Brutally Honest

He promised to fundamentally transform this country...

... and he's doing his level best to do just that:

President Obama has ordered the Pentagon to consider cutting U.S. strategic nuclear forces to as low as 300 deployed warheads—below the number believed to be in China’s arsenal and far fewer than current Russian strategic warhead stocks.

Pentagon and military planners were asked to develop three force levels for the U.S. arsenal of deployed strategic nuclear warheads: a force of 1,100 to 1,000 warheads; a second scenario of between 700 and 800 warheads; and the lowest level of between 300 and 400 warheads.

A congressional official said no president in the past ever told the Pentagon to conduct a review based on specific numbers of warheads.

“In the past, the way it worked was, ‘tell me what the world is like and then tell me what the force should be,’” the official said. “That is not happening in this review.”

The plan for a radical cut in warheads is contained in a review of nuclear weapons ordered by the president in an August directive. The review called the Nuclear Posture Review Implementation Study is nearing completion and could be presented to the president as early as next month.

The plan has come under fire from senior military officers in charge of maintaining nuclear deterrence against Russia, China, and future nuclear rogue states.

Asked about the opposition, a senior officer involved in strategic arms declined to comment.

Critics of the nuclear force cuts in Congress and the national security community said the force structure is being studied without matching the need for nuclear forces to combat growing threats, as was done in past strategic nuclear reviews.

Currently, the U.S. arsenal includes about 5,000 warheads, many of them slated for dismantlement. Russia has between 4,000 and 6,500 warheads and China is believed to have more than 300.

Pentagon spokesman George Little declined to comment on the specific force levels being examined in the review.

“While the details are classified, the president asked DoD to develop several alternative approaches to deterrence and stability, to include illustrative force size and postures to best support those alternatives,” Little said. “As part of the NPR implementation study, DOD is evaluating these alternatives using policy criteria outlined in the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review.”

John Bolton, former U.N. ambassador and undersecretary of state for international security during the George W. Bush administration, said in an interview that the administration’s plan to cut nuclear force to as low as 300 “alone is sufficient to vote against Obama in November.”

“Congress should urgently adopt a resolution rejecting the idea that any of these levels is consistent with American national security,” Bolton said. “Let’s just see who is prepared to support Obama.”

Many of us have been saying for more than three years that this guy's a radical.

Can there be any doubts now?

Crossposted at Wizbang.

"What are the vegetarian and vegan store business owners to do?"

The Obama administration is now assaulting those whose conscience abhors all things beef:

Shock! Utter shock!!! The Obama Administration has mandated that all food stores in the United States selling refrigerated goods, MUST sell beef!

There is an exemption for vegetarians who only employ, and sell their goods to, vegetarians; and, for vegans who only employ, and sell their goods to, vegans. 

What are the vegetarian and vegan store business owners to do?

How long will it take for these businesses to go bankrupt if the owners refuse to violate their conscience by carrying beef in their stores? How many people from the area, meat eaters included, frequent and buy some of the excellent products sold at vegetarian/vegan owned shops? Are people forced to shop and work at these places, or is it a choice? 

If the food shop owner happens to be a Jain, then this mandate would not only be expecting him to violate his conscience, but also would be an assault on his religious liberty.

Get it? Get it? 

OK, so it's a satire - an example of what you might find in a place like, The Onion.   Well, that has some similarities to what the Obama Administration wants to do to Catholic institutions with the HHS mandate (see combox discussion on this point). But, it doesn't just force Catholics and other people of faith with similar convictions to violate their conscience, it's a violation of religious liberty.

What about the Catholic business owners and other people of faith who don't want to violate their conscience over the HHS mandate?   People are not forced to purchase products or services, or to work for any particular business. Why should those business owners be forced to offer something that is contrary to their religious beliefs? 

Just think of the people - those who are currently defending this mandate, or who are taking a back seat to the assault on liberty of Catholics.  Want to bet that they would fight with vigor if this was about vegetarian and vegan store owners being forced to sell beef! 

That was clever.  

Did you believe it initially?  It's understandable with this administration but hopefully, Diane M. Korzeniewsk's piece will get wide-spread attention after making what I think is an apt, though somewhat flawed, analogy (see Diane's combox).

