So… today is the anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Not that any mainstream media source will bother mentioning it. We wouldn’t want people to remember the catalyst that resulted in the bombing of Hiroshima after all, which I can guarantee you the mainstream media will cover when that anniversary rolls around. 

But do you want to know what’s even more tragic than forgetting the anniversary of a horrific attack by an enemy army? There’s an attack going on against our military at this moment, on the anniversary of Pearl Harbor, and most Americans aren’t even aware of it (no thanks to the mainstream). Worse still, the attack isn’t even being carried out by a hostile foreign nation… it’s by our own government. 

Three US Navy SEALs (Sea, Air and Land Forces) have been arraigned for thier court-martials today for what has been referred to as a “dereliction of duty”. What is this horrific offense, you ask? 

Well, it looks like the three SEALS are accused of “abusing” a terrorist that they captured back in early September. While its not yet clear as of this writing exactly when this alleged abuse took place, at some point during his detention, the terrorist claimed that he was “punched in the gut” as well as in the mouth, using his bloody lip as “evidence”. 

Now, before you get all sympathetic about this poor, abused man, let me tell you what this animal did…

Back in Fallujah in 2004, a supply convoy that was being escorted by four Blackwater security contractors was ambushed by terrorists. The contractors were killed, hacked apart, burned, then as a final insult, two of their bodies were hung on a bridge over the Euphrates River, specifically so that reporters could get a good look at them. 

The prisoner complaining that he was abused by the SEALs, Ahmed Hashim Abed, was the mastermind of that attack. Feel sorry for him now?

So, what we have here is that these SEALs are finally able to capture this guy, and in return, they get court-martialed for giving this goon a fat lip. For all we know, the guy probably punched himself in the mouth just so that he could raise this accusation. 

I know what you’re thinking. That’s insane, right? What kind of person would be crazy enough to punch himself in the face just so he could accuse someone of beating him? 

The same kind of person who flies planes into buildings.   The same kind of person who would strap a bomb to himself, wander into a crowd, scream “Allah Akbar” and blow himself up... that kind of person. It wouldn’t seem too far fetched for this guy to punch himself in the face to set his captors up. That would actually be pretty trivial to guys like this. While I can’t state this as an absolute fact, I hear that Al-Qaeda has a training manual that specifically says (some say on page 18), that if captured, accuse your captors of abuse. They may not go free, but they can at least, in their minds, put in that seed of doubt to a sympathetic public with the allegations, which could work out favorably for him in the long run during a trial. 

As most of us know, it’s much easier to make accusations than it is to prove the accuser is lying.

But let’s say that this terrorist mastermind is actually telling the truth. What if he really did get punched in the face by his captors? Of course, that’s assuming that it wasn’t done during a struggle while making an escape attempt. You know what I say to that?

Tough luck. 

Do you really expect me to feel sorry for some animal that is responsible for murdering four contractors and hanging their charred bodies on a bridge for the world to see? This guy was lucky that a fat lip was all he got. He should be on his knees and thanking Allah that it was the SEALs that captured him, and not fellow Iraqis who are not exactly known for their restraint towards their prisoners. This joker would’ve been killed a long time ago, and you can bet that the manner of death would’ve been horrible. Just ask the family members of any US soldier that was captured in Iraq.   Only one has ever come back alive, and she was rescued by us, not returned by her captors.

Split lips will heal in time. Those four contractors will never come back to their families… ever. 

Sources:

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist: Rowan Scarborough, Foxnews.com, 11/30/2009

SEALs Charged in Alleged Assault of Detainee: Gidget Fuentes, NavyTimes.com, 11/24/09

Navy SEALs May go to Prison for Giving a Fat Lip to Islamic Terrorist: Jim O’Neil, Canada Free Press, 11/26/09

Photo of Euphrates River Bridge Hanging: Foxnews.com

As if California really needed another reason to earn the title “the land of fruits and nuts”.

Although it is meant to be satirical, the movement to ban divorces in California has gained somewhat in popularity. John Marcotte, the married 38-year old father of two and the movement’s brainchild, explained that his inspiration for introducing the petition came from the passing of proposition 8, an amendment that banned gay marriage, to which the voters of California passed in 2008.

“Since California decided to protect traditional marriage, I think it would be hypocritical of us not to sacrifice some of our own rights to protect traditional marriage even more.”

WELL… I guess he SHOWED US! 

