Legacy?

Well, Carter is gone, and my flag is still two-blocked as it will remain. But do not despair my friends, we have a new legend to replace Jimmy, at least for a while. Joe Biden is the worst example of someone allegedly “serving” his country. Ha! The only person this ass ever served for his many political years was himself. I can’t remember when or even if, he was ever on the same side of an issue as I was regardless of its importance. And now he is so out of it that anyone who needs a favor probably has full access to the Oval Office to state their case and have old Joe issue a proclamation. What a disgrace. I wonder what it would cost me to have him  fire the Commandant of the Marine Corps today before he leaves office?

Here is another barn burner from my favorite author. Thanks Greg.

Lame Duck Legacy                                                              By: Greg Maresca

If there is such a thing as a sentimental moment at a political convention, President Joe Biden attempted such a ruse at the Democratic National Convention back in August when he recited from the Gene Scheer song, “American Anthem.” “The work and prayers of centuries have brought us to this day,” said Biden. “What shall our legacy be?”

Fatefully, Biden stumbled awkwardly over the word “legacy” in waning attempt at crafting his own legacy. In retrospect, it was the perfect swan song for Bidenism that commenced 55 years ago in 1970.

Legitimacy of legacy lies in truth, and nothing else. There are no shortcuts.

Where to begin: The overrun southern border that has welcomed an estimated 21 million illegally, historic record inflation, out-of-control crime, wars in Gaza and Ukraine, the meteoric rise of China, an ever-exploding national debt, the COVID-19 vaccine debacle, the weaponization of the Justice Department, Hunter Biden’s pardon for federal tax and gun charges that the president said would never happen and a nation more at odds with itself since the Civil War.

Biden is a wandering and incoherent medically confirmed non-compos mentis elderly man with a “get-off-my-grass” aged fragility exhibiting the steadfast spitefulness of Alzheimer’s.

When the Easter Bunny had to show Biden where the exit was after a White House Easter egg hunt America needed nothing more. However, it kept coming. Biden’s descent into dementia put the finishing touches on decades of a blundering, self-aggrandizement political career. The whole charade finally crashed during the presidential debate in June, underscoring how Biden was holding a job way over his head. Arguably, it is the greatest of political scandals.

The thousands of pardons issued are highly suspected including the recent Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients – George Soros and Hillary Clinton, really?

With the death of former President Jimmy Carter, it is Biden who is our worst living President – another legacy splinter that ushered in Trump’s second presidential term.

Barack Obama disclosed years before that we should “never underestimate Biden’s ability to f**k things up,” and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, declared Biden has “been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

Biden’s political agenda was about power and self-enrichment and never about America. It’s Obama politics 101. Biden’s cognitive decline preceded his 2020 candidacy, and the entire Democrat contingent knew and so did anyone paying attention with the media being complicit.

Legacy, like its brother legend, is often distorted and overrated. Statues are torn down, and headstones are knocked over. After a generation or two, no one remembers or cares. Name an Academy Award, Nobel Prize or Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient from a decade ago. Rather, they are a trivia question – if they are lucky.

The innate, yet fallen human condition wants to achieve something of significance that outlives us other than a weathering tombstone with our name etched upon it. Some will pay a high price to do so even if it means selling out to evil.

The octogenarian Biden is spending his final days in the Oval Office telling war stories, while his staff works to spite the incoming Trump administration by banning oil and gas drilling in federal waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans using a decades old law that will make it difficult to reverse.

Enter the modern myth maker” the presidential library. Biden’s version will be constructed in Delaware – not Scranton. In honor of such an occasion, it will be a basement venue with the elevator incapable of reaching the first floor. Walt Disney World’s Hall of Presidents revised their Biden animatronic with Joe sleeping in a beach chair. Meanwhile, McDonald’s will feature a Biden burger that is Fluffernutter on burnt toast minus the beef.

The Democrat party and their media allies perpetuated a colossal fraud against America at the expense of national tranquility and security. They actively censored and criticized anyone that questioned Biden’s obvious cognitive impairments. And those constitutionally disposed to right the ship of state failed – the 25th Amendment be damned – is nothing short of treason.

This ongoing charade of woke democrats, leftists, and their enabling media should be more than enough to bury them all, but many remain incredulous.

