DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2021, 01:49:43 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
283205 Posts in 27512 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  ChristiansUnite Forums
|-+  ChristiansUnite and Announcements
| |-+  ChristiansUnite and Announcements (Moderator: admin)
| | |-+  The Patriot Post Digest 9-36
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Patriot Post Digest 9-36  (Read 1129 times)
nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 64256


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« on: September 11, 2009, 08:02:08 PM »

____________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-36
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
____________________________



THE FOUNDATION

"The executive branch of this government never has, nor will suffer, while I preside, any improper conduct of its officers to escape with impunity." --George Washington

GOVERNMENT & POLITICS
Van Jones channels Che Guevara
The Bigger They Czar, the Harder They Fall


Van Jones, White House adviser on Environmental Quality, or according to the prevailing trend of labeling bureaucrats, the "green jobs czar," resigned over the Labor Day holiday. For those who had never heard of Jones before last weekend, his job in the administration was to act as an adviser to the president on making America's commercial and industrial economy more "environmentally friendly." Jones has a public background as an activist and writer for environmental causes and he is a darling among Hollywood and Washington liberal elites. Oh, and he was also a "community organizer." But there was more to Jones's background than was made public when he took the White House job. For example, Jones has two prior arrests on his record for participating in riots, he has numerous admitted associations with communists and other radicals and he was a supporter of the 9/11 "truthers."

Fox News's Glenn Beck broke the story that led to the czar's deposing -- Jones's name appeared on a petition stating that the Bush administration deliberately brought about the 9/11 terrorist attacks to have an excuse to go to war. Jones would only say that he did not review the language of the petition carefully. How complicated must a petition be for a Yale man like Jones not to understand?

The mainstream media, again acting as President Obama's public relations firm, spent little ink or airtime on the story. (In fact, The New York Times reported for duty only after Jones had submitted his resignation.) Beck and others kept up the pressure, though, and interesting tidbits from Jones's past continued surfacing, including information about his arrests in the Rodney King and Seattle World Trade Organization riots and a video of Jones making speeches in which he tossed out epithets about Republicans which we can't reprint.

Jones made some feeble apologies in hopes of sweeping the growing furor under the rug, but eventually the White House realized that they couldn't defend Jones's radicalism and ObamaCare at the same time. Consequently, while the country was off celebrating the holiday weekend, Jones tendered his resignation at midnight on Saturday, claiming all the while that he was the victim of right-wing character assassination. So much for apologies. While this is a skirmish victory in our efforts to restore Constitutional Rule of Law, rest assured that he'll likely be back, albeit in a less visible position.

How is it that someone like Jones could rise to such a level of responsibility in the White House? Unless one is on a tightly grouped public tour, citizens can't even enter the building without a Secret Service background check. Job applicants are required to fill out a 60-page questionnaire that past applicants have described as a most comprehensive review. Someone with Jones's background never would have been cleared by the Secret Service. The only way Jones could have been approved for the job, as American Spectator columnist Jeffrey Lord points out, is if someone high up in the administration overruled the Secret Service -- someone like the lead rabble-rouser himself.

The White House hopes that this business will end with Jones's resignation. But there are at least 30 (some count over 60) additional so-called czars in the White House who also could use a little public scrutiny. There already exist cabinet positions and executive offices for all the tasks that these new apparatchiks manage, but Obama brought them on board as "advisers" to circumvent the checks and balances of presidential appointments. He knew that radical activists like Jones, et al would not pass muster with the Senate, and certainly not with the American public. So, he created a new office to find a place for Jones in his administration.

Unfortunately, Jones isn't the only radical in Obama's crew. Regulation Czar Cass Sunstein advocates changing the organ donor rules to a system whereby people have to opt out of donating their organs rather than opting in. Sunstein believes that the government should manipulate choices to "make life easier for people and by gently nudging them in directions that will make their lives better." And then there's Obama's Science Czar, John Holdren, who once floated ideas like forced abortions and compulsory sterilization to help control human population levels. How many other people like Sunstein and Holdren are there in the White House? As they say, "Inquiring minds want to know."

Obama Addresses Joint Session of Congress

Chairman Obama declared in his latest speech to Wednesday's joint session of Congress that the time for debate about the government takeover of health care is over. Not only that, but he's done "wasting time" with opponents' criticisms. "I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it's better politics to kill this plan than improve it," he huffed. "If you misrepresent what's in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution, not this time, not now." Left unexplained is why Obama thinks it is his place to declare the debate over.