Mr. Marcotte doesn’t actually give a rat’s furry rear end about “saving marriages”. He’s just doing this to prove his point… that homosexuals deserve to get married as much as heterosexuals do.   Since he didn’t get his way, he’s decided to throw a tantrum. If gays can’t marry, and those self-rightous straights are so obsessed with “saving marriages”, well damn it, we’ll just ban divorces for them.   That’ll fix ‘em! 

Reminds me of Brad Pitt’s vow that he and Angelina Jolie would never get married until gays could get married too. Glad you’re such a proponent of saving marriages, Brad. Second time’s the charm, eh?

No danger of that happening though, as they’re headed for splitsville soon anyway, if you can believe the tabloids.  I’m sure Brad won’t mind putting his marriage plans on hold. Indefinitely.

Now that we’ve established Marcotte’s reason for the petition to ban divorces, how about we discuss one way we can really help save marriages? Here’s an idea that’s been thrown around; rather than enact Sharia Law and forbid divorces, let’s make it harder to get married. 

Gay and Lesbian groups have often flaunted how successful their “marriages” are as opposed to heterosexual marriages, which have a roughly 50% divorce rate. There’s a simple reason for that… too many couples are getting married on a whim, for the wrong reasons. 

Let’s pick on Las Vegas for a minute. How many times have you heard of a couple, sometimes complete strangers, had a little too much to drink and decided to visit one of those “quickie marriage” places? Hell, Carrie Underwood even wrote a song about one (if I were to assume that she writes all of her own songs, I’d guess that the woman has serious man problems). I bet those are counted in the divorce rate.

How many teenagers get married right out of high school, before they even really know anything about their sweethearts? Out come the kids and voila… they’re added to the divorce statistic. 

Do you want to know one reason why gays and lesbians can claim that their marriages last longer and have a lower divorce rate? Probably because it’s so difficult for them to get married in the first place. As getting married is tougher, they’re more likely to make damn well sure that their respective partners are really someone that they want to get involved with for the long run. Few sane people want to go through that hassle more than once. 

However, as more and more states, particularly in New England, are allowing gays and lesbians to marry, I can guarantee you that we’re going to be seeing the homosexual divorce rates start to go up, now that marriages are getting easier for them.

So, how do we make it harder for us straights to get married?

One way is to make it mandatory for the couple to receive some type of counseling once they make their intentions known. It could be a priest, rabbi, counselor, imam, Wiccan high priestess… whatever. I don’t care. 

The important thing is, most of these people need a reality check from a neutral party who will be asking them the tough questions, such as “are you sure that you know exactly what you’re getting into? Do you really think you can handle the financial responsibilities? Just how well do you really know each other… besides how great they are in the sack? What will you do when you have kids?  How will you pay for your house? Mom and dad aren’t going to let you live with them forever. How will you feel about your hottie girlfriend/boyfriend when they’re looks start to go? Are you still going to love them?

Have you done most, if not all, of everything you’ve wanted to do in life already? If you haven’t done it by now, you’re chances of achieving your dreams drop dramatically after you get married and start having kids. 

Unless of course, that is your dream.

Are you really ready to sacrifice your own happiness and dedicate your life to the happiness and well-being of your spouse?

And don’t feed me any of this crap about what a jerk I am (ok… I am, but that’s besides the point), how you married your spouse right out of high school, you’ve stayed together for 30 years, had 5 great kids who are all academic geniuses, you’re filthy rich, blah blah blah.   You got lucky, you beat the odds. You’re a rare exception to the rule, not the norm. Congratulations.

Don’t misunderstand; I am not suggesting that you should not get to marry the person of your choice. This is America after all, not the Middle East. We don’t do arranged marriages here. 

Ok, true… we have the occasional shotgun wedding, but most of these guys had it coming to them.

What I’m asking is that people, especially you young ones, to think with your heads, as well as your hearts, before you jump into a commitment like marriage. 

Ask yourself the hard questions now, so you won’t become part of John Marcotte’s (and his radical buddies) statistics on failed marriages later. 

Links:

Movement Under Way in California to ban Divorce: Judy Lin, Associated Press, 11/30/09

Well, I wasn’t expecting to get back on the subject of the trials of the 9/11 plotters being held in NYC so soon, but something that both Attorney General Eric Holder and Barack Obama said this morning got my attention.

