Thursday, May 28, 2015


by Tabitha Korol

The Oscar-winning actress Natalie Portman said that she would not use her platform of fame or share her strong leftist opinions inappropriately; therefore, she granted an interview to Steven Galloway, The Hollywood Reporter. Thus begins a peek into a leftist’s psychology. (No sunspecs required.)

Portman identified herself as being “quite leftist,” meaning that she is yet another person of Jewish heritage who has withdrawn from her birthright, and follows a distinct set of assumptions held by others – also described as “groupthink.” When asked if she feels uncomfortable about her Jewishness while in France, she offered a brief “Yes,” before deflecting to comment about “the danger of being a Muslim in many places.” The identity of whom the Muslims fear was conveniently not broached - it is their own rage and violence, products of their perception of Muslim supremacism.

France is considered the most dangerous country for Jews today and the Muslims the “main instigators of global anti-Semitism.” France’s Jews, 0.75 percent of the population, live in constant peril. Anti-Semitism has increased by 400 percent since the summer of 2014; 40 percent of violent crimes are committed by Muslims against Jews. Although French officials have deployed about 20,000 soldiers to guard the Jewish businesses and schools, crimes persist, such as:

· the boy who, returning home for Sabbath dinner, was accosted and pummeled by four men with iron pipes – his eye socket damaged, shoes stolen, cell phone intentionally trampled so he could not call for help.

· the 17 year-old girl who was pepper-sprayed and told, “Dirty Jewess, inshallah (Allah willing) you will die”;

· the Jewish mother who, while seated on a park bench, was attacked and beaten by three men;

· the young couple who was robbed in their apartment, the woman raped, her boyfriend restrained;

· the firebombs thrown at a Jewish community center in Toulouse, another at a synagogue;

· the three solders standing guard outside Nice’s Jewish center who were attacked and injured by a man wielding a knife;

· the anti-Semitic riots in Sarcelles (Paris suburb, “Little Jerusalem”), with slogans of death and slaughter.

These and others were carried out against Jews by Muslims, but Portman’s leftism precludes her identifying the criminals and their behavior.

As noted in The Religion of Peace online, close to 26,000 terrorist attacks were committed in the name of Islam since 9/11, and a recent article by Giulio Meotti cites 100,000 Christians per year. All other religions combined do not equal the terror wrought by Islam and no other religion requires the suffix “phobia” to bully others into silence lest they be accused of harboring “irrational fear” when the fear is perfectly rational.

No other religion demands respect while committing the most abhorrent crimes – and this is because Islam is a political, militaristic ideology couched in religion. Their mandate is to conquer and govern all others: immigrate (to a non-Muslim country), populate (increase and demand accommodation), and eliminate (city becomes Muslim), according to the Muslim Brotherhood’s 100-year plan of 1982. About 62 percent of the Quran curses unbelievers or calls for violence, yet, when once sharia is established as law, their own are also controlled harshly. In fact, Iran has been systematically purging (genocide) its own Arab population.

Surely, Portman should have noticed the preponderance of armed French soldiers on Paris streets, where once there were accordionists, flower sellers and romance. France’s oldest and second-largest city, Marseille, founded in 600 BC by Greek sailors, was once considered the European Capital of Culture, but is now ranked as Europe’s most dangerous city, having a 30 to 40 percent Muslim population. Portman and the Left will deny the cause of the violence and the climate of fear that turned the once-charming, coastal city into a no-go zone, where French law is irrelevant. In fact, the Left denies the existence of no-go zones.

Since the Left adheres to a mantra of multiculturalism and equality of people and religions, Portman calls “endangered Muslims” those who amass weapons, invade, and destroy. While one faction continues to attack Israelis and Jews at every opportunity, another faction is slaughtering Christians, beheading, burning, kidnapping, raping, and selling women and children into slavery. Islam is the only group that continues the slave trade. While Hitler and Nazism were responsible for about 60 million deaths, and Stalin and Communism about 80 million, Islam’s legacy over 1400 years approaches 400 million. The Left and mainstream media remain silent, and Portman proves that she is indeed on the Left by denying Islam’s gory history.

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call all Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule, some quite graphic. Aloof from historical context, they proudly regard themselves as part of the eternal and unchanging word of Allah.

Portman has generously, but presumptuously, forgiven Dior fashion designer John Galliano for his several public anti-Semitic rants, yet denounces Prime Minister Netanyahu as racist for noting the growing Arab vote – that could credibly destroy the Jewish people’s only homeland. Blindly loyal to her destructive liberal doctrine, she prefers Palestinians have a home that was never theirs at the peril of Jews in the home that had been theirs for centuries. The Left prefers that Israel again cede land to those who already have a land mass one thousand times Israel’s size, and may be mobilized to slaughter Jews at the mere sound of a bugle. The Left is silent when Israelis are attacked from air, earth, and beneath the earth, but speak out for the rights of those who have Natalie Portman in their sight.

The pretty and talented Natalie Portman knows little about her own heritage and displays a shocking amount of ignorance of the facts, and her arrogance for defending the leftist fiction is indefensible. The irony is that her personal life is unacceptable to those she defends. Under Palestinian rule, Sharia, she would be stoned or beheaded for being of Jewish descent, a woman, outspoken, supporting same-sex marriage, believing in educating females, wearing “immodest” clothing, and having a child out of wedlock. She and her family are at risk now in France, in Israel, and in the United States, and the source is Islam. Sadly, our Leftist academia are no longer teaching their students to think and reason, and Natalie Portman is of that generation. If we add together the Islamists in our midst, the remorseless willfully blind, and the ignorant by indoctrination... I fear for what’s left.☼

A Genocide of Christians
is Underway -
and the West Sleeps

by Dan Friedman
A new document attests to the genocide that is being ignored by the world.

From Giulio Meotti

Every year, more than 100,000 Christians are murdered just because of their faith. This means that 11 Christians are murdered every hour. The numbers are contained in a new document presented by John McAreavey, president of the Justice and Peace Commission of the Bishops of Dublin. A genocide of Christians is under way.

In many Middle Eastern cities, from Aleppo to Mosul, the Islamists have dealt with each and every Christian by displacing, killing or forcibly converting them, and just like the Nazis painted the Star of David on the Jewish homes, the jihadists have painted the “N” letter on Christian houses to identify them before destroying them.

The churches have been demolished, the crosses burned and replaced with flags of the Islamic State, entire communities have been displaced, children and women massacred. Everything has been done in plain sight. The Islamists proclaim that they will not stop until Christianity is wiped off the face of the earth.

These Christians are killed just because they didn’t agree to convert. How many in the West would have done the same? In the video of the recent massacre of Coptic Christians in Libya, it has been noted that many of them, before being beheaded, invoked the name of Jesus in Arabic and chanted prayers.

“Aleppo will be left without Christians within one month”, the Chaldean bishop of the Syrian city, Antoine Audo, has announced. He accused not only the Islamic State, but also “the countries of the region with their Wahhabi Islam and anxiety of historical revenge toward Christianity”.

More than 5,000 Catholics have been killed since 2009 by Boko Haram in the diocese of Maiduguri in northern Nigeria. In total, more than 13,000 Christians were killed by these terrorists. 100,000 Catholics expelled from their homes, 350 churches destroyed, many more than once, after they had been rebuilt.

But you don’t need to go to Mosul to see the crosses removed by bulldozers. Just take a train to Rennes, in France, because according to a court, the statue to Pope John Paul is “too ostentatious” in the square of Ploermel and must be removed.

Or take a train to Luxembourg, the “happy country” where the MP Xavier Bettel has just become the first gay prime minister to marry his partner.

In Belgium, religion will disappear completely from schools and will be replaced by courses in “ethics” and “secular values”. Behind the happy face of this small and rich nation of castles, picturesque forests and towers lies a kind of hypnotic nihilism.

The problem is not the Islamic fanatics who burn the churches and kill the pastors. The problem is that the apathetic, indolent West is letting them to do so because it has ceased to believe in itself.

Monday, May 25, 2015

Created By Broken Homes By Marshall Frank

Insanity definition: "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

In a perfect world, all children would grow up in secure, loving families with a mom and dad, good role models and plenty of love. Alas, the world is not perfect. And the less perfect it becomes, the worse it is for all of us, not only those who are trapped into despair, poverty and neglect.

Kids who come from broken homes are lucky to have parents who still talk to each other, who love and care for the child, and who support, educate and meet psychological needs. Too often that's not the case. Some fathers abandon their duty-bound responsibilities. Why? Because they can.

A 2012 study of deadbeat dads, aired by CNN, indicates that $100 billion a year was owed in unpaid child support. Taxpayers pick up the tab for nearly half that amount in the form of non-reimbursed welfare. Mothers comprise 82 percent of the custodial parents in broken home situations. Child support payments represent 45 percent of their income. Single mothers with multiple kids rely mostly on welfare for total income.

Recent studies show that 1.6 million babies are born to unwed mothers every year. Among blacks, 73 percent of new babies have no father at home, leaving mothers to bear the burden. For Asians, 17 percent; Whites, 29 percent.

It's not only about financial support. Spin-off problems can be worse. Sure, it's important to clothe and feed children, but needs go beyond physical welfare. It is equally important to develop kids into well-adjusted youths who do not turn to the streets for negative love and attention outside the home.

Aye, there's the rub, the unseen, unmeasured consequence of dysfunctional or abusive parenting, or no parenting at all. Psychological damage to children can ultimately cost taxpayers far more than child support checks, particularly after kids reach puberty and engage in behaviors that land them in jails, rehab centers or county morgues. Meanwhile, taxpayers must bear the costs of fighting crime and trauma, not only within the justice system, but in emergency rooms, property loss, physical loss, lost wages, victimization costs and more.

What kids from broken families seek out in the streets is what they often don't get at home: acceptance, attention, guidance and feeling important. Thus, the substitutes. Boys enter gangs. Girls sell bodies. Kids use drugs — to belong. Any mention of morality is laughable. And we pay for it all.

Street gangs are replete with stories about mothers who had multiple kids from miscellaneous fathers who never felt the need to be part of their children's lives. The mothers get all the help possible from Uncle Sam. Deadbeat dads get a free pass called welfare. It absolves them of responsibility, not only for paying money, but for their precious time and commitment. Moms are better off staying unmarried because the government is a sure thing, the dads are not. It's a vicious cycle.

When you hear about aberrant teens, violence and gangs, remember that most of these kids never had a chance from the moment they were born. Many were born of dysfunctional teens themselves, grossly unprepared for motherhood. They never learned how to parent because their parents were just as dysfunctional.

The Great Society of President Lyndon Johnson, it seems, has backfired. It was all about expanding welfare. From 1965 to 2008, according to Forbes, $16 trillion had been appropriated for welfare programs for the poor. That's increased another $2 trillion since. Johnson may have meant to eliminate poverty, but it created a dependent society instead. When Johnson was president, more than 75 percent of black babies were born with fathers in the family. Dads stayed home to help raise kids. Not today. Meanwhile, we continue to hear the same old drumbeat about the need for government to spread the wealth and take care of the poor. Seems that hasn't worked very well.

I guess we must be insane.
_____ ___

Frank is an author and retired police detective who lives in Melbourne. Visit his website at...



By Marshall Frank
Most of my readers know that I strive to research and verify before posting facts and opinions. Once in a great while, a reader will come up with one of those “gotchas” which causes me to restudy a point of view. The few times that has happened, I accept as a learning process by which to do even better.

We all naturally harbor views and opinions that may not be completely verifiable, yet very possibly true. As experienced police detectives are aware, hard evidence is not always left behind, though the circumstantial body of information may point to conclusions that offer solid information and prime suspects.

The following list of views and opinions are based on my own insights, research, a plethora of dot-connecting and plain common sense. This time it’s just me; Thinking Out Loud

I believe the global warming issue is a political sham. Indeed, some science reports espouse warming as a global problem, but the politicians on one end of the fence do all they can to cash in politically. Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has been on-going since the beginning of planet earth. It wasn’t man who created the ice age, nor other shifts in geological or meteorological phenomena. Of course, it’s important do all we can to preserve a good environment. But whenever I hear someone like the president tell us that climate change is more serious than ISIS or international terror, the first thing that comes to mind is; Is he purposely lying? Is this a political detraction?

The rise of ISIS rivals the rise of Nazism in the early 1930’s. It started with a band of brutal radicals, to which the general populace turned a blind eye until the treachery overflowed into their world. Our president originally dismissed ISIS as a JV unit, unimportant. The mission of ISIS is establishing fundamentalist Islamic states to blanket the entire world which will entail mass terror; it is only a matter of time. It’s destined to grow huge and not just in the middle-east. The radical Islamists and the Nazis each worshiped a god: One who could be seen, and the other who cannot be seen. But the fascist ideology is very similar. The only thing that will stop the march of fascism is a defeat from which they cannot recover. Like it or not, that could mean D-Day.

We know that – for many years – Barack Obama’s most influential mentor, and father figure, from ages ten to eighteen was Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed, card-carrying communist who hated the United States. We know that Barack Obama was indoctrinated at an earlier age with Islam. And, we know that Obama’s friends and associates throughout his early life were confirmed anti-Americans, communists and Islamists to which he owed his friendship and loyalty. Thus, we have elected into the White House, a man who was marinated in two ideologies which have, at one time or another, sworn to destroy and conquer the United States. It’s clear the American voters had no clue as to who or what they were voting for.

Race relations were at an all-time pinnacle in America until 2009, when – ironically – a black president took office. Barack Obama, and his ideology and his cronies (Holder, Sharpton, etc.) have set back race relations 40 years, or more. Could it be that it is all part of a grander plan to establish anarchy in America, thus the divide?

Consider the possiblity that Barack Obama may attempt to remain in office. Outside of repealing a constitutional amendment, that can be achieved one of two ways: 1) He can have Michelle Obama run for president, and if elected, he would remain president by proxy or 2) Obama can declare Martial Law. That can be accomplished for a number of reasons; Out-of-control border crossings, war with Iran or other major countries, anarchy in major cities, etc. On March 16, 2012, the White House released an executive order, “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” which expands and reaffirms a previous action giving the executive branch such powers to protect national security. Basically, the federal government has the authority to take over many aspects of American society. Food, livestock, farming equipment, manufacturing, industry, energy, transportation, health care facilities, water resources, defense and construction – all of it could fall under the full control of Mr. Obama.

I believe the current wave of assaults and demonstrations against police is an organized effort to create anger, hatred and disorder by hired anarchists, as part of a grander plan to one day declare police incapable of maintaining the peace. That could also provide a motive for Martial Law. Hopefully not.

I believe Barack Obama is at the least, a sympathizer with the Muslim Brotherhood, or at the most, a stealth agent. Every action he takes in regards to the middle-east is to the advantage of the Muslim Brotherhood, including the uprising and installation of Mohammed Morsi in Egypt in 2011.

I believe Obama will, while president, stand by and do little or nothing to prevent an Israeli catastrophe as Iran or other proxies embark upon an overt destruction of Israel.