Obama claimed his reforms will eliminate massive fraud from public and private health care (which leads us to wonder why the federal government has failed to act against such massive fraud over the last 45 years), will cut large amounts of money from Medicare while forcing physicians to provide additional care to more people amid plummeting reimbursement rates, will eliminate denials due to pre-existing conditions, will cap out-of-pocket expenses, will drive down premium rates, and, finally and most reassuringly, will create rainbows for unicorns -- all for just $900 billion over 10 years. Talk about fantasy.

Of course, Obama also claimed that government will "keep insurance companies honest." Politicians keeping anyone honest? And he wonders why we're skeptical. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) is also skeptical. He yelled, "You lie!" after Obama told Congress that illegal aliens will not be covered by ObamaCare. In its current form, the legislation does say coverage does not apply to illegals, but it also doesn't require citizenship verification. Apparently, it's on the honor system -- and Wilson was right.

Through massive tax hikes on all aspects of our economy and a little accounting jujitsu, the public option supposedly will pay for itself. All that the federal government has to do is quickly learn how to operate as a break-even, self-funded, non-profit insurance company, while preventing insurers from canceling anyone's coverage due to high claims (already illegal under federal HIPAA laws and laws in all 50 states) or fraud. The federal government would also act as a large insurance agent, working hard to match Americans with insurance coverage based on their needs -- as pre-determined by Washington bureaucrats, of course.

Chillingly, the latest Democrat proposal also calls for mandating Americans carry health insurance or face yearly fines up to $3,800, which Obama stated was similar to the fines for driving a car without insurance. Apparently, in the Twilight Zone of Democrat "thinking," making people pay for not having something they don't want or can't afford will encourage them to somehow acquire said thing.

Demanding health care for all Americans is a sweet-sounding sentiment, but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Another vacuous Obama speech hasn't solved anything, hasn't brought the country together to sing Kum Ba Ya, and hasn't conjured up enough leprechaun gold to keep the country solvent.
Logged

nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 64256


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 11, 2009, 08:03:28 PM »

____________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-36
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
____________________________


Quote of the Week

"It was disgusting and it was reprehensible and it was predictable. ... The office of the president of the United States was demeaned last night. President Barack Obama gave a grossly inappropriate and ... embarrassing speech, a campaign speech disguised as a big speech to a joint session of Congress. It was grossly inappropriate in content. There were lies, falsehoods, distortions, it was embarrassing in tone. He called his critics liars when his own positions have been proven to be untrue. ... It was dishonest. It demeaned the office of the presidency. ... It was an awful speech. He was petulant; he was childish; he was a community organizer and agitator; he lied; he was divisive; he attacked me; he attacked Sarah Palin; he attacked conservative Republicans in Congress who dare to challenge government-run health care. He continued to attack tens of millions of Americans who spent the summer attending town hall meetings. It was crude. It was disgusting. The most crude and disgusting performance by any president I have seen." --radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh

On Cross-Examination

"Democrats have wanted President Obama to drop some of his cool and fight for their health-care agenda, and last night they weren't disappointed. The President gave away very little on the substance of what Congressional leaders are proposing, even as he offered a rhetorical bow or two to the idea of compromise. The main message of his speech to Congress is that he is doubling down on his health-care bets and counting on the sheer inertia of Democratic and health industry self-interest in Washington to drive a bill into law. The speech was especially notable for its use of one of Mr. Obama's favorite rhetorical devices: Noting in the first instance that his opponents have a good point, and entirely legitimate concerns, only to reject their ideas in toto when it comes to policy. Thus he endorsed the public's concern about the competence of government to manage one-sixth of the economy, only to finish with a soaring oration about the moral necessity of letting government do so." --The Wall Street Journal

This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award

"Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics. ... Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true." --Barack Obama, in his speech to Congress, at once warning against "scare tactics" and then proceeding (with enough distance between statements) to employ them

This Week's 'Braying Jackass' Award

"There is no place in the Constitution that specifically says health care. There's no place in the Constitution that specifically says education. There is no place in the competition, in the Constitution, there is no place in the Constitution, there is no place in the Constitution, there is no place in the Constitution, there is no place in the Constitution that talks about you ought to have the right to get a telephone, but we have made those choices as a country over the years." --Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) at a town hall meeting when asked by a high school teacher to cite the constitutional basis for a federal takeover of the health care system (yes, he actually repeated himself that many times)

Senator Warner thus demonstrates his inability to uphold his oath of office and to distinguish between the Constitution's guarantee of so-called "negative rights" -- rights that preclude infringements on personal freedoms, such as property rights (e.g., the right to own a telephone) -- and "positive rights," which are a 20th-century liberal fabrication, and are merely government-granted privileges -- like the "right" to health insurance.