After Obama and now Biden, who can blame them?

I wonder who’s idea it was to sell pieces of the border wall? Can you believe they had the audacity to do that. Have any of you bought a piece? LOL

US Air Farce Academy

No, I did not misspell Farce, that’s what the academy has turned into. They are trying to be a civilian university, and that’s not what the academies are supposed to be doing. They are supposed to be training “warriors” not college snowflakes. They are getting a free education, albeit not the education they should be getting, and it’s at our cost. This commentary is sad, very sad. If you are a USAF person, this should wrinkle your brow. The sad thing is this same thing is going on in our schools and university only much more intense. Our younger aduklts know very little about our country’s history and more importantly our traditions laid done by our forefathers.

By L. Todd Wood:

It had been a long time since I had visited my Alma mater, the U.S. Air Force Academy, so I decided to bite the bullet and travel to my 30th reunion last October. I must admit, I did so with trepidation. I have a love/hate relationship with the place. Although I received a fantastic education and met some lifelong friends, it’s a nice place to visit, if you know what I mean.

I will say that I received top-notch military training and discipline when I went through three decades ago. In fact, the discipline that was drilled into me has served me well my entire life, giving me a leg up on my competition: once I start something, I just don’t quit, no matter the odds or barriers put in front of me. I credit USAFA for helping me to develop this ability. It is a learned skill acquired from four years of handling the academics and the professional military and athletic training.

During the Vietnam War, many prisoners of war shot down over North Vietnam credited their fourth class year at the Air Force Academy with giving them the fortitude to make it through years of confinement and torture. After all, isn’t that the basic skill of a warrior, to win against all odds?

Unfortunately, these skills are no longer being taught at USAFA. I’ve seen it with my own eyes, and so have my classmates.

I realized something was horribly wrong when I arrived at the bottom of the ramp to the cadet area, which used to say “Bring Me Men” above the tunnel entrance. It was an iconic quote, and we were taught at the time that “men” meant the human race, not necessarily only the male sex of such. “I’ll meet you at the bottom of the ‘Bring Me Men’ ramp” was a routine line to girlfriends, boyfriends, parents, et cetera who came to visit their cadet at the academy. I never heard any animosity against this quote during the four years of my stay at the Blue Zoo.

Imagine my shock when I saw the quote had been changed to some PC gibberish about “Integrity First. Service Before Self. Excellence in All We Do.” Ten words! At first, I laughed at the thought of some cadet telling his civilian girlfriend to meet him at the bottom of the “Integrity First. Service Before Self. Excellence in All We Do” ramp. But after a quick laugh, I felt sadness at the loss of tradition and loss of the basic masculinity of warfare being taught at the academy. It was then I knew it was gone. I also felt alarm—if they changed this, what else have they changed? This can’t be good for the training of future Air Force warriors.

My next stop, and next horror, was walking around the cadet area with my fellow classmates from the Class of ‘86 and a few others. The place looked about the same. A monument or static aircraft display was changed here or there, and there was a strange-looking obelisk sticking out of the terrazzo near Arnold Hall, but overall, the place was the same. But there was something very, very wrong.

I couldn’t place it, but then it hit me. It was October. The fourth class cadets should not have been “recognized” yet. That meant being accepted in the ranks of the upper class and the associated privileges that come with it. This entailed walking at attention, squaring corners, greeting upperclassmen, and other general military training.

None of this was happening. They were walking at rest, not greeting anyone. Actually, they were ignoring the upperclassmen walking by. I stopped one of them and asked him, “Cadet, are you recognized yet?”

“No, we are not,” was his response. He kept walking. There was no “sir” in his response. He obviously knew I was an alumnus and former military officer. The problem was that he simply didn’t care. He didn’t care because he had been taught not to care. Military bearing was absent. Completely gone. Removed.

And then, the shock continued.

As the time started to get close to the Noon Meal Formation, where the cadets form up and march into Mitchell Hall for lunch, I again realized nothing was happening. Cadets were nonchalantly walking to the huge cafeteria where they are served all at once during the school week for lunch. I subsequently found out the formation had been cancelled due to high winds. I laughed to myself.  There wasn’t even a breeze. Wow, things really have changed.

