FYI -

My letter to the Libertarian Party.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Good morning.  I hope this e-mail finds you all doing well.  I wanted to take the time to write concerning Vice Chairman Arvin Vohra's recent comments concerning the military.  A little about myself, I am a thirty-five year old husband and father.  I am a former U.S. Marine and four-tour Iraq War veteran.  Currently, I work as a patrol division deputy sheriff.  After being raised as a fiscally conservative, blue dog Democrat, I discovered libertarianism and the Libertarian Party in 2008 thanks to Ron Paul's presidential campaign.  While living in North Carolina, I served on their state LP executive committee.  I served as a libertarian minded Republican county commissioner in Bledsoe County, TN.  Currently, I am the Bledsoe County, TN LP county chairman, and I am contemplating running for Bledsoe County Sheriff, as a libertarian, in 2018.  With all of that being said, being a member of the Libertarian Party lately has been somewhat awkward and disheartening.  I'm a Christian, a combat veteran, and a cop.  I am proudly all of those things, but I am also proudly for the legalization of Marijuana, pro-LGBT, and I love guns.  I think Gary Johnson and Bill Weld were great candidate's, even though "pure" libertarians did not.  I am a supporter and fan of Mr. Wayne Allyn Root, and I think that he was forced out of the party, even though his relentlessness and mindset could have helped us win elections.  I found Mr. Vohra's comments uneducated and repugnant.  Since I read the news story, I've struggled with my political identity and wondered if I'm, once again, politically homeless.  I have teetered on the edge of resigning from the party, but after a lot of soul searching and an outstanding run this morning, I have concluded that, if I and others like me, leave the LP, Mr. Vohra wins.  Bluntly, if people like me were actually mindless murderers, Mr. Vohra would probably no longer be breathing after his comments.  The fact that he's still above ground, shows that the issue is a little more complicated than that.  I will continue my membership in the Libertarian Party in order to serve as a voice for a small, but growing section of the party, and I'll say this, if the Libertarian Party really wants to grow and win elections, we need to embrace the big tent theory, and we need to come to the table with those with the background like mine.

Very respectfully,

Aaron Yeargan

Is Erik Prince A Small "L" Libertarian?

This is an interesting piece concerning the future use of private security contractors in a free market.  I recommend anyone that's interested in Erik Prince, BlackWater, or their business model read his book, Civilian Warriors.





-ADY"A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Ron Paul On The ISIS Threat.

FYI - From Dr. Ron Paul and The Ron Paul Channel/Voices of Liberty.




#LibertyRepublican




#LiveFree




-ADY"A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Gov. Gary Johnson on the NSA, Drones, and the Tea Party.

FYI - Gov. Gary Johnson on Russia Today TV.

#LiveFree

#PushBack

#LeftLibertarian

#ClassicLiberal

#ProgressiveLibertarian

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Ron Paul: An Opening to Iran?

FYI - From Dr. Ron Paul/The Ron Paul Institute.

#LiveFree

#LeftLibertarian

#ProgressiveLibertarian

#ClassicLiberal

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"


       

An Opening to Iran?

Sunday October 6, 2013

Last week, for the first time since the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US president spoke with his Iranian counterpart. Their 15 minute telephone call was reported to open the door to further high-level discussions. This is a very important event.

I have been saying for years that we should just talk to the Iranians. After all, we talked to the Soviets when they actually had thousands of nuclear missiles pointed at us! The Iranians have none, according to our own intelligence services. I even suggested a few years ago that we should “offer friendship” to them. Unfortunately, so many so-called experts have a stake in keeping tensions high and pushing us to war. They did not want to hear what I was saying. It seems, though, this is beginning to change now with these recent events.

The phone call was one of the most important moves away from war and conflict in a long time. Taken with the Obama administration’s decision to hold off on bombing Syria, we should be encouraged.

It is also probably a good sign that this phone call has infuriated the neoconservatives at home, the pro-war faction in Israel, and the hard-liners in Iran. Now that a process of negotiation has begun, the chance of war has been significantly reduced. The US is very unlikely to bomb Iran while it is talking with them, and Israel is also unlikely to start a war while the US is at the negotiating table with the Iranian leadership.

But we should also remain very cautious. Obama’s war on Syria was only stopped because the American people finally stood up and said “enough.” The message was received loud and clear and it shocked the neocons pushing war. They were used to being in charge of foreign policy.

In a recent CNN poll, more than 75% of Americans favored negotiations with Iran. This is very good news, but those pushing for war will not give up that easily. Believe it or not, some Members of Congress have recently introduced legislation to authorize war on Iran – even as these first steps toward a peaceful resolution of our differences begin to bear fruit!

So no, they will not give up that easily. There are many in the president’s own Cabinet who do not want to see US/Iranian relations improve. Even the president himself seems unable to avoid provocative statements -- such as his claim that the Iranians are only willing to talk because the sanctions have been so successful in bringing them to the table. That is a false and unnecessary boast, and if he continues in such a way he will destroy what progress has been made.

But we are in the majority now. There are more than three-quarters of us who do not want war on Iran. It is essential that we keep the pressure on the Administration to ignore the war demands in both political parties and among the so-called foreign policy experts. There will be much more war propaganda coming our way as the warmongers get more desperate. Americans must see this propaganda for what it is. They should educate themselves and become familiar with alternative news sources to gain the tools to counter the propaganda. We do have a better chance at peace, but this is no time to let down our guard!

Copyright © 2013, Ron Paul. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted provided full credit is given and a live link provided.  

Ron Paul on the Budget Showdown: A Grand Bargain for Liberty?

