@jackmcoldcuts, “I’m Angry”, too, about Obama’s fiascos in #Libya and #Egypt


All day, I’ve been wanting to sum up my thoughts about the anniversary of 9-11 yesterday and the events surrounding it.

News of the terrorism in Libya and Egypt and the death of our ambassador in Libya ( and 3 other Americans) made me angry.  News of Obama’s refusal to meet with Netanyahu added to my anger.

The further frothing at the mouth of the MSM (and proof of MSM collaboration against Romney) because Romney dared to criticize the empty foreign policy of the “Empty Chair” president sent my thoughts and anger in high gear today.

I am disgusted at a President who used military force, without Congressional approval and against the War Powers Act, in order to remove Gaddafi from Libya and to aid in the ouster of Mubarak in Egypt—-both less-than-stellar men, but leaders who, at least, were mostly in sync with America  in the region.  Now Obama’s so-called “Arab Spring” has turned into a nasty, ruthless “Winter”…..and the Obama administration defends the perpetrators of violence (the one’s he allowed into power) by apologizing for American free speech.  Those perpetrators later murdered our ambassador and other Americans.

But I’m not sure anything further I can write will top what Ace of Spades blogger Jack M. (@jackmcoldcuts) expressed.  Without further adieu and in its entirety:

I was watching the “news” accounts of the ongoing Obama-fiasco in Libya and Egypt this morning, and I couldn’t help but come to one headline/twitter friendly conclusion:

“Obama Apologized. American Ambassador Eulogized. First Amendment Marginalized.”

Perhaps I should add a subsidiary clause to the phrase: maybe something like “Media Sanitized” in reference to the way they are scrambling to protect their precious president as he speaks softly and stumblingly slams his little stick in the Muslim Brotherhood’s front door.

But I’m not writing this post to focus on media bias. Others do that, and they do it better than I do. I’m writing this post for a different reason.

I’m angry.

Continue reading

I’m angry at a hypocritical, feckless President who personally spikes the football over Bin Laden’s death while his state department apologizes to Islamists for the exertion of similar First Amendment rights by other Americans who aren’t lucky enough to be anointed god-kings.

I’m angry that a posturing, empty-suit of a president lectures Americans on “denigrating religious views” when he is on record as referring to Americans of faith as “bitter clingers”, and when he has campaign surrogates attacking his opponent for being a Mormon.

I’m angry that our stroke-addled, possibly brain-damaged Vice President describes 9/11 as a “bittersweet” day, as our embassies are burning and Americans are being killed.

I’m angry over the fact that we spent blood and treasure in Obama’s “Lead from Behind Libyan Adventure” only to see our Ambassador murdered and dragged thru the streets by the very people Obama placed in power.

I’m angry that we helped force an ally out in Egypt knowing he’d be replaced  with an Al-Qaeda friendly government that enjoyed watching its minions take the first symbolic opportunity they had to burn our flag and replace it with Al-Qaeda’s.

I’m angry that at a time when Al-Qaeda’s flag flies over the Cairo embassy, the mis-administration prepares to forgive over $1 BILLION in Egyptian debt.

I’m angry that “Pimp With A Limp” gets to talk to the president, while Bibi Netanyahu, whose allied country faces a potential nuclear annihilation, gets to talk to the hand.

I’m angry that the gut instinct of this mis-Administration is to sympathize with and excuse those who hold our fundamental values in contempt as those same people actively seek any pretext they can find to slaughter us where we stand.

I’m angry that the mis-Administration’s paltry response to a region-wide attack on America, which is, incidentally, what this is, is to deploy 50 Marines to Libya and jet-off to a Vegas fundraiser while preparing a top-ten list for Letterman’s show.

I’m angry that the cornerstone freedoms of speech and religious liberty enshrined in our Constitution are so routinely dismissed and mocked by this mis-Administration. 1st Amendment freedom of speech? “Not if it hurts feelings” we are told. Freedom of religion? “Not if it stands between our mis-Administration and giving Sandra Fluke a free abortion should she want one” we are hectored.

But with four Americans dead, our flag burning, and our embassies trashed, you know what really makes me angry?

Our president isn’t.

Think about that fact.