Inside the noon meal, all former military decorum and training at the lunch table had been vaporized. There was nothing. The freshman cadets didn’t even have the civilian decency to serve their alumni guests first, not to mention any military bearing. They just took the food and ignored everyone else at the table.

It gets worse: after lunch, my colleagues walked into the academic building. Before my eyes, where there used to be formal lecture halls, was a Dunkin’ Donuts. My jaw hit the floor and I actually took a picture– I was that amazed. This was no longer a military academy; it was UCLA in uniforms.

We then visited the dorm rooms. We nonchalantly walked into one cadet’s room who had the door open, which was the custom. We asked them a few questions. They didn’t get up. They didn’t greet us formally. They just sat there. These were fourth classmen. I guarantee you that in the past, if an alum had walked into a fourth class room, the residents would be at attention within seconds and the “sirs” would be flying like birds on a high wire.

Finally, before the football game and other class-specific events, we headed to Arnold Hall to listen to a briefing from the Superintendent on what was going on at the academy. Literally, one of the first things we heard was, “Things are not as tough as they used to be.”

Really? Ya think? was my immediate reaction.

We were presented with an hour-long briefing about how cadets were being trained to be able to “function” within the bureaucracy of the regular Air Force. We heard all about the statistics of the institution—how many awards it had won, where it stood in the rankings against other colleges, how well the sports teams had done, et cetera, et cetera.

Not once did I hear the word warrior. In a flash, I got it. The academy was no longer training cadets to be Air Force warriors. They were no longer training to fight for our country and win wars. They were being trained to function in the bureaucracy. The academy was all about competing with civilian institutions in a variety of ways.

We heard about the new facilities that had been built. We heard all about the new honor chamber to discuss ethics. That happened to be the strange object poking out of the terrazzo.

When the briefing was over, I raised my hand. I had to ask the question. I simply said, “The discipline here no longer exists. Not once did I hear the word ‘warrior’ in your briefing. It seems the mission has changed. Were we no longer about ‘Fly, Fight, and Win?’”

The response I got was laced with derision at my wrong-headed thinking. “We are not here to haze people. They go to the lunch meal to eat, not get trained,” said the Superintendent, who was, by the way, in the first class of females to graduate from the academy. “We have theme rooms to talk about war,” said the commandant of cadets. Yes, he really said that. “We have mock funerals to talk about war.”

Excuse me, but what right do these new leaders of the institution have to throw away decades of training that had worked so splendidly to create warriors like Medal of Honor winner Lance Sijan, who crawled through a rock-filled landscape after being shot down in Vietnam for 46 days with compound fractures throughout his broken body until his bones protruded through his skin, only to escape twice before being killed by the enemy, all the while never giving up any classified information under torture? Do you think he learned that from a theme room? No, he learned that from a full year of military training and discipline, learning attention to detail, how not to quit, how to perform under pressure, day after day after day. That’s where he learned that.

It is obvious the Air Force Academy is no longer training warriors to lead men, or women, into battle. They are no longer into the type of training that created the greatest air force ever known to man. In fact, they are more interested in a military version of safe spaces and trigger warnings, so it seems.

As far as the other academies are concerned, I can’t speak for them. However, I have seen evidence of the same with pictures of black female cadets giving the black power salute, images of female cadets on their cell phone while marching, et cetera, et cetera.

President Obama did a very good job of weakening the institutions that made our military and country great. Military academies are not made to “compete” with other civilian universities. They have a special purpose. I very much hope President-Elect Trump and his appointees can reverse this pathetic trend. Our children’s future depends on it.

Todd Wood is an OpsLens contributor, a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, flew special operations helicopters supporting SEAL Team 6, Delta Force and others. After leaving the military, he pursued his other passion, finance, spending 18 years on Wall Street trading emerging market debt, and later, writing. The first of his many thrillers is “Currency.” Todd is a national security columnist for The Washington Times and has contributed to Fox Business, Newsmax TV, Moscow Times, the New York Post, the National Review, Zero Hedge, The Jerusalem Post, and others. For more information about L. Todd Wood, visitLToddWood.com.

Originally posted 2017-02-04 15:08:42.

Half Mast My Flag?