Video of the Week

"This is my town hall meeting for you. And you're not going to tell me how to run my congressional office. Now, the reason why I don't allow filming is that usually the films that are done end up on YouTube..." --Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN), displaying his disdain for representative government and, thus, his inability to uphold his oath of office

New & Notable Legislation

The Senate is considering legislation that will create a new quasi-government agency tasked with persuading foreigners to visit the U.S. To pay for this advertising, the bill aims to charge a $10 fee for every foreigner that does visit America. The European Commission's Ambassador to Washington, John Bruton, weighed in, saying, "Only in 'Alice in Wonderland' could a penalty be seen as promoting the activity on which it is imposed." Democrats just can't help themselves. A penalty for not having health insurance, a tax on employers who don't provide it, and a $10 fee for foreigners to pay for an agency that advertises to them all fit in the same template. Still, "Alice in Wonderland" can never be a part of the American Dream.
Logged

nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 64256


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2009, 08:04:45 PM »

____________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-36
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
____________________________


NATIONAL SECURITY
Eighth Anniversary of 9/11


Today we solemnly mark the eighth anniversary of September 11, 2001, when 2,996 innocents, mostly American citizens, lost their lives in the murderous attacks against our country by Islamic fascists. In keeping with the presidential proclamation designating September 11, 2009, as Patriot Day, all flags should be flown at half-staff in memory of those who lost their lives that day. We invite you to join us as we offer our prayers for the families of those lost and for our Armed Forces now serving on the front lines of the war that began that day.

As you remember September 11th, we invite you to visit The Patriot's resource to commemorate the attacks on our countrymen, "Day of Terror: A September 11 Retrospective". Now, as we move forward and continue to engage our jihadi foes on battle fronts around the globe, let us never forget why we fight.

Finally, The Patriot has been asked to provide 2,000 Shields of Strength for Marines at Camp Pendleton. However, our Operation account is depleted. Please support OpSoS today so we can purchase and ship these shields ASAP.

Warfront With Jihadistan: Government Duties 101

As we have highlighted many times previously, the most basic duty of a government is to protect its citizens from enemies. It should come as no surprise, then, that treason-lobby leftists who don't "get" this fundamental tenet are simply kicking it to the curb.

In the first example, the Ninth Circus, er, Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that former Attorney General John Ashcroft can be sued for detaining people as material witnesses during 9/11 investigations. In the suit, Abdullah al-Kidd claimed his rights were violated when he was detained for two weeks in 2003. The good news is that to prevail, al-Kidd must show that Ashcroft was personally involved in crafting or executing an illegal policy, a very high bar. The bad news is al-Kidd will likely arm-twist the government into settling by threatening to compel release at trial of highly classified documents. In sanctioning the case, the Ninth Circuit has thrown the advantage to the enemy and national security under the bus.

In the second case, we get a glimpse into how political interests can affect national security. As we highlighted two weeks ago, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the mastermind behind the 1988 PanAm bombing in Lockerbie, Scotland, was released by the Scottish government, ostensibly because he is terminally ill. Facts have surfaced, however, that strongly suggest that the real reason behind the unrepentant Libyan terrorist's release was to secure lucrative oil and energy industry contracts for the UK-based corporate giant BP. Chief among this evidence are energy industry ties between the brother of the Scottish Justice Secretary who released the bomber and Libya. We also speculate that among primary indicators of concealed motives, data on how many other terminally ill convicted mass murderers have been released on humanitarian grounds under Scottish law would be very enlightening.

Common in these illustrations is a systemic disdain for an indispensable role of government, namely, the protection of its people. While legislators and bureaucrats rush to use the apparatus of the state for every conceivable purpose (universal health care is merely the latest effort in the statists' never-ending siege on freedom), they ignore a bedrock role of government.

As a potentially happy epilogue, an English court this week found three terrorists guilty of conspiring to kill thousands in 2006 by blowing up trans-Atlantic flights using explosive liquids carried aboard in soft drink containers. The subsequent ban on liquids carried aboard airliners continues to this day, thanks in large part to these three. However, since the three have no direct oil ties, they may actually have a chance of serving out their life sentences ... but we won't hold our breath.