Eric Holder defended his decision to hold civilian trials in NYC, as opposed to a military tribunal in Guantanamo Bay, by stating that “I have every confidence that the nation will see him for the coward that he is. I’m not scared of what (Mohammed) will have to say at trial - and no one else needs to be either.”

“We need not cower in the face of the enemy,” he continued. “Our institutions are strong, our infrastructure is sturdy, our resolve is firm, and our people are ready.”

Obama agreed, and referred to those who would be offended by the legal privileges given to Mohammed by the benefit of a civilian trial as opposed to a military tribunal “won’t find it offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him.”

Almost as if catching himself, he quickly added that “I’m not going to be in that courtroom. That’s the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury.”

Look you fools… we’re not cowering before these terrorists. We’re not scared of what Mohammed or his ilk has to scream in the courtroom. Saddam Hussein did plenty of yelling and screaming in the courtroom… that didn’t stop him from becoming an Iraqi tree ornament. 

We have plenty of real, legitimate reasons for not wanting the trials being held in NYC, one of them being security concerns, which I discussed earlier. 

The biggest reason, however, is the idea that these Islamic, terrorist thugs, captured while trying to kill us, will receive the same rights and privileges as a U.S. citizen under the Constitution. They’re lawyers can claim that they’re rights weren’t read, that they were tortured, that they have a right to an attorney, etc. Don’t forget, even with Mohammed’s confession that he was the mastermind of the attacks, that confession could be thrown out. They could, even though the chance is small, be acquitted. 

Now here’s the best part… what happens if they are acquitted?

Well, according to Eric Holder, that’s never going to happen. 

“Failure is not an option” he vows. “These are cases that have to be won. I don’t expect that we’ll have a contrary result.”

Does anyone really believe that these guys, particularly Mohammad, will be released back into the populace if found “not guilty”? 

Can you imagine what would happen if we were talking about American citizens still being held after being found not guilty?

So… what exactly is the point of a civilian trial then? If we’re hell-bent on convicting them and keeping them locked up, wouldn’t a military tribunal make more sense? Why are they making the taxpayers go through with this? 

My guess is that their intention is to “show off” to the rest of the world just how “unafraid” we are by holding these trials in the very city that the terrorists attacked, of the complete faith we have in our justice system. 

Instead, we’re going to be showing the world how our justice system has become a complete mockery of what it once stood for. 

Links:

Graham Accuses Holder of ‘Making Bad History’ with Sept. 11 Trial Decision: Fox News, 11/18/09

Obama, Holder Firm on Convicting 9/11 Plotter: CBS5 news.com, 11/18/09

Holder: ‘I’m Not Scared of What Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Has to Say: Rachel Slajda, TPM Livewire, 11/18/09

At least 7,000 people were waiting for an event hosted by a French marketing site called “Mailorama.fr” to start an event, in which a London double-decker bus named the “Bus of Fortune” would drive past the crowd in Paris and hand out envelopes that could contain anywhere from $7.50 to $750 out the windows to the waiting crowd below. 

At least, that was the plan. 

When the police got a good look at the crowd waiting for them, they changed their minds and canceled the event. 

Uh ohhh.

Well, that didn’t sit well with the crowd, and predictably, things got ugly quickly. Windows were pelted with fruit, and at least one car was overturned. I guess that’s what happens when you deny people their “hard-earned” money. After all, have you ever overturned a car and decorated windows with fruit? It’s more difficult than it sounds. They really worked for that money.

While the organizers themselves claimed that they regretted that the event didn’t go as planned, a government official named Eric Woerth expressed shock that the marketing site even considered organizing the event.

“Just because they do this sort of thing in the United States, that’s not a reason to do it in France. It borders on the ludicrous”.

You gotta love the French. Even though the U.S. had absolutely nothing to do with the event, they still find a way to pin the blame on us. 

Oh, and someone needs to clue in Monsieur Woerth that his Socialist government gives money away to slackers all the time, just not as openly as “Mailorama” tried to do.  

Still, frenchie here does bring up an interesting topic. He’s correct when he says that we’ve actually done this kind of thing before. 

Last year in February of 2008, an internet company called “Cashtomatoe.com” decided to throw their own little cash giveaway promotion in Union Square, NYC. The idea was for representatives of the company, dressed as tomatoes, to pass out tomatoes with money attached to them to the homeless. 

