Comments on: Obama’s ‘war on inequality’ Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:37:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: kodaker Fri, 15 Feb 2013 19:26:26 +0000 Dear David Rohde,

Benghazi – Who told General Ham to “Stand Down”, and why Retire”? By John Griffing at Nov 17, 2012 7:26 AM

Just exactly what happened in Benghazi, Libya, in a terror attack that left four Americans dead, is the subject of heated national discussion—especially now that elections are complete. A critical concern is “WHO issued a Stand-Down” order under which help was not dispatched and lead to the death of our four Americans under attack from al-Qaida.
Now apparently one person who would be in a position to offer details, is Gen. Carter Ham, has allegedly made the decision to “retire.”

Already uncovered in the controversy is how there had been pleas for more security for the Americans in that location, how forces who were nearby could have responded, and how there were orders stopping that from happening.

So far the main players have given their statements, and they all “made up” facts to fit the situation so none of them can be blamed. Now Gen. Carter Ham is the ONLY person who KNOWS who told HIM not to send planes and troops but to “Stand-Down”. An order of this magnitude had to come from the White House Situation Room. Fox News reported less than a week after the attack, that Obama, Biden, Hillary and Panetta were all there when the video news of the attack came in. The order to stand-down in this kind of situation is the same as to execute them, which is punishable by Treason or at least Impeachment. Someone needs to get a sworn statement in writing from General Carter Ham who is not a politician.

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:04:01 +0000 @tmc,

Good points, well stated.

By: tmc Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:43:34 +0000 I think President Obama’s second election showed that he does indeed embody the hopes of the subsequent generations. At least for the several of them. I would say three out of five, but others will argue that I’m sure. I don’t think the author of this opinion had any thoughts of immigration in mind, but since three commenters will no doubt move it in that direction, I saw another clear (to me) association to LBJ’s time.
The vast majority of the citizens of this country believe that the Mexican border is a serious issue and needs to be addressed. But the two older and some of the middle generations view the problem from their time periods and do not understand the younger generations viewpoint at all. The younger generations are in the same dilemma, wondering why the obvious (to them) problems of the border are not being addressed by the two older generation in power.
Both want the same result, but for different reasons. To quote a line from the band Butthole Surfers, “It’s hard to see just how you look thru other people eyes”. And yes, I understand the name of that band itself is good indicator of the gulf between the elders and the millennial generations.
The Mexicans taking over and diluting our society and the whole “welfare state” arguments are directly out of the LBJ era. To the younger generations this is not the issue at all, drug cartels and global economic issue are the problem.
It is a shame we can’t get the common result accomplished because neither side will listen to the other long enough to realize they actually have the same goal.
I think the problem has changed from “To many people want to do nothing” to “We have to many people with nothing to do.”.

By: tmc Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:21:44 +0000 I think the comparisons to LBJ and his era are well said. In current times I don’t think LBJ’s methods would work. Directing government to implement things no longer works, is not effective, and more often than not results are not what was intended. All that can be done in government at this point in time is applying influence. The more a group can apply, in the right places, the more likely they can control the outcome. President Obama’s administration I think has little direct influence with the powers that control what they want to change. They are instead trying to use the public support attained through the President to apply pressure in other new ways. It appears to be confusing the older generation politicians that are still living in LBJ’s time, and trying desperately to bring it back. I don’t think they will succeed as they are also trying to use counter measures from that era too.

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 14 Feb 2013 02:03:27 +0000 “Obama emphasized the collective over the individual, and concluded by hailing the notion of “citizenship.” “This country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another,” he declared, “and to future generations.”

The man has not got the slightest understanding of the word “citizenship” when he would award such status on the eleven plus MILLION criminal fence-jumpers that followed in the footprints of three MILLION plus given amnesty in 1986 and multiplying relentlessly ever since. These people won’t assimilate, so WE now provide bilingual everything. Who pays? Not THEM. The good ol’ American taxpayer.

They flood our hospitals, our schools, our parks and playgrounds, our food banks, our prisons and our social services (with fake or stolen Social Security numbers or fake green cards sold openly in their barrio communities)and have doubled the size of the “underground economy”. For them it’s all FREE!

For all this they “return” pennies on the dollar to our GDP. Much of their “earnings” go untaxed, and much is sent to Mexico and points south instead of dominoing through OUR economy three or four times like “normal” wages. They accept no obliation to anyone but themselves.

Their tastes and intentions and aims and desires and wishes and hopes are NOT those of the Greatest Generation or subsequent American generations. But today all bow to the future masters of this country (until it falls on it’s face).