Obama Defense Dept: “No Credible Threat Pre-Benghazi”

By William Teach November 12, 2012 – 2:32 pm

Here’s a new, and disturbing, spin

(UPI) A Defense Department official, speaking on background, provided a timeline of the U.S. military response to the deadly consulate attack.

“I would note … that there was no specific or credible threat that we knew of on the day that the attacks … occurred in Benghazi,” the official said.

Perhaps we do need to enforce the sequestration, and do away with some of the dead wood and non-combat military members warming chairs. Because others sure were worried

The International Committee of the Red Cross pulled its staff out of Benghazi and the State Department issued travel warnings for the region ahead of the attacks, however.

News outlets around the world were discussing the increasing danger in Benghazi and the surrounding area to Westerners from Islamic jihadis. Many of them were pulling their operations out of Benghazi. And we knew there were jihadis streaming in to eastern Libya and Benghazi during the civil war when the U.S. was bombing. Oh, and then there is this

(CNN) Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri again referenced the Benghazi, Libya, attack in an audio tape posted on jihadist websites last week, in remarks that, like all his statements, were immediately carefully scrutinized by counter-terrorism analysts searching for clues about the terrorist network’s operations.

Al-Zawahiri had called for Americans to be targeted in Libya the day before the diplomatic mission was attacked, leading to speculation that al Qaeda’s leadership in Pakistan had some sort of role or influence in the attack.

So, the day before the attack you have al Qaeda’s leader calling for attacks. Humph. You had Ambassador Stevens and many others screaming for more security. And, it was, you know, September 11th. Oh, and that whole thing about tons of people showing up with al Qaeda and Taliban style flags and headbands. The group that was supposed to provide security taking pictures of the American buildings. And it was September 11th. Now, if this had occurred in say, June, that might be a different story. Islamists love using certain dates to plan attacks. 9/11 is the big one.

Read: Obama Defense Dept: “No Credible Threat Pre-Benghazi” »

Posted in RoP, War On Terrorism | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 12, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…is the sea being saved by the carbon limiting efforts of progressive paradise France, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Flopping Aces, with a post on the Obama lemmings.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Excitable Juan Williams: Brokeifornia’s New Election Rules Are Super Awesome

By William Teach November 12, 2012 – 8:50 am

In case you didn’t hear, the brokeyest broke state in the Union has new election rules. On one hand, Juan Williams has some interesting point about them. On the flip side, ugh

(The Hill) Polarization and gridlock have paralyzed Congress. But now, a bright ray of hope for ending those twin curses is emerging from election results in California.

The optimism begins with changes in the system for electing lawmakers in the Golden State, home to the largest congressional biggest delegation.

In 2010, a diverse group of the state’s biggest political stakeholders — including the California Chamber of Commerce, the AARP and then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger — united to support a ballot proposition creating a bipartisan commission that redrew the geographic lines for California’s congressional districts.

Hey, bipartisan! Sweet…but

Out of California’s 53 House races, seven incumbents lost their seats as they ran in more diverse districts — in which candidates had to appeal to more diverse neighborhoods and political groups.

So, they were gerrymandered in order to create more Democrat friendly districts. Two Republicans are in 50-50 races right now. Here’s where it gets more interesting

The proposition also changed the rules for the general election.

The old system pitted the winners of the party’s primaries against each other. The new system provides for the two candidates with the most votes in an open congressional primary to move on to the general election — even if they belong to the same party.

On one hand, this is a good way to clean out the incumbents. As Juan noted, 7 lost their seats (it should be noted that 2 incumbents lost in newly created districts and were competing against another incumbent, in both cases Democrat). However, under the new rules there were 6 districts where only Democrats were on the ballot and 2 where only Republicans were on the ballot. Let’s look at a few

  • In the 31st, there were 4 Democrats and 2 Republicans for the primary. It ended up R vs R. So, no Dem competing in the General
  • In the 35th, 2 Dems and one Green. The Green was not on the General election ballot
  • In the 30th, 3 R’s, 3 D’s, and one Green. The General ballot featured 2 Democrats.
  • The 8th, 10 R’s, 2 D’s, one Independent. The General ballot featured 2 Republicans

Granted, in all of these the chance of the other party (or 3rd Party) winning the district was mostly zip. However, should the people of Brokeifornia not have the chance to vote for a different party on the ballot during the General Election? This limits democracy.

Under this new system, the 24/7 news cycle and partisan bloggers, which encourage the loudest and most extreme voices, are not as able to define the race and control the outcome.

How dare you darned news folks and jammie wearing bloggers push your opinions!!!!!!1!!!!

The bottom line is that voters have more choice among candidates competing for the middle ground, not to be a champion of one political extreme.

Exactly how is limiting the number of people on a ballot creating more choice? How is shutting out competing parties “more choice”?

This also applies to the State legislature races, in which featured 19 same party races. None of the state or House races have seemed to “create more moderates”, as was the intention.