For the first time in my life, I have disregarded the half-masting of my flag. It will remain two-blocked throughout this entire ordeal of burying the worst president of the U.S. I hated this man when he was in office and continued that feeling throughout his life. I personally suffered the ills of his presidency. His vetoeing the military’s pay raises three years running caused severe retention problems in all the services. When the JCS  pleaded with him to approve a pay raise, his reply was that when he was in the Navy pay wasn’t the thing that kept sailors serving.

I  need not say anything else as Mr. Klein lays it all out very well

Jimmy Carter Was a Terrible President — and an Even Worse Former President

Former president Jimmy Carter, who arrived to observe the upcoming Palestinian presidential elections, speaks to the press during a meeting with then-Israeli President Moshe Katsav in Jerusalem, January 7, 2005. (Lior Mizrahi/Getty Images)

By Philip Klein

December 29, 2024 5:48 PM

The truth is that historians have not been harsh enough.
A popular narrative surrounding the legacy of Jimmy Carter is that as president he was a victim of unlucky timing that impeded him politically but that he excelled during his long post-presidential career. The reality is that he was a terrible president but an even worse former president.
Carter’s true legacy is one of economic misery at home and embarrassment on the world stage. He left the country in its weakest position of the post–World War II era. After being booted out of office in landslide fashion, the self-described “citizen of the world” spent the rest of his life meddling in U.S. foreign policy and working against the United States and its allies in a manner that could fairly be described as treasonous. His obsessive hatred of Israel, and pompous belief that only he could forge Middle East peace, led him to befriend terrorists and lash out at American Jews who criticized him.
A former governor of Georgia who had little charisma and national name recognition when he began campaigning for president, Carter ended up in the White House as a fluke. He presented an image as an honest, moderate, and humble southern Evangelical Christian outsider — an antidote to the corruption of the Watergate era. He also benefited from the vulnerabilities of the sitting president, Gerald Ford.
Once in office as an unlikely president, Carter spent his one and only term showing the American people, and the rest of the world, that he was not up to the job.
When he took the presidential oath in January 1977, the unemployment rate was a high 7.5 percent; when he left office in January 1981, it was just as high. Meanwhile, inflation, which was already elevated at 5.7 percent in 1976, the year he was elected, went up in each of his years in office — and reached a staggering 13.5 percent in 1980, the year he was booted out. The only year in the post–World War II period in which inflation was higher was 1947, when the economy was booming and unemployment was minuscule. Put another way, to maintain the buying power that $100 had on the month Carter was sworn into office, you’d need $150 by the time he left the White House just four years later. Under Carter, gas prices doubled, and the supply became so scarce that Americans had to endure long lines at stations to fill up their tanks.
On the international stage, Carter showed weakness, and America’s enemies took notice. Rather than recognize the true nature of the Soviet threat, he preached the defeatist ideology of “peaceful coexistence,” and the USSR steamrolled into Afghanistan. Also under his watch, radical Islamic revolutionaries took over Iran, holding Americans hostage for the last 444 days of his presidency.
It is telling that the defining speech of his presidency was known as the “malaise speech,” in which he spoke not as a leader but as an essayist writing on the “crisis of confidence” in America. He observed: “For the first time in the history of our country a majority of our people believe that the next five years will be worse than the past five years.” As he built a legacy of scarcity, he criticized Americans for wanting plenty, lamenting that “too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption.”
It should be no surprise that Ronald Reagan’s message of strength and optimism turned 1980 into a complete rout. Carter not only lost 489 electoral votes to 49, but he got trounced by ten points in the popular vote — even though an independent candidate, John Anderson, drew 7 percent.
Carter, who performatively carried his own luggage as president, tried to present himself as humble. But somebody actually humble would have taken the hint by the magnitude of his defeat. The real Jimmy Carter was stubborn and arrogant. He had plans for a second term, and he wanted to see them through despite the overwhelming rejection by the American people. So instead of stepping away, he spent the rest of his life simply pretending that he was still president and pursuing foreign policy goals even when it meant undermining the actual president.
The two most egregious examples of this came in his efforts to stop the first Iraq War and his freelance nuclear diplomacy with North Korea.
In his mostly sycophantic 1998 book on Carter’s post–White House career, The Unfinished Presidency, Douglas Brinkley gave a startling account of Carter’s behavior in the run-up to the 1990–91 Persian Gulf conflict.
Concerned by the looming threat of war after Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, Carter pulled out all the stops — and then some — to try to thwart the president, George H. W. Bush. Carter’s efforts started off within the realm of acceptable opposition for a former president. He wrote op-eds, hosted conferences, gave speeches — all urging peace talks as an alternative to repelling Saddam with the use of military force.
But when that failed, he took things to an extraordinary level. Carter wrote a letter to the leaders of every country on the U.N. Security Council, as well as a dozen other world leaders, Brinkley recounted, making “a direct appeal to hold ‘good faith’ negotiations with Saddam Hussein before entering upon a war. Carter implied that mature nations should not act like lemmings, blindly following George Bush’s inflammatory ‘line in the sand rhetoric.’”
As if this weren’t enough, on January 10, 1991 — just five days before a deadline that had been set for Saddam to withdraw — Carter wrote to key Arab leaders urging them to abandon their support for the U.S., undermining months of careful diplomacy by the Bush administration. “You may have to forego approval from the White House, but you will find the French, Soviets and others fully supportive,” Carter advised them.
It is one thing for a former president to express opposition to a policy of the sitting president, but by actively working to get foreign leaders to withdraw support for the U.S. days before troops were to be in the cross fire, Carter was taking actions that were closer to treason than they were to legitimate peace activism.
Carter’s meddling was not limited to the first Iraq War or to Republican administrations. In 1994, there was a standoff between the U.S., its allies, and North Korea over the communist country’s nuclear program. The U.S. was floating the idea of sanctions at the United Nations. Over the years, Carter had received multiple invitations to visit North Korea from Kim Il-sung and was eager to fly over and defuse the situation with an ultimate goal of convening a North–South peace summit and unifying the peninsula. Begrudgingly, the Clinton administration agreed to let Carter meet with Kim as long as Carter made clear that he was a private citizen and that he was merely gathering information on the North Korean perspective, which he would then report back to the Clinton administration.
Without telling the Clinton administration, however, Carter flew to North Korea with a CNN film crew and proceeded to negotiate the framework of an agreement. He then informed the Clinton team after the fact, with little warning, that he was about to go on CNN to announce the deal. This infuriated the Clinton administration, and according to Brinkley’s account, one cabinet member called the former president a “treasonous prick.” To make matters worse, Carter then accepted a dinner invitation from Kim, at which point Carter claimed on camera that the U.S. had stopped pursuing sanctions at the U.N., which was untrue. Nevertheless, once Carter went on television to announce all this, Clinton felt completely boxed in, and he was forced to accept the deal and abandon sanction efforts.
Over time, it became clear that Kim had just used Carter to take the heat off, get economic relief, and buy time while still continuing to enrich uranium in violation of the agreement, which it withdrew from in 2002 after being called out for cheating. Within a few years, North Korea had built a nuclear arsenal. Carter’s effort at freelance diplomacy, in addition to advancing a foreign policy at odds with the administration, squandered a crucial window to stop North Korea from going nuclear.
When it came to unrealized ambitions, nothing frustrated Carter more than the Middle East. He was convinced that, had he been reelected, he would have been able to build on the peace agreement between Israel and Egypt and resolve the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians — even though there were significant differences between the two conflicts. In 2003, he boasted to the New York Times, “Had I been elected to a second term, with the prestige and authority and influence and reputation I had in the region, we could have moved to a final solution.” It was quite a choice of words.
During the pro-Israel Reagan administration, Carter saw little opportunity to advance his agenda, but he perceived an opening when Bush took over. In 1990, he befriended PLO terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, and, Brinkley writes, “Carter began coaching Arafat on how to not frighten democracies by using inflammatory rhetoric: it was a strategy that would eventually lead to the Oslo Agreements of September 1993.”
Throughout the 1990s, Arafat pursued a strategy of talking peace to the world at large while working behind the scenes to continue terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. He was infamous for appearing moderate when speaking in English while fuming radically and inciting violence in Arabic. Throughout this time, he was being mentored by Carter, who not only advised him but even personally wrote a sample speech for him suggesting language to use that would allow him to more effectively gain sympathy from Western audiences. At one point, he went on a Saudi fundraising mission for the PLO at Arafat’s behest. Of course, Arafat had no interest in peace, which became crystal clear in 2000 when he rejected an offer of Palestinian statehood and launched a campaign of terror known as the Second Intifada instead.
