Amb. Stevens Are You Better Off?

---
 Sen.Perry, highlighting the greatness of Obama's foreign policy at the DNC, told the audience:" ask Osama are you better off?" Would Perry now say the same to our murdered Ambassador and his three staff associates?
---
DeBorchgrave concludes Islamists up, Obama Down!  (See 1 below.)

---

Obama to Netanyahu - please go away you are interfering with my campaign.  (See 2 below.)

---
A Football Question
Last year.....after the Packers / Bills game, Buffalo released quarterback Trent Edwards.
During the Packers / Eagles game, the Packers injured Philadelphia quarterback Kevin Kolb.
Philadelphia then had to play backup quarterback Michael Vick.
During a playoff game against the Eagles, the Packers injured Michael Vick and another backup was needed.
After the Packers / Cowboys game, Dallas fired Wade Phillips and most of his staff .
After the Packers / Vikings game, Minnesota fired Brad Childress and most of his staff.
Four weeks after losing to the Packers, the 49er's coach Mike Singletary and most of his staff were fired and replaced.
During the Bears Playoff game, the Packers injured Jay Cutler and backup Todd Collins forcing the
Bears to go with 3rd string quarterback Caleb Hanie.
So here's the question..... .............
Scroll Down






Is it just me, or did the Packers create more jobs last year than Obama?
---

PJTV: "Poliwood -- Dinesh D'Souza: The Author & Filmmaker the White House Can No Longer Ignore

Roger L. Simon and Lionel Chetwynd are joined in studio by best-selling author and filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza. D'Souza explains why he decided to take a page from the Michael Moore playbook and release a powerful documentary during an election season. Why has his film, "2016: Obama's America," become the second-highest grossing political documentary of all time? And how can PJTV viewers help the film do even better? Find out."

--

Obama lucked out and avoided a Carter episode. 

Instead of killing the Ambassador and his associates what would have been the situation had they kept them alive and in captivity?  (See  3 below.)

---

Romney, end of the line for Republicans and the nation?  (See 4 below.)

---

Dick

--------------------------------------------------------

1)As Islamists Rise, U.S. on Path to Nowhere

By Arnaud de Borchgrave

WASHINGTON (UPI) -- The round-the-clock killing of U.S. military advisers by Afghan soldiers they are training coupled with some $200 million worth of jet fighters and attack helicopters destroyed in a heavily fortified allied base in Afghanistan by Taliban guerrillas disguised in U.S. military uniforms are the latest reminders that 11 years of fighting have strengthened rather than weakened the Islamist enemy.

With more than 70 percent of the American people polled saying they are against the Afghan war as well as prolonging it to the end of 2014, the time to reassess the NATO commitment -- originally made to punish al-Qaida and chase it out of Afghanistan, not to wet-nurse a feudal society into democracy -- is past overdue.

The killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three Americans in charge of protecting him, followed by anti-U.S. demonstrations more than one-third of the way round the planet, from Southeast and South Asia to the Middle East and North Africa, triggered a barrage of unhelpful cliches in the U.S. presidential campaign.

Clearly, it was not an amateurish 15-minute YouTube posting that portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a depraved alcoholic that triggered the geopolitical earthquake. Al-Qaida networks, deemed defunct by some U.S. experts, are alive and ready to kick in when the opportunity arises.

The Syrian civil war -- also known as the uprising -- started March 15, 2011. Al-Qaida elements, based in Iraq, came in to what is now a civil war against the regime of Bashar Assad. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are supplying arms and funds to rebel forces. Toll thus far: an estimated 25,000 killed. That's also the number his father killed in less than a week in February 1982 to suppress an Islamist rebellion in Hama.

Iran relies heavily on the Assad regime as a transmission belt to its allies, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. Presumably to ensure the survival of this extremist axis the commanding general of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Ali Jafari, announced last weekend at a major news conference that some Iranian special forces were in both Syria and Lebanon.

Fearful that this might provide Israel with a fresh pretext for intervening against Syria, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast quickly dismissed what Jafari had just said to a worldwide TV audience as "false."

The close alignment of Republican candidate Mitt Romney with Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu's tough talk on the forthcoming need to take out Iran's budding nuclear weapons capability, has rattled Iran's civilian government. But not the Revolutionary Guards. They have staged maneuvers in the Persian Gulf designed to mine the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil route.

From Israel, Netanyahu used football analogies on NBC to persuade Democrats and U.S. President Barack Obama that the time to bomb Iran's nuclear installations is now: "You can't let them score a touchdown because that would have unbelievable consequences for the peace and security of us all, of the world really."

The U.S. intelligence community believes Iran is still a year away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon deliverable by missile.

If this week's global Muslim earthquake is a 5 on the Richter scale, a 9 (10,000 times stronger) is what some geopolitical experts believe would be the global reaction to Israeli air and sea (submarine missiles from the Gulf of Aden) bombing of some of Iran's nuclear installations.

Some experts are fearful Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barack may choose the closing stages of the U.S. presidential campaign when Romney would applaud and Obama would also applaud, lest he be tarred with the appeasement brush -- and lose the White House to Romney.

This, in turn, would make the United States Public Enemy No. 1 throughout the Arab world.

Recent explosions have demonstrated yet again that the Arab world isn't on a glide path to Western-style democracy.

Another hard to escape conclusion is that the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank is more mirage than even distant possibility.

With the $1 trillion geopolitical mistake in Iraq, where Iran today has more influence than the United States, and the $500 billion (thus far) boondoggle in Afghanistan, it is almost too late to heed the advice of George Shultz, a man who has had four different Cabinet posts (including Treasury and State), taught at three of the country's greatest universities, when he asks in a joint op-ed with four other senior fellows at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (all former heads of major policy positions in Washington), in The Wall Street Journal:

"Did you know that annual spending by the federal government (gave us) an unprecedented string of federal budget deficits, $1.4 trillion in 2009, $1.3 trillion in 2010, $1.3 trillion in 2011 and another $1.2 trillion on the way this year. The four-year increase in borrowing amounts to $55,000 per U.S. household."

The five musketeers said U.S. problems "are close to being unmanageable now. If we stay on the current path, they will wind up being completely unmanageable, culminating in an unwelcome explosion and crisis." Q.E.D.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2)-The real reason Obama snubbed Netanyahu

By Edward Klein

L

[Iran is] six months away from being about 90 percent of having the rich uranium for an atom bomb. I think that you have to place that red line before them now, before it’s too late.

—Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to David Gregory on NBC’s "Meet the Press"

One of the most enduring myths about Barack Obama is that he’s been a better foreign policy president than a domestic one. Given his feeble record at home, that isn’t saying much. And now, after the wholesale collapse of his “soft diplomacy” throughout the Muslim world, that myth has finally been shattered.

Indeed, when it comes to foreign policy, it’s amateur hour in the White House. This rank amateurism was on full display in the confusing and contradictory manner with which Obama treated the two most important leaders in the Middle East— Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu of Israel and Mohammed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt.

The current Islamic rage against America began in Egypt, and the American embassy in Cairo has been under constant assault by Morsi’s radical Islamist political partners. So how did Obama react? He agreed to reward Morsi with a private meeting at the United Nations General Assembly later this month, but flatly turned down a request for a get-together with America’s chief ally in the region, Netanyahu.

Netanyahu has made no secret of the fact that he doesn’t trust Obama, and the president has been equally candid that he despises the outspoken Netanyahu. The White House didn’t even try to come up with a valid excuse for the president’s snub of Netanyahu. It said that the president would arrive in New York for the UN on Monday, September 24 and depart on Tuesday, September 25, and Netanyahu wouldn’t arrive in New York until later in the week. But that explanation didn’t wash, because Netanyahu offered to go to Washington if New York wasn’t convenient.

With less than two months remaining in the presidential campaign, Obama was in no mood to be lectured in public by Netanyahu about America’s ineffectual approach to stopping Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. But according to my sources in Jerusalem and Washington, the real reason Obama gave Netanyahu the brush off, was political, no diplomatic.

David Axelrod and his Chicago campaign team reckoned that if Obama agreed to meet with Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister would feel obliged to appear even-handed in the American presidential race and meet with Obama’s Republican challenger, Mitt Romney. The last thing the Axelrod gang wanted to see were side-by-side front-page photos of Bibi’s chilly reception at the White House contrasted with his warm embrace by Romney. Netanyahu and Romney have a close relationship that dates back to their work together at the Boston Consulting Group in the mid-1970s. That friendship has been cemented by Romney’s trips to Israel, where he has dined with Netanyahu and his wife, and by the friends they have in common both in Israel and the United States.

The Obama campaign operation is convinced that Netanyahu is grossly interfering in the American presidential election.