Read: Excitable Juan Williams: Brokeifornia’s New Election Rules Are Super Awesome »

Posted in Elections | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

White House Inundated With Secession Petitions

By William Teach November 12, 2012 – 8:03 am

If you’ll remember, Team Obama created a website, using White House resources and it’s URL, as a “new way to petition the Obama Administration to take action on a range of important issues facing our country.” They “created We the People because we want to hear from you. If a petition gets enough support, White House staff will review it, ensure it’s sent to the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response.” In actuality, it seems to be more of a way to to scrape email addresses and names to soft pedal how super duper great Team Obama is and send subtly veiled campaign messages. There have been some interesting ones, quite a few having to do with far left issues, such as making marijuana legal (these crop up a lot, then disappear down the memory hole), and, oh, here’s a fun one

outlaw offending prophets of major religions

The petition mentions Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed, but, we all know it’s about protecting Islam.

So, are there other fun petitions? Why, yes there are, thank you for asking!

(Daily Caller) How would Old Glory look with 30 stars instead of 50? As far-fetched as it may sound, the White House might soon be forced by its own rules to examine the question.

On Nov.7, the day after President Barack Obama was re-elected, the White House’s website received a petition asking the administration to allow Louisiana to secede.

If 25,000 people sign the petition by Dec. 7, it will “require a response” from the Obama administration, according to published rules of the White House’s online “We the People” program.

“Michael E” from the New Orleans suburb of Slidell penned the initial proposal — the website doesn’t provide last names — in which he asked the Obama administration to “[p]eacefully grant the State of Louisiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.”

His entire petition consisted of excerpts from the Declaration of Independence.

Micah H from Texas also created a petition for Texas to secede. Oh, and

…states with secession-related petitions pending on the White House website now include Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina and Tennessee.

Three states – Georgia, Missouri and South Carolina are each represented by two competing petitions.

Most of the petitions simply copy much of Louisiana’s petition. It will be interesting to see if any get the required 25K signatures which would lead to an administration response, which would be interesting, as well. Most previous responses tend to say “look at what we’ve proposed, we told Someone Else to handle it, then ran off to campaign, vacation, and play golf.”

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: White House Inundated With Secession Petitions »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Current Affairs | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

And Next They Came For Bacon: Clothing Retailer Boo Hoo Opts For Dhimmitude

By William Teach November 11, 2012 – 4:15 pm

Over in Jolly Old England, they look to “respect” one religion while ignoring the rights of other people (via Doug Ross)

Does anyone think they do this due to any employees of the Jewish faith? Not likely. Rarely do you hear Jews complain. They tolerate. This is simply enforcing Sharia law on employees who aren’t Muslim. Possibly out of fear, possibly out of simple dhimmitude.

I wonder when England will ban dogs on the streets?

Oh, and over at Legal Insurrection we learn about a kerfuffle over Israeli food at Harvard.

More: The Daley Gator points out some pre-Christmas dhimmitude in Belgium with an “electronic winter tree”

Read: And Next They Came For Bacon: Clothing Retailer Boo Hoo Opts For Dhimmitude »

Posted in Dhimmitude | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 11, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle that has been ground by a progressive country reducing their carbon footprint, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The People’s Cube (who I stole the picture from), with a post on evil Papa John’s Pizza.

This week’s theme is in honor of Comrade Obama’s re-election.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach November 11, 2012 – 9:39 am

Patriotic Pin Up Gil Elvgren

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America….oh, who the hell am I kidding? We’re doomed. I might as well start using the Socialist flag in these posts, until the resulting crash and destru….OK, had some coffee and a microwave egg biscuit. Much better now. Anyhow, this pinup is by Gil Elvgren, with a wee bit of help

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. A Man, A Dog, And His Gun has a math quiz
  2. American Power points out that part time is the new normal
  3. Blogs For Victory wonders about 141% turnout
  4. Conservative Commune discusses the 99%
  5. Doug Ross reaches way back for a lesson on the election
  6. Fire Andrea Mitchell is “just wondering” about the election results
  7. Gay Patriot wonders if supporting gay marriage could help the GOP
  8. House of Eratosthenes discusses mandate wars
  9. Moonbattery brings us the wonderful state of live news in Liberal World and…hey, bring my camera back, you thief!
  10. neo-neocon has lessons learned from the election
  11. Patterico has some wonderful news about criminals from Brokeifornia
  12. And Public Secrets points out Brokeifornia voters were duped
  13. And while on Brokeifornia, Right Truth points out really important spending by San Francisco
  14. Down in Raised On Hoecakes land, schools may close do to…..can you guess?
  15. And, last, but not least, let’s end on a note that liberals and conservatives can agree on, via teresamerica
  16. And one to grow on: The First Street Journal has remembering Ft. Hood three years later.

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

The posts do take a long time, so, if you want to send me your links for Rule 5 babeage or links, use ye olde email in the header bar (remove the NOSPAM part). Preferably, create the html link so I can copy and paste how you want it to read.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

FBI Whistle Blower Spoke To Eric Cantor Two Weeks Ago Regarding Petraeus

By William Teach November 11, 2012 – 8:32 am

Starting off, Politico offers 6 lingering questions regarding the resignation of David Petraeus, which includes

1. Why resign now?

The Obama administration’s first sex scandal exploded just three days after the president was reelected at the end of a hard-fought campaign and just days before Petraeus was scheduled to appear at a congressional hearing about the attacks in Benghazi.