Our president isn’t. He read a bland and bloodless set of prepared remarks for 10 minutes, hid behind Hillary Clinton’s ever-widening skirt, took no questions, and then thought the best thing he could do would be to hit the Vegas strip.

The truth is this: yesterday I read that the President’s team came out swinging against the “2016:Obama’s America” movie.

They didn’t like the way the president was portrayed. So they attacked Dinesh D’souza and, for some reason, Tea Partiers.

Here is the language they used on BarackObama.com:

“It should say enough about D’Souza’s credibility that a movie catering to the Tea Party attacks someone for allegedly ‘anti-colonial’ views,” the entry reads. “His attempts to hide his lies behind pseudo-scholarly presentation and glossy production values cannot withstand basic scrutiny. The facts show that 2016: Obama’s America is nothing more than an insidious attempt to dishonestly smear the President by giving intellectual cover to the worst in subterranean conspiracy theories and false, partisan attacks.”

That’s tougher than anything Obama said in response to the death of an American ambassador, his staff, or the attack on our embassy grounds.

Which I guess suggests a lesson of sorts. Like those who attacked our embassies and killed our personnel, Obama seems to get riled up by movies that make a point of smearing a self-proclaimed false-messianic prophet.

We can do better. We have to do better. I’m doing all I can to vent my anger into something constructive. I hope you’ll join me.

Never forget!


Remembering 9-11: Just released 9/11 air traffic controller tapes


FILE – In this Sept. 11, 2001 file photo, United Airlines Flight 175 approaches the south tower of the World Trade Center in New York shortly before collision as smoke billows from the north tower. (AP Photo/Carmen Taylor)

You can listen to the just released 9-11 air traffic controller tapes.

They bring back a few memories of the day, but always worth remembering the events and people of that day!

From KRMG.com:

1 ** Peter Zalewski, a Boston controller can’t reach American Airlines flight 11.

2 ** Flight attendant Betty Ong is on-board flight 11. She calls AA reservations from a seatback phone on the plane.

3 ** Controllers hear one of the hijackers aboard AA flight 11.

4 ** Controllers realize they have lost AA flight 11.

5 ** Air controllers are watching as the second plane, United 175, hits the tower.

6 ** Controllers are talking to United 93 when there is a commotion in the cockpit.

7 ** Officials now realize United 93 has crashed.

8 ** Permission is given to shoot down commercial aircraft if needed.

What Obama will say in his (10-day-late) Libya speech


Fear me, Muammar!

Tonight Obama will finally lower himself (in his mind) to address the American public on his Libya mission….10 days after it began.

I don’t know if I’ll watch because I usually get nauseous with his lies and spin.

Besides,  I think I know what we will hear from Obama in one form or another tonight (my thoughts in parentheses):

  • The mission has been clear and focused (even though the mission and actions are NOT clear….and the focused “no-fly zone” has expanded into an effort to prop up the rebels and take sides in a civil war in Libya…and Obama has said Gaddafi must go while declaring that is not our mission)
  • MY mission is successful ( as I mentioned before…Obama will declare success even though the mission and end game is not clear)
  • Implementing a no-fly zone only (even though we are bombing tanks and other targets)
  • We are intervening in a humanitarian crisis (never mind that European oil is at stake… War for oil, anyone?) 
  • Intervening is vital to our national interest (but Defense Chief Gates said just yesterday it is not)
  • We had approval of Arab League and UN (no Congressional approval, though)
  • I repeatedly consulted/discussed with Congress (even though Congress was not consulted prior to bombing, only briefed as it began)
  • Supporting Libyan people and their “democracy” movement (despite the fact that some of the rebels are al Qaeda fighters–likely those who fought against the US in Iraq)
  • We put together a multilateral coalition unlike other President’s in the past who went in unilaterally ( he means Bush and Iraq and he is lying about this…Bush’s coalition came after months of discussion in Congress, 17 UN resolutions and more countries on board than Obama has in Libya)
  • We got out in “days” as I said we would and handed over to NATO (never mind it looks weak AND NATO is pretty much the US of A!)

