.



Plan B was to create “evidence” that the president did actually shoot some skeets and by golly, he hit one of them right below the antler – great shot! He quickly got his bag limit and graciously allowed the other hunters in his group to continue without him “hogging” all of the shots on the elusive skeets.



When PDF (President de facto) Valerie explained what she wanted to the plumbers, they admitted that they didn’t know anything about skeets. One, Barb Dwyer, was the only one who was skeptical that a skeet was even an animal.



Barb was one of the stars of the plumbers unit since “developing” an entire series of college transcripts from Occidental College, Columbia and Harvard showing Obama as 4.0 student who was named to the Dean’s List for his grades. They’d not yet been released to the public; they were awaiting a serious assault on Obama’s refusal to release any school documents – that’s when they’d eviscerate any detractor by releasing the “transcripts” to refute the accusations and validate Obama’s elite intellect at the same time.




Barb was eager to see her work published. It would be akin to a gallery showing of her art.
But in the meantime, the skeet research occupied center stage and time was short.
Cy O’narra was responsible for the research and quickly set to work. It only took one quick Google to learn that they’d been hornswoggled. A skeet wasn’t an animal at all, it was a clay disk that was flung out in front of a shooter to simulate the flight of a bird.



Damn. Damn. Damn.



O’narra quickly contacted Valerie and gave her the news. She was aghast – she had to get to Obama quickly before he made any other dumbass statements about skeets. Luckily, she had him on lockdown. He dare not say anything to anybody without her express consent; she had clamped down on his extraneous comments following the “all the time” skeet reference. Every time he opened his mouth, he wound up with Michelle’s size twelve brogan in it.



So, on to Plan C. They would stage a single photo of the president with gun in hand and layer in some shots from Camp David’s skeet shooting area. This would be simple since a full digital video studio had been created at Stalag Barack and they had access to thousands of stock images taken at Camp David.



When Valerie was inaugurated as PDF, she commissioned two professional photographers to take digital shots of all areas of the White House from varying angles and in different lighting conditions. She did the same at Camp David. Those stock images could be used via Chroma keying (green screen) to place anyone anywhere, doing anything at any time.



Valerie was not to be trifled with; she would stop at nothing to retain her power as the crone behind the throne – and she was prepared.



She could easily produce an image of Obama anywhere on the grounds of Camp David doing manly things like riding a horse, crotch-grabbing, whittling and spitting.



It was widely whispered that if negotiations with Congress made it necessary, she (and the plumbers) could easily produce an image of Speaker of the House John Boehner in a guest bedroom practicing husbandry with a polka-dotted sheep named Baa-baa-rella.



 But now, she had her work cut out for her. She had to (somehow) get Obama to hold a gun, a big shotgun at that, in a shooting position as if he were shooting at a skeetie (or whatever it’s called), all without wetting himself.



Later that day, she had the administration’s property master bring by a bona fide shotgun, a Browning Citori 12 gauge. She summoned Obama and convinced him to hold the loathsome killing machine by promising him a menthol Virginia Slim cigarette (his favorite). He wasn’t going for it, so she promised him a joint. He agreed to the weed. Michelle would slap him silly if she ever found out, but he decided to “be a man” and choom up.



Sharp woman that she is, Valerie had the official plumber photographer shoot the smoke exhaled by the president (without showing his face). They could use the smoke later to make it appear as if it was coming out of the gun when Obama shot at that clay thingy.



The green screen was set up in Obama’s meditation room, a room designated as private and off limits to even the Secret Service. The president required complete privacy to mull and ponder the difficult decisions he had to make as president. It was also where he kept his stash of “Big Uns” for when he felt the need to work on a “stimulus” program.



He was given the Browning to hold (Valerie had to help him hold it up) and told to aim at the target (a silhouette outline of Michelle) on the far wall. Obama grinned, maybe he had a use for the shotgun after all. He grumbled when told that he had to wear protection, stating that he didn’t like those things and didn’t understand why he had to wear one. Valerie explained that protection meant eye and ear protection. “Oh, uhhh, ok.”



The dark safety glasses were no problem, but Valerie had a devil of a time finding ear protection that would fit Obama’s ears. Finally the propmaster found a set of Pro Ears jumbo, model grandé muffs that fit the president’s “generous” appendages.