That’s a good question. Why three days days after the election with the hearings coming up? One of the other questions is “5. What role, if any, did Benghazi play?” Will Petraeus make himself available to Congress? Oh, and then there’s this question “4. Why weren’t Obama and the Hill committees told earlier?” Who says Obama didn’t know? There’s zero chance the head of the FBI wasn’t informed of the probe. And there’s zero chance Eric Holder, as head of the DOJ, wasn’t informed of a probe against the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency by his underling, the head of the FBI. And zero chance Holder doesn’t inform his boss, Barack Obama. And they all surely knew weeks ago, if not longer. Why? We learn on Internet page 2 of the NY Times article

Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, said Saturday an F.B.I. employee whom his staff described as a whistle-blower told him about Mr. Petraeus’s affair and a possible security breach in late October, which was after the investigation had begun.

“I was contacted by an F.B.I. employee concerned that sensitive, classified information may have been compromised and made certain Director Mueller was aware of these serious allegations and the potential risk to our national security,” Mr. Cantor said in a statement.

Mr. Cantor talked to the person after being told by Representative Dave Reichert, Republican of Washington, that a whistle-blower wanted to speak to someone in the Congressional leadership about a national security concern. On Oct. 31, his chief of staff, Steve Stombres, called the F.B.I. to tell them about the call.

Let’s be clear: Petraeus having an affair is only an Obama scandal inside the circles of Washington politics. Obama is not at fault. This should not be a black mark on Obama in the least. People are responsible for their own conduct. That said, there is a saying in politics “it’s not the “crime”, it’s the coverup.” There was no actual crime committed, just a really poor choice of conduct by Petraeus, but, what did Obama and his administration know and when did they know it? Did they make sure to hold off on the resignation till after the election? Did they wait till after the election to inform Petraeus that they knew about the affair?

Another question would be why Congress was not informed till after the election? Diane Feinstein was a bit put out that, as head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, she was not informed of the probe. Who made the decision to not inform her and others in Congress? Damned sure it wasn’t some down the FBI/DOJ food chain.

On Saturday, the two government officials who had been briefed on the case dismissed a range of media speculation that the F.B.I. inquiry might have focused on leaks of classified information to the news media or even foreign spying. “People think that because it’s the C.I.A. director, it must involve bigger issues,” one official said. “Think of a small circle of people who know each other.”

But….

The F.B.I. investigators were not pursuing evidence of Mr. Petraeus’s marital infidelity, which would not be a criminal matter, the official said. But their examination of his e-mails, most or all of them sent from a personal account and not from his C.I.A. account, raised the possibility of security breaches that needed to be addressed directly with him.

So, exactly why were they investigating Petraeus? And how is it possible that the White House had no clue? Will this turn into another example of the Obama administration hiding information? Surely, we can’t expect them to inform the public, but they should have informed certain members of Congress.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: FBI Whistle Blower Spoke To Eric Cantor Two Weeks Ago Regarding Petraeus »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs, Democrats | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Greenie Pig Realizes That Non-Fossil Fueled Travel Sucks In The Rain

By William Teach November 10, 2012 – 6:38 pm

I will give it to Grist’s Greenie Pig, Elisabeth Kwak-Hefferan, for at least giving non-fossil fueled travel a shot, and for challenging others to do the same

True, this method is not exactly swift if your destination is, say, Anchorage.* Within two miles, though? Food-fueled transportation — a.k.a. walking, biking, hopscotching, what have you — can be just as efficient (and when parking is involved, often faster) as hopping in the car. And when you consider that 40 percent of all automobile trips occur within a two-mile radius of wherever we are, the so-called Two-Mile Challenge becomes a truly viable option for putting a cork in the carbon emissions spewing from the typical American lifestyle.

If you read through it, she tries, she really does. But, sometimes fails (why doesn’t she own a Volt?)

Then there are the times comfort comes into play, like when we ordered a pizza from our favorite local joint, 1.8 miles away and a pleasant stroll when it’s not raining bathtubs — which it proceeded to do 20 minutes before our scheduled pickup time. I considered our options: Bike there, and fold the pizza to fit into a backpack? Walk, and bring the pizza its own raincoat? (What’s that — an umbrella for the pizza? Don’t be ridiculous.) When it came down to it, we just didn’t feel like struggling through the cold downpour for 40 minutes, desperately trying to protect the cheesy goodness from going soggy. So we drove.

Yeah, that sucks. But, hey, Liz, if you’re going to sacrifice, it has to be a 100% effort (BTW, I wonder what the food miles are on that pizza?)

Know how many responded to her challenge? None. Warmists love talking, but few are willing to do.

Read: Greenie Pig Realizes That Non-Fossil Fueled Travel Sucks In The Rain »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 10, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil grill using evil fossil fuels to cook evil meat in the world’s biggest carbon polluting nation, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day This ain’t Hell…., with a post wishing the USMC a Happy Birthday!

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove