.
Tags: '80s, Bill Whittle, Coca-Cola, Making Same Mistake, New Coke, Rebranding, RNC, video
Archive | RINOS! RSS feed for this section
*VIDEO* Bill Whittle: New Coke – RNC Making Same Rebranding Mistake Coca-Cola Did In The ’80s
10 May
.
Marco Rubio: Corrupted By Washington In Only Two Years
29 AprMarco Rubio: Corrupted By Washington In Only Two Years – Canada Free Press
It’s hard to believe that Marco Rubio has only been in the Senate since January 2011. With the way he has been going on lately, telling conservatives what a bunch of unenlightened rubes we are for objecting to his immigration reform, you would think he’d been a Senator for 20 years.
.
The once Tea Party favorite, whose chances of being elected President are now on par with Mark Sanford, has been at the forefront of jamming the Democrat’s dream of opening the immigration floodgates through Congress, an effort that shares many the hallmarks of the passage of Obamacare:
Put together in the dead of night by Washington insiders with zero transparency. Check.
Rushing the bill through the legislative process as fast as humanly possible before the opposition can get their act together. Check.
Refusing to accept even the barest hint of cooperation with Republicans who aren’t RINOs. Check.
We’ll have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it! Check.
Representing everything the Tea Party movement has dedicated itself against Rubio is blazing a trail of lies and deceit that must make Obama proud.
Despite Rubio’s assurances that legalization efforts won’t go into effect until after the border is secure, a multitude of analysts have shown this to be a complete falsehood. Once DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano says the border is secure, whether it is or not, the bill goes into effect. Trusting someone who is stocking up on hundreds of millions of rounds of ammo, more than enough to conquer all of Asia Minor, isn’t exactly what most conservatives would call a good bet.
Other fun facts that Rubio has neglected to mention during his magical media tour include:
1, The immediate shutdown of the E-verify system.
2. The potential for 33 million newly minted American citizens in only the first 10 years – a “conservative” estimate, the actual total could be much higher.
3. A permanent voting majority for Democrats guaranteed to last a generation.
4. Making it illegal for law enforcement to arrest and deport anyone who “appears eligible” for legalization.
5. Allowing judges the ability to waive what is now mandatory deportation for certain classes of criminal aliens.
6. Free “Obama phones” for immigrants as they cross the border.
7. A gigantic boon for immigration lawyers as countless appeals, court appearances and so on are granted to illegals before they can be deported.
And that’s just what we know so far. With the endless ability for the DHS Secretary to grant exceptions to not only individuals, but entire “classes of aliens” from conforming to the law, things could get much worse.
The question conservatives are asking themselves lately is why would Rubio serve as a patsy for this clearly dangerous legislation? The answer is he is corrupt. Corrupted by a Washington culture where the elites think they are smarter than us, that they have the power to tell us what to do and who we have to accept into our communities, regardless of the cost to our society and pocketbooks. Where attending Georgetown cocktail parties attended by only the very best sort makes them better than the common people they lord over. A symptom of a government that is no longer of the people, by the people, for the people, but now only for the elite.
From Tea Party favorite to corrupt Washington insider in only two years, ladies and gentlemen, I give you Marco Rubio.
.
Senator Pat Toomey is your Gutless Republican of the Day!
10 AprTrying to sell us out over “background checks”, and giving the Left EXACTLY what they want. What a damned fool
After Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) held a presser putting forth their background check “compromise” this morning, it was gun shows and internet gun sales are in their crosshairs.
The “compromise” consists of closing the so-called “gun show loophole”–something that Democrats and Republican Moderates like Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) have been wanting to do for years.
This supposed “loophole” consists in the fact that some private sellers rent a table at gun shows and make secondary gun sales. In other words, they set up a table to sell their dad’s guns, or their own guns, or the guns their neighbor doesn’t want anymore. These sales require no background check because they are secondary, used gun sales.
What Manchin and Toomey are proposing is an incremental expansion of the NICS background check system that would include these private sales too.
This really is a slippery slope–for once the expansion of background checks starts, where will it stop?
When will the GOP figure out that by caving, they will lose? Take your love of “bi-partisanship and stick it frankly! A bad bill is a bad bill. No matter who backs it! And it amazes me, as it does Bill Quick, that some Republicans want to surrender on an issue we are winning!