Apparently, the mob got tired of waiting, and began yelling “make it rain” and (my personal favorite) “give me my money!” as the clock counted down until the event started. With only 5 minutes to go, the impatient mob of 100 people then pushed their way to the workers, and began grabbing the bags of tomatoes with the money in them. 

Long story short… the money was stolen, fights broke out and people got trampled and stomped on. The money didn’t make it into the hands of the homeless as it was intended, but into the greedy hands of an unruly mob out for quick cash. 

I’m reminded of a scene from that old “Batman” movie back in the 80’s, when the Joker (played by Jack Nicholson) announced on television that he would be celebrating Gotham’s anniversary by throwing a parade and tossing out millions of dollars to the crowd. However, unknown to the greedy parade attendees, he also intended on releasing a deadly gas from the parade floats on the money-grabbing revelers. 

And he would’ve gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for that meddling freak in a bat costume.

Looking back, I sometimes wonder if maybe the Joker was the real hero. 

Sources:

Free Money Event Turns Violent: Frank Carnevale, MyFox Illinois, 11/16/09

Cashtomatoe Money Giveaway Turns Rotten with Union Square Riot: Seth Fiegerman & Tracy Connor, NYDaily News.com, 03/01/08

When I first heard this story on the radio on the way home from work, my first thought was that it was a possible terrorist attack. However, the FBI stated that they did not believe that it was terrorist related (as if some guy randomly shooting and killing people didn’t cause terror to anyone). They later stated that the shooter was in military uniform, and that he was a known soldier.  At the time, they refused to give the soldier’s name. 

I had a bad feeling that I knew why. I remembered how back in 2003, there was a big story about how a U.S. soldier had rolled 3 grenades into his fellow soldiers’ tent, killing 2 officers and injuring 14 other soldiers. It turns out that the soldier was a Muslim; Sgt. Asan Akbar. Apparently, Sgt. Akbar felt that his fellow soldiers were unfairly “personalizing the war as being the fault of all Muslims”.

What better way to make your point that Muslims are not at fault than by rolling a few grenades into your fellow soldiers’ tent? 

Well, my suspicions that the soldier is a Muslim, or at least of Arabic descent, has proven correct so far. The soldier’s name? Sgt. Malik Nadal Hasan. 

I’m going to take a wild guess here; I’ll probably be wrong, but here it goes…

Sgt. Hasan, and possibly his accomplices who may also be Muslims, are unhappy with the war that is going on in Afghanistan.   They’re upset that their Muslim “brothers” are being killed by American soldiers. They’re ashamed to be American soldiers themselves, so they decided to arrange a little shooting spree to “redeem their honor”.   

Naturally, liberals will claim that they condemn the shooting, but the condemnation will be followed by something along the lines of “but it’s understandable why they would do that. If we weren’t over there killing innocent Afghanis/Iraqis to begin with, this would never have happened. The pressure to them must be unbearable”. 

Some have already tried blaming the shooting on the high levels of stress and the numerous deployments to Afghanistan that many of the soldiers have already been through. Naturally, they’ll conveniently leave out the part where hundreds of our soldiers have already gone through this, yet it never occurred to them that as much stress as they may be going through, they never thought to deliberately shoot up their fellow soldiers.

I know that this isn’t the politically correct thing to say, but hey… somebody has to say it. And yes, I’m probably jumping to conclusions, but let’s face it, I’m sure many of you are thinking along similar lines. 

It’s unfortunate that Sgt. Hasan chose to “express himself” in this matter. He’s done more harm to the Muslim image than anything we could have done. 

Sources:

12 Killed in Shooting at Fort Hood: Sig Christensen and Scott Huddleston, Express News, 111/5/09

Officers Testify of Warnings before Tent Attack: Richard A Serrano, LA Times, 07/17/03

As of late, the Republicans have been using the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to support their argument that the cost of the Democrats’ health care reform bill would cost billions more than originally projected. Now, the Democrats are using the CBO to push their argument that not only would just a small percentage of Americans would sign up for the public option (2%), but that it would also help insurers as well. 

That’s the thing about relying on a non-partisan organization like the CBO; it’s a double-edged sword. Their findings can be just as easily used against you by the other side, as you can use its data against their side. And that’s assuming that the CBO is correct to begin with. No organization is always right.

However, this really isn’t so much about the CBO, as it is about the “sandman” tactics that the Dems are using again. 

