With American sentiment toward Barack Obama going south
since the great debate and since the massacre at Benghazi, President Obama has
put special forces troops on alert, ostensibly to make a strike against the
terrorists responsible if they can be identified and found. Fox News is reporting that Obama is weighing
his options and political ramifications.
COMMENTS:
Once again, I am compelled to remind you about the Iranian
nuclear ambitions. I’ve been saying for
months now that should Obama be slipping in the polls, we could expect a
preemptive strike on Iranian missile sites shortly before the election. I also pointed out that there had been a quiet
buildup of American Naval forces in the Strait of Hormuz aimed at a joint naval
exercise with Britain and other allied nations during October. That exercise was reportedly called off, but
the increased U.S. Naval presence in the strait has remained. Whether or not the terrorists can be
identified and/or found before the election is problematic; the location of the
Iranian nuke sites is not. I am still
inclined to think that there will be a strike against Iranian sites by us
before the end of this month. However,
it is a sad state of affairs that we would have a President so intent on
reelection that he would base his decision for either eventuality solely on
politics.
TODAY’S QUERIES & ANSWERS:
Q. How vulnerable are we to a cyber attack? (Nina ~ Davis, CA)
A. Extremely, according to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. We’ve never had a massive attack, but recent
attacks have been increasing against our banking system and government
offices. This is one of the several
reasons I do not leave my computer on for any length of time unless I am using
it. And we all need to give some serious
thought as to what we would do if the electricity went off, cell phones quit
working, ATM machines wouldn’t work and the grocery store couldn’t sell us food
because their cash registers wouldn’t work.
Q. We know that Obama is trying to decimate the coal industry
in this country. Do we really use that
much coal anymore, and if so, what for?
(Yoshiko ~ Seattle, WA)
A. Last year, with the world’s largest supply we produced
over a billion tons of coal; about 90% of that was used to make electricity and
the rest was sold to foreign nations. At the same time, electricity producers have cleaned up the coal-burning emissions. The
abundance of coal makes it relatively cheap, so if we manage to shut down the
industry our rates for electricity will certainly go up.
Q. The Obama campaign is pulling out all of the stops to try
and convince Americans that the White House did not know about the actual
on-the-ground intelligence at Benghazi, to lay the blame at the feet of the
intelligence community and to nail Romney to the cross for speaking out on the
issue. And, they seem to be stymieing any
serious investigation into the massacre.
Why? (Mitchell ~ Albany, OR)
A. For two reasons: (1) Obviously, they have something to
hide and (2) Obama never accepts the blame or criticism for anything he does; he's a psychotic twit. Late yesterday, Hillary Clinton said she would take full responsibility for what happened at Benghazi. Don't believe that for a second; she takes orders from Obama.
TODAY’S QUOTE:
“Here in the United States, we have between
250 and 300 years of a coal supply. That is more than the amount of recoverable
oil contained in the entire world.” ~ Tim Holden
TODAY’S VIDEO:
No comments:
Post a Comment