Meghan McCain gets a reality show, America’s collective IQ hardest hit
28 MarI hate reality TV. To me it is basically scripted, staged, stupid and mind numbing, and tends to feature some of the least likable people. Which of course makes reality TV a great place for America’s most clueless Republican, Meghan McCain. As Zip at Weasel Zippers wonders
What kind of deranged psychopath would watch a reality show based around McRINO’s talentless hack offspring?
Well, this is where we are isn’t it? Talent? Intellect? Who wants those? America apparently craves people who are related to famous people to people who actually have something of value to share.
So, what kind of show will this be? What can viewers expect?
McCain’s show, “Raising McCain,” will follow her as she hits the road interviewing both experts and average Joe’s alike. So far the network has ordered 10 half-hour episodes that will begin airing on August 1.
Participant Media, which owns pivot, created the channel as a way to reach out to Millennials. Pivot will air a mix of narrative films, documentaries, comedies and dramas, including a show co-hosted by actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt of “3rd Rock from the Sun” fame. So far, the network plans to have a reach of 40 million cable subscribers when it launches in August. The network also plans to run a broadband-only feed of the channel for a monthly fee.
“We’re told … that young people can’t have news because we’re just tweeting all the time, and that’s just bullsh**,” McCain said during the presentation for the launch of Pilot TV.
Oh, I cannot wait. But, of course, there is some good news here. Think of McCain’s show as yet another Tree of Low-Hanging Blogging Fruit. The inanities expressed on this show are bound to produce bushels of clips to share, and yes, mock right here.
Reince Priebus: You know who is a model Republican? Huckabee
22 MarVomit inducing statement of the day for me anyway
RNC Chair Reince Priebus told reporters today that former governor Mike Huckabee would be an example of a “model” Republican in his eyes.
The Corner reported:
Earlier today, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus pushed back at critics who have questioned his continued support for Senator Rob Portman, the Ohio Republican who came out in support of gay marriage last week.
“When someone asks me ‘Are you going to cut off funding for Rob Portman?’ I think it’s just ridiculous,” Priebus told a group of reporters Friday during a briefing at National Review’s Washington, D.C., office. “He’s a good Republican. I think it’s also normal and decent to still support a person that you agree with on 99 percent of the issues.”
But Priebus says his support of Portman doesn’t signal a policy shift within the party’s platform. “Yes, we’re still a pro-life party. Yes, we still defend our platform on marriage,” he said. He emphasized, however, that Republicans must also sound “reasonable” to voters who disagree.
Priebus cited former governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas as an example of someone who could be “a model for a lot of people in our party” in terms of discussing issues like marriage and abortion. “I always tell people: Listen to Governor Mike Huckabee,” he said. “I don’t know anyone that talks about them any better.”
Good Grief! The only way we could have done worse in the last two elections would have been if Huck-a-phony was the nominee
Why are four letters so tough for the GOP leadership?
20 MarCome on folks, how hard are the letters B L O and G? Maybe they should get their heads out of their, well, that place their heads should never be, and realize that most of us do this EVERY day, not for cash, or fame, but because we LOVE this nation and are fighting like Hell for it. We do not have whiteboards, or talking point memos. No we are not scripted, programmed talking heads What we do have is original ideas, principles, and a burning desire to help deliver the Conservative message. So, given these facts, why did the RNC report ignore bloggers? Stacy McCain ponders that question
William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection spots the omission:
Even when the report does mention “social media,” it’s in the context of getting out the vote or having the party apparatus find a better way to reach voters.
I would not be surprised if the RNC spoke with some of the salaried conservative media class who share the Washington professional circuit. But did they reach out to the Army of Davids who are the anti-thesis of the consultant model because we mostly don’t get paid or make much money blogging, we do this in our “spare” time, and we are outside D.C.?
Did the RNC get any input from the great unwashed conservative blogosphere? You wouldn’t know it from the report if it did . . .Read the whole thing. The idea of “citizen-journalism” is quite nearly alien to the consultant class. The teamwork concept of voluntary collaboration mystifies people for whom politics is a paid gig. Take away their consulting fees, and these guys wouldn’t have anything to do with politics.
There is nothing wrong with applying the entrepreneurial spirit to politics — “Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn” — so long as the rewards bear some relation to results. As I’ve often said about the hindsight criticisms leveled at the Romney campaign, nobody would have cared what they got paid, if only they had won the election.
