The Dem's latest joke on national security

Peter Huessy:

The Democrats announced a new national security policy five years after 9/11. What took them so long? Were they waiting for the recommendations from the French? It's unclear but they propose to: (1) Get rid of Al Qaeda; (2) Finish the job in Afghanistan; (3) Increase intelligence; (4) Secure our seaports; (5) Eliminate dependence on foreign oil; and (6) Withdraw from Iraq US forces and "redeploy" them somewhere else.
What is wrong with this picture? Everything. They want to get rid of Al Qaeda but won't let us intercept their communications to find out where they are. They cheered when the Patriot Act was nearly killed, but now want us to believe they really, really, want to use its provisions to catch the terrorists.
They want to finish the job in Afghanistan, but 62 House Democratic members have just endorsed cutting $62 billion a year from the U.S. defense budget which, of course, would make "finishing the job" impossible. They want better intelligence, yet supported the Clinton-era dismantling of some 40 overseas intelligence networks. Four times the previous administration had a chance to capture Osama Bin Laden but each time they didn't pull the trigger.
They want to send our troops to "finish the job in Afghanistan", but have proposed crippling the missile defense systems that would protect our soldiers overseas and our Americans here at home. In fact, in the first defense budget of the Clinton administration, even theater missile defense programs-which they now say they support -- were cut some 40 percent from the levels proposed by the outgoing Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney.
They want to protect our seaports, but one of their key allies -- unions -- have fought tooth and nail against the port security measures now being implemented by the Bush administration. They want to protect our seaports, but during the previous administration they turned operations at some of our key ports over to the communist government in China.

...
There is more. Good piece.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more