Disgraceful

9/11 is the anniversary of the day that Islamic jihadists attacked us.  9/11 is a day of remembrance and a day of honoring those that we have lost.

9/11 is also a day that Muslims commemorate....as a day of victory and protest.  Muslims across the world DANCED when they learned about the attacks.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Months ago, some fool, apparently a criminal prohibited from using computers, uploaded an idiotic, sophomoric video, claiming it to be a "trailer" to a larger movie.  It was disrespectful of  Islam.  Quite disrespectful. 

Oh, my.  Whatever shall we do?  Well, other than point and laugh?

On 9/11, our brave State Department, our embassy in Cairo, apologized for certain people who "showed disrespect" to the religion of "tolerance."  This apology was, as per the State Department, NOT authorized.  The Cairo embassy was attacked during a protest about said video.  The protesters breached the wall around the embassy, took down our flag, and replaced with black flag of Islam, similar to the flag of our enemy, Al Qaeda. And then, the State Department offered apologies AGAIN, basically the same as that offered by the Cairo Embassy.

At the same time, our embassy/consulate in Libya was attacked and burned.  Our ambassador and three others, were killed.  Our ambassador's body was dragged through the city.

Governor Romney, seeing the response of the administration, that of decrying the exercise of offensive speech, implying that the Muslims were in the right to violently protest,  declared that response to be disgraceful.  His timing was off, but his description of the response dead on.

Obama and his minions sympathized with the reactions of the protesters.  They blamed the Libyan attack on protests about the video, calling Romney's comments inappropriate.  The press, Obama supporters all, turned ALL of their attention on Romney's comments instead of the fact that our embassy was burned and ambassador murdered.

Well, Obama is lying.  And the press is worse than incompetent. They are WILLFULLY blind and partisan.

This is my shocked face.

The attack in Libya, which many thought to be a terrorist revenge attack, has been shown to be so.  Carney, Obama's lying spokesman, stated that none of the attacks were in response to US policy.
Apparently, that's not so.  The ATTACKERS state that the attack was in response to drone attacks.  Foreign governments, such as LIBYA, and foreign press notified the State Department that the Ambassador was in danger, days in advance.

The press is still ignoring Obama's failings in the Mid East, and especially Libya.  They succeeded in deflecting attention to Romney.

Why was there no security with the ambassador, who, HIMSELF, said that he was in danger?

Why was there no Marine Detachment in a war zone?

Why were two of the three others misidentified as Marines, but were actually former SEALs in the employ of the State Department?  Their jobs were to seek out and destroy MANPADS that were supplied to the "rebels" BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT.  The "rebels" were later identified to by elements of AL QAEDA.

Why was there no security response at the Cairo Embassy? Or any other Embassy under siege?  Were the Marines allowed to carry ammo?  What's the truth?

Why is the President and Secretary Clinton STILL blaming "protesters" for the attack when the truth is known?  Why are they STILL touting how "horrible" that 14 minute horribly amateurish film is while asking Muslims to not blame them?  All this in the face of continued insults, attacks, and outright violence by Muslims across the world?

Where is the defense of our 1st Amendment by this President and his administration?  Where are his demands for the violence to stop and for the foreign governments to live up to the treaties that host countries defend embassies?

While all this is going on, other Islamic threats exist.  Obama refuses to meet with Israel's Prime Minister, stating that he's too busy.  But he's meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood. He's partying.  He's on TV.  But he's too busy to meet with an ally that is in danger from Iran, to discuss that threat.

Romney was right.

Obama IS disgraceful.

The Man Is Earning His Pay

Attorney General Cuccinelli announces he will seek expedited review of Virginia health care lawsuit in the Supreme Court

RICHMOND (February 3, 2011) – Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli announced today that Virginia will file a petition to ask the United States Supreme Court to take Virginia’s health care lawsuit now, as opposed to waiting for the case to first be decided by the court of appeals. The Petition for Certiorari Before Judgment in the United States Supreme Court in the case of Commonwealth v. Sebelius will be filed pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules of the United States Supreme Court.