The bottom line is that if the government can infringe upon Catholic conscience, as it is indeed doing with the HHS mandate, it can infringe upon whatever it chooses to infringe upon and that is a deathknell to liberty as we've known it.

We seriously need to wake up.

H/T to The Anchoress who adds:

I’d been wondering how to come up with a secular example that might help people understand the reality of a government’s assault on the conscience. Diane’s spoof did it brilliantly!

But I wonder if the Catholics can depend on the support of civil libertarians, civil rights activists, constitutional scholars and the, ahem, more honest members of the mainstream press to address this action the Obama administration is taking against the churches — and make no mistake, this is not only about the Catholics. As illustrated with the recently-decided Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School vs EEOC, this administration is attempting to not only chase the churches out of the public square, but to insert itself into their internal concerns and negate those teachings with which it disagrees.

You wouldn’t force a Jewish Deli to stock lobster in reserve for its gentile employees. A reasonable gentile or non-observant Jewish employee would understand who she works for and would not expect it. It would not impact her freedom to buy her own lobster.

You wouldn’t force a Muslim Madrassah to pay for an employee’s pulled-pork sandwich; a reasonable non-Muslim employee would not even think to ask it.

It’s not a difficult concept, really; you don’t have to be that smart to get it.

Read the rest of Diane’s piece and the combox discussion. She’s updated to include a growing list of bishop’s statements!

Read the rest indeed... and more importantly, pass it on.

Freedom is at stake.

Wake the hell up and see it.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Obama's Chief Political Strategist doubles down on Jeremiah Wright

These people have cantaloupe sized gonads:

David Axelrod, chief political strategist for President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign and former White House political adviser, defended Jeremiah Wright on Tuesday evening in a speech in Thousand Oaks, CA.

Axelrod described the initial news reports in 2008 on Obama’s long-time family pastor and mentor as “ninety seconds of vitriol plucked from thirty years of sermons by some enterprising opposition researcher.”

The claim that Wright’s sermons were selectively edited by Obama’s political opponents contradicts what is known about Wright’s preaching and the radical, racialist creed of the Trinity United Church of Christ, to which Obama belonged for two decades and to which he contributed a large amount of money.

Axelrod’s claim is also contradicted by Obama himself, who has cited Wright’s enthusiasm for radical politics as the main reason he was attracted to the church.

...

The lecture was part of the Distinguished Speaker Series of Southern California, and was delivered before a largely friendly audience.

Recording was not permitted in the Fred Kavli Theater, but Axelrod’s remarks on Wright are an exact quote, written down and tweeted immediately upon delivery. 

Joel Pollack, the contributor at Big Government who broke this story, includes the following ABC News report to freshen our memories as to Mr. Wright's "ninety seconds of vitriol":

Amazing that they would not only bring up Jeremiah Wright but actually defend the man and his hatred.

Cantaloupe sized I'm telling ya.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

No Merry Christmas from Congress

By Locutisprime

One more notch for the anti American, anti Christian, anti Christmas brigade. Egalitarianism stikes again and the band plays on...

Congressmen can't say 'Merry Christmas' in mail

Looks like the PC police have threatened members of the House of Representatives against wishing constituents a "Merry Christmas," if they want to do so in a mailing paid for with tax dollars.

Members who submit official mailings for review by the congressional franking commission that reviews all congressional mail to determine if it can be "franked," or paid for with tax dollars, are being told that no holiday greetings, including "Merry Christmas," can be sent in official mail.

"I called the commission to ask for clarification and was told no 'Merry Christmas.' Also told cannot say 'Happy New Year' but can say 'have a happy new year' – referencing the time period of a new year, but not the holiday," said a Hill staffer who requested anonymity.

Another Hill staffer told The Washington Examiner that "we were given that advice after submitting" a draft mailing.

Members of Congress send millions of dollars worth of mail to constituents every year but there are official rules that govern what can and cannot be said in those mailings. Members are barred, for example, from saying anything that might be construed as advocating their re-election.

But saying "Merry Christmas" is also not permitted, according to a Dec. 12 memo from the "Franking Commission Staff" concerning "Holiday Messaging."

More at the link.