The massive stumbling clusterf–k of the Romney campaign’s ”Project ORCA” exposed the fact that greedy incompetents were being paid ginormous fees to do jobs they didn’t actually know how to do. There is a difference between making a living and making a killing, you see.
The GOP ignoring bloggers is akin to a coaching staff leaving motivated, talented players out of his game plan.
RINO Assclown Boehner: I Absolutely Trust Obama (Video)
18 MarBoehner: I Absolutely Trust Obama, There’s No Issue There – Right Scoop
This morning Boehner told ABC that he absolutely trusts Obama, that there is no issue there:
.
.
How in the world could Boehner say something so idiotic. Obama is a pathological liar and has been for as long as we’ve known about him. Boehner himself has gotten burned from Obama lying to the American public over and over to force Boehner’s hand of compromise. Ugh. This is another reason Boehner needs to go.
But on the flip side of this interview, Boehner is getting a bad rap for his comments on the debt crisis. What Boehner said above is that we don’t have a debt crisis over us now, but we’ve got one coming that we must do something about. And he’s right. But he isn’t agreeing with Obama on the debt crisis. As he points out, Obama believes we don’t need to do anything to even avert a looming debt crisis. Boehner says that’s entirely wrong and we do need to reform our entitlements before this looming debt crisis hits us.
So to be fair to Boehner, while he is a terrible Speaker and needs to go, he’s not wrong in what he said on the debt crisis.
Even Paul Ryan agrees:
.
Once Again Jeb Bush Proves That He Is, In Fact, Retarded (Video)
11 MarWhile making the rounds on the Sunday shows, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that President Barack Obama was right to reach out to Republicans to resolve the ongoing budget crisis, but downplayed the suggestion he’s up for running for the high office himself.
………………………….Click on image above for video
“I don’t know what he’s doing, but I would encourage him to do more of it,” Bush said. “It’s important to build trust if you’re trying to deal with the big things. Big issues require everybody to get outside their comfort zone… And the only way you can do that is to engage them on a personal level… I think it’s important and I applaud the president for doing it. And I think Republicans appreciate it.”
As for his future political ambitions, Bush – who was on the Sunday shows to promote the book he co-authored with Clint Rolick, “Immigration Wars” – was noncommittal on running for president in 2016, telling Crowley he isn’t sure if he’d run for any elected office again.
“Nothing has changed. When you asked me before 2012, was I going to run in 2012, and I said no,” Bush said. “I went through the process and decided it wasn’t appropriate. Now, I’ve decided to defer any consideration of it until the proper time to make those kinds of considerations, which is out, you know, more than a year from now, for sure. And when I go through that process, I’ll let you know.”
Every time I hear Jeb Bush 2016, I throw up in my mouth
4 MarFull disclosure, I voted for Jeb in 1994, when I still lived in Florida. I voted for his father in 1988 and 1992, and yes, I voted for “W” in 1998 as Texas Governor, and in 2000 and 2004 for president. I am not a Bush hater. But, Jeb is way too “moderate” for my taste, and I think another squishy Republican is the last thing we need in 2016. So, I do not cheer when I hear Jeb Bush flirting with a possible run.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush won’t confirm he’s a candidate for the next presidential race, but he sounded like a White House hopeful Monday, declaring his party in need of leadership.
“I have a voice, I want to share my beliefs about how the conservative movement and the Republican party can regain its footing, because we’ve lost our way,” he told TODAY’s Matt Lauer.
Bush said he wouldn’t rule out a run in 2016, “but I won’t declare today either.”
I doubt he could win the nomination frankly, although I am sure Karl Rove and the establishment would love him. He is just the type of Republican they swoon over. It is too early to be speculating about 2016 to me. That whole 2014 midterm is a lot closer, and that is a crucial election. We really need the Senate back in GOP hands folks.
Senate Leftists, RINOs Vote To Confirm Pro-Islamist Anti-Semite Hagel As Defense Secretary
27 FebSenate Approves Hagel For Defense Secretary After Historic Nomination Fight – Fox News
The Senate approved Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Defense secretary Tuesday, ending a contentious battle that exposed deep divisions over the president’s Pentagon pick.
