What Did Obama Know, And When Did He Know It?

During the investigation of the Watergate Scandal, Senator Howard Baker (R-TN) asked out loud, “What did the President know, and when did he know it?” This is a good question to ask the current resident of the White House. For although a very smart man (according to the left), Mr. Obama appears to be pretty damned ignorant of the various scandals happening on his watch. If the One only learns about Regime scandals from the media, he needs to fire his staff. After all, if these people are not telling him anything AND letting him get into trouble, he doesn’t need them. Besides, the faux outrage he employs when “learning” about the scandals—clearly a calculated political ploy–has been overdone.

What he knew and when

After the 2008 election, the office of the president-elect’s transition team was briefed by the Bush Administration about the long waiting times and scheduling issues at Veterans Administration (VA) facilities. Senator Obama had already used problems with the treatment of veterans as an emotional campaign issue in 2008.

In April of 2010, the VA’s Deputy Undersecretary of Health for Operations and Management revealed the administration knew of inappropriate scheduling practices. The tactics included telling patients of VA facilities to call back for appointments in 30 days in order to make it appear that there was not a long delay to see a doctor. Such a manual logging system made it easier to hide long wait times from inspectors. Appointments were also routinely cancelled and rescheduled in order to reduce apparent wait times.

The mainstream media have been reporting VA mistreatment for years, so why is Barack only learning about it now? Must have been too busy playing golf or pandering to gay athletes.

How will the VA scandal affect Obamacare?

Not long ago, the left promoted the VA as a national leader in health reform. It was the Democrat Party’s shining example of how wonderfully efficient government controlled healthcare would be. Well, the alternative media have not forgotten. The VA scandal is now an indicator of what Obamacare will do to the American people. Healthcare will be rationed by bureaucrats; and ailing Americans will be condemned to death, at least in part, by the corrupt manipulation of a waiting list.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Persecution: The Air Force Just Banned The Bible In This Memorial

No Honor Allowed for POW/MIA Display

The Missing Man Table is a semi-official place of honor in some dining facilities of the U.S. armed forces in memory of fallen, missing, or imprisoned military service-members. The table serves as the focal point of ceremonial remembrance, originally growing out of US concern for the Vietnam War POW/MIA issue.

The display consists of a small table with a white table cloth, an inverted glass, a plate with a lemon and salt, a single rose, and a yellow ribbon. To a few, the most offensive part of the display is the Bible.

Patrick Air Force Base

The missing man table had been a prominent fixture in the dining facility for years until last week, when the commanders decided that the presence of the Bible was too controversial and had it removed. Base officials informed Fox News’s Todd Starnes that the display was removed because of the Bible. The Holy Bible was seen as a distraction to the purpose of honoring POWs/MIAs. They felt it was proper to replace the place of honor and remembrance with a POW/MIA flag.

When the base leadership received some negative press and pressure, the commanders relented: “After consultation with several relevant organizations, we now intend to re-introduce the POW/MIA table in a manner inclusive of all POWs/MIAs as well as Americans everywhere.”  All that gibberish means they are not going to include the Bible.

Air Force leading the way

While addressing the House Armed Services committee, Air Force Chief of staff Gen. Mark Welsh insisted that there was no war on religious liberty on the service. He complained that “the single biggest frustration I’ve had in this job is the perception that somehow there is religious persecution inside the United States Air Force.” Oh really! Representative John Fleming (R-La.) told Todd Starnes that the “Air Force seems to be the worst offender when it comes to attacks on religious liberty.”

Gen. Welsh is working hard to be Obama’s next choice for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Good General failed to remember what happened to General Merrill McPeak.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

The Splintering Of Al Qaeda Isn’t Necessarily Good News…

Obama Awkward Moment Terrorists Syria Al Qaeda

The recent uprising in Syria may have claimed a new victim–al Qaeda. Since the death of Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda have been without a strong leader to keep the terrorist organization unified.  Documents obtained from the raid that killed Osama revealed earlier divisions.

Divisions 
One of the main causes of division within the terrorist factions involves a central leadership that calls for moderation, believing that worldwide, uncontrolled terrorism is providing the organization with a distorted image. Al Qaeda itself is competing with a fanatical jihadist organization known as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). The ISIL is a splinter group, formed without approval from the al Qaeda leadership and which will not receive official support from the senior al Qaeda junta. Despite being condemned by “moderate” terrorists, ISL is gaining support from worldwide jihadists. The rift between the terrorist cabals was widened by intervention in Syria when the upstart group violated al Qaeda’s rules for waging Islamic holy war. It is claimed that the growing division between jihadists made it difficult for the Obama Administration to know who to support in its attempt to remove Syrian President al-Assad.