Jonah Goldberg: Obama is a kung fu master at defeating straw men

Consider this your must read of the day:

Sounding as if he were still running against George W. Bush, Obama laid the blame for our problems on the “most expensive tax cuts for the wealthy in history.” Of course, he leaves out that those tax cuts also went to the middle class.

He also forgets his own favorite metric of jobs “created or saved.” It’s a bogus, unprovable gimmick, used to defend his failed stimulus, but who is he to say Bush’s tax cuts didn’t save millions of jobs after 9/11?

Obama describes the Bush years as a libertarian dystopia of “‘you’re on your own’ economics,” when we ignored vital spending on things like education and poverty programs. This is Obama’s favorite straw man, and he’s a kung fu master when it comes to defeating it.

He leaves out that Europe already has his preferred policies and is about to go under.

More significantly, Obama leaves out that under “compassionate conservatism,” Bush was the first president to spend more than 3 percent of GDP on anti-poverty programs. Under Bush, federal spending on education grew 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama forgets that Bush fought for the biggest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society (Medicare Part D). He airbrushes away Sarbanes-Oxley, a new cabinet agency, faith-based initiatives, etc.

“Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1 percent,” Obama barked. “That is the height of unfairness.” Except, when the Washington Post asked the White House for evidence to support the claim, an official confessed they “had no actual data to back up the president’s assertion.”

That’s okay. Who cares about the facts when you’re fighting to make America safe for cynicism again?

Read the whole thing.  Pass it on.

Obama is attempting, as he promised, to remake America and he's been largely successful.

He must be stopped.  And it will be a fight to overcome his lies and the army of willing accomplices in the media and the ignorant on social media, leftist blogs and elsewhere who gullibly pass his lies along as truth.

Engage. 

To quote the leftists themselves... and this time be correct... it's for the children.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Ladies and gentlemen, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee

By tim, The Godless Heathen

Via The Gateway Pundit:

"We saw what happened when Iran took hostages in 1979. A president lost his re-election. The prestige of the United States was challenged."

"I am not going to be taken hostage again to extend the Bush tax cuts when every economist says that it’s absolutely absurd forever and points to the fact that no jobs are necessarily created by extending the Bush tax cuts, at least on the top one percent of Americans, and when the top one percent population polled have said that they have no problem with losing that ludicrous benefit forever and ever. And then, when everyone understands the question of mutual sacrifice, benefit and sacrifice, with all of our soldiers coming home we’re now going to talk about being held hostage to the Bush tax cuts forever."

(Emphasis mine)

I have so much to say, yet…I’d rather hear what you, gentle reader, think of that.

"The sense of entitlement and disregard for the law is appalling"

That and much more from the Santa Cruz Police Department blog about... you guessed it... the Occupidiots who've been wreaking local havoc:

On late Saturday night, after over 72 hours of difficult negotiations, Occupy Santa Cruz ended their takeover of a vacant bank building at 75 River Street. Our goal was to have a peaceful resolution to this illegal and unproductive action and we were successful in that endeavor. Thankfully, the group was able to show the maturity that had been lacking in the first three days of the takeover. 

It is our intent to work with the District Attorney's Office to identify those that are responsible and hold them accountable for the trespass. In addition, we will be reviewing the costs associated with the takeover to see if there is any way we can recoup some of the public funds that were spent during the last few days. Clearly, as chief, I would prefer our resources be dedicated to more pressing issues than people that blatantly disregard reason, property rights and common sense. I can't make it clearer that no one has a First Amendment right to break into someone's property, commit acts of felony vandalism and ignore the law. Their actions were senseless and childish and diverted our limited resources. In addition, it placed our officers in needless danger; something that I find completely unbelievable. 

We had worked hard to develop a Plan B to protect people and property and were fortunate that we were able to end this through the skilled work of our negotiators. It was difficult, especially given the lack of a central figure in the group to negotiate and their initial greeting of expletives and slurs about police; not exactly the best basis for friendly negotiation. Within hours, they stopped answering phone calls on the cell phone we provided and continually provided us with unreasonable desires and no time horizon for vacating a space they had no right to be in. The sense of entitlement and disregard for the law is appalling. To say the least, it detracts from whatever their initial message was to have such an escalation of action. Some were quoted in media outlets showing their willingness to be arrested and their lack of interest in negotiation. Others were shown harassing the media or police that were there to speak to them. No longer can we trust that their intentions are purely political protest or other reasonably protected First Amendment actions. We witnessed anarchists, like those involved in the May Day riots, openly participating in the initial takeover and saw some quoted that were willing to face any sort of police action in order to defend their "right" to illegal takeover of the building. 