After Republicans blocked the nomination earlier this month, they ultimately allowed for an up-or-down vote on Tuesday. The margin was historically close, with 58 senators supporting him and 41 opposing in the end.
Though Hagel is himself a former Republican senator, the resistance to his nomination showed an unusual level of distrust among many senators toward the man chosen to lead the Defense Department – at a time when the country is trying to wind down the Afghanistan war, while assessing emerging threats from Iran, Syria and elsewhere in the turbulent Middle East and North Africa.
Republicans had earlier held up the nomination largely over demands for more information from the Obama administration on the Sept. 11 Libya attacks.
But they also raised serious and recurring concerns about Hagel’s record of past statements and votes on everything from Israel to Iran to nuclear weapons.
Sen. John McCain, a leading Republican, clashed with his onetime friend over his opposition to President George W. Bush’s decision to send an extra 30,000 troops to Iraq in 2007 at a point when the war seemed in danger of being lost. Hagel, who voted to authorize military force in Iraq, later opposed the conflict, comparing it to Vietnam and arguing that it shifted the focus from Afghanistan.
McCain called Hagel unqualified for the Pentagon job even though he once described him as fit for a Cabinet post.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asked what the delaying tactics had done for “my Republican colleagues.”
“Twelve days later, nothing. Nothing has changed,” the Democrat said on the Senate floor. “Sen. Hagel’s exemplary record of service to his country remains untarnished.”
Reid blamed partisanship over Obama’s second-term national security team for the delay. Both Reid and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Democrat, warned that it was imperative to act just days before automatic, across-the-board budget cuts hit the Pentagon.
Hagel will succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and join Obama’s retooled national security team. Hagel’s nomination bitterly split the Senate, with Republicans turning on their former party colleague and Democrats standing by Obama’s nominee.
Republicans also challenged Hagel about a May 2012 study that he co-authored for the advocacy group Global Zero, which called for an 80 percent reduction of U.S. nuclear weapons and the eventual elimination of all the world’s nuclear arms.
The group argued that with the Cold War over, the United States can reduce its total nuclear arsenal to 900 without sacrificing security. Currently, the U.S. and Russia have about 5,000 warheads each, either deployed or in reserve. Both countries are on track to reduce their deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 by 2018, the number set in the New START treaty that the Senate ratified in December 2010.
In an echo of the 2012 presidential campaign, Hagel faced an onslaught of criticism by well-funded, Republican-leaning outside groups that labeled the former senator “anti-Israel” and pressured senators to oppose the nomination. The groups ran television and print ads criticizing Hagel.
Opponents were particularly incensed by Hagel’s use of the term “Jewish lobby” to refer to pro-Israel groups. He apologized, saying he should have used another term and should not have said those groups have intimidated members of the Senate into favoring actions contrary to U.S. interests.
The nominee spent weeks reaching out to members of the Senate, meeting individually with lawmakers to address their concerns and seeking to reassure them about his policies.
Hagel’s halting and inconsistent performance during some eight hours of testimony at this confirmation hearing last month undercut his cause, but it wasn’t a fatal blow.
There was no erosion in Democratic support for the president’s choice and Hagel already had the backing of three Republicans – Sens. Thad Cochran, Mike Johanns and Richard Shelby. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., also switched to support Hagel in the final vote.
Yeah, about that Karl Rove Super-Pac
21 FebLet’s face it folks, too many big names, like Karl Rove, care more about their $$$ than moving Conservatism forward. It is not really about doing what is best for the country, it is about establishing, then preserving their place in the pecking order. There are some very dedicated Conservatives out there that put principles over politics, and personal fame. Many of those are bloggers. And yes, bloggers can engage in self-promotion, nothing wring with that. It is when self-promotion starts to dictate what you say or write that it becomes problematic, can you hear me Ann Coulter?. And, most bloggers I link and like are more concerned with helping the country than helping themselves. I am honored to be amongst those who do this every day, each in their own way, not as much for themselves, but for America.
Another blogger who I think balances self-promotion with sincere patriotism is Stacy McCain, and he has some solid advice on how to deal with Karl Rove and his Super-Pac
Until we get down to cases — in a clear-cut situation where a Republican primary pits a solid conservative against a Establishment RINO type hand-picked by Karl Rove — there’s no point getting all angry or frightened about it. Look for an opportunity to beat one of Rove’s picks, to teach the Establishment a lesson, but in the meantime, keep your powder dry.