He was set. They shot several images of him from different angles and with varying lighting to cover all the bases. The shotgun was heavy and he had to stop and take a hit every now and then to regain his strength.



Finally, the deed was done and Obama went back to playing his latest video game “Super Mario Brothers Play House With Honey Boo Boo.”



Gray Poupon was the group member tasked with compositing Obama’s image with one selected from the Camp David image database. When he completed his work, he was pleased and thought that his creation was “A work of art.”



He notified Jarret and copied his work to a special folder on her personal computer. She was elated at the speed with which Poupon had completed his project.



She immediately sent an image to Obama’s press and media supporters at all of the major networks and big city newspapers.



All went well until someone noticed that the president’s finger was behind the trigger while the gun was supposedly firing. Additionally, the choom smoke was more dense than modern smokeless powders emitted, and if that weren’t enough, even though Poupon had deleted the smoke exhaled from Obama’s last hit, it was still there.



OMG, Valerie had released the wrong version of the composite - one that still retained a cloud of smoke being exhaled upwards by a reclining Obama. It ended up looking like it was coming from the right side if the gun barrel itself.



But it was too late.



In her haste to disseminate the evidence to Obama’s supporters, Valerie had attached the wrong version of the image and sent it to her entire “Friends of Obama” address book and it was now popping up everywhere ... and being ridiculed everywhere.



~~~



Now, dear reader, in observance of common propriety, we must censor Valerie’s comments when she learned that the image had gone viral. But know that even drunken sailors would be embarrassed by her tirade. The most we can pass along is:
“mother*!&&#=sonof&&$#%@feeble@++^`#jerk^&^&dumb?>?frakin#$**&&.”



In the end, even though the fault for releasing the wrong image was solely hers, there are openings at the White House for four Photoshop experts again. Get your resumé ready!



Rest in Peace, plumbers unit 4.0, we hardly knew ye.



Legal disclaimer: No skeets were harmed during the production of this account.


garnet92 | February 6, 2013 at 2:44 PM | Categories: Political | URL: http://wp.me/pL408-aD






Tuesday, February 5, 2013

INSTEAD OF AIMING AT THE SKY WHERE CLAY PIGEONS FLY, THE PRESIDENT AIMED STRAIGHT AHEAD AT GUN OWNERS





FEBRUARY 5, 2013


Shooting blanks at the pigeons
BY WES PRUDEN



President Obama has probably put the Secret Service on this one, and the FBI, the CIA and the D.C. cops, too. Who came up with that really dumb idea of putting out an official White House photograph of the president stalking clay pigeons with his shotgun?



Maybe it was the campaign consultant who gave Michael Dukakis a ride in an Abrams tank. (Maggie Thatcher had taken a similar ride two years earlier and looked like George S. Patton.) Or the wizard who decked out John Kerry in a lab suit that gave him the appearance of a giant sperm. The dodo who did that could have been the campaign consultant who advised Jimmy Carter to tell the famous story of how he was attacked by a killer rabbit.



Whoever it was, he or she made it worse by accompanying the photograph with the stern warning that “this [photograph] may not be manipulated in any way.” This was similar to telling a four-year-old that he should “never try to put a pea up your nose.”



Some of the manipulated, or “Photoshopped” images on the Internet are hilariously telling. In one of them, the president fires his gun and a bouquet of petunias emerges from both barrels; in another, the president fires at the house where a celebrated terrorist was captured, over the caption: “the truth about how we got bin Laden.” In still another, he draws a bead on Bambi. Even Michelle and the girls may be laughing, but not as hard as the gun owners and Second Amendment fans to whom this moment in the president’s grand gun-rights offensive was aimed. If the idea was meant to show that the president is just one of the good ol’ boys, as comfortable with shotguns and clay pigeons as he practicing his three-point shot, the early and unanimous word is that the scheme went poof! Or maybe plouffe!



Indeed, the early speculation in the flackery shops in Washington was that David Plouffe, the political adviser who modestly identifies himself as the genius of the last two presidential elections, thought up the scheme and sold it to the president. Mr. Plouffe, not heretofore recognized as a wordsmith or coiner of memorable phrases, is leading the defense of the worst marketing idea since Coca-Cola came up with New Coke nearly two decades ago, only to concede three months later that New Coke was a colossal boo-boo. Mr. Obama has been called a lot of names – secret Muslim, native Kenyan, socialist-in-waiting – but none can sting like being likened to Elmer Fudd, the great white hunter in the world of Bugs Bunny.



