Purging our Warrior Culture

Transforming our military into a new ‘peace corps’

Welcome to the Barack Obama Military – politically correct to the core with a social engineering directive; under-funded fighting forces surviving on fumes for jet fuel (extremely expensive, “green” bio-fuel), borrowed aircraft parts, shortages of practice rounds, anemic pay scales with shrinking benefits, and spiritual disarmament. Demoralization in the ranks of our fighting forces is becoming commonplace.

The president left Iraq on December 18, 2011 and components of the future Islamic State moved into the vacuum. The Obama-inspired “Arab Spring” was planted and an anti-Western tsunami managed by the Muslim Brotherhood and its various jihadist offshoots washed across the Middle East, buoyed by Obama’s policies.

Our imperial president, however, has always been preoccupied with the social engineering possibilities in a new, “transformed military.”

His “new moral authority” turned out to have nothing to do with “moral” anything. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” has been replaced with acceptance of personal proclivities at any price. Military readiness, cohesion, and survivability of combat units are of secondary concern, sacrificed for self-esteem on the altar of Me. The avoidance of any perceived offense, however insignificant or irrelevant, is the prime directive. Social engineering gymnastics are now the order of the day in the Army of One.

As part of the new gender sensitivity curriculum male ROTC cadets at one academic institution were forced to walk around in women’s high heels so they could “relate” – I’m uncertain any other feminine attire was required for the exercise.

The forced secularization of the military, with its moral implications and spiritual distress, is causing armed forces personnel to reconsider reenlistment. God is being removed from the military culture to be replaced, as with all else, by the State. Forget about the old adage, “There are no atheists in fox holes.” Atheists are now camped out in the Pentagon so sermons of chaplains can be checked for content.

The age-old reasons for “why we fight” are no longer taught. Standards are lowered or modified; geared to the lowest common denominator, as in government education, not toward a high achievement standard. In President Obama’s military the new level for performance is “good enough.” Social, biological and psychological criteria unimportant in military applications or deployment situations are now SOP (Standard Operating Procedure).

New “Rules of Engagement,” which endanger the lives of our armed personnel exponentially, are another hazard, tying the hands of our combat forces until a lawyer gives the “go.”

A once effective “warrior culture” has been purged through “social experimentation.” The new U.S. military is now a petri dish for cultural change and a “can’t we all just get along” foreign policy.

U.S. Armed Forces, sent to Africa during the Ebola scare as a new extension of the Peace Corps, gave the unmistakable message to Islamist groups: Osama bin Laden’s epithets against the U.S. “paper tiger” were true. Perception is everything.

The final straw, however, and green light to Islamists everywhere, was the directive from the White House’s DOD on December 3, 2015: All restrictions to women serving in combat roles, even special forces, were removed.

Even though in combat men and women are not interchangeable and, in the military, there is no such thing as “gender neutral,” the directive will proceed, devoid of all common sense and concern for national security and human lives that will be lost. The fact that 92.5% of female Army personnel surveyed wanted no part in combat had no effect whatsoever. The theory of the progressive academics prevailed.

In the Obama Regime, ideology wins. Just ask the wounded survivors at Ft. Hood.

Originally published April 18, 2016


Patriot’s Side

Reviving and defining the concept of Patriotism

While speaking in Paris during the month of April in 1910, Theodore Roosevelt examined his thoughts on the meaning of “patriotism” and how he viewed that concept in an ever more connected world.

Even though he was beginning to develop a progressive ideology, he managed to define the importance of “patriotism” in a very straightforward way:

I believe that a man must be a good patriot before he can be… a good citizen of the world.

Experience teaches us that the average man who protests that his international feeling swamps his national feeling, that he does not care for his country because he cares so much for mankind, in actual practice proves himself the foe of mankind; that the man who says that he does not care to be a citizen of any one country, because he is a citizen of the world, is in very fact usually an exceedingly undesirable citizen of whatever corner of the world he happens at the moment to be in…

If a man can view his own country and all other countries from the same level with tepid indifference, it is wise to distrust him, just as it is wise to distrust the man who can take the same dispassionate view of his wife and his mother.

However broad and deep a man’s sympathies, however intense his activities, he need have no fear that they will be cramped by love of his native land.

Now, this does not mean in the least that a man should not wish to do good outside of his native land. On the contrary, just as I think the man who loves his family is more apt to be a good neighbor than the man who does not, so I think that the most useful member of the family of nations is normally a strongly patriotic nation.

So globalism is nothing new; as we see Teddy Roosevelt recognize the nascent eruption of a “family of nations” at the advent of the 20th Century. Roosevelt addressed the importance of patriotism in a world context and was very direct in his clear understanding of the concept of “patriot” and “world citizen,” and the difference between the two.

People can have that understanding once more – IF we teach patriotism.

Originally published April 18, 2016

A Midnight Ride

Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride

The night of April 18, 1775 word had leaked that British general
Thomas Gage ordered 700 of his regulars to march from
Boston to Concord, to seize a weapons cache of the rebellious
colonists and arrest two Patriot leaders: Samuel Adams and
John Hancock.

Silversmith Paul Revere took off on horseback to warn Lexington
and Concord. In Lexington the following day, “the shot heard ’round the world” signaled the beginning of our War for Independence.

Intellectually Vacant

Raising a generation of ignorant citizens

Many of us continue to wonder, “How can these Bernie Sanders minions be so ignorant; unaware of the death toll and societal damage wrought by Socialism and its siblings during the Twentieth Century?” And, “Can they not know that Hillary Clinton plans to deliver the same thing?”

No; they do not “know.” To know implies knowledge, which they do not have. Indoctrination does not imply knowledge.

CBS reported, in a recent poll of Americans aged 18 to 26, the results when those polled were asked the question: “Which is the most compassionate economic system?”

Conducted by Frank Luntz in his “Luntz on the SnapChat Generation’s Shifting Attitudes” survey, the results from “The Youngest Voters” weren’t too shocking. For those unaware of our government education system’s indoctrination gains in the last generation: Socialism scored highest at 58%; Capitalism was next at 33%; and Communism last at 9%. Obviously, Communism wasn’t taught, at least as an extension of Socialism, or it would certainly have scored higher in the minds of the minions.

Apparently, Fascism wasn’t offered as a choice either. One wouldn’t want to confuse the respondents with another variation of Socialism… then there would be more questions as to its relationship to Communism. Maybe Bernie Sanders could explain, since he’s well versed in all three. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton wouldn’t offer any perspective on the relationship between the three tyrannical economic systems; that would blow their cover.

The followers and new adherents to Bernie’s Socialism, and the respondents to the Luntz survey, are the products of a vast miseducation of the American electorate, in particular those under 30, who have been taught a false definition of “compassion” or have no clue about economic systems.

These “followers” are not only taught that a centralized system of control such as Socialism is “compassionate,” taking from others against their will to give to others who decline to exercise their will, they are indoctrinated that their own system here in the U.S., Capitalism, is an evil system lacking “compassion.”

Not only do these uneducated believe that fostering dependency is somehow compassionate and that others must support this dependency from the fruits of their labor, giving to those who will not labor, they are taught that the document of law that restricts the dependency of Socialism, the Constitution, is evil at its core.

Bernie’s followers are not taught about the Constitution and its Bill of Rights as foundational to American prosperity, allowing free-market capitalism to thrive and grow an economy that has been the envy of the world. They are not taught the meaning of Liberty and what free men and women can accomplish when unhampered in their private economic pursuits, through their individual liberty and personal ingenuity.

They are ignorant of the freedoms they have that allow them to aspire, and achieve, which they possess from birth, as they are of the documents that protect these freedoms. They are told that they are oppressed; but they are actually oppressed by their own ignorance, through progressive education, which teaches them that they cannot succeed without the hand of government intervention controlling their lives.

Despite softening slightly later in life, South African president Nelson Mandela recalled his Marxist roots as president of the USSR-backed African National Congress (ANC) when he stated, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”

Over the last 54 years, this country has suffered under the truth of that axiom.

Originally published on April 18, 2016

Patriot’s Side

Vacationing with his family in Cuba the week before Easter, the president interrupted his press conference in Havana to give a 51second response to the March 22nd massacre in Brussels, Belgium earlier that week. The attacks were perpetrated once again by jihadists of the Islamic State (IS), killing 32 and injuring 270.

President Obama paused praise of the Castro Brothers, commenting from Havana, “The world must unite… We must be together regardless of nationality, or race or faith, in fighting against the scourge of terrorism.”

Possibly unaware that four Americans had lost their lives in the Brussels airport and subway attacks, he did not mention their deaths at the hands of the Islamist butchers of IS. He was concerned with, “Can’t we all just get along?” and… climate change.

Not even a full minute passed, dealing with Islamist attacks in the capital of the European Union and headquarters city of NATO, when he returned to apologies for U.S. oppression toward the people of Cuba.

He waxed poetic, ruminating about the “Two brothers that have been estranged… Cuba built by slaves… as was America.”

Communism enslaved Cuba and turned the former island paradise into a human dungeon. But that was the fault of the U.S. – according to Barack Obama.

When the president commented on “what the Cuban people built… we call it Miami,” he intentionally ignored the fact that Cubans in Miami had been refugees from Fidel Castro’s gulags. These Cubans fled, barely escaping with the clothes on their backs.

Living in Key West, Florida in 1970, I saw the rafts up close, cobbled together with twine, wire and prayers to make it across 90 miles of open ocean to the Keys. These were desperate people fleeing for their lives, not the workers who built a glorious Marxist success story then exported their skills to build Miami. Most perished during the journey, seeking freedom at any cost.

After visiting his comrades in Cuba he tangoed in Argentina, then returned to the U.S. The “Wish you were here!” postcards of President Obama, in front of posters of Che Guevara, will be in your mailbox this week.


Misdirection and sloppy analysis

A comparison was once made that conservatives were those who operate on a belief system and progressives were those who operate solely on opportunity.

Although the disparity between the two is not that simplistic, progressives did use another opportunity to spread chaos last month. The Left’s animosity toward a civil society and that society’s treasured right of free speech was on full display in Chicago on March 11. No doubt the progressive statists will replay the Chicago performance elsewhere in the months to come, to hone their ideological fervor before their major mob action staged for the RNC National Convention in Cleveland later this year.

Reasons for this “mob mentality” on the Left are never given by major media, nor explored. This type of behavior would never be exhibited by the Right, but the “why” of this is also never explained. Reluctance to expose the Left’s true intentions is even found daily on the supposedly “fair and balanced” Fox News Channel (FNC).

One can expect loyalty to the Left from the state-run media, since the same ideology permeates their world view. The journalistic education of staff at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, etc. assures it. It’s who they are; what they’re made of.

FNC, early on, was thought to be a counterweight to the “liberal news fodder” of the major networks – an alternative. However, intentionally or not, FNC consistently mischaracterizes conflicts such as that in Chicago, falling back on worn-out phrases such as, “found on the Left and the Right,” or, “both sides are at fault.”

This excuse for the lack of competent reporting and a shallow analysis of events is getting tiresome. Whether in summary statements by pundits or in the content of interviews with political players in current election contests, the pandering is annoying.

Last month, an excellent illustration of this faux fairness of “we report, you decide” was painted by the coverage of the Chicago Left’s spirited welcome for a Donald Trump presidential campaign rally and the refusal to recognize the candidate’s right to free speech. The mob attempted to stop the actual speech, not the hearing of it.

Interviewed on March 12, Republican Party presidential candidate Governor John Kasich said, “Donald [Trump] has created a very toxic environment and it’s really dividing people.” He elaborated that Trump was wrong to “prey on the fears of people” and repeatedly demanded that “Trump needs to stop it… stop dividing people.” The fallacies in his statements are numerous, yet FNC let them hang in the air, unchallenged.

The night before, after broad state-run media coverage glorified the Chicago mob for disrupting the Trump campaign rally, causing its cancellation, another Republican Party presidential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, and former GOP presidential candidate, Senator Marco Rubio, had offered the same as Kasich, that Donald Trump had instigated the leftist protest in Chicago. Cruz even alluded to a “[Trump] campaign that encourages violence.”

All three are wrong, yet no one on the various FNC broadcasts challenged them on their accusations. Not one commentator reviewed the historical, documented purpose of Leftist mob actions: stop the exercise of free speech.

On his FNC show on Saturday, March 12, Neil Cavuto was put in his place by his guest, former CEO of General Electric Jack Welch. After Neil kept pushing the “both sides are at fault” narrative concerning the Chicago mob’s attacks on free speech, Welch strenuously objected to the ploy.

Despite the evidence of organization by radical leftists for the mob presence in Chicago (George Soros, MoveOn, Bill Ayers, etc.), FNC excused the activity, preferring to point the finger of blame at the Trump organization for stating the obvious.

It’s long overdue that the Left, its players and their purpose, are exposed. There’s nothing balanced about FNC’s coverage.

Originally published April 11, 2016

Notes to Bernie

1) The First Amendment doesn’t state that if you carry around a “Vote for Bernie” sign you are inoculated from arrest for the federal crime of stopping free speech by a candidate running for public office in a presidential election. Better warn your supporters before the “protest.”

2) Socialism is not about “elevating people.” It’s about controlling them and limiting choice. In its more radical forms, its about reducing people to automatons who accept the State as their master, replacing God as the supreme authority. Socialism limits liberty; holds people down.

Bernie, you’ve been a Socialist all your life. You should know.

Judicial Clarity

There really are no court decisions that are “controversial,” if a justice adheres faithfully to the written intent of the U.S. Constitution. He or she simply cannot err if they stick to the law.

All their decisions will be legally and constitutionally sound, therefore correct under U.S. law.

If one is a strict originalist concerning things constitutional, as in the case of Justice Scalia, one’s decisions cannot be called, in any sense, extreme

So where do progressives get this strange idea that conservatives on the court are extreme?

Law school?

A Perversion of Values

Who ARE these people?

Back in August, 2008, during his campaign quest for the U.S. presidency, Barack Obama exposed his twisted ideology, but few listened. The media yawned; he was a Democrat and his radical Marxist ideology didn’t really matter. He was a Democrat.

He believes America is an “imperialist nation.” In his eyes, a threat to peace in the world. His writing has exposed this idea and so have his speeches here and abroad, during campaigns and afterward. To this day he holds it still, as evidenced by changes in our domestic and foreign policy.

America is evil, so our aggressive military stirs hatred around the world and evil spreads. Therefore, reduce the military.

The Islamist butchery and barbarism is simply a reaction to America’s imperialist aggression. As long as we remain the country we are, as founded (in the president’s mind, illegitimately), we will be viewed as oppressors by Muslims. We have taken the wealth of the nations in the Middle East, causing unemployment and poverty. Hence, oppressed people rise up to lash out at Imperial America. This is his understanding.

If only the U.S. would pull back from its leadership role, disarm and withdraw from the world stage, the world would be a more peaceful, safer place. So we did…

Barack Obama’s rush to “reset” our foreign policy failed to address the question from the press, “Why do they hate us?” His reset policy proved dangerously wrong, wreaking more death and destruction, endangering the balance of power in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere.

His ideology and its perversion of “American values” did not have to be taught to his core supporters and staff chosen for his administration. His dedicated followers, in politics, the academy and the sycophantic press, needed no orientation for his ideological agenda; most of them share it enthusiastically. But “American values” is precisely what sets Islam against us.