“Given the uncertainty caused by the divergent rulings of the various district courts on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, we feel that it is necessary to seek resolution of this issue as quickly as possible,” said Cuccinelli. “Currently, state governments and private businesses are being forced to expend enormous amounts of resources to prepare to implement a law that, in the end, may be declared unconstitutional. Regardless of whether you believe the law is constitutional or not, we should all agree that a prompt resolution of this issue is in everyone’s best interest.”

Normally, appeals of decisions of United States district courts are first heard in the federal courts of appeals. But Rule 11 provides that an immediate review in the U.S. Supreme Court is permissible “upon a showing that the case is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in” the Supreme Court.

Cuccinelli noted, “Rule 11 is the exception to the general rule, but this case and the other cases challenging the constitutionality of PPACA are truly exceptional in their own right. There are a number of suits pending throughout the country challenging the constitutionality of PPACA. Presently, 28 states have filed suits challenging the authority of Congress to enact this law. That, in and of itself, is exceptional and makes the cases excellent candidates for immediate review in the Supreme Court.

“We did not make this decision lightly. Given his unique responsibilities to fund and implement PPACA as Governor of Virginia, Governor McDonnell is particularly concerned about the possibility of wasting precious and strained taxpayer dollars preparing for a law that may well be struck down. Recognizing the tremendous amount of time and resources that are and will be expended to implement a law that two federal judges have ruled contains unconstitutional provisions, Lieutenant Governor Bolling and Speaker Howell have joined the governor in requesting that my office seek expedited review. Additionally, I have been encouraged to attempt to expedite this case by Democrats as well as Republicans in Virginia's General Assembly, and of course, the bipartisan passage of Virginia's Health Care Freedom Act last year was the very first step in this entire process here in the commonwealth.

“Despite the fact that the Department of Justice has not agreed to join in a Rule 11 motion, in a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to set an expedited schedule for its appeal of Virginia's district court victory, the Justice Department stated, ‘The constitutionality of [PPACA] has public policy implications of the highest magnitude.’ In other words, according to the Justice Department itself, a case cannot have public policy implications that are more important than this case. We agree and feel that reinforces the fitting nature of our request for immediate review in the Supreme Court,” Cuccinelli said.

The Petition for Certiorari and Appendix are currently being assembled by the legal printer for the attorney general and will be filed with the court as soon as is practicable.

Morning Must Reads from DCExaminer

Washington Post -- Democratic leaders say health bill will pass
If the president cannot bear to part with Robert Gibbs, perhaps the time has come to conjure a new assignment for the pugilistic press secretary.
Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Gibbs chomped and snapped like a box turtle on its back and insisted arrogantly that by next Sunday, Obamacare would be the “law of the land.” Having just seen his March 18 deadline blown off by Steny Hoyer and other House Democrats, Gibbs might want to tone it down a bit. Lawmaking is hard. Passing an unpopular plan for a president in whom few have much confidence anymore is almost impossible.
Members of Congress admit they don’t have the votes yet, but will when it counts. Meanwhile, Congress is considering more and more complex ways to try to pass the legislation to overcome the trust deficit in the House when it comes to the Senate and the White House.
And remember, we still haven’t seen a bill.
Writer Dan Eggen passes on the optimistic timetable for the final vote (now only seven month overdue).
“House Democrats expect to receive a final cost estimate by Monday afternoon, when the House Budget Committee is scheduled to vote on the reconciliation package. It would then go to the House Rules Committee, where Chairman Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.) could package it with the $875 billion measure the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. The package is also expected to include Obama's proposed overhaul of the student-loan system.
The full House is expected to vote on both measures by week's end, with the climactic moment coming as soon as Thursday but, more likely, Friday or Saturday, aides said.”

New York Times -- Millions Spent to Sway Democrats on Health Care
There may be $30 million spent this week alone in the districts of the 40 House members considered swing votes on Obamacare.
Writer Jeff Zeleny looks at the barrage of ads for and against the package in districts like that of Rep. Brad Ellsworth, the southern Indiana Democrat who voted for the House plan last fall but is now running for the Senate seat abandoned by Evan Bayh.
“The coalition of groups opposing the legislation, led by the United States Chamber of Commerce, is singling out 27 Democrats who supported the health care bill last year and 13 who opposed it. The organizations have already spent $11 million this month focusing on these lawmakers, with more spending to come before an expected vote next weekend.
An alliance of groups supporting the health care plan, which works closely with the White House and Democratic leaders, had been spending far less and focusing on fewer districts. But after pharmaceutical companies made a $12 million investment for a final advertising push, spending by both sides for the first time is now nearly the same.”