Great advice. I had my fill of White Board Rove a while back. I always distrust people who seem to be concerned with pimping themselves than anything else. That and Rove always struck as one of those people that gets way too much credit for greatness. One of those people that makes you ask yourself “How in the Hell did they get where they’re at?”
Stacy McCain also notes that one of the critics of Rove is Newt Gingrich. Newt? Really, I guess Dede Scozzafava is just a distant memory, sort of like Newt’s wedding vows to his first wife.
Chris Christie, Andrew Cuomo’s kind of Republican
19 FebJust another politician, all about himself
Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ), who is widely expected to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, may have justharmed his chances by signifying his support for the policies of ultra-liberal New York governor – and possible 2016 Democratic opponent – Andrew Cuomo. Talking with union leader Larry Bulman, political director for United Association of Plumbers, Pipefitters and Steamfitters, Christie reportedly said, “I’m not much different from Andrew Cuomo. I probably agree with him on 98% of the issues.”
Christie leans liberal on a myriad of issues. While he maintains that he supports traditional marriage, that position is clearly malleable for him; he grandstands when it comes to federal disaster funding; he has ties to groups that are questionable in terms of Islamism; his anti-union rhetoric masks the fact that he gets along quite well with most of the unions in his state, including the much-maligned teachers unions; he blasts the NRA on a regular basis.
Ben Shapiro might be right, maybe this is just posturing for a 2016 run, I wonder if Ann Coulter will endorse him again? But, to me, this is the type of political gymnastics Americans are sick of, especially Republicans. Give us a candidate that says what they mean and means what they say! CONSISTENCY damn it!
*VIDEO* George Will: “If The President Wants A Terrible Secretary Of Defense, He’s Got A Right To Him”
17 Feb
.
REALLY, George? And what about the American people’s right to a competent federal government?
After all, the Secretary of Defense is charged with protecting OUR nation. He is supposed to be more concerned with defending the collective interests of 320 million Americans than the short-sighted, political agenda of any single individual.
Why should the Legislative branch of government automatically defer to the Executive branch over issues of OUR national security?
Do the terms “separation of powers” and “co-equal branches of government” mean NOTHING to you?
You see, folks, Mr. Will has just engaged in exactly the sort of mindless, rhetorical argument that practically all so-called conservative pundits do after they’ve spent a few too many years hobnobbing with inside-the-beltway leftists.
They begin to lose their common sense and start viewing everything through the prism of Washington D.C. politics.
We’re not talking here about some largely useless bureaucratic office that any braying jackass with a room-temperature IQ can handle. No, what we’re discussing is the most important federal post next to the presidency itself, one in which life-and-death decisions are made every single day with respect to hundreds of thousands – if not millions of American soldiers and civilians alike.
To reduce such an important topic to some political debate about presidential prerogatives is completely irresponsible, especially during a time of war.
.
Asking Karl Rove to “fix” the GOP messaging is like asking Michael Moore for diet advice
15 FebAttention House GOP members. Karl Rove is not the solution to your problems, Karl Rove IS your problem
BUZZFEED – Republican strategist Karl Rove huddled with a group of House GOP leaders in the office Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy Thursday morning to discuss the party’s messaging efforts, Republicans familiar with the meeting said.
Details of Rove’s presentation to a group of McCarthy’s “whip team” — a subset of the broader conference tasked with educating the rank and file, rounding up votes on key bills and generally enforcing discipline within Republican ranks.
Following the meeting, several lawmakers could be heard instructing staff to setup meetings with Rove.
Rove’s trip to Capitol Hill may not be met with enthusiasm from every Republican. Rep. Steve King, one of the House’s most vocal conservative firebrands, has been eyeing a run to replace Sen. Tom Harkin now that the veteran Iowa Democrat is resigning.
King is in many ways the sort of conservative candidate that makes the party’s establishment nervous about the coming general election, and King told the Iowa Republican earlier this month his is now strongly considering a run — in part as a response to Rove.
“If I would back up in front of Karl Rove’s initiative, that would just empower him, and he would go on state after state, candidate after candidate,” King told the Republican.