In a statement released on Twitter, al Qaeda central leader Ayman al Zawahiri declared that “the ultra-hardline ISIL was not part of the global al Qaeda network.” In a display of his new “moderation,” the Zawahiri-led al Qaeda organization only suspended the upstart ISIL, evan after ISIL extremists had killed al Qaeda members in Syria. That was mighty nice of him after he called for the ISIL to be abolished last year in an attempt to end infighting among terrorists. One thing the two groups have in common is their hatred of the civilized world.

No Time to Celebrate
When the Jihadists are not busy fighting each other, they still hate all things American. The possibility of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “step-child” threat to America is real. The ISIL is gaining popular support from ambitious jihadists operating in Syria and Iraq and has attracted admirers worldwide.

Unfortunately, this means that troops in the war on terrorism have yet another threat to deal with.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

American Military Leaders Now Working On Behalf Of The Enemy?

Mali Al Qaidas Country

Leaders? Where are they?

For years, the late Col. David H. Hackworth warned about self-serving, porcelain princes in leadership positions not acting as leaders, but as political hacks seeking only to enhance their own career. Leadership, at best, is granted lip service but rarely practiced in the rarefied air of the military hierarchy. After all, one public faux pas can be a career ender. If Patton were around today, he would have been purged at once from the U.S. Army by its porcelain princes.

Billy and Karen Vaughn, Gold Star parents of Special Operations Chief (SEAL) Aaron Vaughn, wrote “Truth is, America’s military has always had plenty of ‘good men.’ What it seems to lack in spades is good leaders.” The Vaughns used Robert Gates’ book, Duty, to confirm their suspicions that Mr. Obama sent men and women into a war with a mission he doesn’t believe in. Neither Obama the “leader,” nor many who served under him in the Department of Defense, have any desire to support front line troops. And they also have no strategy to win the war.

This nation’s number one public housing community organizer is indifferent to foreign policy, to paraphrase Bill O’Reilly’s post-Obama interview comment. Obama only cares about social justice. Accusing the current administration of not caring about front-line warriors is hardly a stretch, given that Obama’s only concern about the military has been the plight of homosexuals. He was totally indifferent about the Benghazi murders because the situation existed outside of his “social justice” paradigm.

Rules of Engagement
The champion of social justice and his acolytes created new Rules of Engagement (ROE), which restrict American troops from directly engaging the enemy. In Obama’s world of social justice, giving a life and death advantage to an enemy in combat is considered fairness. The current rules greatly restrict the soldier’s ability to fight a war by totally eliminating the discretion of troops in harms way. If a warrior violates the ROE, they will be court-martialed by REMF Lawyers seeking to greatly improve their performance evaluations and maybe even receive a medal for aggressive prosecution. This creates a hopeless situation for the troops who are serving this country. To quote former JAG Ken Walsh, “it’s Political Correctness driving this train.”

The current leadership is not interested in winning this war. But even more shocking is the fact that no one in a leadership position will tell the Kenyan Muslim that his policy is wrong! No one in this Administration is interested in defeating terrorism. It isn’t social justice! Social Justice to this lot is the desire to use and to sacrifice the U.S. Armed forces in order to provide cover for radical Muslims that might take over the Middle East.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Military Ethics Lapses?





Photo credit: terrellaftermath

Cheating scandals have recently rocked the Air Force and Navy; and the resulting press coverage has, unfortunately, stained the honor and the integrity of the entire military. The majority of Americans have faith and pride in the men and women who selflessly serve this nation. The negative press doesn’t represent the overwhelming majority of service members.

Recent scandals may be an indication of a systemic problem within the forces. Service members are expected to have honor and integrity and are the only individuals associated with the government who have the trust and respect of the American people. But reports of unethical behavior can shake the people’s faith in an all-volunteer force and are unacceptable to those who serve and have served. Fears of growing ethics problems in the American Military should concern the public. For if the ethics and honor of our armed forces are compromised, the most powerful military in history will soon be no better than a collection of self-serving mercenaries.

Scandals recently reported by the media include the revelation that Malmstrom AFB missile launch officers were cheating on proficiency exams and using illegal drugs. The scandal involved at least 23 officers. Navy nuclear reactor instructors at the Charleston Nuclear Power Training Unit are alleged to have cheated on a written qualification exam for future instructors. The Army is investigating a possible large-scale fraud concerning Army National Guard recruitment incentives.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the Pentagon to focus on ethics training and has suggested that character should be a consideration for performance reports and promotions. He is concerned about the strong culture of accountability and responsibility that the public believes must exist in its armed forces.  The Defense Secretary is concerned that an ethics lapse may represent a growing problem and be an indication of a breakdown of character in the military. The Secretary should look in the mirror and see who is responsible for implementing the policies that have created the situation.