Hunters and shooters cherish the photograph of the president staring down the barrel of a Browning 12-gauge shotgun, aiming it not at the sky where clay pigeons fly but straight ahead, as if aiming at a beer can atop a hickory stump.



“That looks pretty pathetic,” Rick Davenport of the Erie County (New York) Sportsmen’s Federation told the New York Post. “That’s not skeet shooting. This is nothing but pandering to the sportsmen and hunters.”



Presidents have played good ol’ boy at their peril. Calvin Coolidge, who didn’t suffer fools gladly or otherwise, nevertheless made himself look foolish when he cheerfully posed for a photograph in the full feathers of an Indian chief. However, he actually was a chief of the Sioux, if only by adoption, and he liked as well to be photographed in a Boy Scout uniform, short pants and all. Teddy Roosevelt was photographed with his guns, and no one doubted that he knew which was the business end of an elephant gun. But when John Kerry, as a candidate for president, called in the photographers he had to borrow a gun for a portrait of himself in a hunter’s camouflage suit. He had the look of a man who would rather be wind-surfing in France.



The president put the arts of persuasion behind him with the beginning of a new week, and flew off to Minnesota to sit down with a group of cops and sheriffs to talk about guns, children, and how awful guns are. The president spent his hour in Minneapolis in a neighborhood described as “traumatized by abundant illegal guns.” But he was safely lodged deep in the bowels of the police department's Special Operations Center. Everything was closed to the public, so it was not clear who he was trying to influence, since all the “attendees” were safely in agreement with him.  Just to take no chances, though, no shotguns and no cameras. There would be no manipulation.



Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.

Monday, February 4, 2013

THE SILENCE OF THE JEWS: SILENCE ON THE CONFIRMATION OF CHUCK HAGEL SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR MEN AND WOMEN OF CONSIENCE

!!!!






 Contentions

Can Jewish Groups Speak Out on Hagel?
 

Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary 02.03.2013 - 12:46 PM
   


One of the interesting subtexts about the debate over the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense has been the relative silence from the organized Jewish world. Though there was widespread shock from most pro-Israel activists, even those who were loyal liberal Democrats, about the president’s decision to choose one of the least Israel-friendly members of the U.S. Senate in the last generation to run the Pentagon, none of the major groups, aside from the Zionist Organization of America, spoke up publicly about his unsuitability for the post or his out-of-the mainstream views.

The reasons for this silence were obvious to anyone who understands their missions and how they operate. The refusal of the major Jewish organizations was rooted in their natural reluctance to embroil themselves in fights they think would hamper their ability to do their jobs. But at this juncture in the Hagel saga, after the nominee flopped at his Senate confirmation hearing and demonstrated how insincere his conversion from being tough on Israel and soft on Iran to a garden-variety backer of the Jewish state, it is time for them to reconsider. Though the odds still favor his confirmation, and with some senators, including Chuck Schumer and Claire McCaskill, citing their silence for their support for the nominee, the rationale of the organized Jewish world for staying out of this contretemps has evaporated.

Groups like the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee or even AIPAC are not in the business of involving themselves in partisan fights. Nor are they interested in futile gestures that embroil them in squabbles that would make it more difficult for them to gain access to decision makers. These are things that often infuriate people who rail at them for not being representative of ordinary Jews or being “self-appointed” leaders. But these are generally unfair criticisms.

All Jewish groups in this country are voluntary associations. If the heads of these groups are not elected by a broad cross-section of the community it is only because most Jews don’t take the trouble to get involved with these organizations. We can argue about whether many of the so-called “major” groups still perform any vital functions. Indeed, many of them are vestigial remnants that have long ceased having any rationale other than institutional inertia. Others are mere partisan fronts for the political parties (the Republican Jewish Coalition has actively campaigned against Hagel while the National Jewish Democratic Council has tried to downplay the appointment) or Jewish surrogates for other liberal causes. Many are merely fundraising outlets for various causes. But some do still perform vital tasks, like compiling data about anti-Semitism or advocacy on behalf of Israel, and don’t deserve all of the scorn that is thrown in their direction.

However, the Hagel nomination illustrated that groups that see themselves as above politics can’t entirely avoid some fights. The nomination of a person who has publicly bragged about his standing up to the “Jewish lobby” and opposed sanctions or even the threat of using force against Iran should have crossed the line between something that merely raised eyebrows and battle that needed to be fought.

