US Navy 2009

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Al Lieberman on June 24, 2008 at 1:19pm

Good question. I think our military has been stretched to beyond what we anticipated, regardless of what we hear and read in the media. Even though our Navy hasn't been in the spotlight, I'm sure they too have been in various stages of readiness. Especially with respect to the nuclear activities arising from the middle east & Korea.
I don't think we should ignore these sensitive issues, but I believe it's now time to focus on the problems we face at home. Hopefully at some point during this presidential race, the candidates will address our concerns and come to a balanced compromise that will relieve some of our frustrations at home and yet satisfy the needs of our world.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gerald Hannah on June 28, 2008 at 12:33am

Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, I do not think they will support any branch of the Military. There were no pay raises when Bill Clinton was President and if there were it was very little. On the other hand I think John McCain will support all branches being Ex Navy, in any case he's my man. I am also from Arizona which gives us something in common besides being retired Navy. As for fuel prices, my bet is the Navy will go
nuclear powder. Just my opinion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gerald Hannah on June 28, 2008 at 12:59pm

Scary. This is what the terrorists are waiting for. Gee, he must be living in another world where everyone loves everyone! Obama telling his plans for the military click the link below! http://msunderestimated.com/2008/03/01/obamas-plans-for-our-militar... This is scary! This is an uninterrupted 51-second video of Obama speaking; he's telling us exactly what he will do to the military. Watch it before this too is removed from the web site. Pass it on. The USA needs a Wake-up call.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Douglas Karr on June 28, 2008 at 1:58pm

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Darrell poole on August 6, 2008 at 11:06am

What the.... is this guy for real, futher more what planet is he livin on
nuff said.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tim Gulliford on June 29, 2008 at 5:25pm

I agree Doug. Dem's are known for cutting the military budget and slashing programs that make Our Nation strong. Since the end of the Reagan era, even Bush senior slashed the military budget but he is part if the "new" Republicans who tend to be more questionable on their ideals. Look at our military forces today. I heard we are at pre-ww2 status in man power which is not very good for defense.

Thank you for sharing that video since some people may not know his true intentions for our military. Do you all remember how clinton and her supporters bragged about being loved by the military? What world is she or should I say, what are they smoking? When her hubby was in charge, we saw the military struggle to survive. I was in the reserves during that time and a lot of people were leaving the Navy because of the lack of budget and the members did not want to serve underneath his reign.

"From the beginning, President Clinton had a rocky relationship with the military. During the campaign, it was alleged that as a college student he had dodged the draft and publicly protested the Vietnam War. As president, his first policy action was to pledge to end the ban on gay men and lesbians in the military. The attempt to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the armed forces faced vigorous opposition in the Pentagon and the Congress. Clinton ultimately accepted a compromise dubbed the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Clinton's first secretary of defense, former representative Les Aspin, Jr., initiated a “bottom‐up” review of the post–Cold War military. His successor, William Perry, further reduced the armed forces by closing bases, capping expenditures, and emphasizing reservists. Active duty personnel declined in Clinton's first term from 1.7 million to under 1.5 million." http://www.answers.com/topic/bill-clinton

I am sure a little elbow grease you can find a lot more about his dislike of the military. So, hillary and her supporters who threw propaganda about the military loving the clinton family is a laughing matter. Then take into account "China gate," "China will likely replace the USA as world leader, said Bill Clinton in a recent Washington Post interview. It is just a matter of time. Clinton should know. He has personally done more to build China’s military strength than any man on earth." http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/26/214938.shtml

Then let us not forget how clinton fought terrorism. His wife would have not been any better. Do Americans expect obama to be strong against terrorist? I guess a good car salesman can sell swampland to the masses.

Moral of my story. I will not be voting for "change" or any other liberal rant.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gerald Hannah on June 29, 2008 at 6:12pm

AMEN!!!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gerald Hannah on June 29, 2008 at 7:08pm

Very interesting. 2010 was not a good year to be President, yes, 2010 was long ago and far away.
As we look back on history, it appears that some Presidents had an easy ride--times of growth and stability. Teddy Roosevelt, Warren G. Harding, Dwight Eisenhower, Bill Clinton come to mind. Those were good years to be President.Others were elected just when the Republic was facing terrible crises: Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, George W. Bush. They rose to the occasion, even though they were controversial and widely hated while in office. Not such good years to be President.Just a few years prior, in 2008, the country began foundering. We were in the sixth year of the Iraqi Occupation, and the economy was flat. The mainstream press clearly wanted a Democrat elected.
Although we didn't know it until some years later, oil producing nations had colluded to secretly buy their own oil on the open market, driving oil prices to shocking levels above the true demand price- reaching a high of $162 a barrel in October, 2008, just before the general elections.
Their purpose was simple: to effect regime change in the United States.And of course, the U.S. economy was already in a real estate slump and also suffering the curse of stagflation; slow growth and high inflation.
There were a million home foreclosures.Independent truckers went under by the thousands.Airlines failed. Airlines with names now long-forgotten: United, Delta, Northwestern, American. All now merged, of course, into the one lone U.S. carrier we love so much: Southwest.Against this backdrop of weariness of the war on terror, and economic distress, the American people were ripe for a demagogue, and they certainly got one in Barack Hussein Obama.He and his running mate Kathlene Sibelius inspired them with vague notions of hope and change; of a world in which diplomacy settled all international problems, of free universal health care, of abundant alternative energy, of peace and love.
It was a vision too good to resist.The Republican nominee, a name you probably haven't heard in years anyone? Yes, it was John McCain, an obscure Senator from Arizona had no clue how to run a national campaign, and a platform nearly as liberal as Obama's.The selection of Condoleeza Rice as his running mate looked brilliant at first. Unfortunately, black voters viewed her as white, and women voters viewed her as one of the guys. Even so, the McCain/Rice ticket would have won the election if it weren't for the fact that 16 percent of conservative Republicans voted for anyone remember? That's right, Bob Barr, another name that's a footnote in history. After Obama's narrow win, thanks to recounts in Broward Countyty, Florida, the country was positively giddy. A Democrat House, Senate, and President. At last an end to gridlock in Washington. Camelot! When Congress convened in January, 2009, the 44th President of the United States did something unique in history: he made good on his campaign promises. Certainly most Americans never really thought he was serious during the campaign. But whether because of inexperience, idealism, or simply incompetence, he followed through. In Obama's first One Hundred Days, the Congress passed his initiatives, and he signed them into law as he said he would. He repealed the Bush tax cuts, and increased capital gains taxes. He enacted a windfall profits tax, and instituted price controls on gasoline and diesel fuel. He passed universal health care, which added an additional 10 percent tax increase on all working Americans. He signed the Immigrant Amnesty bill which created 12 million new citizens instantly, each with entitlements. He closed the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, and summarily released all the detainees. He repealed the Patriot Act, and cut funding for espionage, and eliminated all terrorist listening and wiretaps. Most important, he began the complete and immediate withdrawal of all American troops from Iraq. He ignored the advice of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who wanted to retain bases in Kuwait and Qatar. Instead, he went with the recommendation of Secretary of Defense Dennis Kucinich, and ordered all troops back to U.S. soil. Voila! In One Hundred Days, by May of 2009, it was all done, and the vision was complete. He did exactly what he said he would do. So it was in the summer of 2009 that things began to unravel for Obama. Of course, the economy needed a tax cut, not an increase, and unemployment quickly rose to 12 percent. Even attorneys and economists were put in the bread lines. Hard times. Price controls on gasoline immediately led to shortages and gas lines. The global cooling trend we have seen for the past 25 years first became obvious in 2009, exposing the CO2 global warming fraud. People were justifiably angry. Federal deficits increased massively because thousands of baby boomers, facing job loss and much higher taxes, simply gave up and took social security. Although the superb U.S. health care system was thrown into disarray, the bright spot was the creation of the Federal Department of Health care, and the immediate hiring of 250,000 administrators, inspectors and auditors, the only job growth in any economic sector in 2009. By February 2010, the U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq was complete. It was a very expensive undertaking.And then in March, the gradual Shiite insurgencies from Iran turned into a true Iraqi civil war. In May, Iranian tanks crossed the border and quickly took Baghdad. Although the exact number is not known, at least 230,000 Sunni Iraqis died as we stood by. Iran also quickly moved into undefended Kuwait. President Obama did exactly what he said he would. He sent Secretary of State Maria Cantwell to Tehran to meet with Iranian President Ahmadinejad. After two weeks of high level talks, the United States agreed to allow Iran to retain Iraq and Kuwait to create stability in the middle east, with the understanding that Israel would not be disturbed. Cantwell returned to Washington, and explained the agreement in her famous speech, in which she proudly noted that the Obama administration had finally achieved "peace in our time" in the Middle East. So there was some surprise at the rocket attacks on Tel Aviv on August 14th. President Obama said, "This is not the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad I knew. The Obama administration decided it would be destabilizing to take sides in the conflict, and approximately 29,000 Israeli civilians died during the summer and fall. American Jews were appalled at the inaction. Yes, in 2010 most American Jews were Democrats, but because of 2010, they are solid Republicans today. As awkward as it was, everything might have turned out all right for the Obama administration going into the fall mid-term elections of 2010, if it hadn't been for the dirty bomb in the Port of Long Beach. The administration had cut funding for the inspection of containers, because they felt it showed a "lack of trust" in the international trading community. It wasn't really a very big bomb, and thank goodness, not a real nuclear device, but nonetheless it contaminated some expensive real estate- Newport Beach, Palos Verdes Estates- and ultimately caused the death of 14,000 Americans. People were especially annoyed that Disneyland had to be closed for decontamination. And so, in the midterm elections, Republicans regained control of both the House and Senate, and the rest is history. The impeachment proceedings against President Obama for "failure to protect and defend" were swift and nearly unanimous. Vice President Sibelius resigned. Newly-elected Speaker of the House, J.C. Watts, became the 45th President of the United States. But you know the rest of the story well. Republicans finished the war on Islamic fundamentalists, largely by aiming ICBMs at Mecca and Medina. No Democrat has been elected President since. Republicans have held both Houses of Congress. History of Western Civilization and Economics are now taught in all public schools and in English only.
and there are border fences, north and south. We old codgers remember the ancient Confucian curse: "May you live in interesting times. Well, 2010 was an interesting year, but it was not a good year to be President

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tim Gulliford on June 30, 2008 at 4:54am

God Help us...


As for illegal aliens. The media and dems white washed the numbers. The numbers are closer to 25 to 40 million illegals. If anyone is "Shocked" at the price of the iraq war, just look at the cost we are paying out for illegal aliens to stay here.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Al Lieberman on August 29, 2008 at 11:33am

I'm sure many of you "hard core, right winged" conservatives will disagree, but having spent some time observing the presidential candidates debates, reflecting how our economy has declined, seeing so many lives affected by this shameful war in Iraq, and thinking about my childrens future, I cannot support a candidate who agrees with the current president, and his administration's policies. Lets be real. America has suffured enough! It's time for a change.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tim Gulliford on August 29, 2008 at 2:55pm

Al,

That is your right and opinion in which you have my respect. But, "hard core, left winged" democrats seem to fail at recognizing that the intel on Iraq that Bush was basing his war against saddam, was the same intel clinton was basing his assumptions about saddam.

America has suffered in many ways but not all in the hands of Bush. Sure, he is not exactly my buddy as he fails to see the lack of security on our borders has done to Our Great Nation but he is not a push over nor did he sold any of our missile technology to another nation.

What the Dem's are offering for the next President is not my cup of tea. Socialism, higher taxes for all, universal health care, global warming fix (hog wash), and many more B.S., is not for me.

McCain was not my choice either, I was voting for Duncan Hunter, an Ex-Marine, as McCain worries me about the illegal alien issue. Today, my decision was solidified as he picked Sarah Palin for Vice President. What she brings to D.C. will fix a lot of broken issues as she has in Alaska.

Just in case the "Hard core, lefties" do not mention it, Palin taxed the oil companies even more and sent that money back into the Alaskan community. She also has an 80% approval rating. Go read about her and see that this "Change" is what we need; not socialism.

Being real as real can get..... ;)

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Al Lieberman on September 1, 2008 at 6:23pm

Hey Tim,
I just received the following...this should get your goat! -Al

Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.

Huh?

Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:


She was elected Alaska 's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.1

Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2

She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3

Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4

She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5

She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.7
This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.

We also asked Alaska MoveOn members what the rest of us should know about their governor. The response was striking. Here's a sample:

She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks, AK

She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska. —Christine B., Denali Park, AK

As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage, AK

Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage, AK

She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau, AK

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK

So Governor Palin is a staunch anti-choice religious conservative. She's a global warming denier who shares John McCain's commitment to Big Oil. And she's dramatically inexperienced.

In picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has made the religious right very happy. And he's made a very dangerous decision for our country.

In the next few days, many Americans will be wondering what McCain's vice-presidential choice means. Please pass this information along to your friends and family.

Sources:


1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=1

3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=2


4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=3

5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=4

6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=5

"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=6

"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=7

7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=21119&id=13661-6718539-8daUqJx&t=8

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2
• 3