I think we might also be able to play Obama Libya speech “Bingo” and see how many times he says the following:

  • Success, I, me, unilateral/(Bush insinuation), humanitarian, handing off, NATO, bloodbath, let me be clear, I did, I have, smart, no-fly zone, I’ve said from the beginning

Here are some things Obama will not utter tonight:

  • The word “war” (kinetic military action, perhaps?)
  • A “let me be clear” reminder of his own statements about Presidents declaring war without approval, about “dumb wars”, about how we can’t go about helping every nation in need
  • al Qaeda
  • oil
  • that his hand off to NATO means that we are still footing the bill and pretty much run NATO with our manpower and leadership.

And you can bet that the paradoxes of the Libyan War outlined by Victor Davis Hansen will not be addressed by Obama.  I highly recommend reading VDH’s piece here.

Oh–and for the media’s part, don’t expect a replay of the hand-wringing they displayed for Bush and the Iraq War.  You can just hear some of the following and how it would be spoken and portrayed if this were a Republican President/Bush in office:

  • Still no answers on why Congress was not consulted, but the Arab League and the UN were.
  • And tonight, despite the rhetoric of the President, we find that the rebels in Libya have al Qaeda amongst their midst…if not fully comprised of al Qaeda fighters who fought against the US in Iraq.  Are we propping up our enemies?
  • What will this WAR cost the American taxpayers in this poor economy?
  • Why choose Libya for humanitarian aid?  Or is this really about a war for oil?  Join us tonight at 10PM for the exclusive.
  • Obama’s Defense Sec and Sec of State gave differing viewpoints on our need to be in this unilateral war.  We, the MSM, will ask about the chaos in the President’s administration.

…..I could go on.

Have fun watching our President —10 days, at least, too late.

Obama claims the mission he didn’t clearly define in Libya is succeeding


I said this to my husband on day one of the bombing in Libya….

(Official White House Photo)

“Watch and see…Obama will not clearly define the mission in Libya and will skirt the questions being asked so that he can claim success no matter what happens.”

This is Obama’s MO (method of operation) on many things….

He has been unclear and contradicting from the get-go on Libya.  (and, one could argue, disconnected since he chose to leave the country for  5 days while engaging the troops in war in Libya).  From Yahoo/Politico:

Obama was asked the most obvious question — what is the U.S. endgame in Libya? — several times during his trip [to Latin America]. His answers seemed deliberately obtuse: To stop a humanitarian crisis and, hopefully, drive Muammar Qadhafi from power, while at the same time ceding leadership of the effort to countries with a direct regional stake in the outcome — France and Arab League nations — sooner rather than later.

Well, it didn’t take long….he declared success today….

From American Pundit:

In Saturday’s speech, Obama said its military mission in Libya is ‘clear and focused’, despite some criticism. “We’re succeeding in our mission,” he said. “We’ve taken out Libya’s air defenses. Gaddafi’s forces are no longer advancing across Libya.”

Also, Obama mentions taking out Libyan air defense and that the “forces’ are no longer advancing across Libya….

But I thought we were only implementing a “no-fly zone” which may include bombing air defenses but not ground “forces”.

Don’t get me wrong…I think our military has been successful in what they have been asked to do–just as they always are–but that doesn’t mean the mission is clear nor has it been communicated effectively in this country.

Of course, Obama also claimed that he has kept us informed…then why so many questions? Another question?

Even though we have seen SOME Democrats object to Obama’s methods on taking us into this war (ie. little consultation with Congress while consulting with and agreeing with the United Nations), we still have not seen the full-blown fierce rhetoric of the Left that was spewed at George W. Bush…and Bush compiled a larger coalition and consulted with Congress for months before Congress also AGREED to action in Iraq.  Where’s the “rush to war” and “war for oil” pronouncements from that crowd now?

(Or would that be “rush to kinetic military action” and “kinetic military action for oil”?)

And perhaps even more disturbing than Obama’s MO for declaring his success, is the fact the reports coming out in the last couple of days indicate that we may be propping up al Qaeda fighters against Gaddafi.  As bad as Gaddafi is do we want al Qaeda jihadis exerting major influence if Gaddafi goes? 

From UK Telegraph headline:

“Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime”

I still don’t understand why Obama wanted to jump on board this campaign.  For the anti-war professor who railed against Presidents going to war without Congress and “dumb” wars, it is a bit mind-boggling to understand his thinking on this.