Some of the major organizations, or at least their leading donors, are dyed-in the-wool Democrats who would never put themselves in direct opposition to the president. Yet even those who were privately upset about Hagel reasoned that the campaign to stop Hagel was doomed. After abandoning Susan Rice, his preferred candidate for the State Department, there was good reason to believe that President Obama would fight harder for his “soul mate” at Defense. A popular president whose party has a majority in the Senate is not liable to lose such a nomination fight, so they thought it made more sense to shut up about Hagel and retain their access than to fight and lose.

This was a not unreasonable conclusion, but it was also a self-fulfilling prophecy. While many Jewish leaders were hoping that Hagel could be stopped without their help, by their very silence they gave cover to pro-Israel Democrats who decided that avoiding giving offense to the president took precedent over defending their principles. On this point, Schumer, whose announcement of public support for the nominee seemed to take all the drama out of the confirmation battle, has been quite candid, as he has explained that it was impossible for him to fight Hagel while Jewish groups kept their own counsel.

But my expectation that Schumer’s move would more or less end the controversy was confounded by Hagel’s catastrophic performance at his Senate confirmation hearing on Thursday. At this point even those who have no problem with Hagel’s troubling positions are grappling with the fact that the president’s choice has given the appearance of incompetence and an inability to articulate the president’s stated positions on the issues.

It was assumed that Hagel’s confirmation conversion to positions that affirmed the alliance with Israel and hostility to Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran would be done in such a manner as to at least quiet concerns about his transformation from foe to friend of the pro-Israel community. But at his hearing, Hagel was not just unprepared; the insincerity of his flip-flops was transparent. He refused to admit that he was wrong to refuse to vote to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group. Nor did he disavow his slanders about Israel’s conduct during the 2006 Lebanon War. And he could not give a straight answer as to his views about containment of Iran even when given three tries to do so.

At this moment, when even partisan Democrats are expressing their discomfort about Hagel, it is time for the major Jewish groups to, at the very least, express their belief that the nomination should be reconsidered. They needn’t issue an outright call for a no vote on his confirmation or directly fight the president. But they can speak out about the problematic nature of what Hagel said at his hearing and whether the president ought to think twice about insisting on shoving him down the throat of an obviously troubled Democratic caucus.

Doing so would involve some risk and cause them to be criticized by some Democratic partisans. But as they already know, the only people who are actually enthusiastic about Hagel are those, like the vicious Israel-basher MJ Rosenberg, who think the nominee is lying about changing his views about Israel and Iran.

Let’s also dispense with the notion that if Jewish groups speak out on Hagel, they will be confirming the myth that the “Israel Lobby” is an all-powerful force that, as the nominee said, “intimidates” Congress into doing “stupid things.” It is true that that is what some foes of Israel will say if Hagel loses. But the truth is they are already saying it and the vast majority of Americans—who are the backbone of the bipartisan consensus in support of Israel—reject these slanders. The question now is whether an advocate of those views, even one who has now disavowed some of that statement, albeit in a manner that lacks all credibility, will be elevated to one of the highest positions in the government.

Whatever it was that Hagel has been telling Democrats like Schumer or even the big Jewish groups who got a private meeting with the nominee, no one who watched that hearing can seriously believe his protestations of a change of heart. Though he may still be confirmed if the president goes to the mat for him, the outcome is by no means certain. That means this is a moment when the major Jewish groups must drop their reticence and speak truth courageously to power.

Though it is often wise for such groups to stay out of fights with the White House, this is not the moment for such caution. Were the major groups to call for a reconsideration of his nomination, it could be the tipping point in the debate. Should they fail to find their voices now about Hagel, many of the good people inside these organizations may have reason to look back with regret on their decisions. Hagel’s appointment raises genuine doubts about this administration’s commitment to stopping Iran’s nuclear threat and continued support of Israel at a time when its enemies (such as the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt) are gaining strength. Silence at such a moment is impossible for men and women of conscience.