Netanyahu, according to their theory, wants Romney to win the election because he shares Netanyahu’s hawkish views on Iran. What’s more, the Israeli prime minister’s constant complaints about America’s approach to Iran are viewed by Axelrod & Co. as an effort to portray Obama as a weak leader.

Furthermore, the Axelrod operation believes that Netanyahu is somehow in cahoots with a major Republican effort to influence Jewish voters to abandon Obama and vote for Romney. The Chicago operatives point to the fact that the Republican Jewish Coalition is spending $6.5 million in advertisements to influence the Jewish vote in swing states like Florida.

Jews represent only 4 percent of the population in Florida, but because they vote at a disproportionately higher rate than other groups, they account for 7 to 8 percent of the total vote. Obama got 78 percent of that vote in 2008. Current polls put him at 68 percent or lower among Jews in Florida. If Obama's margin is reduced by 10 percentage points, that would translate to 85,000 lost votes. In a close election, the Jewish vote could make a difference in who wins Florida— and the presidential election—and Obama would have no one to blame but himself.

Edward Klein is the former editor in chief of The New York Times Magazine. His latest book is "The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House." (Regnery 2012)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)---

This is our U.S. Ambassador to Libya being dragged through the streets before being murdered. (Could notpost the picture and just as well) An American Ambassador, J. Christoph er Stevens, -diplomat, father, husband, American Citizen- being dragged through the streets of Benghazi,Libya. What does the Prez do? The President does NOTHING! . . . . He  go's to Las Vegas for a fund raiser, and then two more this Saturday. This is an act of war.  ...at least, it SHOULD be.  To our president it's just another act of violence by the "peaceful" Muslims. He and the Sec'y of State have already apologized !!  Un-freaking-believable!! This government is so stupid - they will send them another $6.3 Billion in foreign aid. This is horrible, outrageous and very sad.   Can it get any worse? - - - I dread what is coming next.

---
4)

Romney May Be the End of the Line for the Republican Establishment

• 
 
• Scott Rasmussen

Mitt Romney's comments about 47 percent of Americans being dependent on government and locked in to vote for President Obama highlight a fundamental reality in American politics today: The gap between the American people and the political class is bigger than the gap between Republicans and Democrats in Washington, D.C.

Romney's remarks are the GOP equivalent of Obama's notorious comments about small-town Pennsylvania voters bitterly clinging to their guns and religion.

Both Romney and Obama highlighted the condescending attitude that political elites hold of the people they want to rule over. A National Journal survey found that 59 percent of political insiders don't think voters know enough to have meaningful opinions on the important issues of the day. That's a handy rationalization for those who want to ignore the voters and impose their own agenda.

In the nation's capital, this gap creates bigger problems for Republicans than Democrats. Democratic voters tend to think that their representatives in Congress do a decent job representing them. That's because Democrats are a bit more comfortable with the idea of government playing a leading role in American society. However, 63 percent of Republican voters believe their representatives in Washington are out of touch with the party base.

Establishment Republicans in Washington broadly share the Democrats' view that the government should manage the economy. They may favor a somewhat more pro-business set of policies than their Democratic colleagues, but they still act as if government policy is the starting point for all economic activity.

Republican voters reject this view. They are more interested in promoting free market competition rather than handing out favors to big business. They detest corporate welfare and government bailouts, even though their party leaders support them.

The GOP base sees government as a burden that weighs the private sector down rather than a tool that can generate growth if used properly. Ninety-six percent of Republican voters believe that the best thing the government can do to help the economy is to cut spending and free up more money for the private sector.

The Republican base is looking for someone like a 21st century Ronald Reagan, who will display his faith in the American people. The Washington Republicans are more comfortable with politicians like George W. Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney. Though the establishment has dominated the party since Reagan left the White House, the 2012 election could well be the end of the line.

If Romney loses in November, the Republican base will no longer buy the electability argument for an establishment candidate. From the view of the base, the elites will have given away an eminently winnable election. Someone new, from outside of Washington, will be the party's nominee in 2016.

If Romney wins and does nothing to change the status quo, the economy will falter. He will end up as the second straight one-term president, and the nation will desperately be searching for an authentic outsider in 2016.

If he wins the White House, the only way for Romney to succeed will be to side with the nation's voters and throw out the club in Washington. That will be great news for the country but bad news for political insiders on both sides of the partisan aisle.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------