I believe Hillary Clinton (and possibly the president) was likely aware of the scheme prior to the Benghazi attack of 2012. Her actions, or inactions, prior to and following the attack, aided and abetted which could be considered “Obstruction of Justice.” Certainly the actions following the attack rivaled that of many past criminal suspects; Lie, duck and get lost.

For one reason or another, I seriously doubt that Hillary Clinton will make it to an election day. There are too many hammers ready to fall, and she is a grossly dishonest person. And, she is inevitably going to come under fire for so many of her major actions and inactions as debates near. It’s unthinkable that any informed American citizen could cast a vote for this woman, regardless of party.

Click here: Did Obama sign a martial law executive order? — RT USA

Monday, May 18, 2015

Isaiah 10.1 - Woe unto those
that make unjust laws

Take the time to read thru this. It is very scary how one madman can destroy a Great Nation!

​We are all aware that a significant number of U.S. military high ranking officers have been relieved from duty since BO took office in 2009. What I didn't realize is how extreme this has been. ​

Below is a list of Generals, Admirals and Navy officers who have been fired under the Obama administration because they disagreed with his policies and handling of the armed forces.

​So who the hell is protecting our country?

(Read to the end...print it for aware friends.)

• General John R. Allen - U.S. Marines Commander International Security Assistance Force [ISAF] (Nov 2012)
• Major General Ralph Baker (2 Star) - U.S. Army Commander of the Combined Joint Task Force Horn in Africa (April 2013)
• Major General Michael Carey (2 Star) - U.S. Air Force Commander of the 20th US Air Force in charge of 9,600 people and 450 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (Oct 2013)
• Colonel James Christmas - U.S. Marines Commander 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit
• Major General Peter Fuller-U.S. Army Commander in Afghanistan (May 2011)
• Major General Charles M.M. Gurganus - U.S. Marine Corps Regional Commander of SW and I Marine Expeditionary Force in Afghanistan (Oct 2013)
• General Carter F. Ham - U.S. Army African Command (Oct 2013)
• Lieutenant General David H. Huntoon (3 Star), Jr. - U.S. Army 58th Superintendent of the US Military Academy at West Point , NY (2013)
• Command Sergeant Major Don B Jordan - U.S. Army 143rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command (suspended Oct 2013)
• General James Mattis - U.S. Marines Chief of CentCom (May 2013)
• Colonel Daren Margolin - U.S. Marine in charge of Quantico 's Security Battalion (Oct 2013)
• General Stanley McChrystal - U.S. Army Commander Afghanistan (June 2010)
• General David D. McKiernan - U.S. Army Commander Afghanistan (2009)
• General David Petraeus - Director of CIA from September 2011 to November 2012
• Brigadier General Bryan Roberts - U.S. Army Commander 2nd Brigade (May 2013)
• Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant - U.S. Marine Corps Director of Strategic Planning and Policy for the U.S. Pacific Command
• Colonel Eric Tilley - U.S. Army Commander of Garrison Japan (Nov 2013)
• Brigadier General Bryan Wampler - U.S. Army Commanding General of 143rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command of the 1st Theater Sustainment Command [TSC] (suspended Oct 2013)

Navy Admirals fired:

• Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette - U.S. Navy Commander John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group Three (Oct 2012)
•Vice Admiral Tim Giardina(3 Star, demoted to 2 Star) - U.S. Navy Deputy Commander of the US Strategic Command, Commander of the Submarine Group Trident, Submarine Group 9 and Submarine Group 10 (Oct 2013)

Naval Officers fired: (All in 2011)

•Captain David Geisler - U.S. Navy Commander Task Force 53 in Bahrain (Oct 2011)
• Commander Laredo Bell - U.S. Navy Commander Naval Support Activity Saratoga Springs , NY (Aug 2011)
• Lieutenant Commander Kurt Boenisch - Executive Officer amphibious transport dock Ponce (Apr 2011)
• Commander Nathan Borchers - U.S. Navy Commander destroyer Stout (Mar 2011)
• Commander Robert Brown - U.S. Navy Commander Beachmaster Unit 2 Fort Story , VA (Aug 2011)
• Commander Andrew Crowe - Executive Officer Navy Region Center Singapore (Apr 2011)
• Captain Robert Gamberg - Executive Officer carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower (Jun 2011)
• Captain Rex Guinn - U.S. Navy Commander Navy Legal Service office Japan (Feb 2011)
• Commander Kevin Harms - U.S. Navy Commander Strike Fighter Squadron 137 aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln (Mar 2011)
• Lieutenant Commander Martin Holguin - U.S. Navy Commander mine countermeasures Fearless (Oct 2011)
• Captain Owen Honors - U.S. Navy Commander aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (Jan 2011)
• Captain Donald Hornbeck - U.S. Navy Commander Destroyer Squadron 1 San Diego (Apr 2011)
• Rear Admiral Ron Horton - U.S. Navy Commander Logistics Group, Western Pacific (Mar 2011)
• Commander Etta Jones - U.S. Navy Commander amphibious transport dock Ponce (Apr 2011)
• Commander Ralph Jones - Executive Officer amphibious transport dock Green Bay (Jul 2011)
• Commander Jonathan Jackson - U.S. Navy Commander Electronic Attack Squadron 134, deployed aboard carrier Carl Vinson (Dec 2011)
• Captain Eric Merrill - U.S. Navy Commander submarine Emory S. Land (Jul 2011)
• Captain William Mosk -U.S. Navy Commander Naval Station Rota , U.S. Navy Commander Naval Activities Spain (Apr 2011)
• Commander Timothy Murphy - U.S. Navy Commander Electronic Attack Squadron 129 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, WA (Apr 2011)
• Commander Joseph Nosse - U.S. Navy Commander ballistic-missile submarine Kentucky (Oct 2011)
• Commander Mark Olson - U.S. Navy Commander destroyer The Sullivans FL (Sep 2011)
• Commander John Pethel - Executive Officer amphibious transport dock New York (Dec 2011)
• Commander Karl Pugh - U.S. Navy Commander Electronic Attack Squadron 141 Whidbey Island, WA (Jul 2011)
• Commander Jason Strength - U.S. Navy Commander of Navy Recruiting District Nashville, TN (Jul 2011)
• Captain Greg Thomas - U.S. Navy Commander Norfolk Naval Shipyard (May 2011)
• Commander Mike Varney - U.S. Navy Commander attack submarine Connecticut (Jun 2011)
• Commander Jay Wylie - U.S. Navy Commander destroyer Momsen (Apr 2011)

Naval Officers fired (All in 2012):

• Commander Alan C. Aber - Executive Officer Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 71 (July 2012)
• Commander Derick Armstrong - U.S. Navy Commander missile destroyer USS The Sullivans (May 2012)
• Commander Martin Arriola - U.S. Navy Commander destroyer USS Porter (Aug2012)
• Captain Antonio Cardoso - U.S. Navy Commander Training Support Center San Diego (Sep 2012)
• Captain James CoBell - U.S. Navy Commander Oceana Naval Air Station's Fleet Readiness Center Mid-Atlantic (Sep 2012)
• Captain Joseph E. Darlak - U.S. Navy Commander frigate USS Vandegrift (Nov 2012)
• Captain Daniel Dusek - U.S. Navy Commander USS Bonhomme
• Commander David Faught - Executive Officer destroyer Chung-Hoon (Sep 2012)
• Commander Franklin Fernandez - U.S. Navy Commander Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 24 (Aug 2012)
• Commander Ray Hartman - U.S. Navy Commander Amphibious dock-landing ship Fort McHenry (Nov 2012)
• Commander Shelly Hakspiel - Executive Officer Navy Drug Screening Lab San Diego (May 2012)
• Commander Jon Haydel - U.S. Navy Commander USS San Diego (Mar 2012)
• Commander Diego Hernandez - U.S. Navy Commander ballistic-missile submarine USS Wyoming (Feb 2012)
• Commander Lee Hoey - U.S. Navy Commander Drug Screening Laboratory, San Diego (May 2012)
• Commander Ivan Jimenez - Executive Officer frigate Vandegrift (Nov 2012)
• Commander Dennis Klein - U.S. Navy Commander submarine USS Columbia (May 2012)
• Captain Chuck Litchfield - U.S. Navy Commander assault ship USS Essex (Jun 2012)
• Captain Marcia Kim Lyons - U.S. Navy Commander Naval Health Clinic New England (Apr 2012)
• Captain Robert Marin - U.S. Navy Commander cruiser USS Cowpens (Feb 2012)
• Captain Sean McDonell - U.S. Navy Commander Seabee reserve unit Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 14 FL (Nov 2012)
• Commander Corrine Parker - U.S. Navy Commander Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 1 (Apr 2012)
• Captain Liza Raimondo - U.S. Navy Commander Naval Health Clinic Patuxent River , MD (Jun 2012)
• Captain Jeffrey Riedel - Program manager, Littoral Combat Ship program (Jan 2012)
• Commander Sara Santoski - U.S. Navy Commander Helicopter Mine Countermeasures Squadron 15 (Sep 2012)
• Commander Kyle G. Strudthoff - Executive Officer Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 25 (Sep 2012)
• Commander Sheryl Tannahill - U.S. Navy Commander Navy Operational Support Center [NOSC] Nashville , TN (Sep 2012)
• Commander Michael Ward - U.S. Navy Commander submarine USS Pittsburgh (Aug 2012)
• Captain Michael Wiegand - U.S. Navy Commander Southwest Regional Maintenance Center (Nov 2012)
• Captain Ted Williams - U.S. Navy Commander amphibious command ship Mount Whitney (Nov 2012)
• Commander Jeffrey Wissel - U.S. Navy Commander of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (Feb 2012)

Naval Officers fired (All in 2013):

• Lieutenant Commander Lauren Allen - Executive Officer submarine Jacksonville (Feb 2013)
• Reserve Captain Jay Bowman - U.S. Navy Commander Navy Operational Support Center [NOSC] Fort Dix , NJ (Mar 2013)
• Captain William Cogar - U.S. Navy Commander hospital ship Mercy's medical treatment facility (Sept 2013)
• Commander Steve Fuller - Executive Officer frigate Kauffman (Mar 2013)
• Captain Shawn Hendricks - Program Manager for naval enterprise IT networks (June 2013)
• Captain David Hunter - U.S. Navy Commander of Maritime Expeditionary Security Squadron 12
• Captain Eric Johnson - U.S. Navy Chief of Military Entrance Processing Command at Great Lakes Naval Training Center, IL (2013)
• Captain Devon Jones - U.S. Navy Commander Naval Air Facility El Centro , CA (July 2013)
• Captain Kevin Knoop - U.S. Navy Commander hospital ship Comfort's medical treatment facility (Aug 2013)
• Lieutenant Commander Jack O'Neill - U.S. Navy Commander Operational Support Center Rock Island , IL (Mar 2013)
• Commander Allen Maestas - Executive Officer Beachmaster Unit 1 (May 2013)
• Commander Luis Molina - U.S. Navy Commander submarine Pasadena (Jan 2013)
• Commander James Pickens - Executive Officer frigate Gary (Feb 2013)
• Lieutenant Commander Mark Rice - U.S. Navy Commander Mine Countermeasures ship Guardian (Apr 2013)
• Commander Michael Runkle - U.S. Navy Commander of Mobile Diving and Salvage Unit 2 (May 2013)
• Commander Jason Stapleton - Executive Office Patrol Squadron 4 in Hawaii (Mar 2013)
• Commander Nathan Sukols - U.S. Navy Commander submarine Jacksonville (Feb 2013)
• Lieutenant Daniel Tyler - Executive Officer Mine Countermeasures ship Guardian (Apr 2013)
• Commander Edward White - U.S. Navy Commander Strike Fighter Squadron 106 (Aug 2013)
• Captain Jeffrey Winter - U.S. Navy Commander of Carrier Air Wing 17 (Sept 2013)
• Commander Thomas Winter - U.S. Navy Commander submarine Montpelier (Jan 2013)
• Commander Corey Wofford - U.S. Navy Commander frigate Kauffman (Feb 2013)

(Note): This trend continues in 2014 !

Since Barack Obama has been in the White House, high ranking military officers have been removed from their positions at a rate that is absolutely unprecedented.

Things have gotten so bad that a number of retired generals are publicly speaking out about the 'purge' of the U.S. military that they believe is taking place. As you will see below, dozens of highly decorated military leaders have been dismissed from their positions over the past few years.

So why is this happening? What is going on right now is absolutely crazy especially during a time of unrest. Is there a deliberate attempt to reshape the military and remove those who don't adhere to the proper 'viewpoints' ? Does someone out there feel a need to get officers that won't cooperate out of the way?

Throughout world history, whatever comes next after a military purge is never good. Perhaps you are reading this and you think that 'purge' is too strong a word for what is taking place.

If this continues, what is the U.S. military going to look like in a few years?

Just consider the following quotes from some very highly decorated retired officers:

- Retired Army Major General Paul Vallely: “The White House protects their own. That's why they stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and Obamacare. He's intentionally weakening and gutting our military, the Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

- Retired Army Major General Patrick Brady: “There is no doubt he (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him.”

- Retired Army Lt. General William G. Jerry Boykin: “Over the past three years, it is unprecedented for the number of four-star generals to be relieved of duty, and not necessarily relieved for cause.”

- Retired Navy Captain Joseph John: “I believe there are more than 137 officers who have been forced out or given bad evaluation reports so they will never make Flag (officer), because of their failure to comply to certain views.”

A Pentagon official, who asked to remain nameless because they were not authorized to speak on the matter, said even young officers, down through the ranks have been told not to talk about Obama or the politics of the White House. They are purging everyone and if you want to keep your job just keep your mouth shut. Now this trend appears to be accelerating.

General Vallely's comment: “Absolutely every communist regime on the planet did this as soon as they got in power.”


Saturday, May 16, 2015

Well Spoken - Worth Keeping

Editor's Note: Maybe you've seen this's 100% accurate, but not believed by most voters, especially Millennials. BHO is not America's first African-American president (1/8th African)...he's more accurately America's first Arab-American president (3/8ths Arab), assuming that his mother Stanley was 100% "White-American," as reported. And, thanks to ever-increasing government entitlements, the African-American descendants of African slaves, brought to the U.S. by Arabs, are still enslaved.

Probably the best description of Barack Obama ever written. Jack Wheeler is a brilliant man who was the author of Reagan's strategy to break the back of the Soviet Union with the star wars race and expose their inner weakness. For years he wrote a weekly intelligence update that was extremely interesting and well-structured and informative. He consults(ed) with several mega corporations on global trends and the future, etc. He is in semi-retirement now. He is a true patriot with a no-nonsense approach to everything. He is also a somewhat well-known mountain climber and adventurer.
The first paragraph of Mr. Wheeler's statement is perfect.

by Dr. Jack Wheeler

The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, nothing but abstract, empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.

He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides, but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya. Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.

What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is "African-American," the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.

Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah. It's something Hillary doesn't understand - how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.

Thus Obama has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.

Thank heavens that the voting majority of Americans remain Christian and are in no desperate need of a phony savior. He is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.

And yet he got elected, not once but twice. Thanks to those who did not think it was important to vote for freedom and those who were willing to give up their freedoms for entitlements.

Remember, you don't have to be on a southern plantation to be a slave; if you are dependent on government entitlements, then you just have a different slave owner.

Thursday, May 14, 2015



Editor's Note: Just before the 2008 national elections, Obama promised
 his mesmerized fans that he was about to "fundamentally change" this
unique republic. Seven years into his outrageous foreign & domestic
agenda, he arrogantly believes that he has also been given a legal right
to change the mainstream media, and especially the top FNC reporters
 and commentators that lead the field with 'fair & balanced' views. - reb

For going on seven years we have learned three things about President Obama: 1) He loves the poor so much he continues to create more of them. 2) He loves the poor so much he does everything in his power to keep them poor. 3) He doesn’t see the opposition as loyal, but as bad players — his enemy. This is especially true of Fox News, which Obama ripped as anti-poor bigots during a Wednesday afternoon summit on poverty.

We’re used to this Obama, the forever-partisan who has never seen himself as president of all the people but only of those who worship him.

What was most revealing about the president’s comments was his expressed desire to “change how the media reports.”

Speaking of Fox News, the poor, and the way GOP leaders think, Obama said, [W]e’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues.”

Here is the full transcript:

I think that the effort to suggest that the poor are sponges, leeches, don’t want to work, are lazy, are undeserving, got traction. And look, it’s still being propagated. I have to say that if you watch Fox News on a regular basis, it is a constant venue. They will find folks who make me mad. I don’t know where they find them. They’re all like, “I don’t want to work. I just want a free Obama Phone, or whatever.” And that becomes an entire narrative that gets worked up. And very rarely do you hear an interview of a waitress, which is much more typical — who is raising a couple of kids and doing everything right but still can’t pay the bills.

And so, if we’re going to change how Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) think, we’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues, and how people’s impressions of what it’s like to struggle in this economy looks like. And how budgets connect to that. And that’s a hard process because that requires a much broader conversation than typically we have on the nightly news.

After seven failed years, to watch Obama sit there and discuss the poor as though he is part of the solution and not the problem, is laughable.

And let’s not forget that Obama knows nothing about poverty. He has lived a privileged life.

Obama attended prep schools as a child, lived with his well-to-do grandparents in Honolulu as a teen, where he attended Panahou, a fancy private school. Both of his grandparents were well educated; she even worked as the vice president of a bank. For a time, Obama had a nanny! From there Obama attended Occidental College in California, was well off enough to visit Pakistan for 3 weeks; he then attended two of the most prestigious colleges in the country: Columbia and Harvard.

The closest Obama has ever come to experiencing anything close to poverty was during his time as a community organizer in Chicago. And in that dynamic, the poor were just pawns for Obama to manipulate to achieve his political ambitions.

Obama knows nothing of struggle, or what life is like for those who do. And after 7 years of his failed economic policies, we also know he doesn’t give a damn enough about the poor to change his policies in a way that might actually help them.

Obama likes poor people fine — he likes them dependent on the government.

He also likes the news media to do what it’s told.

Tuesday, May 12, 2015


Would you believe that Lee Iacocca is 91 years old and is still KICKIN’ butt? Check out his latest rant.

Just as true today as it was when his book first came out. He was, and still is, a brilliant businessman!

Often we need to be reminded of Iacocca's words, Remember Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from its death throes?

He's now 91 years old and has a new book

, 'Where Have All The Leaders Gone?'.

Lee Iacocca Says:

"Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage with this so called president?

We should be screaming bloody murder!

We've got a gang of tax cheating clueless leftists trying to steer our ship of state right over a cliff,

we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even run a ridiculous cash-for-clunkers program without losing $26 billion of the taxpayers' money, much less build a hybrid car.

But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say,

'trust me, the economy is getting better..

' Better ?

What the Hell ! You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic'.

I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the Democrats out, along with Obama!'

You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore.

The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs.

While we're fiddling in Afghanistan, Iran is completing their nuclear bombs and missiles and nobody seems to know what to do.

The liberal press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of
asking hard questions.

That's not the promise of the 'America' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for.

I've had enough. How about you?

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged.

This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest 'C' is Crisis! (Iacocca elaborates on nine C's of leadership, with crisis being the first.)

Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with thumb up your butt and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a battlefield yourself.

It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down. On September 11, 2001 , we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes.

We're immersed in a bloody war now with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving, but our soldiers are dying daily.

We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the world, and it's getting worse every day!

We've lost the manufacturing edge to Asia, while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs.

This country has the largest oil reserves in the WORLD, and we cannot drill for it because the politicians have been bought by the tree-hugging environmentalists.

Our schools are in a complete disaster because of the teachers' union.

Our borders are like sieves and they want to give all illegals amnesty and free healthcare.

The middle class is being squeezed to death every day.

These are times that cry out for leadership.

But when you look around, you've got to ask: Where have all the leaders gone? Where are the curious, creative communicators?

Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and common sense?

I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point.

Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo?

We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.

Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping the government will make it better for them. Now, that's just crazy. Deal with life.

Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing.

Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three' referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, look what Obama did about it.

Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debt, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening.

But these are the crises that are eating away at our country and milking the middle class dry.

I have news for the Chicago gangsters in Congress.

We didn't elect you to turn this country into a losing European Socialist state.

What is everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on NBC or CNN news will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change?

Had Enough? Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here.

I'm trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope - I believe in America...

In my lifetime, I've had the privilege of living through some of America 's greatest moments.

I've also experienced some of our worst crises:

The 'Great Depression,' World War II,' 'the 'Korean War,' the 'Kennedy Assassination,' the 'Vietnam War,' the 1970's oil crisis, and the struggles of recent years since 9/11.

Make your own contribution by sending this to everyone you know and care about.

For, it is your country, folks, and it's your future and your progeny.

My / Our future is at stake!


So now we find out that the entire Tsarnaev family (Dad, Mom, 2 sons & 2 daughters started receiving government assistance as soon as they set foot in our country. As political refugees they were entitled to settlement assistance from day one. (Section 8 Housing, public healthcare, food stamps etc.)

Then their stellar older son impregnates and marries the daughter of a doctor, and this new little Muslim family receives 18 months of government assistance. They only came off welfare after the naive young wife starts working 70 hours a week while husband Tamerlan stays home and builds bombs and plans to kill and injure the very Americans who have paid for his pathetic existence for the past 12 plus years.

A Breakdown of your and my investment into the TsarnaevFamily:

Section 8 housing Free public healthcare Food stamps and other EFT transfer payments Federal Pell Grants for both sons and most likely their daughters as well. (That is $5200.00 per year for each son or daughter who attended a college.)

City of Cambridge also awarded a $2500 per year scholarship to the younger son.

Younger son also reportedly was receiving state college scholarship.

What did we receive for our investment:

· Older son was arrested for domestic battery on a former girlfriend.

· The mother was arrested last year for shoplifting $1600 in merchandise from a Lord & Taylor store. Mother is facing immediate arrest for failure to appear regarding this matter.

· Then of course we know that the two sons combined to kill four people (3 Americans & a Chinese exchange student), severely injure 100 plus other people, carjacked another victim and only let him live when they found out that he was not an American citizen.

· Now we have the two pathetic parents who have returned to Russia and are claiming that their poor sons are innocent and are being framed by the same American government that allowed for their pathetic existence the past 12 plus years.

When are we going to put a stop to this madness?

Please pass this on and commit to getting involved in the 2015-2016 election process.

Monday, May 11, 2015

WSJ: Arab Rulers Snub Obama's Summit

[Who would have thought it? Some of America’s most important Middle East allies flipping the bird to Barack Hussein Obama, preferring instead to ignore his assurances about his nuclear deal with Iran! They’re signaling they no longer trust Obama’s America, and they are unwilling to put their lives in the hands of the serial betrayer. Instead, they will make other arrangements to protect themselves. Would that Americans should “get it” too. df]

by Dan Friedman NYCWSJ, May 10, 2015

Rulers Snub Arab Summit, Clouding U.S. Bid for Iran Deal

Saudi monarch’s decision signals that the Arab states aren’t on board with nuclear accord

By Jay Solomon and Carol E. Lee in Washington and Ahmed Al Omran in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

WASHINGTON—Saudi Arabia’s monarch pulled out of a summit to be hosted by President Barack Obama on Thursday, in a blow to the White House’s efforts to build Arab support for a nuclear accord with Iran.

King Salman’s decision appeared to ripple across the Persian Gulf. Bahrain said on Sunday that its ruler, King Hamad bin Isaa Al Khalifa, had opted not to travel to Washington.

The only two monarchs from the six countries confirmed to attend the summit at the White House and the presidential retreat at Camp David, Md., were the emirs of Qatar and Kuwait.

At stake for the White House is Mr. Obama’s key foreign-policy initiative, an Iran pact that is proceeding toward a June 30 deadline without support from regional powers. King Salman’s decision signals that the Arab states aren’t on board and could continue to act on their own to thwart Tehran, as Saudi Arabia has done in leading a military coalition against Iran-backed rebels in Yemen.

Senior Arab officials involved in organizing the meeting said not enough progress had been made in narrowing differences with Washington on issues like Iran and Syria to make the Saudi ruler’s trip worth it.

“There isn’t substance for the summit,” said an Arab official who has held discussions with the Obama administration in recent days.

Senior U.S. officials said as recently as Friday that they expected King Salman, who took power in January, to travel to Washington.

The Obama administration planned the summit as a way to build Arab support for the Iran nuclear deal by giving more arms and security guarantees to members of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council—Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman.

The White House on Sunday sought to play down any rift with Riyadh or the other GCC countries, stressing Saudi Arabia’s crown prince and his deputy would be at the meetings.

“We look forward to the attendance of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, with whom the president has met on several occasions, including in the Oval Office in December 2014 and January 2013,” said Bernadette Meehan, spokeswoman for the National Security Council.

Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, Adel al-Jubeir, said King Salman was staying in Riyadh to focus on the Yemen cease-fire and humanitarian aid effort.

“Minister Al-Jubeir reiterated King Salman’s commitment to achieving peace and security in Yemen and his eagerness to the speedy delivery of humanitarian aid to the brotherly people of Yemen,” Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry said.

The Obama administration has cited the GCC summit as crucial for building regional support for the U.S.’s Middle East policies, particularly its diplomatic engagement with Iran.

Saudi Arabia has been sharply critical of the White House’s efforts to curb Tehran’s nuclear capacity in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions.

Riyadh has also pressed the U.S. to take more-aggressive steps to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Iran’s closest Arab ally, and to push back the Tehran-supported insurgency in Yemen.

Secretary of State John Kerry met with King Salman on Thursday in Riyadh to discuss the Camp David agenda, U.S. officials said. He then met with the GCC’s foreign ministers in Paris, where he offered to give the GCC countries non-NATO major-ally status, said a senior U.S. official. But the Arab diplomats showed “very, very tepid interest,” the official added.

“It’s something we’re prepared to consider, and we had raised it with them,” the U.S. official said. “But they seemed to think it was not that critical or even important a step.”

Last Monday, French President François Hollande met in Riyadh with King Salman and other Gulf Arab leaders to discuss regional security matters. Within the international bloc of countries negotiating with Iran, France has emerged as the most critical of the effort.

Saudi officials told Mr. Kerry on Friday that King Salman would attend the Camp David summit, U.S. officials said, and that the overall message in Paris was positive.

The White House said that day that the Saudi monarch would meet President Obama on Wednesday ahead of the dinner.

“We have heard nothing negative about what we are trying to do,” the U.S. official said on Sunday.

In Paris, Messrs. Kerry and al-Jubeir agreed on a plan to forge a cease-fire in Yemen and to promote a political transition in the Arab country.

The Obama administration also pushed for better integrating the U.S.’s and GCC countries’ missile defense systems as a way to contain Iran.

“Whoever comes will be empowered to speak in the name of their government and will sign onto whatever‎ is agreed to at Camp David,” the administration official said. “So the dynamics may change based on who’s there and there will have to be maybe some adjustments.”

Some Arab officials said they didn’t believe the agenda at Camp David would go far enough to address their concerns about Iran.

Some of the Arab states said they were hoping the GCC could sign a mutual defense treaty with Washington, similar to South Korea’s and Japan’s.

Such treaties would bind the U.S. to defend the Persian Gulf states if they faced Iranian aggression.

The White House, however, didn’t believe it could win congressional approval to back such a treaty, said U.S. and Arab officials involved in the discussions.

Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E. and Qatar also are seeking more-advanced weaponry to counter Iran, including surveillance equipment, cruise missiles and drones.

These countries also have expressed interest in buying the Pentagon’s more-advanced jet fighter, the F-35.

Sales of such military gear are complicated by the U.S.’s strategic alliance with Israel, these officials said. Congressional legislation mandates the Jewish state must maintain a “qualitative military edge” over its neighbors, including Saudi Arabia.

Two people briefed on the presummit negotiations said the Saudis ultimately decided the agenda wasn’t substantive enough to require the attendance of 79-year-old King Salman.

The Sultanate of Oman, which hosted secret negotiations between the U.S. and Iran in 2012 and 2013, said its deputy prime minister, Sayyid Fahd bin Mahmoud al-Said, would lead his country’s delegation. The country’s ruler returned home in March to Muscat from Germany, where he had received months of receiving treatment for an undisclosed illness.

The U.A.E. is sending a delegation led by Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

Sunday, May 10, 2015

A Sobering Prediction

Rec'd from D/F Top-Copy, NYC

In the coming years, it will be harder and harder for Americans to remain indifferent to Islamic terrorism, because so much of it will be close to home disrupting our daily lives and dividing the nation along a deep ideological fault line. We’ve already seen the split that followed in the aftermath of the Texas cartoon contest - as many condemned Pamela Geller as praised her.

That’s only a sample of things to come. As terrorist attacks in our nation become more frequent and more deadly, American thinking will become more sharply divided, pitting one side blaming the victims for being “provocative” against the other side blaming the Islamists for being terrorists. Depending on which worldview prevails, an oppressive atmosphere could settle over the USA – and for all and intents and purposes that would mean the terrorists have won a decisive battle in their Jihad to destroy our society and way of life.

The wild card in this is the outcome of the 2016 election. It is probably our best (or last) hope.

Americans are not quick studies, and are easily distracted. 9/11 was a warning most of us have already forgotten. If we don’t elect a president who loves our Constitution, shares our values, and is willing to do the hard work to reverse Obama’s damage, we will suffer a slow death like the frog in the kettle. What happens after that is anyone’s guess.

Tuesday, May 05, 2015


Meet Sheriff David Clarke in 'David Clarke Speaks'

Born and raised in the City of Milwaukee, I played on the championship varsity basketball team at Marquette University High School. I went on to earn a degree in Criminal Justice Management from Concordia University Wisconsin, graduating summa cum laude. As part of my ongoing educational studies, I also graduated from the prestigious FBI National Academy and the National Executive Institute in Quantico, Virginia.

Over the past three-and-a-half decades, my career in law enforcement has spanned multiple assignments. My journey of service began with the Milwaukee Police Department in 1978, where I helped protect the city for 11 years as a patrol officer on the streets. After promotion to Detective in 1989, I was assigned to the Homicide Division, investigating close to 100 homicides a year as part of a team and making arrests in over 80% of cases.

My leadership was recognized again in 1992, with a promotion to Lieutenant of Detectives, and in 1996, when I was promoted to the rank of Captain of Police, with assignments as Commander of the Crimes Against Property Division, the department’s First District (downtown), and the Intelligence Division.

In 2002, I won my first election as Sheriff with a margin of 64%. In 2006, I garnered 73% of the vote, proceeding to win 74% in 2010.

The fight has always been in the primary election as it tends to be hyper-partisan.
Like me, most people question why the Office of Sheriff is a partisan election. I have never asked a person to vote for me because I run as a Democrat. I ask them to vote for me based on my 35-year commitment to keeping citizens safe. Most voters get it when it comes to public safety. There is no Democrat or Republican way to be a sheriff. The enemy is not the opposing party; the enemy is the criminal.

South Milwaukee National Night OutSheriff David Clarke doing literal outreach
The line between security and privacy is as thin as it is sharp. Early in 2013, I received an M.A. in Security Studies from the Naval Postgraduate School, Center for Homeland Defense and Security, completing my thesis on domestic intelligence operations and protecting privacy and civil liberties. The co-existence of freedom and safety may be the greatest challenge any leader will face, yet the balance is attainable. As an elected officer, I’ve devoted my entire life to finding and implementing this balance.

I firmly believe law-abiding American citizens do not deserve to be treated as random statistics. The Milwaukee Sheriff’s web page features an electronic Citizen Complaint Form where an officer from Internal Affairs will contact you to ensure those in authority are held accountable. The form reads, “Your input is a valuable tool that we use in order to provide the exceptional service that you – the taxpayer – pay for and should expect.”

My wife Julie and I continue to make our home in the City of Milwaukee.

Note: Here Author Kevin Cirilli gives our readers another perspective... See 1/28/13

SHERIFF DAVID CLARKE JR (EXCERPT): "Skip 911, Defend Yourself!"

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke Jr. said on Monday, in a radio ad, in which he urges residents to take a safety course in firearms because "calling 911..and waiting is no longer your best option."

Clarke Doubled Down On CNN's "Starting Point" saying that "there are certain instances where calling police would be of no use."

"There are certain situations -- and I think most people would get that -- For instance, once the wolf is at the door, once the intruder is in your home... once your on the street and someone sticks a gun in your face to take your car or your wallet, you don't have the option of calling 911," Clarke said.

"You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back; but are you prepared? Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm... so you can defend yourself until we get there. You have a duty to protect yourself, and your family. We Are Partners Now; Can I Count On You?"
___ ___

Friday, May 01, 2015

Senator Ted Cruz, Candidate

Part 1 - Note to Snake Hunters Website from D/F Top Copy, NYC

Toss the stale thinking and tired political clichés aside in favor of this simple fact. Senator Ted Cruz is the only one on the horizon who is equipped with the talent, ideology and conviction to repair the damage caused by eight destructive years of the Obama regime. So today, I am planting a stake in the ground. I support Senator Cruz for President of the United States of America in the coming election. Watch him speak before the Senate a few days ago, and see if he doesn’t move you toward the same decision I’ve made.

Enough of the fence sitters and naysayers! Senator Ted Cruz is the genuine article, and believe me, they don’t come along everyday.

Part 2
To: Dan Friedman - Thank you... and I certainly agree that Senator Ted Cruz is among the top brainy candidates with the potential to lead this nation out of the dreadful six years of Obama-mania (and guided every step of the way by "senior advisor" Valerie Jarrett). The G.O.P. has at least two dozen highly qualified people capable of providing this unique nation the opportunity to recover the moral high ground in both our critical domestic legislation, and in regaining lost ground in international affairs. The importance of a business friendly environment is essential to begin lowering the crushing effects of the $18,000,000,000,000.00 national debt; our 'military-industrial-complex' is suffering with an unresolved budget deficit... and the only viable solution is Energy Independence from O.P.E.C. and that obviously translates to Saudi Arabian Oil Wealth.

Today, the U.S.A. is Number One in Natural Gas Production, and very soon, thanks to Hydro-Fracturing Technology we will lead the world in Oil Production.

Part 3


Today I rise to talk about what has come to define the Obama Administration, which is a consistent pattern of lawlessness that disrespects the Constitution, that disrespects the congress, and that disrespects the people of the United States. In any administration under any president, the person charged with being the chief law enforcement officer is the attorney general. I've been blessed to work
in the U.S. Department Of Justice and there is a long tradition, a bipartisan tradition of attorneys general remaining faithful to the Law and to the Constitution, and setting aside partisan considerations of politics. Unfortunately, that tradition has not been honored during the Obama Presidency. Attorney General Eric Holder has been the most partisan attorney general the United States has ever seen. This Attorney General has systemically refused to do anything to seriously investigate or prosecute the I.R.S. targeting citizens for expressing their First Amendment Rights. Indeed, he has assigned the investigation to a major democratic donor and partisan democrat who has given over $6,000 to President Obama and the democrats. Eric Holder has abused the office, and has turned it in many respects into an arm of the democratic party. He is the only attorney general in the history of the United States to be held in Contempt Of Congress. And so there are many, including me, who would very much like to see Eric Holder replaced. There are many, including me, who would like to see an attorney general who will return to the traditions of the Department Of Justice, of fidelity to law, and that includes most importantly, the willingness to stand up to the president who appointed you, even if he or she is from the same political party. During the conformation hearings I very much wanted to support Loretta Lynch's nomination. Bringing in a new attorney general should be turning a positive page in this country, but unfortunately the answers that Ms. Lynch gave at the conformation hearings, in my opinion render her unsuitable for conformation as Attorney General Of The United States. That was a shame. Ms Lynch's record as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York had earned her a reputation as a relatively no nonsense prosecutor, so it was my hope we would see similar approach and similar answers from Ms Lynch at the conformation hearing. Instead, she chose to embrace the lawlessness of the Holder Justice President. When she was asked whether she would defend President Obama's Illegal Executive Amnesty, which President Obama himself has acknowledged no fewer than 22 times... that he had no constitutional authority to undertake, and which a federal court has now enjoined as unlawful, she responded affirmatively, saying she thought the administration's contrived legal justification was-- Quote-- reasonable. The nominee went on to say see sees nothing wrong with the president's decision to unilaterally grant legal status and work authorizations although explicitly barred by federal law, to nearly five million people who are here in this country illegally. When asked further -- Quote -- Who has more right to a job, A United States citizen, or a person who came to this country illegally, she responded -- Quote -- I believe that the right and obligation to work is one that is shared by everyone in this country, regardless of how they came here. Well, Mr. President, a very large majority of the American citizens would beg to differ. Rule of Law matters. When she was asked about the limits of prosecutorial discretion, the dubious theory that President Obama has put forth to justify his illegal Executive Amnesty, she could give no limits to that theory. When asked if a subsequent president could use 'prosecutorial discretion' to order the Treasury Secretary not to enforce the tax laws, and to collect no more Income Taxes in excess of 25%, she refused to answer. When asked if a subsequent president could use that same theory to exempt the State of Texas, all 27 million people, from every single federal labor law and environmental law, she refused to answer. When asked if she agreed with the Holder Justice Department that the government could place a G.P.S. censor on the car of every single American without 'probable cause' she refused to answer. That extreme view was rejected by the United States Supreme Court, Unanimously. When asked if she agreed with the Holder Justice Department that the First Amendment give no religious liberty protection whatsoever to a church or synagogue's choice of their own Pastor or their own Rabbi, she again refused to answer. Likewise, that extreme view was rejected unanimously by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Indeed, Justice Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama said that the Holder Justice Department says nothing about religious liberty, or a church or synagogue; Justice Kagan said, "I find your position amazing". Well, I'm sorry to say that Ms Lynch was unwilling to answer whether she holds that same amazing position that the First Amendment does not protect the religious liberty of people of faith in this country. Then asked at her hearing if she believed the federal government could employ a drone to kill a United States citizen on U.S. Soil, if that individual posed no imminent threat, she refused to answer. When asked if she would be willing to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the I.R.S. Targeting of Citizens and Citizen Groups for their political views, something which President Obama said he was -- Quote -- angry about, and the American People had a right to be angry about, and when asked if she would appoint a prosecutor who was at a minimum not a major Obama donor, she refused to answer. This nominee has given every indication she will continue the Holder Justice Department's lawlessness. That was here testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. I wanted to support this nomination. I wanted to see a new Attorney General who would be faithful to the law, but her answers made that impossible. And I would note there is a difference. Eric Holder began disregarding the Constitution after he was confirmed as our Attorney General. Ms. Lynch has told the Senate that's what she's going to do. And that means each and every one of us bears responsibility. In my view, no Senator can vote for this conformation consistent with his or her oath, given the answers that are given. And I would note a particular onus falls on the new Republican majority. For several months, I've called on the Republican majority to block the conformation of President Obama's Executive and Judicial nominees other than vital national security positions unless and until the President rescinds his lawless amnesty. I'm sorry to say the majority leadership has been unwilling to do so. The Republican majority if it so chose, could defeat this nomination, but the Republican majority has chosen to go forward and allow Loretta Lynch to be confirmed. I would note there are more than a few voters back home what exactly is the difference between a democrat and a republican majority when the exact same individual gets confirmed as our Attorney General, promising the exact same lawlessness, what's the difference? That's the question each of us will have to answer to our constituents when we come home. In my view, the obligation of every senator to defend the Constitution is front and center why we are here. We have a nominee who has told The United States Senate she is unwilling to impose any limits whatsoever on the authority of the President of the United States in the next 20 months. We are sadly going to see more and more lawlessness, more recklessness, more abuse of power, more executive lawlessness. Now, more than ever we need an Attorney General with the integrity and faithfulness of law to the President Attorneys General in both parties, Republican and Democrat, have done so, when credible allegations of wrong-doing by Richard Nixon were raised, his Attorney General, Elliott Richardson, appointed a special prosecutor, Archibald Cox, to investigate, regardless of partisan politics. Likewise, when credible allegations of wrongdoing by Bill Clinton arose, his Attorney General Janet Reno, a Democrat, appointed Robert Fiske the Independent Council to investigate those allegations. Eric Holder has been unwilling to demonstrate that same faithfulness to law, and unfortunately Ms. Lynch has told the senate that she too is unwilling to do so. For that reason, I urge all of my colleagues to vote No on Cloture, and to insist on an Attorney General who will uphold her oath to the Constitution, and to the people of the United States of America.
I Yield The Floor.

REUTERS/Jason Reed
by Matthew Boyle24 Apr 2015Washington, DC367
The vote that mattered in confirming Loretta Lynch to become the next Attorney General was not her actual confirmation vote, but the cloture vote that set that up, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview on Friday. Cruz said:
Yesterday I gave an impassioned floor speech calling on Senators to stop this confirmation. The place to stop it was the cloture vote. Cloture requires 60 votes. Republicans have a majority. We have 54 Republican senators. Had Republicans simply stood together, Ms. Lynch would not be attorney general today. But unfortunately Republican leadership decided that it was not worth fighting to defend the rule of law. Loretta Lynch is attorney general today because Republican leadership decided they wanted her to be attorney general. And I said on the Senate floor yesterday there are a great many people across this country wondering why exactly did we have an election when we fought so hard in 2014, when a Republican Senate confirms the exact Attorney General Harry Reid’s Democratic senate would confirm?
While 10 Republican senators voted for Lynch’s final confirmation, it was the cloture vote—which had a 60-vote threshold—where Senate GOP leadership could have stopped Lynch if they wanted to. A whopping 66 senators voted for cloture, which means 20 Republicans technically voted for Lynch’s nomination—and by extension, for President Obama’s executive amnesty in doing so. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell personally whipped votes for Lynch’s nomination, and for the cloture vote, according to a report from The Hill‘s Alex Bolton.
Those Republicans who voted for cloture alongside all 46 Democrats are: Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Richard Burr (R-NC), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Susan Collins (R-ME), Bob Corker (R-TN), John Cornyn (R-TX), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Cory Gardner (R-CO), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mark Kirk (R-IL), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Rob Portman (R-OH), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Mike Rounds (R-SD), John Thune (R-SD) and Thom Tillis (R-NC).
Cruz said those Republicans responsible for confirming Lynch and all the Democrats violated their oaths of office, since Lynch has guaranteed that she will uphold President Obama’s lawlessness, including especially his executive amnesty. Cruz said:
For several months, I have been leading the fight to stop the confirmation of Loretta Lynch—and the reason is simple: Ms. Lynch came before the Senate Judiciary Committee and refused to articulate any constitutional limits whatsoever on the authority of the president. When asked how she would differ from Eric Holder, the most partisan attorney general this nation has ever seen, she refused to state even a single difference. I had wanted to support Ms. Lynch’s confirmation precisely because Eric Holder has so undermined the Department of Justice, and like many others I was eager to see a new attorney general sworn in. But the answers Ms. Lynch gave to the Senate Judiciary Committee over an extended period of questions refused to acknowledge any limits on the president’s power, and she made clear that she intended to be a rubber stamp for unlimited executive power in the hands of President Obama. In my view, no senator—Democrat or Republican—could vote to confirm Ms. Lynch consistent with his or her oath of office. Some say, confirming Loretta Lynch means Eric Holder is no longer Attorney General. But there is a difference. Eric Holder began disregarding the law and abusing his office after he was confirmed. Ms. Lynch looked senators in the eye and told us she intends to disregard the law. For senators to vote to confirm an attorney general in that circumstance means they are complicit in the lawlessness.
Cruz was not present for the final vote—meaning he didn’t cast a vote on final confirmation—and he told Breitbart News that’s because cloture is where it could have been stopped. He went on to say:
I would note that some of the press had a field day that I was not physically present for the final confirmation vote. For two months I led the fight to stop her confirmation. I voted against confirmation in the Senate and repeatedly questioned Ms. Lynch. I urged my colleagues in writing, in public, in private and on the national stage not to confirm Ms. Lynch. I flew back to Washington to cast the vote that mattered, the cloture vote, yesterday morning. That was the 60-vote threshold that could have stopped Ms. Lynch and I was there to cast that vote and I spoke on the Senate floor urging my colleagues to vote no. Once Republicans had invoked cloture, her confirmation was a done deal. The final vote was a 50-vote threshold and there were ample votes to confirm her. I had a scheduling conflict that did not enable me to be there for what was in the end a meaningless vote because leadership had already decided to give President Obama and Harry Reid what they wanted. So while I was not physically present, under Senate rules being absent is the same thing as a no vote.

When Breitbart News noted that his not voting on final confirmation bolsters his argument that the real vote was cloture, he added that “that’s exactly right.” “The fight to defeat this nomination was on cloture, and Republican leadership did not want to fight that fight,” Cruz said