Carter’s friendship with Arafat was part of a pattern in which he would chastise Israel in the most extreme terms while ignoring or minimizing the actions of terrorists and dictators whose enemies happened to be Israel. On a Middle East trip in 1990, he visited Syria to meet with Hafez al-Assad and had nothing to say about the brutal dictator’s violations of human rights, but then he went to Israel and blasted its human rights record as it was trying to form a government. Carter met with and embraced Hamas and, in 2015, the year after thousands of rockets were fired indiscriminately at Israel civilians, claimed that the group, which in its charter calls for the extermination of Israel, was the party actually committed to peace and that Israel was not.
In 2007, Carter published Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, which was not only one-sided in its attacks on Israel but was filled with inaccuracies and distortions. At one point in the book, he invoked the story of Jesus to liken Israeli authorities to the Pharisees. In the first edition, he included a line in which he asserted that terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians were justified until Israel submits to demands: “It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel.” While he claimed this line was a mistake, he defended the rest of his work and dismissed legitimate criticism as merely coming from Jews.
“Most of the condemnations of my book came from Jewish American organizations,” Carter said in an interview with Al Jazeera, in which he also claimed that Palestinian rocket attacks on Israelis were not acts of terrorism. In a Los Angeles Times op-ed, he further advanced old tropes of nefarious Jewish control. He complained that the pro-Israel lobby made it “almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine” and lamented that “book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations.” This wasn’t true, and, further, it means that he described all Jewish writers (such as Jeffrey Goldberg, who reviewed the book for the Washington Post) as representing “Jewish organizations.”
In a speech at George Washington University on the same book tour, he argued that the obstacle to peace was “a minority of the more conservative [Israeli] leaders who have intruded into Palestine and who are unfortunately supported by AIPAC and most of the vocal American Jewish communities.”
At the event, one student asked about the fact that 14 members of the Carter Center’s advisory board had resigned over the book, and Carter had a familiar response: “They all happen to be Jewish Americans; I understand the tremendous pressures on them.”
One of the members to resign was a close associate, Ken Stein, an Emory University professor who had spent decades at the center — as its first permanent director, and then as the Middle East fellow, during which time he traveled with Carter and took notes on their meetings with foreign leaders. In a blistering review for the Middle East Quarterly, Stein wrote, “While Carter says that he wrote the book to educate and provoke debate, the narrative aims its attack toward Israel, Israeli politicians, and Israel’s supporters. It contains egregious errors of both commission and omission. To suit his desired ends, he manipulates information, redefines facts, and exaggerates conclusions.”
Among the examples he gives is an account of a meeting Carter had with Hafez al-Assad, in which Stein was the notetaker. Even though Stein shared his notes from the meeting, Carter’s account of the same meeting in the book was manipulated to make Assad seem more flexible than he actually was.
Stein also included the revelation that “Carter’s distrust of the U.S. Jewish community and other supporters of Israel runs deep.” Stein recalled an interview he once conducted for his 1991 book in which Carter bitterly told him:
[Vice president] Fritz Mondale was much more deeply immersed in the Jewish organization leadership than I was. That was an alien world to me. They [American Jews] didn’t support me during the presidential campaign [that] had been predicated greatly upon Jewish money. . . . Almost all of them were supportive of Scoop Jackson — Scoop Jackson was their spokesman . . . their hero. So I was looked upon as an alien challenger to their own candidate. You know, I don’t mean unanimously but . . . overwhelmingly. So I didn’t feel obligated to them or to labor unions and so forth. Fritz . . . was committed to Israel. . . . It was an act just like breathing to him — it wasn’t like breathing to me. So I was willing to break the shell more than he was.
It probably didn’t help Carter’s mood that, in 1980, he received a lower share of the Jewish vote than any Democratic candidate since 1920.
In the coming days and weeks, there will be an effort to rewrite history and claim that the 39th president was underappreciated and that people have been too harsh on him. But the truth is that historians have not been harsh enough. One of the few silver linings that can be offered about Jimmy Carter is that, thankfully, he was too politically inept to be given the opportunity do even more damage.
Will he survive as the worst president the country has ever had? I don’t know, but he’d at least be runner up to the POS we have now.
I am reminded of the story in General Petraeus’ book about his day of retirement after being fired by Obama. He went to see the president to bid him farewell since Obama saw fit to not attend his retirement ceremony that morning. Obama allegedly said, “General, I’ll bet you can’t wait to piss on my grave.” To which the general replied, “No sir. At my retirement ceremony this morning, I swore to never stand in another line.”
Oh, lest I forget, Happy New Year brothers and sisters!!

