Lately, it seems as though I am a member of a dying breed. An American citizen who reserves their utmost respect for our armed forces. One who appreciates the sacrifices they and their families make to keep this country how it was envisioned…a hopeful country, a proud country, a free country, the greatest country that has ever exsisted.

I have not a scintilla of respect for Barack Hussein Obama. In fact, I am very afraid of what he and his ilk would do to this country, what they would turn it into. The fact that the socalist Europeans love him should be enough for the voters in this country to run away from him as fast as they can. I want a president that represents America, not the world. I do not want a transnational president.

John McCain was not my choice for a candidate. I have many disagreements with his policies. However, no one can deny his respect and commitment to his country. That he will do everything in his power to keep it safe and secure is without doubt. And, let’s face it, if we don’t have a safe and secure country that is not being attacked by terrorist, none of the other things will matter much.

This is an excerpt from the Remarks By John McCain At The American GI Forum.
Here he is speaking about the successful surge in Iraq.

“And as our troops took the fight to the enemy, Senator Obama tried to cut off funding for them. He was one of only 14 senators to vote against the emergency funding in May 2007 that supported our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. He would choose to lose in Iraq in hopes of winning in Afghanistan. But had his position been adopted, we would have lost both wars.

Three weeks after Senator Obama voted to deny funding for our troops in the field, General Ray Odierno launched the first major combat operations of the surge. Senator Obama declared defeat one month later: “My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now.” His assessment was popular at the time. But it couldn’t have been more wrong.

By November 2007, the success of the surge was becoming apparent. Attacks on Coalition forces had dropped almost 60 percent from pre-surge levels. American casualties had fallen by more than half. Iraqi civilian deaths had fallen by more than two-thirds. But Senator Obama ignored the new and encouraging reality. “Not only have we not seen improvements,” he said, “but we’re actually worsening, potentially, a situation there.”

If Senator Obama had prevailed, American forces would have had to retreat under fire. The Iraqi Army would have collapsed. Civilian casualties would have increased dramatically. Al Qaeda would have killed the Sunni sheikhs who had begun to cooperate with us, and the “Sunni Awakening” would have been strangled at birth. Al Qaeda fighters would have safe havens, from where they could train Iraqis and foreigners, and turn Iraq into a base for launching attacks on Americans elsewhere. Civil war, genocide and wider conflict would have been likely.

Above all, America would have been humiliated and weakened. Our military, strained by years of sacrifice, would have suffered a demoralizing defeat. Our enemies around the globe would have been emboldened. Terrorists would have seen our defeat as evidence America lacked the resolve to defeat them. As Iraq descended into chaos, other countries in the Middle East would have come to the aid of their favored factions, and the entire region might have erupted in war. Every American diplomat, American military commander, and American leader would have been forced to speak and act from a position of weakness.

Fortunately, Senator Obama failed, not our military. We rejected the audacity of hopelessness, and we were right.”

PLEASE read the entire article HERE. He speaks of other things besides the surge and relates a story about an American GI that should garner the respect of even the most cynical. It is worth every minute of the time it takes to read it.

The unethical or unprofessional practice by news media and journalists to sensationalize the news in order to drive up circulation.

The term originated during the circulation battles between Joseph Pulitzer and Randolph Hearst. They both began to disregard standard journalistic methods in order to push their country towards a war with Spain while dramatically increasing the circulation of their individual newspapers.

Man-made Global Warming = Yellow Science:

“When it first reared its head, yellow journalism was roundly condemned by the journalistic community. The condemnation of their peers was an insufficient deterrent for Pulitzer and Hearst, because it was the approval of the public that drove their circulation. Eventually the entire journalistic community acceded to the sensationalism that the public seemed to insist on.

In recent decades, the scorn of prominent scientists such as John Coleman has been similarly unable to stop the ascendancy of the global-warming hypothesis as the public has been increasingly drawn by its sensationalism.

The long-term results of yellow journalism have probably been more devastating than the war it started. Journalists have lost the respectability of their profession, and the public has lost real journalism. We are in very real danger, as scientists and as a nation, of losing the respectability of a professional community that has done so much to make this country great in the past hundred years. If yellow science overcomes real science it will not only be on account of the greed, ambition, and cowardice of our scientists but also the sloth and cowardice of a public that is unwilling to stand up and demand professionalism. This is why, as the editors of the New York Press said in 1897, I “called them yellow because they are yellow.”" JAMES KERIAN

Read the entire article HERE.

Â

A must read article HERE.