Saturday night, 2008 candidate for the Republican Presidential Nomination, Baptist Preacher, former Governor of Arkansas, and erstwhile talk show host Mike Huckabee made the following announcement, concerning a possible bid to seek the Republican Presidential Nomination for the 2012 Elections:

All the factors say go, but my heart says no.

The past few months have been times of deep personal reflection. Even though I wasn’t actively establishing a campaign organization or seeking financial support to run again, polls have consistently put me at or near the top to be the Republican nominee.

But I know that under the best of circumstances, being President is a job that takes one to the limit of his or her human capacity. I can’t know or predict the future, but I know for now my answer is clear and firm: I will not seek the Republican nomination for President this year.

I had not done much toward a race because my life was filled with work that I truly love here at Fox News, doing radio commentaries on my daily Huckabee Report on 600 radio stations, traveling the country for speaking engagements, and helping good conservative, pro-life candidates who were running for office.

To which the majority of Conservatives replied:

Whew!

Why, you ask?

As I did with GOP Elite front-runner du jour, Mitch Daniels, let’s look at Governor Huckabee’s record as Governor of Arkansas (1996-2007) through the measurement of the three-legged stool of  Reagan Conservatism:

Fiscal Conservatism – From an article  published at washingtonpost.com, on January 1, 2008, Huckee’s fiscal record as Governor of Arkansas leaves a lot to be desired:

According to the Tax Foundation, the state and local tax burden on the average Arkansan increased from 10.1 per cent to 11.3 per cent under Huckabee. When he came into office in 1996, Arkansas ranked 30th in the nation as the state with the highest taxes. When he left at the beginning of this year, it had risen to 13th.

Overall tax revenues in Arkansas rose by some $500 million under Huckabee, according to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. In Huckabee’s defense, $400 million of this increased revenue went to pay for improvements in the state’s educational system mandated in 2002 by the Arkansas Supreme Court, to correct inequalities in education spending. The biggest tax increases came in 2003 and 2004, after the Supreme Court decision.

…The Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration has confirmed that there were 90 tax cuts in the period 1995 to 2005, reducing revenues by $378 million. But many of these tax cuts were very narrowly tailored. A list assembled by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette included the following:

Exempting Arkansas Symphony Orchestra from sales tax. Total revenues foregone: $20,000

An income tax deduction for organ donation: $76,000

Exempting county fairs from special events tax: $15,000.

Offsetting these tax cuts were at least 21 tax increases, including repeated tax hikes on tobacco, alcohol, increases in the sales tax, and a 3 per cent “income tax surcharge.” The tax hikes brought in a total of $883 million between 1995 and 2003.

 Social Conservatism – Per an article posted on foxnews.com on December 10, 2007:

As governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee had a hand in twice as many pardons and commutations as his three predecessors combined.

…Although the Republican presidential contender and Southern Baptist preacher plays down any personal involvement in that release, Huckabee granted 1,033 pardons and commutations in his 10 1/2 years as governor of Arkansas. The acts of clemency benefited the stepson of a staff member, murderers who worked at the governor’s mansion, a rock star and inmates who received good words from their pastors.

…Whitewater figure David Hale, a government witness in the trial that forced Gov. Jim Guy Tucker’s resignation and let Huckabee ascend to the office, was pardoned after being sentenced to 21 days in a state insurance case. Huckabee complained it would cost too much to hold him. The price tag: $1,200.

Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards received a gubernatorial pardon for a 1975 traffic offense. Huckabee prepared the paperwork to clear the rock star’s good name after he met him at a North Little Rock concert.

During his years as governor, Huckabee granted clemency an average of about once every four days. Huckabee’s successor, Mike Beebe, has issued 40 so far this year, fewer than one a week. Bill Clinton, Frank White and Tucker granted 507 clemencies in the 17 1/2 years they served as governor.

The most-discussed clemency case during Huckabee’s tenure involved Wayne DuMond, who was castrated — he said by masked men who attacked him at home — while awaiting trial on charges he raped a teenager in 1984. Though Huckabee did not pardon DuMond nor commute his sentence, two members of a state parole board maintain that he pressured them to make a decision in the case.

National Defense – In an opinion piece titled America’s Priorities in the War on Terror, posted in the January/February 2008 edition of the Council on Foreign Relations’ site, foreign affairs.com, Huckabee wrote:

The United States, as the world’s only superpower, is less vulnerable to military defeat. But it is more vulnerable to the animosity of other countries. Much like a top high school student, if it is modest about its abilities and achievements, if it is generous in helping others, it is loved. But if it attempts to dominate others, it is despised.

American foreign policy needs to change its tone and attitude, open up, and reach out. The Bush administration’s arrogant bunker mentality has been counterproductive at home and abroad. My administration will recognize that the United States’ main fight today does not pit us against the world but pits the world against the terrorists. At the same time, my administration will never surrender any of our sovereignty, which is why I was the first presidential candidate to oppose ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty, which would endanger both our national security and our economic interests.

…The Bush administration plans to increase the size of the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps by about 92,000 troops over the next five years. We can and must do this in two to three years. I recognize the challenges of increasing our enlistments without lowering standards and of expanding training facilities and personnel, and that is one of the reasons why we must increase our military budget. Right now, we spend about 3.9 percent of our GDP on defense, compared with about six percent in 1986, under President Ronald Reagan. We need to return to that six percent level.

While a strong National Defense Budget is a good thing, the naivete of the statement if it is generous in helping others, it is loved is bothersome.

America is already the most generous nation on the face of the Earth.  In fact, some of the very nations we funnel money into, are those who are secretly plotting against us.

In conclusion, while Gov. Huckabee has some Conservative qualities, and is quite affable, as a Presidential Candidate, he makes a fine talk show host.

Have you ever been set up for a blind date by people who claimed to care about you and were sure that they knew what was best for you?