Transparency like never before

If you’ve not been to this site then you need to and bookmark it. This is what I call transparency at its finest. The MSM’s heads are exploding because this president publishes the news himself. That way there are no “sound bites” taken out of context, no editorializing, no opinions of anchors. They were so upset because he flew to be with a Seal Team member’s family as they were receiving the body of their son and he didn’t tell them where he was going. They would have turned a very solemn event into a three-ring circus because they have no moral code by which to live.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/#page

Go to this site for your news and get it straight from the news maker himself.

Originally posted 2017-02-03 15:16:44.

WSJ editorial on voter fraud

Amazing, Unbelievable that we live in a modern high-tech country , yet we allow this to go on election after election. Now, I realize that the writer is a Republican and a lawyer, but it seems he has the facts backing up what he is saying. Yet, no one reports this or worse yet, does nothing about it.

President Trump’s promise to investigate voter fraud has drawn predictable responses from Democrats and the media, who insist there is no such thing and have been fighting for years to prevent any inquiry into the matter. But an investigation in Mr. Trump’s hometown shows that the problem is real.

In 2013 the New York City Department of Investigation—the storied law-enforcement arm of city government, which houses and manages all the city’s inspectors general and investigators—decided to test the system. City investigators posed as 63 ineligible individuals still on the city voter rolls. Each ineligible voter had died, moved out of the jurisdiction, or been convicted of a felony at least two years earlier.

The investigators didn’t go to great lengths to hide their attempted fraudulent votes. In five instances investigators in their 20s or 30s posed as voters age 82 to 94. In some cases the investigators were of different ethnic backgrounds from the voters they were impersonating. Yet each was given a ballot and allowed to cast a vote without question.

In other instances the investigators informed the poll worker that they had moved but didn’t have time to get to their new home on Election Day; all but one was allowed to vote. Only one investigator was flat-out rejected. He had the misfortune of trying to vote at a polling place where the clerk was the mother of the ineligible felon he was impersonating.

Ninety-seven percent of the barely disguised phony voters were allowed to vote unimpeded, and none was referred for criminal charges or officially reported to the Board of Elections. One can only imagine what a sharp operator trying to fix an election could do by flooding polling places with ineligible voters.

The Department of Investigation proved how easy it is to perpetrate such a fraud. More important, it showed that such illegal behavior doesn’t get reported or corrected. When the department published its report, the Board of Elections took no steps to prevent future fraud. Instead, the board complained that the investigators engaged in voter fraud and should be prosecuted. The district attorney refused to charge the investigators for their productive and lawful investigation.

Last year a Democratic New York election official, Alan Schulkin, was forced to resign after he was caught on tape telling the truth about electoral process. “Certain neighborhoods in particular, they bus people around to vote,” Mr. Schulkin said. “They put them in a bus and go poll site to poll site.” In another case a local polling official reported to the police that a group of men had apparently voted more than once, while others were told they couldn’t vote because their ballots had already been cast. The police response, according to press reports, was that they don’t investigate alleged voter fraud.

In 2014 President Obama’s bipartisan Presidential Commission on Election Administration concluded that maintaining accurate election rolls was a key part of the democratic process. Yet subsequent efforts to do so has led to claims of voter suppression, thereby stalling progress.

And while New York does not require identification to vote, its registration requirements are fairly strict and there is no such thing as same-day registration. Many states are less stringent, which would make the opportunities for fraud greater.

America has a flawed voting system that is susceptible to fraud and has few precautions against it. A federal investigation could go a long way toward ensuring citizens U.S. elections are honest.

Mr. Levy is vice chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association.

Originally posted 2017-02-03 08:35:21.

Conservatism

Verified by MonsterInsights