“Only 2% of Americans are going to use the public option.” the Democrats claim. “What’s all the big fuss about? You’re getting all worked up over nothing! 2% is hardly a government takeover, is it? Hell, it will even help private insurers out because the premiums for the private plans will be cheaper due to the higher premiums of the public plans. What’s everyone so afraid of? We won’t let a government takeover happen; we’re on your side!”

In other words… back to sleep, middle-class America… back to sleep.

This argument is strikingly similar to one that was used with another policy that the Democrats pushed way back in 1913… you know it now as the income tax.  

The Dems were successfully able to make it Constitutional for the federal government to grab a percentage of your income, by force, by using a tried and true tactic; they played the wealth envy game. They targeted their campaign towards poor and middle class Americans by soothingly assuring them; “Don’t worry…only the wealthiest 1% in the north-eastern United States would ever have to pay that mean ol’ income tax.  That’s hardly a government takeover, is it? After all, we’re only making the richest among you pay their fair share. They have plenty of money. You won’t be affected at all! Remember, we’re on your side!”

Not surprisingly, the tax was passed by an overwhelming majority, and the 16^th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was added.  

We all know how that little promise turned out now, don’t we? 

You may be wondering right now, “Wait a second… I don’t live in the north-eastern U.S….I’m not wealthy; so why am I’m paying income taxes?”

I’ll get to that later but until then, I leave you with this; don’t listen to the sandmen, don’t fall back asleep, we have enough nightmares with the income tax as it is.

Sources:

After All the Fuss, Public Health Plan Covers Few: Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press, 11/01/09

“If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.” 

Unfortunately for the employees of the Burlington Coat Factory in Columbus, Ohio yesterday, at least 1,500 shoppers apparently forgot that little nugget of wisdom.

After a woman, later identified as Linda Brown, pulled up to the store in a rented limousine and loudly announced that she had just won the lottery and would pay for everyone’s purchases of up to $500, shoppers, convinced that they were being treated to free merchandise, began snapping up as many clothes as they could carry and bringing them to the register to have them rung up. 

It didn’t take long for the shoppers to call their friends and relatives to inform them of the “great deal”, and in no time, the store was filled with at least 500 shoppers, with another 1000 outside trying to get in. Registers were ringing up purchase after purchase. One customer, Candace Jordan, informed Ms. Brown that she didn’t need new clothes; she needed money to pay the rent. Ms. Brown wrote a check for the requested amount for her on the spot. 

I want you to remember Candace Jordan’s name; I’m coming back to her later.

Well, to make a long story short, it turned out that the entire thing was a hoax. Linda Brown had not actually won $1.5 million in the lottery. In fact, she had nothing, but by the time the customers had realized it, she had taken off in her rented limo. Unfortunately for Ms. Brown, she had made a crucial error; if you’re going to use a limo as a getaway vehicle, don’t rip off the driver. The driver turned her in to the police after he had realized that he was not going to get the $900 that she owed him. 

What Linda Brown did was reprehensible, and it turns out that she is a repeat offender; this was not her first brush with the law. Likely, she’s going to be spending some time in jail. However, in my opinion the behavior of the customers was even worse than Ms. Brown’s. 

You see, when they found out that they weren’t getting free merchandise after all, they decided to not only run out of the store with their ill-gotten gains, but vandalize whatever they couldn’t carry out. It was the looting in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina all over again. They were promised free merchandise, and by God, they were going to get it. The employees of the store lost hundreds, maybe even thousands of dollars worth of stolen merchandise, not to mention a huge mess to clean up once the riot was over. 

The worst part about this riot was that it was completely senseless. These customers technically weren’t ripped off; the purchases weren’t under their names, they were under Linda Brown’s.   It wasn’t their money at stake. The worst that would’ve happened is that they simply wouldn’t have gotten the clothes for free.   If they really wanted them, they only needed to pay for what they actually could have afforded. They did plenty of ripping off of their own though, figuratively and literally.

Linda Brown, as bad as her behavior was, at least has an excuse; the woman is reported to be mentally disturbed to some degree. She has a history of odd behavior, centering on a desperate need for attention. The customers, however, have no excuses. 

So what would possess 1,500 people to act like sharks at a feeding frenzy?   It’s simple, really… the promise of free goods combined with the “entitlement” mentality that’s on the rise in America. It’s this mentality that has contributed to the drain of not only our finances but to the rise of the Democrat Party in general, along with the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank (not that I believe people like the above shoppers have any idea who these politicians are) and most notably, the election of Barack Obama. 

I think it’s a pretty safe bet that most of those rioting shoppers are Obama voters, or vote Democrat in general. To the Democrats, there’s no better tactic than convincing the masses that not only do they “deserve” or “have the right to” various goods or services, but that they can actually deliver these to them; anything to keep the masses voting the Dems back into power. After years of such indoctrination in our government-run public schools, the media and entertainment industry, the result is incidents like the one in Ohio. 

Promise the world, blame the opposition for anything they can’t deliver, keep their delegates angry enough at the Republicans to vote for you again. Rinse and repeat. 

The liberals have done their job well.

Now, remember Candace Jordan? The woman who asked for money to pay her rent? In my opinion, she’s the worst moocher of the lot. This woman actually went to the store, not to buy a coat (she said she didn’t need clothes, remember), but for the express purpose of getting free money from someone she thought was a millionaire. Kind of reminds me of the woman who cried to Obama that she needed a house, or more recently, the unruly crowd who thought they were being handed “Obama checks” a few days ago.

Oh well, at least in the end the joke was on her, but like the other shoppers, she didn’t actually lose any money, she only didn’t receive something that she was promised (which she really didn’t earn in the first place). She’s no worse off than when she started.

Perhaps, in her own twisted way, Linda Brown was trying to teach us a lesson about just how selfish and irresponsible we’ve become. Unfortunately, she’s also demonstrated just how gullible we can really be. It’s just a shame that so many people have such a sense of entitlement, that they will learn absolutely nothing from this.

Sources:

Lottery Hoax Causes Riot at Ohio Coat Factory: Mehgan Barr, AP Writer, Associated Press, 10/14/09

I’m going to be blunt about this. Military recruiters have a hard enough time filling their quotas as it is, especially now. Ending this policy is going to make it tougher. 

I’m not suggesting that gays are incapable of serving their country with pride and honor. This has a lot more to do with the psychological factor of heterosexuals than the performance capabilities on the part of homosexuals. 

So-called “open minded” straights can brag all they want that they don’t care what homosexuals do behind closed doors, but I’m willing to bet that their tunes would quickly change if they were forced to share that same room with them while they did their business. 

As someone who has served in the navy, I can tell you first-hand that I’ve heard conversations between a few of my shipmates bragging about exactly what they would do if they ever found out that a fellow sailor was gay. Trust me, their plans weren’t very nice. Most of those stories would end with their victim doing an unplanned swan dive over the side. 

You can’t just force most people to change their psychological wiring, no matter how many new laws you introduce. Laws that are created to control one’s behavior do not change his beliefs, it just suppresses them.

Now, there may be some gays (or “open minded” straights) reading this who will say “So what if the recruitment of straights goes down? They’ll be plenty of gays perfectly willing to take those homophobes’ place! The recruitment numbers will barely change.”

This brings me back to the title of this article, which states that removing this policy will contribute to lower recruitment numbers. It is not the end-all. There are a few other policies that Obama has promised that concern me… policies that will affect the recruitment of both straights and gays.

One of the big attractions for a potential recruit is the promise that upon completion of his service, he will receive a large sum of money for his college tuition, notably the Montgomery G.I. Bill. When I enlisted back in 1990, it was $10,000 (for 4 years of service). Currently, it is now around $47,556. 

Guaranteed college money... sounded good to me at the time!

Another big attraction is the guarantee that many of your medical expenses will be taken care of under the Department of Veteran’s Affairs (commonly called “VA Benefits”) for life. Trust me when I tell you that in my experience as both a veteran and as a kid raised in a military family, VA medical care is not as great as it sounds… I prefer the private sector.  However, to most young recruits who have little to no military experience, this sounds like a good deal. It certainly did to me when I signed up.

Here’s the problem… President Obama has pledged that not only would he like to see a “single-payer” health care system in place (a government system in which everyone’s health care is provided for by taxpayer dollars, a practice embraced in socialist countries), but he has also stated that he wants the government to provide the funds for a student’s college education. After all, as his supporters would say, “everyone has the right to an education”.

What happens if these policies were actually put into place? The fact is, there are plenty of young folks who join the military not out of a sense of pride, duty and honor to serve their country, but because they’re getting ready to graduate from school, they don’t know what they’re going to do with their lives, and they want a chance to get some money for college. The military seemed to be a good solution to that problem. 

I hate to admit it, but this was true in my case. Patriotism and a sense of duty weren’t instilled into me until years after I had joined at the age of 19. 

Your typical teenage candidate, when approached by a recruiter, would probably be thinking along the lines of “Why should I join the military and risk getting killed for something I’ll automatically be getting as a civilian under President Obama?” 

As if I hadn’t made enough enemies already, the last policy that I’m about to discuss will probably have our fine servicemen and women ready to form a lynch mob against me. 

President Obama has also made a promise back in February to give a military pay raise of about 2.9 %. If anyone deserves a pay raise, it’s our service members, especially the ones serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Unfortunately, wanting to give someone what you think they deserve is a lot different than what is actually practical. 

Where is this extra money going to come from? True, Obama claims that it will come from cuts in wasteful military spending, such as on what he claims are “Cold War-era weapons systems we don’t use” (I’m assuming that he’s referring to nuclear missiles), but who determines what we need or don’t need? Some would argue that it is those very missiles that prevent us from being attacked to begin with, but Obama has pledged to reduce our arsenal, an ideal that awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize.

Too bad North Korea, China, Iran and Russia don’t share those dreams. 

Just as in the private sector, when you’re forced to raise the minimum wage for employees, you’re going to need to sacrifice something in order to achieve that goal and still maintain the bottom line, whether it means cutting programs, services… or employees. 

I wouldn’t be so concerned about the pay raise if our economy was booming, but unless you’ve been hiding in a cave for the past year like a certain Saudi terrorist leader has, you know that we’re not doing so hot right now. I hate to suggest this, but the pay raise may have to wait.

Let the accusations of “homophobe” and “Obama-basher” begin.

Sources:

Obama reaffirms will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’: Christine Simmons, Associated Press, 10/11/09

Obama’s budget calls for 2.9% military pay raise: Jeff Schogol & Leo Shane III, Stars and Stripes, 02/27/09

Active Duty GI Bill User’s Guide: Military.com

Obama on Single Payer Health Insurance:  (Video) Posted by 6y2o12la, 06/29/08

In the event of an emergency landing, dumping excess fuel to lighten the weight of the aircraft was at one time a standard procedure. Now, a Japanese airliner is asking their passengers to do some dumping of their own before they even take off. 

A new policy introduced by All Nippon Airways (ANA) has encouraged their passengers to pay a visit to the restroom before boarding their planes. The reason? No, it’s not because their restrooms were removed… not yet, anyway. The logic behind it is that passengers with empty bladders will be lighter, which would add less weight to the plane, which in turn, would burn less fuel. The result is… you guessed it; lower carbon emissions. The things people will do to save the planet. I can’t help but wonder what the penalty is for using the restroom on the plane. 

On second thought, never mind.  I don’t want to know.

While I was reading this story, I looked at the picture that was provided on the website. As I observed the blue and white airliners, I couldn’t help but wonder; wouldn’t it have made more sense to simply have scrapped all that heavy paint off? How many pounds would be shed? However much weight would have actually been lost, it has to be more than anything the passengers could have… shed. 

Unless, of course, one of the jetliners was transporting a sumo wrestling team to their next meet, but that’s another matter. 

Believe it or not, this actually isn’t the most bizarre story I’ve heard about our attempts to lower our carbon emissions. That honor goes to the Australians, who were trying to figure out how to genetically re-engineer their native kangaroos (by replacing their stomachs with a cow’s stomach) so that they wouldn’t, to put it politely, pass as much gas. One scientist even urged Australians to eat kangaroo burgers as opposed to cow burgers, since a kangaroo’s flatulence emits more carbon into the atmosphere than a cow’s. Result… fewer kangaroos poisoning the atmosphere with their… ahem… farts.

Seriously, how many more stories like these are we going to see until these global warming nut jobs are laughed out of the public media? To be honest, I hope we see a lot more of them. The more stories like these are aired, the more people will realize just how ridiculous these folks are. I can hardly wait for the next one, keep ‘em coming, you tree-hugging wackos.

And remember… save the planet; eat more kangaroo.

Sources:

Airline Asks Passengers to use Toilet Before Boarding…. : Mail Foreign Service 10/06/09

Kangaroo Farts: Susan Reed, All About My Planet.com 12/15/07