When you asked them what this individual looked like, they said:

Oh, they’ve got a great personality.

Then, you probably asked:

Okay.  So, what’s their personality like?

Scrambling for an answer, your friend or family member responded:

Hey, don’t worry about it.  You’ll get along fine.  After all, beggars can’t be choosers.

The Republican Elite, aided and abetted by the Main Stream Media, is attempting to set Americans up with a blind date.

His name is Mitch Daniels.

If you are like I used to be, until recently, you had a vague idea of who Mitch Daniels was, but that’s about it.

Allow me to introduce you.

Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. was elected as the 49th Governor of the State of Indiana in 2004, in his first bid for any elected office.

Governor Daniels came from a successful career in business and government, holding numerous top management positions in both the private and public sectors. His work as CEO of the Hudson Institute and President of Eli Lilly and Company’s North American Pharmaceutical Operations taught him the business skills he brought to state government. He also has served as Chief of Staff to Senator Richard Lugar, Senior Advisor to President Ronald Reagan and Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President George W. Bush.

Daniels’ first legislative success created the public-private Indiana Economic Development Corporation to replace a failing state bureaucracy in the mission of attracting new jobs. In each of its first four years of existence, the agency broke all previous records for new jobs in the state, and was associated with more than $18 billion of new investment. In 2008, Site Selection magazine and CNBC both named Indiana as the Most Improved State for Business in the country, and the state is now near the top of every national ranking of business attractiveness.

On his first day in office, Governor Daniels created the first Office of Management and Budget to look for efficiencies and cost savings across state government. In 2005, he led the state to its first balanced budget in eight years and, without a tax increase, transformed the $600 million deficit he inherited into an annual surplus of $370 million within a year.

Sounds pretty good, huh?  Just like the description of a blind date.

Also, if you’re like me, you never really paid any attention to the diminutive (5’4″) Daniels, until he uttered this now-famous gaffe, as related  and followed up on by John McCormack at  weeklystandard.com on June 8, 2010:

Mitch Daniels told THE WEEKLY STANDARD’s Andy Ferguson that the next president “would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues. We’re going to just have to agree to get along for a little while,” until economic issues are resolved.

This morning, at the Heritage Foundation, I asked Daniels if that meant the next president shouldn’t push issues like stopping taxpayer funding of abortion in Obamacare or reinstating the Mexico City Policy banning federal funds to overseas groups that perform abortions. Daniels replied that we face a “genuine national emergency” regarding the budget and that “maybe these things could be set aside for a while. But this doesn’t mean anybody abandons their position at all. Everybody just stands down for a little while, while we try to save the republic.”

To clarify whether Daniels simply wants to de-emphasize these issues or actually not act on them, I asked if, as president, he would issue an executive order to reinstate Reagan’s “Mexico City Policy” his first week in office. (Obama revoked the policy during his first week in office.) Daniels replied, “I don’t know.“

Then, in an interview with nationalreview.com’s Michael Barone, posted October 11, 2010, Daniels came out in favor cutting our National Defense Budget:

As OMB director, Daniels was on the National Security Council, and as governor he’s visited Indiana troops around the world. He says, “It’s important to support the commander in chief” on Afghanistan. But he’s open to cuts in defense spending beyond those Defense Secretary Robert Gates has imposed. “No question that the system is rigged to overspend,” he says, “like health care. No question that defense dollars could be spent better.”

Finally, on October 15, 2010, politico.com reported the following:

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels opened the door Thursday to supporting both a value added tax [VAT] and a tariff on imported oil, bold proposals that could cause trouble for him with conservatives as he flirts with a long-shot bid for the presidency.

As we get closer to the 2012 Presidential Elections, and the GOP Elite and Main Stream Media get more desperate to maintain the status quo, Mitch Daniels is being singled out as their candidate of choice.

Just this week, while Mitt Romney doused himself with the gasoline known as Romneycare and lit a match, Daniels informed America that he was considering a Presidential run, but, first,  he had to get his wife’s permission.

Also, this week, Daniels picked up an endorsement from Speaker of the House, Cryin’ John Boehner.  Governors Chris Christie and Scott Walker  also quietly snuck upon the bandwagon,  privately pledging to lend their support, should Daniels decide to run.

Just as one evaluates accepting a blind date, so should one evaluate a potential presidential candidate.

Speaking for myself, the measurement of a presidential candidate  will always be the three-legged stool of Reagan Conservatism:  Fiscal Conservatism, Social Conservatism, and National Defense.

As exemplified by the three quotes in today’s post, Mitch Daniels doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

The accused stands before the Tribunal as the Chief Inquisitor reads the charges against him.  Finally, the Chief Inquisitor asks:

How you plead in this matter?  Where does your loyalty lie?  With us or our enemy?

The accused stands there, quivering, wondering what his fate will be…

No, gentle reader, I have not been describing a scene from the Spanish Inquisition, led by Friar Tomás de Torquemada in the 1400s.

Rather, I have been painting a scene of a possible future where the United States Government, led by President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), makes federal contractors disclose their political contributions.

The White House has already submitted a draft proposal suggesting this.

According to Federal Procurement Director Daniel Gordon, the proposal isn’t final. He also added that contractors will be protected, regardless of their political preferences:

Agencies may consider only the factors that are set out in the solicitation – nothing more, nothing less.

And if you believe that, I have a flooded-out bridge over the Mississippi River to sell you.

The president’s proposal is not sitting will with either side of the aisle.

Democratic Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill joined Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent, in sending a cautionary letter to President Obama.

In the letter, Lieberman wrote:

[R]equiring businesses to disclose their political activity when making an offer risks injecting politics into the contracting process.

Per Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who as chairman of the House Oversight committee, has promised to look into a lot of the Obama administration policies this year, hit the president square between the eyes, when he said that contractors are afraid of

…a corrupt Chicago-style spoils system where contracts are tied to partisan political affiliations.

Obama’s newest mouthpiece, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, defended the proposed Inquisition at yesterday’s White House Press Briefing, saying:

Disclosure is a good thing. And I’m not sure when it became a bad word or a bad idea. Disclosure used to be something that Republicans supported very much.

Disclosure, yes. Coercion and Blackmail, no.

According to his minions in the White House, Obama feels as if this abrogation of freedom is warranted because of the Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case. This ruling took away limits on corporate political spending more than a year ago.

However, because of the chasm of disagreement which exists between Republicans and Democrats on what exactly the Supreme Court ruling means, the federal election commission hasn’t been unable to create the rules governing its implementation.

The Obama Administration insists that the proposal is in draft form and the president is still looking it over.

According to them, the proposal is all about transparency and openness.

Uh huh. Then why doesn’t it apply to unions?

Per Rep. Darrell Issa:

It exempts unions which do have a limited amount of contracts and a great many grants to the federal government.

In an article written by Michelle Malkin, posted on realclearpolitics.com, 2 years ago today, May 13th, 2009, the Conservative author wrote that:

“We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama — $60.7 million to be exact — and we’re proud of it,” boasted Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, to the Las Vegas Sun this week. The behemoth labor organization’s leadership is getting its money’s worth. Whether rank-and-file workers and ordinary taxpayers are profiting from this ultimate campaign pay-for-play scheme is another matter entirely.

The two-million-member union, which represents both government and private service employees, proudly claimed that its workers “knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama.” It dispatched SEIU leaders to seven states in the final weekend before the election to get out the vote for Obama and other Democrats.

Through a series of local chapter takeovers and bully campaigns to destroy the reputation of executives who refuse to submit to their will, Stern and his scandal-plagued lieutenants have consolidated low-skill service workers to create a 21st century labor empire. The ubiquitous Stern now enjoys a prominent seat at the table of every major policy discussion at the White House, including economic recovery and health care radicalization.

That proved to be the tip of the iceberg.  Employees of federal and trade unions gave extraordinary amounts to Obama’s election, as well as to the campaigns of Democats running in the 2010 Midterms.

And, now that Obama has announced his campaign for re-election, union members will be required to give again.

For example, from thehill.com:

The National Education Association (NEA) has asked its members to support President Obama’s bid for a second term in the White House.

The move by the NEA — the country’s largest union, with more than 3 million members — shows that labor, a traditional ally of Democrats, is gearing up for the 2012 election.

Labor support will be critical for Obama and for several Senate Democrats who are expected to face tough reelection campaigns.

NEA’s political action committee approved a recommendation Thursday to support Obama’s reelection bid. The union’s representative assembly will meet in Chicago in July to vote on the PAC’s recommendation.

After all they’ve done and are doing for Obama, we surely can’t expect him to put the unions through the same Inquisition that he will other federal contractors, can we?

Some days, my posts just seem to write themselves.

Approximately 16 hours ago,  USA Today published an opinion piece by former Massachusetts Governor, and favorite of the GOP Elite, Mitt Romney.

Entitled Romney: As first act, out with ObamaCare, the editorial begins with the following:

Health care is more than just one-sixth of the American economy. It is a source of well-being for individuals and families. We are blessed with much that is good in American health care. But we have taken a turn for the worse with ObamaCare, with its high taxes and vastly expanded federal control over our lives. I believe the better course is to empower the states to determine their own health care futures.

First, the good news: Health care in the United States has made remarkable advances in our lifetimes. Dramatic improvements in medical technology have expanded both the length and quality of life. And the U.S. health care system continues to provide consumers with many choices.

But our health care system has several well-known problems: high and rising costs, significant numbers of Americans without insurance, and glaring gaps in quality and efficiency.

We can fix these problems. Unfortunately, with the passage of ObamaCare last year, the president and the Congress took a wrong turn. ObamaCare will lead to more spending, greater federal involvement in health care and negative effects on U.S. economic activity. The president definitely forgot the admonition to “do no harm.”

My plan is to harness the power of markets to drive positive change in health insurance and health care. And we can do so with state flexibility (unlike ObamaCare’s top-down federal approach), no new taxes (as opposed to hundreds of billions of dollars of new taxes under ObamaCare), and better consumer choice (as opposed to bureaucratic, government choice under ObamaCare). This change of direction offers our best hope of preserving both innovation and value.

If I am elected president, I will issue on my first day in office an executive order paving the way for waivers from ObamaCare for all 50 states. Subsequently, I will call on Congress to fully repeal ObamaCare.

The needle on my Irony Meter just pegged so hard it snapped in two.

Back in 2006, Romney was singing a different tune as he signed a massive health-insurance overhaul into law as Governor of Massachusetts. “Romneycare” was packed with subsidies, exchanges, and mandates to extend coverage to the uninsured. Four years later, it became the model for the national nightmare known as Obamacare, the very National Healthcare Law that he now promises to eliminate.

During a New Hampshire Presidential Campaign Debate on Jan. 6, 2008, the following revealing moment transpired:

Debate moderator Charles Gibson of ABC News: “But Gov. Romney’s system has mandates in Massachusetts, although you backed away from mandates on a national basis.”

Romney: “No, no, I like mandates. The mandates work.”

GOP contender Fred Thompson: “I beg your pardon? I didn’t know you were going to admit that. You like mandates.”

Romney: “Oh, absolutely. Let me tell you what kind of mandates I like, Fred, which is this. If it weren’t –“

Thompson: “The ones you come up with. Bingo”

Later, during an April 19, 2010 interview with Newsweek’s Andrew Romano, Governor Romney added the following:

I’d like to clear something up about that federalist argument. During one of the 2008 debates, Charles Gibson said, “You seem to have backed away from mandates on a national basis.” And your response was, “No, no, I like mandates. The mandates work.” Were you saying that you supported federal mandates then, even though you say you don’t now?

