The debt ceiling blame game 2


By Tom Quiner

Is there anything wrong with raising the debt ceiling?

A Senator said yes. He charges the president for being “unpatriotic” and “irresponsible” for asking to have the debt ceiling raised.

Who is this Senator? You guessed it: the former junior senator from Illinois, Barack Obama.

It is wrong when a Republican wants to raise it, but okay when a Democrat wants to do it.

Senator Obama chastised former President Bush for driving up the national debt to $10.6 Trillion by the time he left office. Senator Obama was justified in being upset. I would put more blame on the Congress that actually authorizes the spending. Let us also remember that Democrats controlled Congress from 2006 until 2010. So the debt crisis is certainly bi-partisan.

However, once Senator Obama became President Obama, the debt ceiling has rapidly increased to the point that Mr. Obama wants it raised to $16.4 Trillion.

The problem now is squarely a problem of the Democratic Party. Government indebtedness significantly increased once Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took the reins of the House and Senate respectively. The Senate hasn’t even passed a budget in three years.

When Republicans retook the House in 2010, they have advanced a modicum of fiscal restraint, only to be blocked by the President and the Democratically-controlled Senate.

Senator Obama was correct: government indebtedness was out-of-control during the Bush years. I wish President Obama agreed.

“We’re not at war against Islam” 2


By Tom Quiner

Thus said the President:

“We are not at war against Islam. We are at war against terrorist organizations that have distorted Islam or falsely used the banner of Islam. If we’re going to deal with the problems Ed Henry was talking about – reducing the terrorist threat – we need all the allies we can get.”

Are we really at war against terrorism when the President sent the following directive to speech writers soon after his arrival at the White House:

“this administration prefers to avoid using the term Long War or Global War On Terror (Gwot) … please pass this on to your speechwriters”

The President prefers to call these efforts “overseas contingency operations.”

Contrast this rhetoric with that of former President Bush:

the war on terror “will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated”.

So, while the President manages our contingency operations overseas, it is fair to ask then, who exactly IS the enemy?  While we ponder that question, I will present some politically incorrect recent news, news that usually won’t see the light of day in the mainstream media (MSM):

Yesterday, in Yala, Thailand: Muslim separatists shoot a 52-year-old Buddhist in the head then kick his body under a bridge.

Yesterday, in Vladikavkaz, Russia:  A Shahid drives an explosives-laden vehicle into a market, blasting seventeen shoppers to bits.

Yesterday, in Mogadishu, Somalia:  Five Fedayeen suicide bombers storm an airport and kill nine others, including two women.

Yesterday, in Kurram, Pakistan: Militants murder ten bus passengers with an explosive device.

Yesterday, in Diyala, Iraq: A woman is beheaded in her own home by suspected al-Qaeda ‘insurgents’.

Yesterday, in Muqdadiya, India:  A cleric is beheaded and set on fire by “Freedom Fighters.”

The common link with yesterday’s mass murders:  they were committed in the name of the Islamic faith.

Carnage in the name of Allah is a daily occurrence around the world.

Could you imagine the outcry if this daily carnage was taking place in the name of Christ?

The political Left in this country and around the world hold the belief that somehow the Western world has brought on all of this carnage by our actions towards Muslims around the world.  Three experts refute the Left’s thesis.

These experts include the prophet Muhammad;  Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini; and Osama bin Laden.

Bin Laden expressed their shared vision this way:

“I was ordered to fight the people until they say ‘there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Muhammad.’ “

He didn’t limit the scope of the fight to Iraq or Afghanistan or Israel.  The Left implies that the root cause of terrorism is Western imperialism.  Bin Laden makes it clear through his rhetoric and Islamic violence throughout the world that this premise is false.  In fact, the exact opposite is true.  Muslim imperialism has led to attacks and deaths in India, Pakistan, Thailand, Somalia, Kenya, Russia, and Iraq  yesterday alone.   It is important to recognize that most Muslims reject Muslim imperialism.  It is equally important for the rest of the world to understand that Muslim imperialists want us to convert … or die.

Another leading voice of Islam was the Ayatolla Khomeini.  Here are his views on Israel:

“This regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.”

“If one permits an infidel to continue in his role as a corrupter of the earth, his moral suffering will be all the worse. If one kills the infidel, and this stops him from perpetrating his misdeeds, his death will be a blessing to him.”

Peace and coexistence are impossible with imperialist Muslims according to the Khomeini’s and Bin Laden’s of the world.  Mohammed himself said in the Koran 9:5:

“Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

What is the common thread with worldwide terrorism?  Islam.

The President says we’re not at war against Islam.  That may be true.  But then it’s fair to ask: is Islam at war with us?  Ask the families of the victims of 9/11.

President and Mrs. Bush greet returning soldiers Reply


By Tom Quiner

Returning soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan were shocked and awestruck when they got off their plane at Dallas/Ft. Worth airport last week.  The 145 returning soldiers were greeted by President and Mrs. Bush.

This isn’t the kind of story that will get big press.  The video above is worth watching. The soldiers really appreciated the gesture by the former President and First Lady.

If Bush lied, Clinton lied 2


By Tom Quiner

Believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs

“Bush lied” was once again invoked in the letters to the editor in the Des Moines Register this morning.

For the record, here is specifically what the President said:  “Saddam Hussein has huge stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons.  And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal.”  Only it wasn’t President Bush who spoke it. Thus spoke then President Clinton.

Believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs

President Clinton’s thoughts on Mr. Hussein are worth revisiting in light of countless assertions that “Bush lied”.  Before the U.S. invaded Iraq, most of the world, including Kofi Annan (then the Secretary-General of the United Nations) and John Kerry, believed Iraq housed weapons of mass destruction.  To think otherwise, one had to assume Mr. Hussein destroyed the weapons, but didn’t report it to U.N. inspectors even though it would’ve gotten sanctions against Iraq lifted.  That doesn’t make sense.

Hussein encouraged the belief that he possesses such weapons with statements like this, made in 20o0:

“Iraq will not disarm until others in the region do. A rifle for a rifle, a stick for a stick, a stone for a stone.”

Believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs

Finally, in 2004 after his capture, Hussein acknowledged the truth about WMDs to FBI interrogator, George Piro.  He said most of the weapons had been destroyed by United Nations weapons inspectors in the 90s.  Iraq destroyed the rest themselves.  But Hussein pretended he still had them. In his mind, that perception was critical to deter Iran from attacking Iraq:

“It was very important for him to project that because that was what kept him, in his mind, in power. That capability kept the Iranians away. It kept them from reinvading Iraq,” said Agent Piro.

Why, then, didn’t Hussein ‘fess up when he saw U.S. forces preparing to attack Iraq because of this very perception he had so carefully inculcated?

“… he told me he initially miscalculated President Bush. And President Bush’s intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 under Operation Desert Fox. Which was a four-day aerial attack. So he expected that initially,” Piro says.

Bush-haters are uninterested in such evidence.  Their mind is made up.  But think about the logic they must employ.

In their mind, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair launched a war based on a lie (no weapons of mass destruction) that would soon reveal the lie when no such weapons were found.  Doesn’t make sense.

If weapons HAD been found, the same people would probably have said that Bush planted the weapons to justify going to war against Iraq.

There are certainly honorable differences of opinion on whether the U.S. should have gone to war with Iraq.  Let’s debate the merits of the war honestly and can the phony argument that President Bush lied.  If he did, so did President Clinton.