It is clear that the UK and France have a vested interest in oil there, but Obama has went out of his way to alienate those two allies in the last two years. Why would he do this to help them now?

Or is it that Obama saw pressure from the United Nations and will take this opportunity to prove (in his mind) that the world doesn’t need America as a leader.  And to prove that he fully intends to follow the lead of the UN and international community instead of obtaining Congressional buy-in and doing what is best for the United States.

Then again, there are theories that Obama wishes to prop up these Muslim radicals (like Al Qaeda) in the region.  It seems to be what has happened in Egypt.  Get rid of the bad dictator so that an even worse ideological group of Islamic radicals can gain the reigns of power. 

Was it pressure from the UN?  Is he trying to prove a point about his professor’s take on war and peace?  Or he is purposefully propping up the radical Islamic world?

The one item he has stated – to assist in a humanitarian crisis— is the least likely reason why he decided to go into Libya…..if it were, we would have been in Iran two years ago, Egypt three months ago, and Syria and Bahrain now.

Famous “Soccer Mom” schools Ivy League grad President on terrorism


Priceless…..Sarah Palin is not only correct, but hands Obama his narcissistic head to him on a platter here:

From Palin’s Facebook page (my emphasis):

President Obama’s meeting with his top national security advisers does nothing to change the fact that his fundamental approach to terrorism is fatally flawed. We are at war with radical Islamic extremists and treating this threat as a law enforcement issue is dangerous for our nation’s security. That’s what happened in the 1990s and we saw the result on September 11, 2001. This is a war on terror not an “overseas contingency operation.” Acts of terrorism are just that, not “man caused disasters.” The system did not work. Abdulmutallab was a child of privilege radicalized and trained by organized jihadists, not an “isolated extremist” who traveled to a land of “crushing poverty.” He is an enemy of the United States, not just another criminal defendant.

It simply makes no sense to treat an al Qaeda-trained operative willing to die in the course of massacring hundreds of people as a common criminal. Reports indicate that Abdulmutallab stated there were many more like him in Yemen but that he stopped talking once he was read his Miranda rights. President Obama’s advisers lamely claim Abdulmutallab might be willing to agree to a plea bargain – pretty doubtful you can cut a deal with a suicide bomber. John Brennan, the President’s top counterterrorism adviser, bizarrely claimed “there are no downsides or upsides” to treating terrorists as enemy combatants. That is absurd. There is a very serious downside to treating them as criminals: terrorists invoke their “right” to remain silent and stop talking. Terrorists don’t tell us where they were trained, what they were trained in, who they were trained by, and who they were trained with. Giving foreign-born, foreign-trained terrorists the right to remain silent does nothing to keep Americans safe from terrorist threats. It only gives our enemies access to courtrooms where they can publicly grandstand, and to defense attorneys who can manipulate the legal process to gain access to classified information.

President Obama was right to change his policy and decide to send no more detainees to Yemen where they can be free to rejoin their war on America. Now he must back off his reckless plan to close Guantanamo, begin treating terrorists as wartime enemies not suspects alleged to have committed crimes, and recognize that the real nature of the terrorist threat requires a commander-in-chief, not a constitutional law professor.

– Sarah Palin

On that last line….truer words have rarely been spoken.

9/11/01 – We can never forget


We remember those who died, those who lost loved ones, and those who have fought against the evil that perpetrated this atrocity.

Never forget what terrorists did on that day.

I just finished watching the movie United 93 this morning….as my husband said, ‘This is how you remember what happened!”

Indeed it is. 

Horrifying to watch and emotional to this day. 

God Bless those who fought off the evil subhumans on that plane in Shanksville, Pennsylvania 9-11-01. 
Never, ever forget what happened to those who died in New York, Washington DC, and Pennsylvania…it was horrific and words can’t do it justice.

God Bless our Military who have worked tirelessly to fight the evil that is terrorism.

God Bless our brave firefighters, police officers and other emergency personnel who also gave the ultimate sacrifice on that day.

God Bless President George W. Bush who magnificently led us through the worst attack on our soil.  He deserves so much credit…much more than he has been given.

God Bless the USA. 

More pictures and stories here and here.