No. We created an incentive for people to get insurance at the state level. Our plan is a state plan. I oppose a federal plan for purposes of federalism. It would be like saying, a father has spanked his son. Do you think that the federal government should be allowed to spank children?

So people are misinterpreting that quote?

I do not favor the federal mandates that are part of Obamacare.

Back in February 2007, you said you hoped the Massachusetts plan would “become a model for the nation.” Would you agree that it has?

I don’t … You’re going to have to get that quote. That’s not exactly accurate, I don’t believe.

I can tell you exactly what it says: “I’m proud of what we’ve done. If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.”

It is a model for the states to be able to learn from. During the campaign, I was asked if I was proposing that what I did in Massachusetts I would do for the nation. And the answer was absolutely not. Our plan is a state plan. It is a model for other states—if you will, the nation—it is a model for them to look at what we’ve accomplished and to better it or to create their own plans.

There are obvious similarities between Obamacare and what you did in Massachusetts. Do you acknowledge that what you did in Massachusetts has become a model for nation under Obama, whether you wanted it to or not?

I can’t speak for what the president has done. I don’t know what he looks at. He never gave me a call. Neither he nor any of his colleagues [gave me] a call to ask what worked and did not work, and how would they improve upon it and so forth. If what was done at the state level, they applied at the federal level, they made a mistake. It was not designed for the nation.

The lesson for today, boys and girls? 

When is a mandate not a mandate?

When Mitt Romney signs it into law, or course.

President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) made a re-election campaign stop along our border with Mexico, yesterday.

Speaking in El Paso, Texas, Obama, using the ghost of Osama bin Laden as a campaign prop, once again made the false analogy of those who have entered our country illegally, to our immigrants of previous generations who did not:

We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants — a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America’s precepts.

It doesn’t matter where you come from. What matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded, that you believe all of us are equal. In embracing America, you can become American. That is what makes this country great.

That’s the problem, Mr. President. These illegal immigrants love the land that they come from, more than they love the country they broke into.

Speaking in his usual I’m-smarter-than-you tones, Obama attacked Republican leaders for their unwavering stance on border issues:

All the stuff they asked for, we’ve done. I suspect there will be those who will try to move the goalposts one more time. … Maybe they’ll say we need a moat. Or alligators in the moat.

No moat, Mr. President. Nor alligators. America simply wants you to secure our border.  Now.

Obama continued:

They’ll never be satisfied. But that’s politics.

The most significant step we can take now to secure the borders is to fix the system as a whole so that fewer people have incentive to enter illegally in search of work in the first place. This would allow agents to focus on the worst threats on both of our borders — from drug traffickers to those who would come here to commit acts of violence or terror.

The system does not need fixing, Mr. President. The border fence needs building.

Covering himself, as to not seem too blatant in his recruitment of new Democratic voters, the president went on to say that Washington has to “secure the borders and enforce the law.” and business owners need to be punished for exploiting undocumented workers.

Regarding those who are illegally entering our country, Obama said that they have to admit they broke the law (Don’t hold your breath, Scooter.), pay taxes and a fine, learn English and be willing to undergo background checks before starting the legalization process.

The problem is, that would require an outbreak of personal responsibility. Again, don’t hold your breath waiting on that to happen, Mr. President.

The issue of illegal immigration remains a political hot potato, as evidenced by the Democratically-controlled Congress’ failure to pass the Dream Act when they had the opportunity to, at the end of last year.

Obama realizes the potential of the Latino population.  He was victorious in several Western states in 2008, such as Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, partly on the emerging strength of the Latino vote. Democrats are hoping that Hispanic voters might swing traditionally Republican Arizona toward their side next year.

Which helps to explain why Obama’s Administration  is suing Arizona.

Obama received more than two-thirds of America’s Hispanic vote in 2008 with an approval rating among Hispanics holding around 68% during the first three months of this year, per polls commissioned by CNN.

How do average Americans feel about this Hot Button Issue?  Here are some headlines from RasmussenReports.com:

• 59% Favor Cutoff of Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cities
• 63% Still Believe Border Control Is Top Immigration Priority
• 61% Oppose U.S. Citizenship for Children Born to Illegal Immigrants
• 67% Favor Automatic Police Immigration Checks, Most Support Sanctions on Employers and Landlords
• More Voters Still Think Federal Government Encourages Illegal Immigration
• Voters Still Put Border Control Well Ahead of Legalizing Those Here Illegally
• Voters still strongly believe that gaining control of the border should be the legislative priority.
• 52% in California Say Current Policies of Federal Government Encourage Illegal Immigration
• 60% in Colorado Say Policies of Federal Government Encourage People to Enter the United States Illegally

A cursory glance at these headlines shows that the majority of Americas are absolutely not in agreement with the president on this issue.

So, why is he pushing it?

Simple.  The president needs voters. 

There are almost 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States of America.  They total  five per cent of our country’s workforce.

By granting amnesty to these people who have broken into our country, as a burglar breaks into a home, as well as to their offspring, Obama and those who handle him, believe that they are strengthening the Democrat voter base, replenishing those ex-sycophants who figured out for themselves that Obama’s promise of Hope and Change, was not one of personal prosperity.

Hence, the illogical statement, heard time and again from Obama, that:

The most significant step we can take now to secure the borders is to fix the system as a whole so that fewer people have incentive to enter illegally in search of work in the first place.

Arizona rancher Robert Krentz, murdered on his own property by an illegal immigrant, would disagree.

You’re a Navy Chaplain. You’ve received a formal notification from the Office of the Chief of Navy Chaplains, instructing you that you have permission to perform the sacred ceremony of marriage for same sex couples, providing that homosexual marriage is legal in the state where the ceremony will be performed.  What do you do?

Far-fetched? Nope.

Per cnsnews.com, the notification was issued to all Navy Chaplains by the Chief of Navy Chaplains, Admiral Michael Tidd, on April 13th, 2011.

According to the advisory, the Chaplain Corps is bringing up-to-date its Tier I training manuals, which had previously ruled that same-sex marriages would not be authorized on federal property.

In the memo, Tidd inferred that chaplains need to be in lock-step with service-wide efforts underway to be more accepting of homosexuality and same-sex marriage as the end of the military policy on homosexuality nears.

Referencing “additional legal review” by Navy attorneys, the admiral said the Navy

…has concluded that, generally speaking, base facility use is sexual orientation neutral.

If the base is located in a state where same-sex marriage is legal, then the base facilities may be used to celebrate the marriage.

According to Admiral Tidd’s notification, chaplains now have permission to “marry” homosexual couples but the Navy will not force them to perform ceremonies:

Regarding chaplain participation, consistent with the tenets of his or her religious organization, a chaplain may officiate a same-sex, civil marriage: if it is conducted in accordance with the laws of the state which permits same-sex marriages or union; and if the chaplain is, according to applicable state and local laws, otherwise fully certified to officiate that state’s marriages.

Per Navy spokeswoman Alana Garas, the change was ordered, but then, she backtracked and told CNSNews.com that the document

…does not reflect a change in policy, but a change in Tier I training for Navy chaplains that looks forward to when Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is removed.

Which, according to her, will not happen until 60 days after the president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify to Congress that repeal will not harm military readiness.

Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, is concerned that, in its haste to “hustle-in homosexuality,” the Navy may be violating federal law – the Defense of Marriage Act.

According to Steve Taylor, communications director for Akin:

Offering up federal facilities and federal employees for same-sex marriage violates DOMA, which is still the law of the land and is bound to the duties of our military, including chaplains.

The administration and various states may be operating as if DOMA doesn’t exist, but the Navy and Marine Corps and all the Armed Services are sworn to obey the law, which this new instruction violates.

Is this a violation of the Defense of Marriage Act?

Even if it is, the President of the United States of America and his Attorney General decided, in their infinite wisdom, that DOMA was unconstitutional this past February.

Per nytimes.com:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced the decision in a letter to members of Congress. In it, he said the administration was taking the extraordinary step of refusing to defend the law, despite having done so during Mr. Obama’s first two years in the White House.

“The president and I have concluded that classifications based on sexual orientation” should be subjected to a strict legal test intended to block unfair discrimination, Mr. Holder wrote. As a result, he said, a crucial provision of the Defense of Marriage Act “is unconstitutional.”

Presidential Decree aside, Tom McClusky, senior vice president of government relations at the Family Research Council,still thinks that this is a violation of DOMA:

You’re talking about government facilities and government employees, so it would seem to be a direct violation of DOMA. I’m not seeing a lot of wiggle room there.

MCClusky reminds us that Conservatives had sounded the warning months ago that the push to repeal the military ban on homosexuality would lead to efforts to introduce same-sex marriage, but were made the subject of ridicule at the time:

This is what we thought was going to happen, and unfortunately now it’s happening.

Unfortunately, the military is getting out in front on this issue and when you have a president who doesn’t believe the Defense of Marriage Act is a law he needs to follow, it’s no surprise that the military would follow his lead.  The president may think he’s above the law, but he’s not. If he has a problem with the Defense of Marriage Act, that’s something that he needs to address legislatively, not just by ignoring it.

Homosexual Marriage is legal in only four of these United States, plus the District of Columbia, having been voted down by Americans in approximately 30 states.  The states that allow it are: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and New Hampshire. Vermont recognizes civil unions. Maryland, New York and Rhode Island recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Liberal Ideology is famous for having a predilection for Social Engineering.

But , why do they have to use our Best and Brightest as their Lab Rats?

KJ Udpate 10/11/11 9:22 a.m. – Per mywaynews.com, under pressure from 63 House lawmakers, the Navy late Tuesday abruptly reversed its decision that would have allowed chaplains to perform same-sex unions if the Pentagon decides to recognize openly gay military service later this year.

It sounds like the Congressional switchboard melted down…again.

The Obama Administration, less than a week after sending in a Navy Seal team to kill Osama bin Laden, authorized a missile strike against radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, hiding out in Yemen.

The drone missile strike occurred in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the Yemeni affiliate of al Qaeda. The problem is, we missed.

However,Yemeni officials reported that two al Qaeda operatives were killed in last Thursday’s strike.

Who is this  Radical Imam that the U.S. Government has put a “hit” out on?

Here are some facts about this Islamic Terrorist Leader:

• He is an American citizen, born in New Mexico in 1971, Anwar al-Awlaki was an imam at mosques in California, Colorado and Washington, D.C., from the mid-1990s to the early 2000s. He left the U.S. in 2002.
• He comes from a prominent family: His father was the minister of agriculture and a university president in Yemen.
• He is a Facebook aficionado: Devoutly supported by young Muslims, al-Awlaki has exploited social networking to spread his teachings. He has groups on Facebook and MySpace and his “fans” include American high school students.
• He advocates Jihad: Al-Awlaki’s extensive pro-Jihad writings include the essay, “44 Ways to Support Jihad” — considered a key text for al Qaeda members — which calls for young Muslims to receive arms training for potential battles. (Watch Anwar al-Awlaki lecture on religious zeal.)
• He hasn’t always preached extremism: In the weeks after 9/11, al-Awlaki spoke often with Western reporters about Islam, and condemned the World Trade Center attacks.
• He is allegedly linked to Osama Bin Laden: His links to al Qaeda were first suspected by U.S. authorities as long ago as 1999, when the FBI claims he had contact with one of Osama Bin Laden’s “procurement agents.”
• He had close ties to the 9/11 attackers: Two of the terrorists who hijacked Flight 77 and crashed it into the Pentagon on 9/11 had a “close relationship” with the imam in San Diego and in Washington, D.C. In the Congressional Joint Inquiry on 9/11, al-Awlaki is referred to as one of the terrorist’s “spiritual advisor.”
• Nidal Hasan was a member of his congregation: The Fort Hood shooter — who’s reported to view the imam’s teachings with “deep respect” — attended the Washington, D.C. mosque where al-Awlaki preached.
• The U.K. has censored him: Al-Awlaki was banned from speaking via teleconference at a London event in August 2009 that raised money for Muslims held at Guantánamo Bay.
• He has written in support of the Fort Hood shootings: Al-Awlaki posted comments on his website in support of the Fort Hood attack, calling Nidal Hasan a “hero” for fighting against “American tyranny.”
• He was “presumed” killed in a previous U.S.-backed military strike: When the Yemeni military attacked a gathering of al Qaeda leaders in a mountainous province of that country last Dec. 24, officials from Yemen and the U.S. announced that al-Alwaki was believed to have been present and was presumed dead.
• Reports of his death may have been premature: Just a few days after the attack, a Yemeni journalist said he’d been contacted by al-Awlaki and that the cleric was alive and well. Al-Awlaki claimed to have been a short distance away from the site of the attack.
• His preachings may have inspired the “Underwear Bomber”: Investigators in the U.K. think it’s possible that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was inspired by al-Awlaki’s teachings. Specifically, Abdulmutallab was tied to an advocacy group that has “championed” al-Awlaki.
• He has been approved for targeted killing (as demonstated last week.) CIA operatives have been given the “extremely rare, if not unprecedented,” go-ahead to capture or kill the U.S. citizen, given his danger to America as an al-Qaeda operative.
• Faisal Shahzad says al-Awlaki inspired him to act: The man charged with trying to set off a car bomb in Times Square has reportedly told law enforcement that he is a “fan and a follower” of al-Awlaki, and that the influential imam’s teachings motivated the attempted bombing.

In September, the Yemeni government said it had surrounded Awlaki in the village of Houta. Then, strangely. the Yemenis reported that they had captured two-dozen al Qaeda fighters and a “vital terror headquarters” instead of their primary target.

Hmmmm.

The Yemeni Government then released a statement saying that the military was still “combing the area, searching for militants before declaring the area safe for its residents to return.” The military says the battle began after a unsuccessful attack by AQAP on a pipeline. Thousands of civilians had to flee their homes in the wake of the fighting.

According to the Yemenis, Awlaki was near the village with a group of suspected al Qaeda militants. But a Yemeni diplomat who had spoken to military commanders on the scene told ABC News the Government had no confirmation that Awlaki was at the location.

It sounds like the Yemeni Government is playing games with us, doesn’t it? Either that, or they’re grossly incompetent.

Whatever’s going on, the Obama Administration had better not rely on the Yemeni Government for any more intel about Awlaki.

American lives are at stake.

Memphis made international news this week twice. Once for the flooding of the Mississippi River, which I detailed to you in yesterday’s post. The other news affected considerably fewer people than the flooding, but you would have thought that it was some sort of international incident.

Two Islamic religious leaders were asked to leave a commercial airliner in Memphis after the pilot refused to fly with them aboard.

Masudur Rahman and another Islamic leader had boarded their Delta Connection flight from Memphis, Tennessee, to Charlotte, North Carolina before they were unexpectedly asked to get off the plane.

The ironic thing is, the Muslim men were headed to a North American Imams conference, where the topic was Islamophobia or fears of Islam and discrimination against American Muslims.

According to  Rahman:

It’s racism and bias because of our religion and appearance and because of misinformation about our religion. If they understood Islam, they wouldn’t do this.

How can it be racism when it’s a religion comprised of people of several races?

Rahman recounted that he and Mohamed Zaghloul, both members of the Islamic Association of Greater Memphis, were cleared by the TSA and boarded the plane for an 8.40am departure.

After the plane left the gate, the pilot then announced the plane must return, per Rahman.

At that time, the men were asked to return to the boarding gate. When they got there, they were told the pilot was refusing to accept them because some other passengers could be uncomfortable.

Rahman said Delta officials conferred with the pilot for more than thirty minutes, but he still refused to fly with them aboard.

The men were escorted to a lounge and were booked on a later flight. They left for Charlotte later the same day.

According to Rahman, a Delta manager apologized for the pilot’s actions, but that he and Mr Zaghloul never met face-to-face with the pilot.

Both Muslims are Memphians. Rahman, an adjunct instructor of Arabic at the University of Memphis, was dressed in traditional Indian clothing.

Zaghloul was dressed in Arab clothing, including traditional headgear.

According to TSA spokesman, Jon Allen in Atlanta, the incident was not initiated by that agency.

A Delta Air Lines spokesman reported that the flight was operated by Atlantic Southeast Airlines, which is also based in Atlanta.

Jarek Beem, a spokesman for Atlantic Southeast, said the incident was under investigation:

We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

Rahman and Zaghloul have contacted the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the well-known and infamous Muslim civil rights and advocacy group in Washington, D.C.

I’m shocked.

Per spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, the group will follow up with the airline and with the TSA to help ensure such incidents do not continue to occur.

Here’s some background information about CAIR, per discoverthenetworks.org:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) describes itself as a “non-profit, grassroots membership organization … established to promote a positive image of Islam and Muslims in America,” to protect Muslims from hate crimes and discrimination, and to present “an Islamic perspective on issues of importance to the American public.” According to the Council’s Director of Communications, Ibrahim Hooper, “We are similar to a Muslim NAACP.” As of June 2007, CAIR claimed 32 branch affiliates in the United States and one in Canada.

CAIR was co-founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad, both of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and functioned as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. Awad and Ahmad previously had served, respectively, as IAP’s Public Relations Director and President. Thus it can be said that CAIR was an outgrowth of IAP.

…From its inception, CAIR has sought to portray itself as a moderate, mainstream organization, and as early as 1996 its officials became frequent guests at State Department and White House events. In the aftermath of 9/11, when the Bush administration tried to reassure American Muslims that Islam was not the target of the war on terrorism, CAIR officials were prominent among the invitees. CAIR was the main Islamic group to gain U.S. media access in the post-9/11 period, providing the “Muslim view” of the terrorist attacks and of America’s response to them. As self-acclaimed Muslim spokesmen, CAIR officials typically refused to “simplify the situation” by blaming Osama bin Laden for the attacks on America. Moreover, while they eventually were induced by journalists to condemn Palestinian suicide terror in a pro forma manner, they hedged their disavowals by describing it as an understandable response to Israeli brutality.

These are Moderate Muslims?

Why did the pilot react like that?  Because, just like the rest of Americans, he’s on edge, due to the promised retaliation by Islamic Extremists over the assassination of Osama bin Laden.

And Rightfully so.

The other thing that contributes to average Americans’ uneasiness around Muslims,  who currently comprise just 1.5 % of our population, is the deafening silence by Moderate Muslims concerning the cowardly, murderous actions of their Islamic brethren.  Instead, outspoken groups like CAIR continue to fan the flames of distrust.

Until  Moderate Muslims start speaking up and condemning Islamic Terrorism, incidents like the one in Memphis will continue.

While President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) continued his victory lap in a clown car yesterday, in celebration of his gustsy call in ordering the death of Osama bin Laden, residents of the Mid-South were being forced out of their homes by the worst flood of the Mighty Mississippi River since 1937.

In my hometown of Memphis, Tennessee, volunteers and convicts have spent that last few days filling sandbags in an attempt to somehow stem the flooding of America’s largest waterway.

As of this morning, Ol’ Muddy was sitting at 46.2 feet, on it’s way to 48 feet by this Wednesday.  The community of Frayser, in North Memphis, is flooded, with one of it’s main throughfares, Highway 51 and Watkins, completely closed to traffic.

Riverside Drive and historic Beale Street are closed due to the backing up of storm drains.

Mud Island River Park, which you may have seen featured in the Tom Cruise movie, The Firm, is closed due to the flood, and the high income residential community, Harbor Town, on the other end of the island, is being evacuated , for reasons shown by the picture below.

And, for the first time in its history, the annual World Famous Memphis in May Barbeque Cook-off, which draws contestants from all over the world,  has had to be moved from Tom Lee Park, beside the river, to Tiger Lane, beside Liberty Bowl Memorial Stadium.

Bob Nations, director of emergency management for Shelby County, which includes Memphis, said there was still time to get out, with the crest not expected until Wednesday.

Speaking of the evacuation notices that they were handing out door-to-door, Nations said:

This does not mean that water is at your doorstep. This means you are in a high-impact area.

About 950 households in Memphis and about 135 other homes in Shelby County were getting the notices. Shelters were opened, and the fliers include a phone number to arrange transportation for people who need it.

Down in the Delta town of Tunica, Mississippi, reborn as Las Vegas South, the flooding is having a horrible impact.  Per commercialappeal.com:

Tunica County stands to lose $3.5 million in gaming revenue tax collections, and the state another $7 million, if the county’s nine casinos remain closed for all of May because of high water.

“The closing of our nine casino properties will only exacerbate an already major economic crisis on a state and local level,” Webster Franklin, CEO of the Tunica Convention & Visitors Bureau, said in releasing some startling economic impact numbers Tuesday.

…Numbers released Tuesday by the Tunica Convention & Visitors Bureau reveal the anticipated economic impact of flooding on Tunica’s casino operations:

Tunica’s nine casinos have averaged about $87 million in gross gaming revenue during May over the past three years. Based on that average, closing the casinos for all of May would mean a loss of about $10.5 million in state and local collections from the Mississippi gaming tax imposed on the gross revenues.

About 4,600 hotel rooms have been closed, meaning a loss of about $6.2 million in room revenue for the month based on a 75 percent occupancy rate.

About 38 percent of the total square footage of gaming space in the state, or about 521,410 square feet, is affected by the closings.

About 9,300 jobs, with a monthly payroll of about $18 million, have been lost temporarily. Most casinos have announced plans to compensate employees for at least two weeks’ pay while they’re off, but the circumstances vary from property to property.

After speaking to several  casino employees this week, I’ve been told that they’ve been encouraged by the casino human resources departments to file for Unemployment Compensation from the state of Mississippi while they are off work due to the flooding.

Workers from the Mississippi Department of Wildlife and Fish and from the Department of Homeland Security are assisting local law enforcement in keeping looters and the overly curious away from the casino properties.

Americans are suffering, where is the President of the United States? 

He’s been busy wrapping up his self-congratulatory-I-got-bin-Laden-Magical-Mystery-Tour, which included his first trip to Ground Zero in New York City since 2008.

Yesterday, he went to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, to congratulate those involved in the assassination of bin  Laden.  Of course, he gave a speech, making sure the cameras were catching every word.

Today, he gave his weekly address.  Did he mention the thousands of Americans being affected by the flooding of the Mississippi River?

Nope.  He spoke about Clean, Green (as in money) Energy.  Per whitehouse.gov:

Speaking to the American people from Indianapolis, Indiana, President Obama said that clean energy companies like Allison Transmissions will keep the economy growing, create new jobs, and make sure America remains the most prosperous nation on Earth.  Clean energy is also part of the ultimate solution to high gas prices.  Until we reduce our dependence on oil, we will be held hostage to the ups and downs of the oil markets.  That means we need to continue to invest in clean, alternative sources of energy – like advanced biofuels and natural gas – and more efficient cars, buses and trucks.

Great, while thousands of Americans are being effecting by the flooding and the recent Southern tornadoes, on top of the 1/6th receiving food stamps and all those who are unemployed, instead of addressing the suffering of Americans, Scooter is worried about making money for his buddy Jeffrey Immelt and his company G.E., and their pie-in-the-sky plans for building windmills to produce energy.  Meanwhile, gas prices continue to climb out of control and average Americans are struggling horribly to keep a roof over their heads.

And the President of the United States, like  Ol’ Man River, just keeps rollin’ along.

President Barack Hussein Obama’s (mm mmm mmmm) campaign stop at 9/11’s Ground Zero in New York City yesterday was strangely understated for a politician who is always ready to toot his own horn.  To quote the great Jim Treacher of The Daily Caller, the event was building up to have all the class of a victory lap in a clown car.  Of course, that was before his two predecessors, Presidents Clinton and Bush 43, backed out of attending yesterday’s photo op, forcing Obama to cancel his plans for a self-congratulatory speech.

While in New York City, Obama met with the firefighters serving at Engine 54, Ladder 4, Battalion 9, a station that lost 15 firefighter during the collapse of the Twin Towers. While there, he posed for the cameras and said:

This is a symbolic site of the extraordinary sacrifice that was made on that terrible day.

He later met with police before visiting the site of the most horrific Islamic Terrorist attack ever on U.S. Soil, a site which he has not taken the time to visit since 2008.

While at the site where 3,000 innocent people were murdered, he said that  the American pursuit of the bin Laden

…sent a message around the world but also sent a message here back home that when we say we will never forget, we mean what we say, that our commitment to making sure that justice is done is something that transcended politics, transcended party.

Making sure the cameras were on, Obama closed his eyes and clasped his hands where the twin towers of the World Trade Center once were a signature edifice in the Manhattan skyline.

Today, a 60 stories high contested memorial of fountains and reflecting pools note the place where the towers fell and Americans jumped to their deaths or were crushed under the weight of concrete and steel.

While at Ground Zero, Obama spoke with 50 administration-selected representatives of families who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001. Per freerepublic.com:

The administration apparently sent out form-letter invites to 50 hand-picked relatives of 9/11 victims, which began “Dear 9/11 family member.” At least one family has turned down the request, saying that they felt the letter was impersonal.

“If this form letter was the invitation, it was kinda lame,” said John Vigiano, who lost two heroic sons – one a firefighter and the other a police officer – in the attack. “I’m honored the president of the United States is coming to New York,” he said. “[But] to me it’s just going to be a photo op.”

While making his brief comments, Obama called for a new spirit of national unity. He spoke of the raid on bin Laden’s compound, saying that he hoped that bin Laden’s death showed the world that:

…we did what we said we were going to do, and that Americans, even in the midst of tragedy, will come together, across the years, across politics, across party, across administrations, to make sure that justice is done.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, dubbed by the press and his own PR people America’s Mayor, because of his leadership after the attack, appeared with Obama yesterday.

Some of those directed impacted by 9/11 did not think very highly of President Obama’s day-long photo op.

David Beamer, father of 9/11 hero Todd Beamer, told FOX News:

I feel some chagrin now, though, about how the rest of it has been handled. And frankly it started May Day, 2011 when the president announced what had happened. The excessive use of the personal pronoun that he used in his remarks, I really felt that was the beginning of the Commander-in-Chief putting too much spotlight on himself, taking too much credit for what the remarkable Americans had done. And of course it’s only now accelerated to a greater degree in the media.

He’s not the only one who was not impressed. Debra Burlingame, the sister of Charles “Chic” Burlingame (pilot of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon) , tried to bend Obama’s sizable ear yesterday. According to Burlingame, she confronted Obama about Attorney General Eric Holder prosecuting the men who interrogated KSM, which may have been responsible for intelligence leading us to bin Laden.

Burlingame recounts her conversation with The President of the United States:

As a former attorney I know you can’t tell the Attorney General what to do, he said, ‘No, I can’t.’ But I said ‘we — that shouldn’t stop you from giving your opinion. We wouldn’t be here today if they hadn’t done their jobs. Can’t you at least give them your opinion.’ And he said ‘no I won’t,’ and he turned around and walked away.

Sorry, Debra.  He’s can’t be bothered helping a bunch of Federal Government Employees.  He has to go congratulate a bunch of them….Huh?

Obama’s excellent campaign adventure continues today.

Per the Associated Press:

A White House official says President Barack Obama will meet with some of those involved in the military assault that killed Osama bin Laden when he visits Fort Campbell, Ky., on Friday.

A team of Navy SEALs raided a compound in Pakistan, killing the terrorist mastermind. Bin Laden was later buried at sea. Fort Campbell is home to the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, which participated in the raid against bin Laden.

The aide requested anonymity to speak before the official announcement of Obama’s meeting.

And, finally, lest we all forget whose decision it was to kill bin Laden:

Per weeklystandard.com:

Obama’s not one to “spike the football” after a victory (or after killing Osama bin Laden), but it seems his campaign team (or some of his ardent supporters) doesn’t feel the same way. Check out http://www.gutsycall.com — it redirects users to Obama’s campaign website, http://www.barackobama.com. Could it be that his reelection campaign made this call? Or is it just a couple of his most steadfast supporters?

According to this domain lookup website, the website was purchased yesterday, May 4. The purchaser, though, remains anonymous.

Unbelievably presidential, huh?  Man, I miss George W.  Bush.  Heck, at this point, I may even miss Jimmy Carter….Naw…that’s who we have now…on steroids.