If You've Never Had the Guts to "Participate" in Combat, Don't be To quick to Condemn US Troops Posing with Dead Afghan Insurgents

Not to condone indiscipline but believe we need put thing into perspective before we convict and condemn these soldiers. Exactly what did they do that thousands in previous wars have not done and did they do anything that violated the UCMJ?

There are 18 photographs taken by troops of the famous 1st Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment (4th Brigade Combat Team), 82d Airborne Division in 2010 in Zabul province that show soldiers posing next to Afghan corpses, including the mangled body of a suicide bomber hoisted by his ankles and one of two soldiers hold up a dead man’s hand, extending his middle finger. Of course it was the ultra-Left leaning Los Angeles Times that published the pictures.

Of course SecDef Panetta and the Obama installed senior uniformed leadership have all been quick to throw these Soldiers under the bus as have a host of Democrat members of congress. Even Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI.), a former Army 82d paratrooper and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was quick to chime in. I might add, although he is a West Point Grad, Jack didn’t stick around in service long enough to ever hear a shot fired in anger!

Former Army Captain Andrew M. Exum, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and is now a Center for a New American Security analyst in Washington, said he doubted the photos would cause a big stir among Afghans. “Speaking bluntly, most Afghans are probably not going to be terribly offended by the body of a suicide bomber being treated in less than respectful ways,” and he noted Afghan public reaction to the Marine urination video was relatively muted.

Colonel George S. Patton III, son of the famous WWII general, was the very effective commander of the 11 Armored Cavalry Regiment in Vietnam and his 1968 Christmas cards from the war zone read: “From Colonel and Mrs. George S. Patton III -- Peace on Earth.” But instead of Christmas appropriate pictures it had photographs of dismembered Viet Cong soldiers stacked in a pile. Patton also posed grinning with his going away present from his men, a guerrilla’s skull with a bullet hole above the left eye. His punishment for all this was he was promoted to the rank of Major General before he retired.

Of course in 1968 Vietnam where US Killed numbered 2000 a month, not 1906 in 10½ years (May 68 alone we lost 2415 killed), we might have been a little more callus but War is Hell and unless you’ve “participated,” don’t be so fast to judge others.

Obama’s Secretary of the Navy Mabus – What’s Next, Selling Navy Ship Naming Rights to Political Contributors as if They’re NFL Football Stadiums?

The 3 April 2012 Fort Worth Star-Telegram had an interesting article by J.R. Labbe commemorating the countdown to the 22 September 2012 commissioning of the Navy’s newest littoral combat ship (LCS) in Galveston, the USS Fort Worth. The christening took place on 4 Dec 2010 and was reportedly “a day of tradition, patriotism and honor -- with special emphasis on tradition.” Bush 43's Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter had selected the name which was in keeping with Naval tradition. The Navy is big on tradition -- from its naming to the keel laying to the mast stepping to the christening – its been done thousands of times before -- or at least that is how things were done before the Obama Administration decided to abandoned all tradition. Instead of naming ships to honor a Service Hero, a significant Military leader or recognize a place or an event that exemplifies the character, spirit and commitment to the Service, the current SecNav, Ray Mabus has decided to substitute time-honored Navy tradition for an exercise in political pandering. Granted the Navy secretary has sole discretion in naming Naval Vessels but this guy has taken politics to a new level. I would not be at all surprised to wake up one morning to find Mabus “selling ship naming right” to Obama bundlers as if a war ship was an NFL Football stadium. Even Mabus’ Wikipedia page notes he is the target of heavy criticism from Military veterans and several members of Congress for abandoning the norms of ship naming protocol to make political statements.

In 2010, Mabus, a former Mississippi governor, named a San Antonio-class amphibious transport ship after deceased Pennsylvania Rep. John P. Murtha -- the defense appropriation's king of pay-to-play who did more to divert scarce Military resources from sorely needed service priorities to political cronies (a la Obama with Solyndra) than any politician in recent memory. Then in May 2011, he named a Lewis and Clark-class cargo ship after migrant labor leader Cesar Chavez. Rumor has it there’s a USS Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a USS Jane Fonda and a USS George Soros in our future.