Conservatives like Steve King have always made the GOP establishment nervous, Reagan made them nervous, the Tea Party makes them nervous. That is the problem, these weasels are so busy being nervous, they cannot lead, so we keep getting stuck with “safe” candidates that lose, McCain,Romney, that type of candidate. Here is a BIG HINT to the GOP leadership. Stop backing the candidates the Democrats WANT you to run! See the Democrats will signal which candidate they fear by going hard after those candidates in the primaries. The ones they do not fear they will ignore. And the candidate they want us to nominate? They will praise them and talk about what a “good presidential candidate” he or she would make, and how “formidable” they would be. By the way the media does the same thing. I have to point this out since you, Karl Rove, and his stupid white board cannot figure it out!
Tell you what. Fire Karl Rove, he is all about Karl Rove, not the GOP anyway. Call me, I work cheap, Hell I will advise you for free. Why? Because I actually care about Conservatism. Or you can keep getting advice from Rove, and his ilk. Tell me how is that working out for you?
Obama Defense Secretary Nominee Chuck Hagel Endorsed By Communist Party USA
6 FebHagel Endorsed By Communist Party USA – WorldNetDaily
After reportedly receiving support from Iran, Chuck Hagel, President Obama’s defense secretary nominee, has yet another endorsement to add to his resume, this one coming from the Communist Party USA.
………………
People’s World, the Communist Party USA’s official magazine, touted Hagel as “represent[ing] the more sober elements who have called in our national discourse for rejection of the old cold war tactics, the unilateralism and the continual push for wars all over the world.”
The magazine’s labor editor, John Wojcik, slammed the ”neocon” U.S. Senate for trying to “force Hagel to disavow his opposition to what they call the ‘successful’ surges in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
A People’s World blast email further lamented Hagel “is still the subject of controversy due to some mild criticism he made of the State of Israel.”
Wojcik contended “it was the U.S. Senate, not President Obama’s nominee, Chuck Hagel, that fell down on the job at the hearings.”
“It was allowed to become a place for right-wing grandstanding and unacceptable efforts to rewrite history,” he continued.
Wojcik conceded that Hagel “does not have the kind of record that progressives conclude will make him a Secretary of Defense who would chart the entirely new foreign policy direction the times require.”
Last week Hagel took heat from Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Oka., who asked during the Senate hearings why Iran supports Hagel’s nomination as defense secretary.
As a senator, Hagel opposed sanctions on Iran, instead calling for “direct, unconditional talks.” He was one of only 12 senators who refused to sign a letter asking the European Union to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization.
WND reported Hagel went on the Middle East satellite network Al Jazeera in 2009 to argue that before dealing with the nuclear arsenals of rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea, the U.S. and Russia must first lead the effort by phasing out their own nuclear weapons.
WND also reported Hagel serves on the board of the Ploughshares Fund, a George Soros-funded group that advocates a nuclear-free world.
The Ploughshares Fund has a long history of anti-war advocacy and is a partner of the Marxist-oriented Institute for Policy Studies, which has urged the defunding of the Pentagon and massive decreases in U.S. defense capabilities, including slashing the American nuclear arsenal to 292 deployed weapons.
Hagel’s thesis on minimizing the U.S. nuclear arsenal was reiterated in a 2012 report he co-authored titled “Global Zero: U.S. Nuclear Policy Commission.”
The report called for an 80-percent reduction in U.S. nuclear weapons to about 900, with only half of those being deployed. It further called for the eventual phasing out of short-range nuclear weapons and the elimination of ICBMs and B-52 bombers.
The report was the initiative of the Global Zero advocacy group, which works for a nuclear-free world.
Hagel co-authored the commission report with former U.S. diplomat Thomas Pickering, who reportedly previously held clandestine meetings with Hamas aiming to open U.S. dialogue with the terrorist group.
Iran is arguably the largest state sponsor of terrorism.
Regarding his views on jihad, WND exposed that in unreported remarks during a 2007 Senate hearing, Hagel posited that terrorism does not arise from religious beliefs but instead is a response to despair and a lack of hope.
The Communist Party USA may ideologically support some of Hagel’s ties.
WND reported Hagel sits on the board of a fund that serves as the main financial backer of a group urging the U.S. to join the U.N.’s International Criminal Court, which could prosecute American citizens and soldiers for “war crimes” and other offenses.