Higgins and Conway -- Swing Districts Oppose Health Reform
Let me be clear -- this is no poll that the White House would deign to read. It was done by a Republican pollster and ponders a question that the administration thinks is unworthy. Team Obama knows that some House Democrats from swing districts will lose over their health care votes, but that is just a small price (for someone else) to pay for getting the listing presidency back on track – and taking over 1/6th of the economy.
The President’s pollster heaped scorn on the op-ed by fellow Democrats Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell last week, so he’s hardly going to be interested in the observations of Heather Higgins of Independent Women’s Voice and GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway.
But if I were a House Democrat I might take a look, whether the White House wanted me to or not.
The survey of 1,200 registered voters in 35 swing district reveals that the president’s health plan is bitterly unpopular – with 60 percent asking for a compete do-over.
“Seven in 10 would vote against a House member who votes for the Senate health-care bill with its special interest provisions. That includes 45% of self-identified Democrats, 72% of independents and 88% of Republicans. Three in four disagree that the federal government should mandate that everyone buy a government-approved insurance plan (64% strongly so), and 81% say any reform should focus first on reducing costs. Three quarters agree that Americans have the right to choose not to participate in any health-care system or plan without a penalty or fine.”

New York Times -- Contractors Tied to Effort to Track and Kill Militants
Only few publications could portray an effort to kill terrorists and jihadis as unambiguously bad.
Writers Dexter Filkins and Mark Mazzetti turn in an unintentionally hilarious piece about the reporters who were drawn into a Pentagon black-ops program designed to gather intel and then kill the baddies under the Obamaian guise of fostering cross-cultural understanding.
The funny part is that reporters who sold their services at a premium price to the Defense Department to produce some blathery blog about cultural understanding in Afghanistan are so shocked that the military used the information they gathered for killing people. It may be hard to remember, but that’s still kind of the military’s job.
The real target of the piece is Michael Furlong, a front man and contractor for all manner of shadowy efforts over the years. The CIA doesn’t like the Pentagon doing secret squirrel stuff, especially using their former agent Furlong, and obliged with blind quotes about the dangers of “playing James Bond.”
But the funny part is the offended dignity of fake journalists working for the American military.
“In addition, at least one government contractor who worked with Mr. Furlong in Afghanistan last year maintains that he saw evidence that the information was used for attacking militants.
The contractor, Robert Young Pelton, an author who writes extensively about war zones, said that the government hired him to gather information about Afghanistan and that Mr. Furlong improperly used his work. ‘We were providing information so they could better understand the situation in Afghanistan, and it was being used to kill people,’ Mr. Pelton said.”

Fred Hiatt -- Obama's happiness deficit
Hiatt avoided the most obvious modern example for how to take the job of the presidency seriously without taking yourself seriously – Ronald Reagan.
But maybe that omission will help Democrats listen to his plea to Obama – lighten up, dude. Remember, you asked for the job and came to town full of hopeandchange.
“A year later, here's how they came across to People Magazine:
‘It was their first interview of the New Year on Jan. 8 in the rose-colored library on the ground floor of the White House. President Obama spoke in such a hush about the loneliness of his decisions on war and terrorism that one could hear between his words the tick of an old lighthouse clock across the room.’
Do Americans really want to hear the tick of the old lighthouse clock? Or would they prefer the good cheer that we associate with FDR or JFK, the jauntiness with which they took over the White House and made it theirs?
Less lugubriousness wouldn't necessarily buy him a health-care bill. But in the long run, Americans might find it easier to root for or with Obama if he'd show us, despite everything, that he's happy we hired him.”

A little perspective

All casualties are terrible. This counting of casualties by the press, as if the 300th, or the 1000th, had any extra meaning over the 1st one, is just wrong. Well, here's an accounting of casualties. THIS is what war used to be like.

From A TANGLED WEB, posted on July12th: Today is the 90th anniversary of the battle of Passchendaele one of the bloodiest battles ever fought. Around 310,000 Allied soldiers and around 260,000 German soldiers were killed or wounded during the battle.