Since entering public life, his ideological foundation has not changed. He still apologizes for what he calls the “sins of America” everywhere he goes; not humbly, as one asking for forgiveness, but boldly, as the accuser of an already indicted nation.

Other leftists in the Obama Regime continually chant, “This isn’t who we are,” or numerous adaptations of “These aren’t our American values.” The realization that these people have no clue about what those “American values” are, or represent, eventually crystallizes and exposes them.

Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail, after the Islamist attacks in Brussels on March 22nd, noted that we must plan a response that is “consistent with our values.”

It’s pathetic, really, that Mrs. Clinton so consistently gets “our values” wrong, going back decades when she was defending Puerto Rican FLAN terrorists for killing American citizens and destruction of their property. She has exhibited repeatedly that she has no love for “American values” (this includes respect for the rule of law…).

Likewise Bernie Sanders, who commented, “As a world community, we must come together.” But we are not a “world community” Bernie. The world is a conglomeration of nations, with different beliefs, cultures and values, most not interchangeable. The U.S. is different than others for a variety of reasons, many of these not shared, including its purpose.

Leftists, however, seek to change this. Their “transformed” America will be built at the expense of those who are forced to build it, against their will.

Can we ever expect the radical Left to embrace American values? No, since their goal is to replace them with something else.

Originally published April 11, 2016

Two Choices

The Year of the Fed Up American

Americans are really tired. No, more than tired; that implies weariness, which is painfully evident.

They’re tired of being held down by the boot of progressivism and repeatedly lied to. The indifference of those in the GOP, elected to oppose the Regime in two landslide historic elections, speaks volumes.

“Fool me twice…” American citizens, voting citizens, are fed up. They’ve had enough with the cavalier attitude of the so-called “political ruling class.”

They are fed up with the constant, oppressive drumbeat of political correctness; stifling speech, association, conscience, and religious expression. Thought control through education, then followed by force.

Americans are fed up with the excuses given for our loss of respect throughout the world, in particular among the nations of the West; the “free” countries that once relied on our strength, fortitude – and reliability. Who believed we honored treaties.

The people are fed up with their shrinking household incomes buying less, as federal, state and local government spending continues to balloon; taxpayer dollars spent on frivolities that add nothing to their families’ well-being. Unemployment, or reduced employment, pushing the “American Dream” out of reach.

They are fed up with the escalating costs of education, health care and other essentials while those here uninvited, illegally, are shown preference over American citizens. Little concern is shown by our immigration agencies as alien invaders raid our national pantry of its goods and services.

American citizens are indeed weary, and fed up, with the excuse of compassion as a reason for lawlessness and indifference regarding our nation’s sovereignty.

On the Left, progressives supporting the Socialist-Democrat Party haven’t gotten enough from government and turn toward the “free college” candidate. They want more government control over our lives and are in lock-step in that regard. Freedom, for them, is secondary to the comfort of the hammock provided by government.

Leftists have an intense dislike for our nation as founded and seek to change it.

Over on the Right, people want less government in their lives, fewer restrictions and more decision making on their own. Independence and freedom are paramount; they move to candidates that promise a smaller nanny state and individual liberty. Conservative Americans believe in the country as founded, dislike the way it has been disfigured and transformed. Particularly, they seek to restore traditional education and preserve our cultural heritage.

For these tired and fed up American voters in this election year, what they want is straight forward – far simpler than the media and politicians paint it to be.

Choose more intrusive government and less control over your destiny? Then you should vote for the Left in the guise of Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton.

Do you want less government control, to keep more of your paycheck, and to pursue your American Dream? Then you should vote for Donald Trump or Ted Cruz.

You can choose between Socialism and Capitalism; the choice is in your hands.

If only more Americans understood the difference between the two. Leftists who riot in mobs outside of Trump campaign rallies for pay certainly think they do.

Clutching their “Bernie” signs, the Left knows what they want and will take it by force if need be. If they get their way, the future won’t be bright for those who love America as we have known it.

We have two choices; only two.

Originally Published March 21, 2016