Opposes U.S. missile defense
Ploughshares, meanwhile, opposes America’s development of a missile defense system and contributes to scores of anti-war groups highly critical of U.S. foreign policy and military expansion.
Ploughshares is directed by Joseph Cirincione, who served as an adviser on nuclear issues to Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Cirincione also was director of nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress.
Among the groups to which Ploughshares donates are the anti-Israel Americans for Peace Now, the Arms Control Association, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Center for Policy Alternatives, the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity, the radical Citizen Action, Citizens for Environmental Justice, the Coalition for New Priorities and the radical Institute for Policy Studies.
More grantees include the New America Foundation, the Nonviolent Peaceforce, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, the Nuclear Freeze Foundation, the Nuclear Weapons Freeze Campaign, Peace Action, the Peace Studies Association, Physicians for Human Rights and Physicians for Social Responsibility.
Ploughshares has also funded the Soros-financed Connect US Fund, which urges more U.N. helmets on U.S. troops, as well as the Center for American Progress, which has strong influence on White House policy.
Also on the list of Ploughshares grantees is The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which has long petitioned for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear stockpiles. According to Pavel Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, the work by the magazine editors was for the benefit of the Soviet Union.
Two of the magazine’s founding sponsors, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer, were accused of passing information from the Manhattan Project to the Soviets. Both were also key initiators of the Manhattan Project.
Ploughshares funds the International Crisis Group, a small organization that boasts Soros on its board and is a key promoter of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine used to justify the NATO airstrikes in Libya last year.
Massive defense slashes
Another Ploughshares grantee is the Institute for Policy Studies.
Ploughshares is listed on the institute’s website as a partner organization.
The institute works with the Center for American Progress to release an annual “Unified Security Budget,” which reportedly has influenced White House military policy. Previous recommendations from the two groups’ yearly Unified Security Budgets have been adapted by the Obama administration.
The 2012 budget, reviewed in full by WND, called on Obama to use the U.S. Armed Forces in part to combat “global warming,” fight global poverty, remedy “injustice,” bolster the United Nations and increase “peacekeeping” forces worldwide.
The budget called for massive, second-term slashes to the military budget. The savings are to be used to invest in “sustainable energy” and in fighting worldwide climate change.
The report makes clear the stated objective of transforming the U.S. Armed Forces to stress conflict resolution and diplomacy.
The report takes issue with the use of forces on the ground in various countries to secure or influence the longer-term strategic position of other nations.
It recommends scaling back all U.S. ground forces by 20 percent and reducing the Navy’s surface fleet by 20 percent, including two carriers and carrier combat air wings. It also calls for reducing the Air Force by two combat air wings while cutting standing peacetime overseas deployments in Europe and East Asia by up to 50,000 troops at a time.
The budget’s authors strongly argue for the reduction of the U.S. nuclear arsenal to no more than 292 deployed nuclear weapons and the complete elimination of the Trident II nuclear missile. It’s a process Obama already initiated in April 2010 when he signed a deal with Russia reducing stocks of weapons-grade plutonium.
The accord with Russia was signed at a nuclear summit in Washington arranged by Obama at which leaders of 47 nations committed to reducing the world’s nuclear stockpiles. One week earlier, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev and Obama signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, committing both countries to reducing their deployed nuclear arsenals.
Obama had broadly proclaimed his disarmament intentions during a 2007 campaign speech.
“Here’s what I’ll say as president: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons,” Obama said.
By 2010, as president, he was arguing: “We need to change our nuclear policy and our posture, which is still focused on deterring the Soviet Union – a country that doesn’t exist.”
Obama’s declaration came just as Russia signed a major arms deal with Syria and began to revive its Cold War-era naval bases in the Middle East, including in the Syrian ports of Tartus and Latakia on the Mediterranean.
The joint CAP and IPS report, meanwhile, recommends the U.S. cease all further development of missile defenses.
The report pushes for all current missile defense programs to be cut, including Ground-based Midcourse Defense, Airborne Laser and Kinetic Energy Interceptors.
“It is unwise to fund more advanced systems for missile defense while current ones have yet to be proven effective against their targeted threats,” complains the report.
The military’s vital Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation program is to be cut by $10 billion across the board.