Hey... can someone point me in the direction of some of those good people who are involved in the Occupy protests?

I'd love for them to answer how it is that they would continue to associate themselves with the movement.  And then I'd like to ask them what specifically would the Tea Party movement not address as to their grievances.

Wouldn't you?

With props to John at VerumSerum.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Power abuse

A month ago I put up a post detailing the Richmond Tea Party's attempt to recover money they were charged by the city to hold a rally, this in light of the Occupy protest being able to do what they did months later without being charged similarly.

Yesterday I was contacted by Colleen Owens about a new twist to the story, a twist that suggests some in Richmond have it in for the Tea Party in a most nasty way.  

Her piece at Big Government tells us more:

Two weeks after the Richmond Tea Party delivered an invoice to Richmond Mayor Dwight Jones for costs incurred for previous rallies, we received a letter from the City of Richmond formally stating that the city is auditing our Tea Party. Coincidence? This audit is an obvious attempt to intimidate and harass us for standing up against the unfair treatment and discrimination against our Tea Party.

...

Here is the City Audit Letter Notification (click on image for larger version):

Read the entire piece.  

If this isn't abuse of power, nothing is. 

Crossposted at Wizbang.

"The party will explicitly abandon the white working class"

The New York Times has details:

For decades, Democrats have suffered continuous and increasingly severe losses among white voters. But preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.

All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.

It is instructive to trace the evolution of a political strategy based on securing this coalition in the writings and comments, over time, of such Democratic analysts as Stanley Greenberg and Ruy Teixeira. Both men were initially determined to win back the white working-class majority, but both currently advocate a revised Democratic alliance in which whites without college degrees are effectively replaced by well-educated socially liberal whites in alliance with the growing ranks of less affluent minority voters, especially Hispanics.

The 2012 approach treats white voters without college degrees as an unattainable cohort. The Democratic goal with these voters is to keep Republican winning margins to manageable levels, in the 12 to 15 percent range, as opposed to the 30-point margin of 2010 — a level at which even solid wins among minorities and other constituencies are not enough to produce Democratic victories.

So... if you're white... you're the wrong color according to Obama and his strategists.

In other news... water is wet, the sky is blue and Jeremiah Wright was once Obama's pastor... for over 20 years.

Just sayin'.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

"They don't call them patients, they call them units"

Remember when they laughed off, ridiculed and otherwise denied Sarah Palin's assertion that Obamacare would usher in death panels?

Listen to this neurosurgeon, fresh from a seminar in Washington DC, tell about what it is that the HHS has in store for seniors:

The Anchoress calls it what it is. Evil:

So if you are a 70 year-old Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Krugman — with a potent private health insurance plan such as the one enjoyed by Members of Congress and other bureaucrats — you will get every appropriate surgery and treatment applicable.

But if you are a 70 year-old former bookkeeper or waitress on Medicare, well — you have swung your last golfclub or danced your last waltz, because the “ethics panel” that assesses your unithood will have no problem inventing a equation that goes something like, “Potential-Tax-revenues-minus-potential-cost-divided-by-social-and-political-value-equals…a negligible unit.

And you’ll be shuffled off to the room with the big screen full of daffodils and excellent speakers blasting Vivaldi, and made “comfortable.”

Assessing human beings as “units” is Evil. Period, full stop. It is a diabolical disorientation. The only people who do not understand that are people who also have difficulty with that inconvenient old “conscience thing“.

The caller to Levin’s show said he was a neurosurgeon, and of German descent. He mentioned his ancestry at the same time he discussed “units” and admitted he was distressed. The source of his distress was very likely his recognition of a the sort of ruthless efficiency someone in his family once knew first hand, either from one side of the ledger, or the other.

Tell me again that elections don't matter.

Video H/T to Wheat & Weeds.

Crossposted at Wizbang.