I might as well pick up where I left off; that is, by taking note of how little our president and media care about our nation’s security. This has become even clearer since my September14th post, as 1) the MSM has continued to not report the information divulged in the British press about security leaks at our Libyan consulate, and 2)
continued to peddle the childish fantasy that last week’s attacks were
spontaneous individual acts rather than planned acts of terror.
However, Obama’s lack of commitment to our security, and his lack of commitment to freedom and peace anywhere on earth, was most vividly demonstrated by his snubbing of Benjamin Netanyahu at a time when Netanyahu was trying to work cooperatively to counteract
nuclear armament. Make no mistake about it: Obama has, in a slippery but
obvious way, sided against the only free and moral nation in the Middle East --
a nation which also happens to be our most loyal and important ally in the
world. In so doing, he has sided with the forces of barbarism and theocracy.
These actions mark him as a disgrace to the office he holds.
* * * * *
As dangerous as Obama’s presidency is, it can be argued that the reticence of so many Americans to say aloud what I wrote above -- purely because they don’t want to be considered racist for not looking favorably upon The Exalted One -- is far, far more dangerous for the future of our children.
* * * * *
The MSM can not be moved to care about standing up to defend freedom when it is assaulted by Muslims, but man, you sure can count on them to paint Romney as the enemy of normal people for making his completely logical “47 percent” comment. And they expect to be taken seriously?
Frankly, I am thrilled about Romney’s comment; it is way past time to hear such words come from the mouth of a politician, even if he only intended them to be heard by the in-room audience. They could go down as among the most consequential words ever uttered by a pol if they spur the nation into a serious conversation about the disastrous effects that dependency, coupled with an entitlement mentality, has on society,
* * * * *
I was 13 when the book Fatal Vision was made into a TV miniseries starring Karl Malden. It was from watching that miniseries that I first learned about the case of former Army surgeon Jeffrey MacDonald, who was charged with murdering his wife and two daughters the year before I was born. MacDonald was convicted, but has so stridently claimed his innocence that he refused to apply for parole when he was eligible, because the requirement that he show remorse for the crime would suggest that he did in fact commit it.
In scrolling through the headlines yesterday, I learned that MacDonald is back in court this week, seeking to gain freedom via DNA testing that was not possible when he was originally tried. I have no particular opinion as to his guilt or innocence, because much like the JFK assassination, whoever is arguing for a particular side seems to make sense no matter which side they are on. I do, however, keep coming back to this thought: If the “innocent side” is still able to sound so compelling 42 years later, how can it be just for the accused to remain in prison?
* * * * *
On a similar note (albeit from the “other side of the coin”) did you hear that
America’s oldest cold case appears
to have been solved after 55 years? The details are intriguing and you can go here to read about them.