Granted, Chavez and Murtha both may have once been in the military like millions of others but to be worthy of a ship to bear a person’s name they should have at least demonstrated great courage in actual combat. Then, to add insult this February Mabus decided to name the 10th LCS the USS Gabrielle Giffords after the former Arizona Democrat Congresswoman. Now she may be worthy of admiration and respect for her courage in overcoming her injuries in a January 2011 town hall shooting and she did serve on the House Armed Services Committee but she wasn't exactly any outspoken champion of the Military. In her favor she is married to a now retired Navy Captain (and former NASA astronaut) but so is my wife and no one is talking about naming a ship after her! Maybe a post office or a government building in her Tucson hometown, but a Navy man of war, are you kidding?

Every Veteran ought to be outraged by this politicizing of the Navy and demand that President Obama ask for Ray Mabus’ immediate resignation. With the average life of a Naval vessel almost 50 years, can you imagine one of your grandchildren having to serve aboard the USS Oprah Winfrey?

Than again, with the Obama Five Year Defense Program, this might be all the Navy's bankrupt Shipbuilding Program can afford so maybe a name like the USS Jon Corzine would be appropriate?

Update 24 April 2012: In a letter released today sent to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA San Diego) asks that the Navy name a ship after slain gay activist Harvey Milk who was murdered on Nov. 27, 1978, while serving as a San Francisco supervisor. Milk served in the Navy in the early 1950s but had a rather undistinguished service record.

Now granting Filner’s wishes would be right in character for Mabus who has substituted time-honored Naval ship naming tradition for an exercise in political pandering but this would take it to a new level. A USS Harvey Milk would quickly become the joke of the fleet with the ship's Motto being: “Never Leave Your Shipmates' Behinds!” Does anyone really believe sailors would be clammering to serve on this ship?

When Obamacare Goes Down in Flames – Who Should Get the Credit? – Attorney General Eric Holder, of Course!

When Solicitor General of the United States Donald B. Verrilli Jr. suffered an episode of Ankyloglossia (aka tongue tied) during his historically inept presentation before the Supreme Court attempting to defend the indefensible -- Obamacare, it just might have doomed the Government's chances of victory. If (or when) the Court strikes it down, the decision is expected to be announced in late June, Verrilli should get his fair share of the credit but Obamacare opponents should be most grateful to Verrilli’s immediate Boss – Attorney General Eric Holder.

It was AG Holder that selected Verrilli to argue the administration’s case for the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act and it was the AG and his staff that “prepared” him for the task. Hence, the AG should be hailed as a Conservative Hero for his selecting and preparing the Government’s “legal representative” who is probably the second most gaff prone Democrat in Washington – second to only the “Gaffmister” himself, VP Joe “Five-Deferment” Biden (see previous Bolg articles below: 9 Oct 10 - Joe Biden - The Consummate Gaff-mister and Some of My Favorite “Biden-isms” and 23 Oct 11 - Biden Ties President's Washington Post Four Pinocchios with "Absurd Claims About rising Rape & Murder Rates").

For Liberals, selecting Verrilli was probably AG Holder’s worst lapse of judgment since at least his approving shipping arms to Mexican drug cartels in “Operation Fast and Furious” and maybe even as far back as his recommending to President Clinton that he Pardon International Fugitive Marc Rich on his last day in office.

One thing AG Holder can be thankful for is that the Court did NOT permit C-SPAN to stream live video of the proceeding because the court released audio was bad enough. It was during the second day of proceedings, the day dedicated to debating the constitutionality of the individual mandate, where Verrilli really excelled! He started out by repeatedly pausing, excusing himself and generally appearing lost during his presentation – then things really began going down hill! It was truly painful to hear but watching it was reportedly excruciating.

As a matter of fact, Verrilli performed so poorly in defending the individual mandate that the liberal justices continually interrupted him to help him make his case by beginning their comments with “what I really think you mean to say,” thus underscoring how badly he was struggling to make his case. The obvious question neither Verrilli nor his handlers appear to have ever considered or prepared him to answer was: What is the limiting principle to the Government’s power to interfere into the private affairs of a citizen? The credit for that oversight falls right at the feet of AG Holder!

Now none of this should detract from the brilliant performance of Paul Clement who was representing the 26 states opposing the law but in defense of Verrilli, it’s tough for any advocate to compare well to him in a courtroom, especially when your argument is so weak on the merits. Also, unlike Verrilli, Clement was able to make his arguments without any "assistance" from "friendly" Justices. Any sane liberal or conservative would have to admit that Clement is just about the best in the business — one of the great oral advocates of all times – the William Jennings Bryant of our generation -- and he delivered a slam-dunk performance.

The Court won’t rule solely based on Verrilli’s dubious oratory skills but having both sides in a position to claim credit for overturning Obamacare will be a novel outcome. Clements for his superb arguments while Holder’s and Verrilli’s contributions will be because of an inept presentation and a complete lack of preparation. But among Attorney Clement, Attorney General Holder and Solicitor General Verrilli, Holder deserves the lion’s share of the credit because he was the one that sent Verrilli into a fight with a knife when Clement had a gun!

Tom Hanks Scores 3 Pinocchios for Misleading Account of Obama Mother's Insurance Dispute in His Dem Campaign Flick: ‘The Road We’ve Traveled’

Does Tom Hanks have no shame? Not only did he produce HBO's "Game Change" - a Democrat hit piece masquerading as entertainment and history (see my critique of that piece of trash below) but had the audacity to continue trying to mislead the public in his 17 minute Obama campaign film “The Road We’ve Traveled.” Here, even the Washington Post Fact Checker had to call him out and award him THREE PINOCCHIOS for his series of out right misstatements about Obama and his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, including these concerning her health insurance. (See below graphic to see what the WaPo Fact Checker actually said.)

Narrator Tom Hanks: “He (Obama) knew from experience the cost of waiting [on health care reform].”

President Obama : “When my mom got cancer, she wasn’t a wealthy woman and it pretty much drained all her resources”

Michelle Obama: “She developed ovarian cancer, never really had good, consistent insurance. That’s a tough thing to deal with, watching your mother die of something that could have been prevented. I don’t think he wants to see anyone go through that.”

Hanks: “And he remembered the millions of families like of his who feel the pressure of rising costs and the fear of being denied or dropped from coverage.”

This series of words and images was a blatant attempt to perpetuate the misleading falsehood first evokes by candidate Obama during the 2008 campaign that his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, fought with her insurer over whether her cancer was a pre-existing condition that disqualified her from coverage. During the campaign Obama frequently suggested his mother had to fight with her health-insurance company for treatment of her cancer and said: “For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.”

If this had been true, I would agree with Obama that there would have been “something fundamentally wrong about that.” But as journalist Janny Scott reveals in her excellent biography, “A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s mother,” letters from Dunham to the CIGNA insurance company clearly shows her dispute was over disability coverage, not health insurance. Disability coverage helps replace lost wages due to illness and has NOTHING to do with Medical Insurance. When she became ill, Dunham was working in Indonesia for Development Alternatives Inc. of Bethesda and her base pay was $82,500, plus housing and car allowances. Her 1995 salary is the equivalent of $123,000 today.

Dunham died in 1995 of uterine and ovarian cancer and her health insurance covered most of the costs of her medical treatment…The hospital billed her insurance company directly, leaving her to pay only the deductible and any uncovered expenses.

Dunham did filed a disability insurance claim which CIGNA denied because her doctor had suspected uterine cancer during an office visit 2 ½ months before Dunham started the job in Indonesia. Disability insurance is different than health insurance coverage denied because of a pre-existing condition. Disability insurance is NOT part of Obama’s health care law.

The White House dismisses the President’s misstatements as: “The president has told this story based on his recollection of events that took place more than 15 years ago.”

So how does Hanks deal with this story? He never directly repeats Obama’s false claim that his mother had to fight for treatment in her hospital room because she was being denied health insurance coverage but look at what Hanks' film does say:

1. Hanks says: “The president knew the cost of waiting on reform.” (Though disability coverage was not an issue in the health care debate.)

2. The president says cancer “drained all her resources.” (Health insurance paid most of her bills, so this is not the case of someone being bankrupted by tens of thousands of dollars in bills and her today’s equivalent salary of $123,000 should have provided her some savings.)

3. Michelle Obama says Dunham “never really had good, consistent insurance.” (Regardless, Dunham had good health coverage when the cancer was discovered.)

4. The first lady also suggests the death “could have been prevented.” (That’s not an insurance issue! Dunham skipped an important test recommended by her US doctor that might have spotted the cancer earlier and then her Indonesian doctor later diagnosed her problem as appendicitis and removed her appendix. By the time the cancer was finally discovered it was third-stage.)

5. Hanks says that Obama’s family felt “the pressure of rising costs and the fear of being denied or dropped from coverage.” (She was NEVER in jeopardy of losing health insurance.)

Bottom line, Hanks' Obama propaganda film creates a false impression very similar to Obama’s 2008 campaign rhetoric that his mother was denied health-insurance coverage that drained her resources and with better coverage she might have lived longer. Nothing could be further from the truth! To skirt the truth the film never uses the words “health insurance” but instead the first lady says “insurance” and Hanks says “coverage” which gives them the out that they were not really out right lying but were talking about disability insurance. Only problem, disability insurance is different than health insurance coverage and has nothing to do with Obama’s health care law.

So what earned Hanks and his film Three Pinocchios? Hanks goes out of his way to give the false impression that Dunham was involved in a fight over health-insurance coverage rather than disability-insurance. Hanks must have known he had a problem with his film or he would have used Obama’s false 2008 campaign phrases like “pre-existing conditions,” “health insurance,” and “treatment.” Instead, he just arranged the quotes and images to leave the misleading and false impression of what really happened. This was an effort consistent with his other "falsehood filled" film, "Game Change!" Good Job Tom!

FACT CHECKER Calls-out Obama Over "Solyndra Shuffle" Trying to Blame Bush for His $535M Taxpayer Give Away!

The 23 March 2012 Washington Post FACT CHECKER Called-out Obama Over His "Solyndra Shuffle" Trying to Deflect his Blame for the $535 MILLION Taxpayer Give Away to a Failed Company Associated with His Major Bundler!

What a difference a year makes! I have posted Glenn Kessler’s entire 23 March Fact Checker below if you want to see what he actually said but here’s my interpretation of it.

Back in 2010 when Obama was riding high on his Green initiatives, he praised the company when he visited Solyndra, the solar panel manufacturer associated with George Kaiser. Remember George, he’s that Oklahoma billionaire who served as an Obama "bundler" raising TONS of money during the 2008 presidential campaign. George’s company, Argonaut Ventures, was the single largest shareholder of Solyndra with 39% of the company so when Obama’s Energy Dept illegally decided to put investors ahead of Taxpayers in recovering money in the Solyndra bankruptcy, George was the BIG beneficiary.

So here is how Obama touted his investing $535 MILLION of your Taxpayer money back in 2010:

“We can see the positive impacts right here at Solyndra. Less than a year ago, we were standing on what was an empty lot. But through the Recovery Act, this company received a loan to expand its operations. This new factory is the result of those loans… Before the Recovery Act, we could build just 5 percent of the world’s solar panels. In the next few years, we’re going to double our share to more than 10 percent.”
— Obama, remarks at Solyndra Inc., Fremont, Calif., May 26, 2010

…and when Obama’s Taxpayer “investment” went south, here is the “Obama Shuffle” again trying to play the “Blame Bush” game:

“Obviously, we wish Solyndra hadn’t gone bankrupt. Part of the reason they did was because the Chinese were subsidizing their solar industry and flooding the market in ways that Solyndra couldn’t compete. But understand: This was not our program, per se. Congress — Democrats and Republicans — put together a loan guarantee program because they understood historically that when you get new industries, it’s easy to raise money for startups, but if you want to take them to scale, oftentimes there’s a lot of risk involved, and what the loan guarantee program was designed to do was to help startup companies get to scale.” — President Obama, interview with American Public Media’s “Marketplace,” March 21, 2012

Aiding and abetting Obama’s Solyndra fiasco was Steven J. Spinner, another elite member of Obama’s “$500K+ Bundler Bunch” who Obama hired to "oversee" the administration's energy loan program. Talk about hiring the wolf to watch the chicken house! Spinner pushed and prodded career Department of Energy officials to approve the Solyndra loans even though his wife's law firm was representing Solyndra! Appears Spinner had forgotten he had signed an ethics agreement pledging he would "not participate in any discussion regarding any application involving his wife's law firm (Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati)."

What Obama once touted as his administration’s BIG achievement has now somehow become a bipartisan effort that preceded Obama — what a difference a year makes. Which is it?

Here are the Facts: The Energy Policy Act of 2005, was signed into law by Bush and Section 1703 of Title XVII included loan guarantee funding to promote innovative clean energy technologies. Solyndra had applied for a loan under 1703, but no loans were made by the time Bush left office.

In 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as Obama’s stimulus, Obama added a new section — 1705 — which offered a more attractive loan package because it did not include credit subsidy fees. Solyndra received its $535 MILLIOM loan under Obama’s Section 1705 — not the original Bush Section 1703 program.

A White House 14 Oct 2009 E-Mail obtained by congressional investigators shows Obama officials viewed Solyndra as a key element in “supporting the president’s manufacturing strategy” adding “The Administration’s combination of loans, grants, tax credits and mandates will help the United States regain its position as the world leader in manufacturing clean energy equipment.”

The Obama 2010 quote above clearly demonstrates, the president chose to emphasize the administration’s role in crafting the Solyndra loan when he spoke about Solyndra, only to “do an about face” once Solyndra failed.

Obama officials can’t cite a single example of the administration mentioning Bush until after Solyndra went belly-up. A 4 Sep 2009, news release even quoted VP Biden as saying: “This announcement today is part of the unprecedented investment this Administration is making in renewable energy and exactly what the Recovery Act is all about.” So in Biden’s own words, the stimulus law was promoted — not any Bush-era law. Biden touted the administration’s pivotal role when it looked like Solyndra was going gangbusters and then began blaming Bush when things started going badly.

The Fact Check’s Pinocchio Test awarded Two Pinocchios noting The Obama administration is straining too hard to reverse history by trying to link the Solyndra failure to the original Bush law setting up the loan guarantee program when Solyndra received its loan through Obama’s program expansion for which he was all to quick to take credit for when things looked fine. The Fact checker’s bottom line: ‘It’s hard to believe that any reasonable person could interpret Obama’s remarks this week as anything but a distinct effort to put the blame for Solyndra in some one else’s pocket. The president should accept responsibility, not shirk it.’

HBO's "Game Change" - A Democrat Hit Piece Masquerading as Entertainment and History

“Game Change” – Why can’t the Liberal Press just be honest and call it what it is. A Democrat campaign “hit piece of trash” masquerading as entertainment and history.

Mark Halperin and I have one thing in common, neither of us was behind the scenes of the Republican Campaign so know the “truth.” But basing a made for HBO movie about the 2008 Republican candidates on a book Halperin, a “journalist” that was “outted” as a Democrat partisan by his own memos to his ABC News colleagues, is like basing one on the Obama Administration on Laura Ingraham’s book “The Obama Diaries.” Throw in that it’s produced by Tom Hanks, the guy that narrates Obama’s re-election campaign 17-minute film being shown at campaign events around the country for fundraising and campaign volunteer recruitment, and you get a better picture on how unbiased this piece of trash really is. I wouldn’t believe a word Halperin said even under oath!

Now if you want to talk about DUMB incompetent VP picks, does anyone really believe Joe Biden, the quintessential political idiot, is qualified to be Vice President? Every time Joe speaks, I listen with anxious anticipation confident he will commit some “world-class” gaffs to provide comic relief. He is the reason every American should pray each evening for Obama's good health as he will surely go down in history as the dumbest and most inept vice president of all times; by comparison he makes Bachmann appear cerebral, Palin intellectual, and Dan Quayle absolutely brilliant.

I have posted a compendium of the “gaff-mister’s” Greatest Hit “Dumb Biden-isms” (and there are many) further down on this Blog at: http://old-soldier-colonel.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-had-worst-week-in-washington-vice.html

Obama's "$500K Bundler Bunch" Get to Attend a State Dinner and Get a Free Meal as an Added Perk!

Below I Blogged about: How to Acquire a Title or Become a “Top Government Official” the “Old Fashion Way” – Buy it from Obama! – But here’s a little late breaking Bundler News. As a Bonus Perquisite for Obama’s 2012 Bundling Crowd, the Prez is throwing in a free meal at a gala event – all at Taxpayer expense.

According to ABC News, 41 Obama cronies who gave the legal maximum and then gather checks from friends and colleagues who did the same up to $500,000+ were among the 364 “guests” at the 14 Mar 12 White House official dinner in honor of British Prime Minister David Cameron. This Bundling Bunch is responsible for at least $10.7 million of the roughly $250 million Obama and Democrats have amassed to date for this election. Appears this has become a regular Obama “payoff technique” as he feted other Bundlers at the recent the State Dinner honoring South Korean President Lee Myung-bak.

Remember, this is an added perk so members of the "Bundler Bunch" are still in line for a plum Government appointment or an ambassadorship.

Here’s the full list of attending “$500K+ Bundling Bunch” members & where they work. You'll notice lots of Wall Streeters, Hollywooders and Lobbyists are included:

Gerald Acker, Huntington Woods, MI – (Goodman Acker PC)
Mark Alderman, Bryn Mawr, PA – (Cozen & O’Connor)
Jean-Phillipe Austin, Miami, FL – (Physician)
Matthew Barzun, Louisville, KY – (Brickpath LLC)
Tom and Andrea Bernstein, New York, NY – (Chelsea Piers Mgmt)
Neil Bluhm, Chicago, IL – (Walton Street Capital)
Wally Brewster, Jr. & Robert Satawake, Chicago, IL – (General Growth Properties/Keller Williams Realty)
Jim Crown, Chicago, IL – (Henry Crown & Co)
John Crumpler, Durham, NC –(Hatteras Venture Architects)
Meredith DeWitt, Harvard, MA – (Political Consultant)
Fred Eychaner, Chicago, IL (Newsweb Corp)
Joseph Falk, Miami, FL – (Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson)
Rajiv Kumar Fernando, Chicago, IL – (Chopper Trading)
John Frank, Bellevue, WA — (Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Microsoft,)
William Freeman, Nashville, TN – (Freeman Webb Co)
Lou Frillman, Seattle, WA – (GVA Marquette Advisors/Financial Designs Ltd)
Anthony Gardner, Washington, DC – (Palamon Captial Partners)
Chad Griffin, Los Angeles, CA – (Chad Griffin Consulting)
Samuel Heins and Stacey Mills, Wayzata, MN – (Heins, Mills & Olson)
Don Hinkle, Tallahassee, FL – (Hinkle & Foran)
Gary Hirshberg, Concord, NH – (Stonyfield Farm)
Barry Karas, Los Angeles, CA – (Perlman & Assoc/Actor)
Janet Keller, Laguna Beach, CA – (Consultant)
Charlie Kireker, Weybridge, VT – (Twin Birches)
Orin Kramer, New York, NY – (Boston Provident)
Mai Lassiter, Los Angeles, CA – (Overbrook Entertainment)
Suzi Levine, Seattle, WA – (Microsoft)
Joe Liemandt, Austin, TX – (Trilogy Enterprises Inc)
James Murray, Keene, VA – (Greenbriar Square Property Management)
Susan Ness, Bethesda, MD – (Susan Ness Strategies)
Michael Monroe Parham, Seattle, WA – (Realnetworks Inc)
Carol Pensky, Washington, DC – (Retired)
Ellen Richman, Greenwich, CT – (Richman Group)
John Scully, San Francisco, CA – (Spo Partners & Co)
Diana Shaw Clark, Washington, DC – (Writer)
Jay Snyder, New York, NY – (HBJ Investments)
Sally Susman, New York, NY – (Pfizer Inc)
John and Sandi Thompson, Woodside, CA – (Fenwick & West)
George Tsunis, Cold Spring Harbor, NY – (Chartwell Hotels)
Harvey Weinstein, New York, NY – (Weinstein Co)
Anna Wintour, New York, NY — (Editor-in-Chief, Vogue Magazine)