At Least Five Supreme Court Justices Believe in the Constitution

June 28, 2010 | Comments (2)

We who believe in the Second Amendment, and, by extension, the U.S  Constitution, are supposed to look at today as a big day for gun rights. Our opposition probably assumed we would be dancing in the streets right now, celebrating wildly in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5 to 4 vote, ruling that local governments (such as Chicago and Washington, DC) cannot pass laws denying gun ownership that override the second amendment of the Constitution that grants we the people the unalienable right to bear arms.

But I’m not celebrating, and I’m not hearing many whoops and hollers from others who happen to believe in the Constitution as the law of our land, either. Instead, I am feeling sad, confused and, not surprisingly in our nation’s current climate, angry yet again. I don’t happen to see why there is even a question here. I don’t understand how this case ever found a place on the docket in the first place.

Until further notice, and despite the current administration’s and Congress’ efforts to change this, our nation is governed by the laws set out clearly in black ink and parchment on that legendary document assembled and signed by our founders more than two centuries ago. Stated clearly, alongside our rights to assemble, to speak freely and to practice our chosen faiths, is our right as Americans to protect our homes, our families, and our country, by whatever means necessary. And the Mayor of Chicago, the City Council of Anytown, USA, nor the President of the United States can’t change that. Period. Case closed. No interpretation necessary.

But today four so-called Americans assigned the duty to ensure our nation remains true to its rule of law, the U.S. Constitution, made clear their hostility and disregard for this great document. They announced clearly to all who would listen (and it’s a safe bet, I think, that if confirmed, Elena Kagan, would have joined their chorus, as well) that they are willing shamelessly to cast the Constitution aside in favor of their own leftwing worldview (without forfeiting their own armed bodyguards, of course). This is nothing new, I know, but today’s ruling just seems somehow more blatant than other more subtle, obscure, even complicated rulings of years past.

If I didn’t know plenty of people, including my own son, who have seen the Constitution in person over the last few months, I would guess that if we looked, we would find it in shreds at the bottom of the White House paper shredder having been replaced by an angelic portrait of Barack Obama. But in truth it has been shredded. In spirit if not in fiber. And it leads us to yet another sad day for America. I just don’t know how many more of these we can take.

Betsy Siino | Comments (2)

Waiting for Left-Wing Apologies to General Petraeus

June 25, 2010 | Comments (2)

Well, two days have passed since Commander-in-Chief Obama dismissed General Stanley McChrystal and handed control of the Afghanistan theater of the war on terror over to General David Petraeus. Two days, and I have yet to hear an apology from Obama or Hillary or any of their kindred left-wing spirits in Congress, who just months ago referred to General Petraeus as a failure as Commander of the war in Iraq, and joined forces with those who would refer to him gleefully and oh-so-cleverly as General “Betray-us.”

While I am waiting for this apology (and not holding my breath), I imagine what I presume the scene  might have been two days ago in the editorial offices of Rolling Stone. I imagine the staffers, editors and writers gathered around an office television, hanging on the every golden word of their beloved Obama. As soon as they hear that magical announcement — ding, dong, McChrystal is gone – deafening cheers, joyous high-fives and leaps into the air erupt in response, all-out celebration for the death blow they have so successfully dealt the U.S. military.

But then, one in their midst, his eyes and ears still directed toward the tube, calls for them to cease and desist in their revelry. Face ashen and drawn, he calls their attention back to their beloved O. They watch in silence. In shock. They can’t believe what they are hearing. David what? The Betrayer in Afghanistan? No! The celebration has ended as suddenly as it began. And this time, whether they and their fearless leader in the White House care to acknowledge it or not, their nemesis, the U.S. military, won’t be so easily taken down.

In fact, at this very moment rumors are flying that General Petraeus agreed to take over in Afghaniston only on condition that he can alter the notorious rules of engagement that have severely curtailed our warriors’ abilities to carry out their missions and to protect themselves on the ground. I’m sure these rumors have not escaped those Rolling Stone staffers, who, should the rumors prove to be true, fear they won’t have another cause for celebration any time soon.

Betsy Siino | Comments (2)

General McChrystal’s Dismissal and a Failing President’s Panic

June 23, 2010 | Comments (4)
So General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of our U.S. troops in Afghanistan, is summoned to the White House to explain comments critical of the Obama administration in Rolling Stone Magazine. The military hit piece insinuates that the General and his inner circle are not all that pleased with Obama and his minions (even though he, the General, allegedly voted for Obama). General McChrystal is summarily dismissed by Commander-in-Chief Obama, a man unworthy even to lick the combat boots of this American hero, who for decades has upheld his Constitutional oath to protect this nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

And I say, thank you, General McChrystal. Perhaps by your own design, you find yourself playing a key role in this flagging President’s pathetic effort to suggest he is a leader in a time when his incompetence is being showcased in circus-like clarity to America and the world. Perhaps you and your staff were insubordinate in even considering (for whatever reason) speaking with Rolling Stone, but you are no fool, Sir, and I am confident you knew exactly what you were doing.

For months I have ranted that our military cannot possibly respect this man they are forced to regard as their Commander-in-Chief. Perhaps this recent event, then, is a message, a sign sent to us from our troops, reassuring us that despite their mandated courtesy, the military at large does not in any way respect or trust this radical left-wing administration and the man at their helm.

We have seen glimmers of this, particularly in the less-than-boisterous response our military tends to offer the President when he enters a room. This occurred most recently, when the light applause that greeted Obama for his West Point commencement address forced him to delete a reference to overwhelming cheers from his telepromptered speech. It’s downright laughable to imagine that this anti-war, anti-military “community organizer,” who surrounds himself only with like-minded sixties throwbacks (“wimps,” their critics in Rolling Stone called them) would somehow believe that the greatest military force in the world would follow them blindly in their efforts to bring our great nation to her knees.

Nevertheless, Obama today justified his dismissal of a man so blatantly his superior in a phony, hawkish speech, insisting, without any shred of authenticity, that he values debate among his team and that he reveres the greatness of America and her military. If he says it, he figures once again, we will believe.  And, once again, he is wrong. In fact, early response to his latest phony speech indicates that far too many Americans for Obama’s comfort are once again viewing him, his words and his actions as wrong, ineffectual and dangerous.

 Obama has told us, as well, that General David Petraeus will be taking the reins in Afghanistan. In his phony-hawk speech Obama sang General Petraeus’ praises, apparently hoping we’ll forget those halcyon days when he counted himself among the tyrants in our government who referred to this American hero as General “Betrayus” and treated him with abject disrespect when he testified before Congress about our troops’ success in Iraq. But we won’t forget, Mr. Obama. Ever. And you can bet that despite whatever you discussed today, General Petraeus hasn’t forgotten either.

The bottom line here is that this is simply another wrench thrown into Obama’s ongoing troubles that seem to be spiraling out of control by the day. And, as with all the pathetic, face-saving, panic-driven decisions he makes, he will soon be reminded yet again that there are consequences to his unique blend of thuggery and ineptitude.

Though Barack Obama attempted to appear strong and decisive to the masses today (his expression revealing another truth), his decision unleashed a man of true leadership and heroism who can squish him like a bug, both literally and with his now-liberated freedom of speech. The General has street cred among us “regular Americans” that the current occupant of the White House will never have. Despite General McChrystal’s alleged vote for Obama – which, frankly, I find the most shocking element of this entire story – I have a feeling the General  will do much in the months ahead to make amends for a vote that helped to sentence our nation to Obama’s twisted dominion.

In the meantime, as we await the fallout of General McChrystal’s dismissal and a failing President’s panic, my prayers remain with our troops in Afghanistan. Once again they find themselves pawns in an insidious game of wonton D.C. decisions that place political aspirations and posturing above their safety, their security, and their dedication to protecting our United States. May God be with them. May God be with us all.

Betsy Siino | Comments (4)

Obama Tries to Be Manly and the Left Goes Gaga

June 11, 2010 | Comments (0)

Following the advice of his handlers, pollsters and a bunch of celebrities, Barack Obama tried to get tough this week and “show his anger” with the oil-spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico by dropping the A-word. Apparently the belatedly scripted shot of him walking along an oil-spattered beach in his spindly designer suit, his dress shirt rolled up at the sleeves, concern emanating from his furrowed brow, just wasn’t enough to suggest that he is powerful and competent.

But once he dropped that A-word, making it clear he would be finding whom to blame (rather than finding solutions), his minions in the lapdog media went wild, cooing that their President had not only exploded in emotion, but had also given the masses a quintessential show of masculinity. To be fair, they really aren’t all that familiar with masculinity, so I suppose they can be forgiven for so blatantly misidentifying it here, yet it’s sad to think that Chris Matthews’ leg is probably still tingling.

Of course, those of us who do admire true masculinity, and still consider real men to be valuable assets to our culture, found Obama’s attempt to show some belated manly behavior in response to this devastating tragedy inappropriate, completely lacking in leadership, and downright embarrassing. We the people would have preferred to see him jump on the disaster at its onset; acknowledge its potential impact; and pass up a few tee-times, fundraisers, teleprompted speeches, and rock concerts in the White House. Oh, and for the record, Mr. President, a real man, a genuine American leader, would have told the aging Beatle that it was not the time, nor certainly the place, to bash the man who occupied the Oval Office before you did. Now that would have made my leg tingle.

When not tingling over their President’s show of manliness, the lapdogs are similarly celebrating the masculinity of Joe McGinniss, the so-called journalist who has courageously moved in next door to Sarah Palin to spy on her and her family and gather dirt. Again: What can you expect from a gaggle of clowns who have only the likes of Keith Olbermann, our tingly friend Chris, and David Letterman (to name only a few) as their masculine role models?

Unfortunately, it’s a lost cause even to imagine the left ever figuring out that stalking, cursing, blaming, avoiding, evading and hand-wringing do not a real man make. Nor are they components of a leader, particularly an American leader. And a leader, man or woman, is what we Americans need right now. We need a fearless American at the helm of our nation who genuinely loves, respects and cherishes this country and her laws. These are qualities that cannot be faked. We know them when we see them, and we look forward to the day when we will see them in the White House, in the halls of Washington, and in the State Houses and City Halls of this great nation once more. We pray that day will come soon.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)