Afghan Election Questions Continue

In Afghanistan, the vote counting continues from last month's presidential election, and it does not appear to be going well. This week, Afghanistan's election commission announced a vote count that gave current President Hamid Karzai about 54 percent of the vote with about 92 percent of the vote counted, which is just enough to claim victory and avoid a runoff. However, other candidates quickly and angrily rejected the tally. According to the commission, the nearest challenger, former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah, has 28 percent of the vote. Prior to the election, it was expected that Karzai and Abdullah would split the vote and require a runoff. Western and Afghan observers say fraud was rampant, with loyalists to President Karzai (or were they Taliban posing as Karzai supporters?) setting up over 800 fake polling sites where no one voted but where possibly hundreds of thousands of ballots were counted toward Karzai's re-election.

Karzai has been Afghanistan's president since elections were first held after the overthrow of the Taliban by the U.S.-led coalition. He has been a close ally of the U.S., and if the election results stand, it could put the Obama regime in a bind. The U.S. had hoped that this election would help weaken the Taliban by giving the population a greater voice in their government. Instead, Obama now faces the prospect of defending an Afghan government that is needed in the Long War, but that is widely seen as illegitimate in the eyes of the Afghan population. With the Taliban continuing to successfully rebuild their strength, and with U.S. casualties at a wartime high, let's hope the Community Organizer-in Chief is up to the task.
Logged

nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 64256


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2009, 08:05:50 PM »

____________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-36
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
____________________________


Profiles of Valor: USMC Lt. Col. Kennedy

Kennedy


U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Col. Brian Kennedy flew more than 71 combat missions in his AH-1W Cobra helicopter between the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom on March 20, 2003, and April 14, 2004. Most of the missions were flown at night, at low altitude and in harsh conditions. On March 20, the first full day of the war, he flew along the Safwan Hill border to provide a landing zone for American forces, successfully engaging Iraqi defensive positions and scout vehicles. In the ensuing days, he led a mission over the Al Rumaylah oil fields, which were rigged with air defense artillery and also defended with small arms fire. Kennedy later led a successful assault on Basra, which allowed British troops to secure positions there. He destroyed eight Iraqi artillery positions in those flights -- a significant blow to the Special Republican Guard -- as well as the only remaining ballistic missile system capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction against Allied Forces in Kuwait. Though Kennedy calls himself an "ordinary Marine," he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross with combat "V" for valor for his superb airmanship, courage and leadership.

BUSINESS & ECONOMY
When the Chinese Quote Ben Franklin...


The United States' fiscal policy that views money as something not only to be spent at will, but also something to be printed ad infinitum, has prompted an American history lesson from an unlikely source. China's Cheng Siwei, top communist official, leader of that country's green energy drive and former Vice-Chairman of the Standing Committee, summoned the wit and wisdom of Benjamin Franklin to warn that "he who goes borrowing, goes sorrowing." Predicting that if the U.S. "keeps printing money to buy bonds it will lead to inflation, and after a year or two the dollar will fall hard," Siwei said China will begin reallocating its foreign reserves into other currencies, including euros and yen -- a significant move given that China's $2 trillion-plus in reserves are the world's largest.

China is not the only concerned party. Echoing earlier proposals by China and Russia, the UN has added its voice to the call for a new global currency. Blaming the dollar-based system for much of the current economic crisis, the UN Conference on Trade and Development has proposed a system of managed international exchange rates in which countries would maintain stable rates and "central banks would have to intervene ... [or] be told to do so by a multilateral institution such as the International Monetary Fund."

Meanwhile, President Obama -- who as senator argued in 2006 that "America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership" -- has now asked Congress to raise the debt ceiling above its current $12.1 trillion limit. Three years ago, Obama pointed to growing debt as Washington's "shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren." Now, according to Obama's tax cheatin' Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, raising the limit is "critically important ... so that citizens and investors here and around the world can remain confident that the United States will always meet its obligations."

Hmm, from a burden to a necessity -- another gust of the leftward winds of Obama's change.

Indiana Challenges Chrysler Bankruptcy

On Sept. 3, Indiana Treasurer Richard Murdock, fiduciary for three public funds, filed an appeal with the Supreme Court of the United States asking SCOTUS to rule on the legality of the Obama-forced Chrysler bankruptcy. Barack Obama's chicanery not only continued his visceral loathing of the Rule of Law (violating U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 ) but also upended 220 years of settled bankruptcy precedent (i.e., secured creditors being made whole prior to unsecured creditors.)

While SCOTUS refused in June to halt the sale of Chrysler (mainly because Indiana represented only $42.5 million of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt), the Justices almost invited an appeal based upon the merits of the case.

Outside of local Indiana media outlets, the story is not covered, and, even more ominously, major search engines (Google, Yahoo, Wikipedia and Bing included) seem to have buried links to it, an all-too-frequent occurrence for information detrimental to Obama.