Topics: AIPAC, Anti-Defamation League, Chuck Hagel, Chuck Schumer, Jewish organizations

Saturday, February 2, 2013

WHAT DO JEWS REALLY THINK ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE OF SCHUMER AND LEVIN AT THE HAGEL HEARING


!!!!






Contentions

Hagel’s Credibility Left in Shreds

Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary 01.31.2013
   
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/01/31/chuck-hagel-credibility-left-in-shreds-hearing/

It’s not clear if administration sources that leaked the story that Chuck Hagel had three practice sessions before a mock committee before his actual Senate confirmation hearing were trying to help or hurt the former senator. Hagel’s performance was so shaky that even some of his liberal supporters like Peter Beinart were lamenting on Twitter about his stumbling and bumbling answers to tough questions.


That he flopped so badly after being rehearsed speaks volumes about how bad he was. Indeed, he had so many misstatements that it will be hard for news organizations to choose which of them to broadcast in their highlights of the hearings. But as much as his inability to speak coherently and present a plausible defense of his record while under pressure was exposed today, in what was probably the worst showing by a presidential nominee in a confirmation hearing in memory, it was his credibility that took the biggest hit.


Time and again throughout the day, Hagel bobbed and weaved when presented with examples of the contradictions between the voluminous record of votes and statements about Israel, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah and what he has been saying in public since President Obama nominated him to be the next secretary of defense. Under tough questioning from Lindsey Graham, Kelly Ayotte, Roger Wicker and Ted Cruz, Hagel’s pose as a consistent and ardent friend of Israel and foe of Iran was shown to be nothing but a hastily constructed façade that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

As I have written repeatedly since his nomination was announced, Hagel has been working hard to disappoint those who have always shared his views since he was so eager to discard principles that he had ardently supported. But one such supporter was unfazed by his reversals. Former Media Matters staffer MJ Rosenberg is a bitter critic of Israel and its supporters to the point where he is considered toxic even by many on the left. But as Twitchy notes, Rosenberg wasn’t particularly helpful to Hagel today since he tweeted:



I spent a couple of hours with Hagel a few years ago. Talked with him about Israel. Happily, he is lying today &  knows it. He’ll be a good SeDef.


But you didn’t have to have that kind of inside information to understand that what was happening in the confirmation wasn’t particularly honest. Throughout the day when faced with offensive quotes or votes that were inconsistent with his current stands, Hagel rationalized about changing times or context. But the more the context of each incident was examined, the less truthful the Nebraskan sounded. It wasn’t just gaffes like his statement that his opposition to designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group was rooted in his belief that the Islamist regime was a “legitimate and elected government,” which he later walked back. It was his inability to explain why he refused to support Israel during the intifada or branded its defensive war against Hezbollah as a “slaughter.”


But his deceitful approach wasn’t solely focused on his views about Israel and Iran. His attempt to explain his role in producing a report about America’s nuclear deterrent was just as bad. He refused to own up to his views and the plain language of a document that he co-authored. His inability to be honest about his opposition to the Iraq surge when pressed to do so by John McCain was not so much outrageous as it was transparently weak.


By the end of the day, Hagel was reduced to saying something that shouldn’t inspire much confidence in his leadership when he said his opinions didn’t matter so much because he was not being appointed to a policymaking position. Hagel’s defense of himself as a mere bureaucrat may be in line with the Obama administration’s top-down approach to policy but it is a dispiriting exhibition for someone who is actually being tapped for one of the most important positions in the Cabinet.


Chuck Hagel demonstrated today that he isn’t fit for such a senior post. His incompetent testimony should have embarrassed the president and backers like Chuck Schumer, who gambled his own reputation on a man who has little credibility. That may not be enough to derail a nomination that is being rammed through on a partisan basis by the Senate’s majority caucus. But today’s disappointing show by Hagel shamed not just Democrats but a nation whose defense is being entrusted to an incompetent liar.




Topics: Chuck Hagel, Chuck Schumer, Kelly Ayotte, Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz