I opposed the war in Iraq at the time - Did Donald Trump?

Donald Trump is being attack by Republican politician’s for saying he opposed the war in Iraq and thinks it was a mistake.  I know this is probably shocking to many Republicans and some Democrats, but there were Republican voters back then who possessed the foresight to know that the Iraq War was going to be something we would regret for many years to come. We stood on street corners in front of Federal Buildings around the country carrying signs protesting our participation in the Iraq conflict. Those who opposed the war in Iraq from the very beginning took no end of abuse for taking that position.  We were booed, threatened and had cigarettes flicked at us by fine upstanding people passing by who believed the lies being told them by politicians. We were often resented by other protesters because we were older, conservative and Republican – we were not one of them.  

It was not difficult for us to figure out that Iraq was about to become our next Iran. We understood that it was a religious dispute among Muslims that had gone on for generations and no outsider was going to fix it or end it. We felt sorry for the weaker Muslims, but were thankful the conflict had not been brought to our shores and knew if we interfered it would cost American lives and accomplish nothing. Saddam Hussein, just as the Shaw of Iran, had not caused us problems the problems in Iraq were internal problems and between Muslims. 

Rightly or wrongly some of us believed the reason for America’s involvement was oil. If that was the reason then China should thank us for getting involved because they benefit from the oil not us. I always believed some politicians feared a return of oil shortages as experienced during the Carter years and the oil corporation’s feared lost profits and assets in Iraq. The oil industry's political donations may have influenced politicians to make bad decisions. 

I agree President Bush was close to gaining a better Iraq, but he or anyone else would have solved the problems within Iraq and outside of Iraq among Muslims. If we would not have gone in to Iraq then Obama would not have had any American troops to bring home. I also agree that Obama made a terrible mistake in withdrawing our troops after we were engaged in the internal conflicts of Iraq. It did not take a Middle East expert to know that Iran would attempt to fill the vacuum when we were gone.

John Kasich, Chris Christie, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have all said at one time or another they would not have invaded Iraq in the first place, but that they would not have withdrawn our troops after we were there as Obama did. Rand Paul said the same thing, but that's no surprise. Jeb Bush has even made statements that the Iraq war was not a good idea. Do you remember the Kelly question to Jeb Bush “… if you knew then what you know now would you have invaded Iraq” – it took five days for Bush to come up with a final answer? Trumps mistake in stating he opposed the Iraq war was he made it a personal attack on President “W” Bush to upset Jeb Bush. That would have worked if Trump was running as a Democrat, but he claims to be running as a conservative (progressive) Republican.

 With everything that has happened over the last dozen years, including events of just the last year, it's very hard to say that the invasion was a good idea. Iraq has loomed large over every aspect of US politics and foreign policy for more than a decade.

Republican politicians had moved the debate to the 'surge', where they had a much better argument to make. The ‘surge’ created an opening for a political solution, which never ended up happening and I personally never believed would.

 In the 2008 presidential race, the Iraq 'debate' was largely fought over who was right about the surge. Donald Trump has in 2016 brought the debate back into a territory that the Republican establishment does not want to go – should we have invaded in the first place. 

Public opinion has turned decisively against the Iraq war. But political fights recently have largely been fought over ISIS, whether there should have been a full pull-out from Iraq, chaos in Syria, Libya and Yemen and more. Most American I think would agree we have to stop ISIS and other terrorist groups, but Republican politicians and Democrat politicians, including Hillary Clinton and John Kerry who supported the invasion of Iraq, would like to leave the question if we should have invaded in the first place in the closet never to be revisited again – Donald Trump has opened that closet door.

Would we have the ISIS problem we have today if we had not invaded Iraq – I guess we will never know? The invasion certainly destabilized the Middle East even further. Today we are in such a hellish situation in the Middle East that it is hard to defend the original invasion.  Did the invasion speed up the terror coming to our shores?

I am sorry it is not the ‘hawks’ in Washington that deserve any credit for Iraq it is those politicians who had the good sense to oppose the Iraq invasion from the outset. Iraq is a reality and we now must try to make the best of it and unfortunately that probably means leaving troops in the Middle East for many, many years to come – perhaps forever. It means increasing our military presences which means modernizing and increasing our military. It means it is going to be even more difficult to lower our National Debt. But, most of all we must consider Americans may have died and suffered for nothing.

Yes, some Republican voters were arguing at the time against invading Iraq, on the grounds that Iraq did not pose a threat to the U.S. imminent enough to justify an invasion. Some Republicans and I was one of them were publicly shouting themselves hoarse, pointing out at the time that, at the very least, there were serious questions about whether Iraq really posed the threat the Bush administration and other politicians claimed it did.

Jeb Bush said, "…the focus needs to be on the future." We should always focus on the future, but we should never forget the past. I do not think we should let the present moment pass without acknowledging that those who were most focused on the future during the run-up to the war in Iraq were the ones working to stop it from happening.  

In closing, I would like to give credit where credit is due Vice President Al Gore and Illinois State Senator Obama and twenty-one other Democrats like Teddy Kennedy opposed the Iraq war from the beginning and publicly stated they did at the time – all politicians that I would have never voted for.  Bernie Sanders an Independent who was in the House at the time was against the invasion. I only know of one Republican who spoke out loud and clear against the invasion and it was Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island who is now a Democrat. I have no recollection of Donald Trump saying anything whatsoever in public about invading Iraq before the war began, although I am not sure I even knew who Donald Trump was at that time.

It was not just those in the Bush White House who were responsible for the tragedy, but leading Democrat members of Congress as well, some of whom are now in senior positions in the Obama administration supported the invasion of Iraq. There is enough blame to go around in both parties.

Levinson was a spy not a hostage.

The family of the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared in Iran in 2007, has acknowledged he was working as a "spy" for a rogue CIA operation and accused the CIA, FBI and the Obama administration of "betraying" him by not doing enough to gain his release. I would think that anyone working as a “spy” for any country would understand the risk. Levinson was an FBI Agent specializing in organized crime in the U.S. before his retirement and it is said he was a skilled and meticulous FBI agent.  

Anyone who has read my blog knows that I am not a fan of Obama, but I have mixed emotions about the Robert Levinson hostage (spy) case and do not know how much Obama could have done or could do to secure Levinson’s release – if he is still alive. I think it is utter nonsense for some to claim Obama is not interested in the case because Levinson is Jewish.

It was originally reported Levinson was looking into a cigarette smuggling ring for a client of the security consultancy business he had run since leaving the FBI ten years earlier.

Iran denies any involvement in the hostage taking of Levinson and it has been rumored he was being held in Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan.  Washington having no evidence of who is holding Levinson, where he is or who holds the key to negotiating his release has not been able to make progress on the case.

The first photographs and video emerged of former FBI-agent Robert Levinson in late 2010. In the video he looked thin, but said he had been treated well by his captors and was badly in need of medicine for his diabetes.  He appealed to the United States government to “answer the requests of the group” holding him. There has since been no evidence that he is still alive.

David McGee, a family lawyer and spokesperson for the Levinson family said, “The CIA and the FBI betrayed Levinson as it tried to hide the fact that he had a long-term relationship with the CIA, spying on Iran's nuclear program and on the terror group Hezbollah in the rogue operation.” Isn’t that normal procedure and you are told that before you take such an assignment. I was in Intelligence Service during the Vietnam conflict and we knew if we were captured in Laos the U.S. Government would deny any knowledge of our being there. You volunteer for those types of assignments you are not forced to take them.

American intelligence officials suspect the Iranian government, specifically its intelligence services, is behind the production of the 2010 images released by the Levinson family as well as a "proof of life" video. Ray Takeyh, a former State Department senior advisor on Iran, told ABC News he believes the Iranian leadership knows where Levinson is.

Dawud Salahuddin an American fugitive was the last person to see missing secret CIA operative Robert Levinson alive in Iran, but he has denied being involved in his mysterious disappearance. Dawud Salahuddin is a suspect in connection with a 1980 murder. Salahuddin fled the United States after the shooting in Maryland of an Iranian exile and he later confessed to the killing and justified the killing by claiming it was a 'jihad’ killing. He also met with Mr. Levinson's family in Iran and claimed to have met with the missing man, but denied knowing anything about his disappearance. I cannot help but believe the meeting between Levinson and Salahuddin has something to do with Levinson's disappearance. It is difficult for me to trust anything Salahuddin would say.  

The CIA paid Levinson's family $2.5 million to pre-empt a revealing lawsuit, and the agency rewrote its rules restricting how analysts can work with outsiders. I do not know if the truth will ever be known by the public and I don’t know if it should be known by the public. The truth could endanger the lives of others. It was obviously worth $2.5 million dollars to keep the facts from coming out. 

Behind closed doors, three veteran analysts were forced out of the agency and seven others were disciplined. The CIA claimed they did not know that Jablonski, one of the three veteran analysts forced out, was paying Levinson to do work for the CIA which was a violation of CIA rules. She should have notified her boss that she had put him on the payroll and they claim she did not.  I would think those forced out and disciplines were simply scapegoats.

Some in the U.S. government believe he is dead. But in the absence of evidence either way, the government holds out hope that he is alive and the FBI says it remains committed to bringing him home.

I believe he is dead and Iran cannot shed any light on the case without admitting to their involvement. What would be the purpose for Iran to continue to hold him now since the truth is known he was a “spy”. How long do you think a person in bad health, as Levinson claimed he was in 2010 live? He has diabetes, was in need of his medication, he has probably has had no lab work or monitoring of his sugar and been eating the wrong food. I am a diabetic and I know what happens when I do not take my insulin at the right time, watch my sugar intake and eat snacks and meals as I am supposed to.

I have a problem calling Mr. Levinson a hostage. He was a spy for the United States and according to international law Iran had every right to arrest him, imprison him and even execute him. My definition of a hostage is a person taken against their will and held for no legal reason. Regardless of the reason a person volunteers for a government top secret job be it the adrenalin rush, money or patriotism you commit to taking the risk of being caught. You understand for national security reasons your government may not admit you work for them. I feel sorry for the Levinson family, but I do not blame Obama or agencies of the U.S. government. 

Obama and American Christians are failing Assyrian Christians.

 A small army of Assyrian Christians are fighting back against the advances of ISIS and they are depending heavily on the United States and other Christian nations to help them, but military help has not been forth coming.  There are Christian leaders in the United States meanwhile telling them to pray and telling us to pray for ISIS members and to love ISIS so much they will convert to Christianity.

I wonder if those Christian leaders, that want us to love ISIS to conversion and pray for their conversion, would be begging for military help or our love and prayers for ISIS if they were living in ISIS controlled areas. I know if I was in that group of Assyrian Christians fighting to save the lives of my family members, the lives of my neighbors and fighting to preserve my heritage I would be praying that Christians and Western Allies would provide me the military aid I desperately needed to defend my way of life. Talk is cheap unless you have a dog in the fight!

Obama argues that equipping and arming a rebel army would carry risks for the U.S. and other Western nations. I admit the advance of ISIS into Iraq demonstrated that risk. The Iraqi forces quickly surrendered and abandoned their American-made equipment when ISIS advanced upon them.

The United States has a track record of supporting the wrong people and the wrong fighters. I can recall Iran, Yemen, Vietnam, Egypt, Philippines, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Uganda, Bolivia, Cuba, Brunei, South Africa, Haiti, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Rhodesia, Pakistan and the list goes on. Our leaders seem to have a penchant for supporting dictators are those in power right or wrong.

I would prefer we support those who are fighting for their own land, their own villages, their own cities and their own future. The Iraqi troops had no attachment to the land they were defending. The Assyrian Military Forces began fighting in the summer of 2014 and to this date they have not been adequately supported. They have a dog in the fight! The group started with just 12 fighters. Assyrian Christian women sold their wedding rings and other objects made of gold to finance the purchase of AK-14s and other munitions.

Assyrian Christians lived comfortable lives prior to the invasion and lost everything in one night when ISIS swept through. America support’s the Peshmerga, the Sunnis and the Yezidi, but not the Assyrian Christians of Nineveh? Are these bold speaking Christian’s leaders supporting The United Assyrian Appeal an organization that provides aid to the Assyrian military families who are fighting against ISIL/ISIS? I doubt it!   

"I am one of the servants of Allah.  We do our duty of fighting for the sake of the religion of Allah.  It is also our duty to send a call to all the people of the world to enjoy this great light and to embrace Islam and experience the happiness in Islam.  Our primary mission is nothing but the furthering of this religion. “Osama bin Laden.

Many Christian leaders would like to bury their heads in the sand or look for ways to modify Islamic radical terrorism to fit their own Christian beliefs, but the fact is that violent radical Islamic Muslims are quite clear about their religious goals. Their acts are done specifically in the name of Allah and for the cause of Islam and Islamic rule across the globe.

“The Taliban are simply a band of dedicated youths determined to establish the laws of Allah on earth... The Taliban will fight until there is no blood in Afghanistan left to shed, and Islam becomes a way of life for our people. “Mullah Omar, Taliban leader.

"Our animosity is based on religion.  We hate Americans for their secular ideology." Tehrik a Taliban spokesman.

"In the name of Allah the Avenger, I swear on the holy book to perform my sacred duty as a soldier of Islam in this Jihad to restore to this world the light of divine justice... Allah demands no less for me to die in the cause and be sent immediately to paradise." A Taliban official.

“Islam came for the good of humanity.  If someone doesn't like our good we fight them.” Faruq Khalil Muhammad in Canada.

“We are working until we make Allah's religion supreme and we live a precious life in the shadow of Islamic Sharia law, or else be rewarded with martyrdom in the cause of Allah.  We are plotting for the Chinese to suffer the torture of Allah, or else by our hands” Abdul Haq, leader of the Turkistan Islamic Party.

“The attack by the Islamic State in America is only the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah [Islamic territory] in the heart of our enemy. Allah said those who fight you kill them wherever you find them." Statement by ISIS following the shooting massacre at San Bernardino.

How can the Islamic radical Muslims make themselves any clearer than they have? I stand with Reverend Frankly Graham.  We need to be praying for our country and Christians first. We need to be showing love and support for Christians around the world fighting to survive. Obama may think all religions are the same, but I do not. I apologize for Christian (Catholic crusades and inquisition) actions in the past, but that is the past and this is 2015. I know of no Christians taking delight in killing those of other religions like the radical Islamic Muslims are doing today. Christians who use violence against their enemies can expect no special reward from Jesus Christ.

I would also like to remind Obama and Ron Paul about the Islamic Crusades in 630 A.D. Muhammad invaded and conquered Mecca. Later on, Muslims invaded Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, Iran, Egypt, Africa, Spain, Italy, France, etc. Obama and Ron Paul act as if the Christians are the only ones that conducted Crusades.

The Western Crusades started around 1095 to try and stop the Islamic aggressive invasions. In 1094 Byzantine emperor Alexius Comnenus I ask western Christendom for help against Seljuk (Muslim Turks) invasions of his territory. In 1095 Pope Urban II agreed to help.

It is estimated that Islam has killed at least 270 million people: 120 million Africans, 60 million Christians, 80 million Hindus, 10 million Buddhists, etc. and forced conversions to Islam has been the norm, across three continents—Asia, Africa, and Europe—for over 13 centuries.

Defeat of ISIS is the only thing that will slow down Radical Islamic Muslim Terrorist. Only one thing will possibly stop Radical Islamic Muslim Terrorist and that is for Moderate Islamic Muslims to take up the fight and I do not see that happening.  They are like some American Christian leaders all talk and no action.

Don't fight ISIS - Islamic radical terrorist love them!

I just read an article written by JR Vassar the lead pastor, Church at the Cross, Grapevine, Texas.  He claims, “I am saddened by the tendency of some Christians to call for the sending of missiles upon our nation’s enemies more than to pray for the sending of missionaries to the hardest places.” When is he leaving for Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan? I am capable of praying for both.

He admits, “The Islamic State is a horrific evil and must be stopped. The destruction it is bringing on innocent life and human civilization is heartbreaking and should fill us with righteous indignation. Likely, it will take the international community to defeat the Islamic State, and it will almost certainly mean military conflict.” Who does he expect to volunteer for the military conflict non-Christians?

He is, “… grieved that some influential pastors and Christian leaders eagerly call for the bombing of regions that will inevitably lead to the destruction of human life (innocent image-bearers who suffer as collateral damage), and do so without tears and a broken heart.” I do not know of any Christian leader that would call for the bombing of ISIS if they thought there was another way.  I also do not think any Christian leader has ever called for the destruction of ISIS without having a heavy heart when doing so.

He suggested we, “Pray for our enemies and desire their salvation.” He claims God would want us to show them mercy and give them an opportunity to repent. He knows that is what God would want us Christians to do. If he believes in the literal translation of the Bible he must know that God called for the destruction of innocent women, children and animals of the Israelites enemies. I do not believe in the literal translation of the Bible so I think it was more the men of Israel that wanted their destruction, rather than God, but they may have thought that was what God wanted them to do.  The same as Reverend Vassar thinks he knows what God wants us to do as it pertains to the terrorist. If God wanted the enemies of the Israelites destroyed, but does not want our enemies destroyed does that mean God loved the Israelites more than He loves us?

He went on to write, “Our call is to follow the command and example of Jesus who told us to love our enemies and pray for them, and who himself laid his life down for his enemies, even praying for their forgiveness as they killed him. Again, if we are calling for missiles, but not praying for missionaries, we have lost touch with the heart of God.” I am sorry, but I am not prepared to have my throat cut by the followers of ISIS and honestly I do not think he is either. It is easy for him to write or say the things he does from Grapevine, Texas. I guess if his wife and children were caught in a terrorist situation he would prefer to allow them to be slaughtered than try to kill his enemy.

Jesus was not fighting a foreign enemy He was trying to reform His own people – the Jews. Jesus did not have a military, but he had no problem displaying his anger in the temple turning over the tables of the money changers. King David had a military given to him by God and he certainly used it. If we are going to use Biblical comparison King David and his enemies are more like our enemy ISIS and Muslim terrorist than Jesus and His enemies. If it was Protestants and Catholics (Ireland) fighting over differences I would agree with Reverend Vassar, but it is not. It is good versus evil!  

He admits that as we pray to God we know there will never be peace on this earth, “…we know that ultimately complete peace and justice are a world away, in the new heavens and new earth.”

He says, “We do not need to fear Muslims, but love them, befriend them, and seek to share the good news of Jesus with them.” I do love some Muslims, those that are not trying to kill me, my caregiver is Muslim.

I probably have more experience dealing with Muslims than he does, since I have lived on the Island of Mindanao in the Philippines for the past ten years. I live in Davao, but I am not about to travel to Cotobato or Sula where Muslim terrorist are kidnapping foreigners regularly. I welcome him to come to Southern Mindanao at any time and love the Muslim terrorist and the Communist insurgents to the peace table. The Philippine government has been trying to do it for thirty years and have failed.

 “We are not Americans first, but Christians first. We belong to a kingdom that is not of this world — a kingdom with no boundaries or borders. We may disagree on policy or diplomacy, but infinitely more important is that we agree on Jesus, his rule, and his great love for his people and for this world. We don’t have to be divided by our lesser loyalties when we are united by our greatest loyalty.” This all sounds good, but it is not realistic when it comes to dealing with terrorist in 2015. I do not think God intends for us to let Islamic terrorist cut our heads off, destroy our religion, invade our country and not resist.

I think a diplomatic solution would be impossible with groups like ISIS or other groups of Islamic Muslim Terrorist. Reverend Vassar wrote Jesus faced radicals and He did not try to kill them if I am not mistaken Jesus was killed.  Jesus knew pain, suffering, persecution and terrorism first hand is Reverend Vassar willing to do the same, is he willing to sacrifice his family without a fight, I am not.

If men like Reverend Vassar had reached out to the young men that make up ISIS and other terrorist groups a decade ago maybe we would not be in the mess we are in today. I think Reverend Vassar should consider that perhaps the church failed in reaching out to the Arabs in the Middle East.

Paul was once a terrorist killing Christians just at ISIS is doing today and he came to accept Christ as his Savior so there is hope. But, who is willing to go today and try to convert ISIS members. Is Reverend Vassar willing, if not he should not be so asking someone else to.

Jesus’ way of putting His enemies in their place was by shaming them. How does Reverend Vassar propose that we shame ISIS?

Christian leaders should have taken more seriously education reform, business opportunities, economic reforms and employment opportunities in Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Africa and Afghanistan and maybe there would be no ISIS today. Was Reverend Vassar pushing for those reforms prior to now?

I am not Reverend Pat Robertson and I do not say, “Convert or die”. I would like to see them convert to Christianity, but that is not a requirement for me to have peace. But, I do not think it is possible for us now to love the members of ISIS to a negotiated peace. I say that because they are telling us, “Convert or die”.

The Iraqi Christians since 2003 until about 2014 were known for being passive. They finally realized they could no longer be passive and stay alive. Unfortunately they began to stand up for their religious liberty and their freedom too late. Are Americans being ask to do the same by religious leaders like Reverend Vassar? Are we going to wait for ISIS to tell us to convert, pay a tax or die as they did the Christians in Mosul? Did not Obama take the passive role and allow ISIS to grow stronger, accomplish more evil and kill more Christians?

I am not for the destruction of ISIS only because they are killing Christians. I am for the destruction of ISIS because I am against any group of people that practice genocide against a weaker group of people.

ISIS is nothing more than a gang like those in any large city in the United States that kill people in order to expand their territory.  They both are criminals (terrorists) who are determined to murder people in order to gain control. They must be stopped and I truly believe God condemns their actions.

I do not believe God expects us to only pray and take no defensive action against them. Most of us do not sit back and refuse to work and expect God to feed us. Most of us do not refuse to take preventive action to maintain our health simply because we believe God can heal us. Most of us would not sit down on the couch and watch while a robber took our belongings and possibly raped our wife and do nothing but pray. Why do some Christians expect us to only pray and take no military action to protect our families, neighbors, country and us?

I believe in prayer and I have no doubt that pray is powerful, but I also believe God expects us to take action along with prayer. Why don’t we just stop being charitable and pray to God to take care of the poor, orphans and widows?  

More Hillary Clinton B.S. to win an election!

In an interview Sunday, Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton (of course she is the front-runner she has no Democrat competition) defended herself against critics of her words against radical Islamists and her actions immediately after the Benghazi attacks. Only Obama and Clinton could find a way to defend incompetency and blame someone else.

Clinton was interviewed by George Stephanopoulos, a former staffer to her husband, President Bill Clinton, a close friend to both Bill and Hillary, a donor to the Clinton Foundation and served on the board of the Clinton Foundation until he embarrassed himself and thought it was in his best interest to resign if he wanted to continue to have a media career.

Stephanopoulos pressed Clinton on a common Republican criticism, that she refuses to say the United States is fighting "radical Islam." He pressed her as much as any best friend who wants to see her elected would press.

Clinton claimed she says radical Islamists all the time. Really! I do not think I have heard her or Obama make those types of comments.

She did add, “Using the term "radical Islam sounds like the United States is going after an entire religion, ignoring the vast majority of peaceful Muslims. Also, she said, it helps create the notion of a "class of civilizations" that actually aids Islamic State (ISIS) recruiting.” According to her and Obama they do not call it what it is in order not to aid the terrorist.

No one denies that there are more Muslims not waging terrorist attacks than Muslims that are. I think she is trying to buy Muslim and Liberal votes by being politically correct. I do not think we are fighting Islam the religion or all Muslims if I did I would not have a Muslim caregiver. We are fighting “RADICAL ISLAM MUSLIMS”. How can you fix a problem if you cannot or will name it?

When asked if the United States is winning the fight against ISIS, Clinton said, "I can say today that we have a new set of threats.” You had better watch your back Obama, Mama is turning against you to win an election! It was interesting to me that she in no way implied that we were losing the fight against ISIS – which we are.

Clinton attacked Texas Sen. Ted Cruz for suggesting we should "carpet bomb" ISIS, She mocked him by saying; "He's never had any responsibility for trying to figure out who the bad guys are and who innocent civilians are." As if she has! Civilian casualties are the cost of war and quite frankly I prefer civilian casualties in Syria and Iraq than in the United States. If we are not willing to risk causing civilian casualties abroad we should get out and bring our people and equipment home and wait until we are fighting on our own soil, risking the lives of American citizens.

She said current and retired military leaders should come together to rebuild the Sunnis and Kurds to fight on the ground in Iraq against ISIS. I am all for that, but it was Obama and Mama Clinton that prior to her campaigning were not willing to take the advice of military leaders to do just that. What a difference how ones greed to be President can alter their thinking.

She said people are within their rights to buy and carry guns after the San Bernardino attack. Yes, Mrs. Clinton the Constitution gave us that right before and after the San Bernardino attack. It is a shame it took San Bernardino to make you realize that.

She addressed charges she lied to family members of the four Americans killed in Benghazi by blaming the attack on an anti-Muslim YouTube video: she said, "I understand the continuing of the grief of the loss that parents experienced with the loss of these four brave Americans. … This was a fast-moving series of events in the fog of war." She does not and cannot understand what the parents are going through because she has never experienced that kind of loss. She did lie to not only the parents of those murdered she lied to the world. Fast moving – if she would have misspoken within hours of the event and corrected herself the next morning I could cut her some slack, but she, Obama and all the rest of his administration continued to lie for WEEKS after the event.

She talked about how Americans see her as untrustworthy: "Obviously, I don't like hearing that, George, but I think people who have worked with me, people who voted for me twice in New York, people I've had a very long relationship with and working on their behalf, are going to know what I do and when I say I'll do it, I'll move everything I can to get it done." The people that work with her are as dishonest as she is or they could not work with her. As far as her winning elections - that is the result of her being a good politician capable of saying what the people want to hear in order to get votes. Americans all know she lies and covers up and the majority may elect her President in 2016 even knowing those facts.

She said the U.S. should not declare war on ISIS because it is a "legal term" and only Congress has the authority to declare war. CONGRESS should declare war or not risk the lives of American soldiers. Anytime we send our troops to foreign soil to fight or advise we should be willing to do whatever is needed to WIN!!!!!

I am sorry Mrs. Clinton I am one that did not buy your campaign spill.

 

 

Obama's Legacy!

I recently mentioned in a piece I wrote that Obama is concerned about establishing a legacy in his last year of his imperial rein. I read an article recently that made me realized that Obama could stop worrying about his legacy because he has already established several.

Every president has a legacy that he is remembered by - George Washington was the first president; Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves; Ronald Reagan revived the economy; Bill Clinton balanced the budget; Carter coward to Iran; First Bush attack Iraq and second Bush will be remembered by 9/11.

How will Obama be remembered? He was our first black president? Let take a minute to review his accomplishments: He killed Bin Laden; He screwed up our health care; He increased federal spending by one-fifth and the national debt by two-thirds; He expanded presidential power via executive action, often without legal authority; He was responsible for the Democrats losing 69 House seats, 13 Senate seats, both houses of Congress, 12 governorships, 30 state legislative chambers, and more than 900 state legislative seats; He was the worst President since Carter;  His Iran deal will give Israel a decade to figure out how to defend itself against a nuclear-armed theocracy bent on its destruction; He mismanaged the withdrawal of troops in Iraq so badly that it allowed the “J.V.” ISIS terrorist group to organize and grow stronger than anyone could imagine; He received an undeserved 2009 Nobel Peace Prize; He oversaw a Job growth so weak that the definition of what constitutes a “recovery” had to be redefined downward; He increased the National Debt more than all Presidents before him put together; He oversaw increasing the food stamps program from 26 million to 46 million recipients, etc. He could promote his ability to fail and not learn from it!

He can pick and choose or lay claim to all the above for his legacy, but he no longer has to worry about leaving behind a legacy – he already has.

I hope his primary legacy will be that Americans woke up and realized we cannot afford to have another President like Obama ever again and will not vote for Hillary Clinton. We do not need a Third Obama Term.