Next on the chopping block: the complete cancellation of the second SSN-744 Virginia Class submarine. While the Unified Security Budget describes the new model as “unnecessary to address any of the threats facing the United States today” and “a weapon looking for an enemy,” the SSN-774 is designed for covert collection of intelligence, transportation of special operations teams and launching of tactical Tomahawk missiles – flexible capabilities tailored to rapid responses required by the 21st-century’s conflicts with irregular combatants.
Similarly targeted for cancellation are the V-22 Osprey helicopter and the Navy and Marine Corps versions of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Combating ‘global warming’
The 2012 Unified report sets the tone of its lofty agenda by demanding immediate reductions in the military’s already heavily slashed budget. But there is one exception requiring massive increases in funding – any spending that funds “alternative energy” or focuses Defense Department resources on combating “climate change as a security threat.”
The report authors recommend investing “the lion’s share” of the few allotted military increases in addressing the so-called “threat” of climate change.
The report wants Obama to take billions of dollars from the U.S. military and instead use them for a “green stimulus.”
These groups also envision the military as a tool to fight so-called global warming. In 2011, IPS released a 40-page CAP-endorsed report titled “The Green Dividend,” a term IPS defines as “a major shift of resources from the military budget to sustainable energy.”
The IPS research paper identifies the Pentagon as the “largest institutional energy user – and greenhouse gas emitter – on the planet,” arguing that if it undertook a “crash program” to convert to renewable energy sources and clean vehicles, it could make a significant impact on global emissions.
IPS calls on the Pentagon to contribute to a green world “by simply getting out of the way, by handing over unneeded military installations to be converted into green job incubators.”
The report lauds Obama’s first-ever U.S. Global Development Policy, which was issued in September 2010 and declares that the primary purpose of development aid is to pursue broad-based economic growth as the means to fight global poverty.
The report goes on to recommend that massive funds be sent to combat global woes, including an increase of $3.5 billion to “Global Health” investment and $2.14 billion to support United Nations peacekeeping and ensure that the United States does not fall behind in U.N. payments.
David Frum writes, readers get headches!
28 JanTo be fair, a bad column can happen to any writer, but, with Frum, it is habitual
In Josh Marshall’s post on being a “non-gun person,” he tells a story about visiting gun-owning family friends as a young boy and unintentionally pointing a real gun at a little girl.
But this kind of mishap does not happen only to non-gun people.
My wife’s family are gun people. I mean, real guns. Her grandfather was decorated for gallantry at Vimy Ridge and went on to found the Canadian armored corps. Her father served in World War II and Korea, and then worked for years as a foreign correspondent covering wars from Congo to Vietnam. He was a dozen feet away when Jack Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald – and was filmed by another news reporter running toward the sound of gunfire.
Frum then goes on to describe an incident in his family where a gun was used irresponsibly, sort of like Frum uses his writing software irresponsibly, and someone almost got shot. OK to be fair, my family has always had guns, so did just about everyone I grew up with. Number of accidents? ZERO! Well except for my Uncle Earl who went a little nutty after drinking bourbon and reading too many David Frum columns. Damn if he did not shoot his computer! So, my Aunt Karen made a firm rule, no more reading more than one inane column from the Frumster a week. Because really now, does anyone NEED to read David Frum? Exit question. Is it me, or does Frum write like a Liberal pretending to be a Republican so he can gain approval from Beltway Liberals?
Governor FAT BASTARD Slams “Reprehensible” NRA For “Dragging People’s Children” Into Gun Control Debate (Video)
18 Jan
I wonder what Tubby thinks of Obama exploiting other people’s children for political purposes?
.
.
A) The NRA did not attack Obama’s kids. B) Didn’t Obama already drag his kids into politics when he constantly used them as political props, going so far as to feature them in campaign donation pleas?
Via Mediaite:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie slammed the National Rifle Association’s latest ad in which they accuse President Barack Obama of hypocrisy for sending his children to a school where they are protected by armed guards. Christie called the ad “reprehensible” and said that the NRA should not be “dragging people’s children” into the gun control debate.
“I think any of us who are public figures, you see that kind of ad and you cringe,” Christie said on Thursday at a news conference in Trenton. “I’m a father who is a public figure, who has four children and my children had no choice realistically in what I decided to do with my career and what affect that has had on their lives.”
——————————————————————————————————–
Related article:
.
darcprynce
Dave C
Gatordoug