As readers might recall, Chrysler's secured bondholders received only 29 cents on the dollar, while Obama's cronies at the United Automobile Workers collected 55 percent ownership in the new company for their unsecured holdings, and Italian automaker Fiat was flat-out gifted 20 percent ownership plus options for an additional 15 percent without investing even a single penny in Chrysler. (We have yet to determine the political sleaze behind that deal.)

If ever there was a David versus Goliath moment, this is it. And Indiana Treasurer Richard Murdock has the stones to sling at this giant.
Logged

nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 64256


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2009, 08:07:09 PM »

____________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-36
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
____________________________


CULTURE & POLICY
Village Academic Curriculum: Forced Into Public School


A New Hampshire girl has been ordered to attend public school, in some measure because of her Christianity. Amanda's parents split in 1999 while living in Massachusetts, but mother and daughter moved to New Hampshire in 2002. Amanda has been home-schooled since first grade, and her mother has cultivated her Christian beliefs, but her father, who is not a Christian, wants her to attend public school where she can soak up some atheism. With the parents unable to reach common ground, the issue headed to court, where a court-appointed guardian determined that Amanda excelled in her schooling with curriculum approved by the school district. She also regularly took standardized tests and attended her local public school for art, Spanish and physical education classes.

However, the guardian concluded that Amanda's "interests, and particularly her intellectual and emotional development, would be best served by exposure to a public school setting in which she would be challenged to solve problems presented by a group learning situation and ... Amanda would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior." While the court said it was "extremely reluctant to impose on parents a decision about a child's education," it ruled that Amanda must attend public school. The Alliance Defense Fund has filed a motion to reconsider on the mother's behalf, but last week Amanda started fifth grade at the local public school. If the question were an atheist forced to attend a Christian school to give "exposure to different points of view," we doubt the outcome would have been the same.

HIV Prevention

Fox News recently reported, "In an effort to reduce the spread of HIV, public health officials are considering the promotion of 'universal circumcision' for all baby boys born in the United States." Several studies purport to show that, in Africa, circumcised men reduced their risk of infection by half. Fox notes, "However, those studies focused on heterosexual men who are at risk of getting HIV from infected female partners. The main issue in the U.S. is men who have sex with men." According to the Centers for Disease Control, homosexual men make up about 4 percent of the population, but they account for more than half of new HIV infections each year. In addition, public health officials estimate that 79 percent of adult American men are already circumcised, though that trend is moving downward. In 1999, only 65 percent of newborns were circumcised.

Such techniques, while they certainly don't hurt, only serve to further a feeling of insulation from the consequences of certain decisions. Western culture glorifies sex to the point that people will do almost anything to avoid the consequences -- whether it be "comprehensive" sex education, abortion or, now, circumcision. In the real world, immorality more often results in disease and other life-altering changes. We're willing to wager that married monogamy is the best way to prevent HIV.

Climate Change This Week: Contraception Fights Warming

Speaking of bedroom activities, the UK Telegraph reports, "Contraception is almost five times cheaper as a means of preventing climate change than conventional green technologies, according to research by the London School of Economics." The report, "Fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions, Less Cost," found that every 4 pounds spent on family planning over the next generation would reduce global CO2 emissions by more than a ton. By contrast, it would take at least 19 pounds for low-carbon technologies to produce the same result. Roger Martin, chairman of the Optimum Population Trust at the LSE, elucidates: "It's always been obvious that total emissions depend on the number of emitters as well as their individual emissions -- the carbon tonnage can't shoot down as we want, while the population keeps shooting up." Once again, envirofascists look to population control as a method for maybe saving the planet. They should feel free to go first.

And Last...

Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters writes, "As wildfires rage throughout Southern California, media have predictably begun to blame this awful natural disaster on President George W. Bush much as they did almost exactly two years ago when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans." He notes the example of MSNBC's Dan Abrams, who said that the wildfires in California are "raising tough questions about whether the National Guard is extended too much to handle emergencies at home." Abrams continued, "Back in May, before the fire started, The San Francisco Chronicle reported that the California National Guard was down a billion dollars worth of equipment -- 209 vehicles in Iraq, including 110 Humvees and 63 military trucks. According to the report, the California Guard should have had 39 diesel generators on hand. They say it had none. The Kansas governor raised similar concerns earlier this year when she said the deployment of National Guard troops to Iraq hurt the emergency response to a deadly tornado in her state. The question -- is this another unanticipated cost of a prolonged and expensive war effort?" Nine months after he left office, and regardless of the problem, it's still Bush's fault.

*****

Veritas vos Liberabit -- Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot's editors and staff.

(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)
Logged

Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2019 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media