FYI - From Rep. Ron Paul/The Ron Paul Institute.

#LiveFree

#LeftLibertarian

#ProgressiveLibertarian

#ClassicLiberal


-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

                   

A Grand Bargain for Liberty?

Sunday September 29, 2013

As I write this, it appears that the federal government is about to shut down because the House and Senate cannot agree on whether to add language defunding or delaying Obamacare to the “Continuing Resolution”. Despite all the hand-wringing heard in DC, a short-term government shut down (which doesn’t actually shut down the government) will not cause the country to collapse.
And the American people would benefit if Obamacare was defeated or even delayed.

Obamacare saddles the American health care system with new spending and mandates which will raise the price and lower the quality of health care. Denying funds to this program may give Congress time to replace this bill with free-market reforms that put patients and physicians back in charge of health care. Defunding the bill before it becomes implemented can spare the American people from falling under the worst effects of this law.

As heartened as we should be by the fight against Obamacare, we should be equally disheartened by the fact that so few in DC are talking about making real cuts in federal spending. Even fewer are talking about reductions in the most logical place to reduce spending: the military-industrial complex.

 The US military budget constitutes almost 50 percent of the total worldwide military spending.  Yet to listen to some in Congress, one would think that America was one canceled multi-million dollar helicopter contract away from being left totally defenseless.

What makes this military spending impossible to justify is that is does not benefit the American people. Instead, by fomenting resentment and hatred among the world population, our costly interventionist foreign policy makes our people less safe. Thus, reducing spending on militarism would not only help balance the budget, but would enhance our security.

Yet both the House and the Senate continuing resolutions not only fail to reduce military spending, they actually authorize $20 billion more in military spending than authorized by the “sequestration” created by the 2011 Budget Control Act.  Most of the supposedly “draconian” sequestration cuts are not even cuts; instead, they are "reductions in the planed rate of spending.” This is where Congress increases spending but by less than originally planned—and yet they claim to cut spending.

Under sequestration, military spending increases by 18 percent instead of by 20 percent over the next ten years. Yet some so-called conservatives are so opposed to these phony cuts in military spending that they would support increased taxes and increased welfare “military” spending. This “grand bargain” would benefit the DC political class and the special interests, but it would be a disaster for the American people.

Instead of grand bargains of increased spending and taxes, those of us who support limited government and free markets should form a coalition with antiwar liberals to reduce spending on both the military industrial complex and domestic welfare programs. Instead of raising taxes on “the rich” we should also work to reduce all corporate subsidies. This “grand bargain” would truly be a win-win for the American people.

Sadly, even if a congressional coalition to cut both warfare and welfare spending was formed, it would be unlikely to carry the day as long as the Federal Reserve is willing to enable Congress’s debt addiction by monetizing the debt. But this cannot last forever. At some point the Fed’s policies will result in hyper-inflation and an economic crisis that will force Congress to reduce spending.

Hopefully, the growing number of Americans who are awaking to the dangers of our current path can convince Congress to reduce overseas militarism and begin an orderly drawdown of the welfare state before this crisis occurs

Gov. Gary Johnson's statement on U.S. intervention in Syria.

FYI - From The Office of Gov. Gary Johnson.

#LiveFree

#ProgressiveLibertarian

#PushBack

#LeftLibertarian

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Gov. Gary Johnson released the following statement concerning U.S. intervention in Syria:


“No one disagrees that the use of chemical weapons in Syria is despicable, and the results tragic. However, those facts alone do not make going to war either justified or even a good idea. And while the Administration can parse words all day long, launching missiles or dropping bombs constitutes going to war.

“There is no clear U.S. interest in what is, in reality, a civil war on the other side of the globe. Likewise, there is nothing to indicate at this time that intervening in that civil war will benefit anyone -- either here in America or in Syria.

“The consequences of our military actions in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan should be a lesson to President Obama and others who appear determined to act without any meaningful strategic or national defense justification.”

FYI - From Cristy Lenz/CNN.com.

#LiveFree

#NeverForget

#BringThemHome

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Captured U.S. soldier's letter revives family's hopes

From Cristy Lenz, CNN

updated 7:41 AM EDT, Thu June 6, 2013

In 2012: Honoring POW Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Letter: "He was no doubt alive"
• "They are being very careful with him," Bergdahl's father writes
• Bergdahl was captured after he finished his guard shift
• His father believes a resolution is "getting closer"

(CNN) -- The family of Bowe Bergdahl, a U.S. soldier captured by the Taliban in 2009, received a letter from him recently -- reviving their hopes that the 27-year-old army sergeant is still alive.

Bergdahl's father mentioned receiving the letter in an e-mail exchange with Dwight Murphy, the spokesman for the local POW/MIA group in Boise Valley, Idaho.

 

"We have received a letter from Bowe through the Red Cross!" the father says in the exchange. "He was scripted and redacted but he was no doubt alive and his faculties fully functioning as of two months ago."

 

He did not say when he got the letter, but Murphy copied and pasted the exchange with the father on his Facebook page after receiving his permission to do so.

2012: Challenges of POW negotiations

2012: Remembering prisoners of war

 

The father's letter goes on say, "They are being very careful with him. He is still highly valued at high levels.

 

"Guantanamo, drones and politics in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Washington are still the big issues."

CNN was unable to reach the father late Wednesday night. The network also reached out to the military and the International Committee for the Red Cross for confirmation, but did not hear back.

Last week, the military told CNN it had no reason to believe Bergdahl was dead.

 

In 2012: Parents of captured soldier lead Washington motorcycle rally

 

Whereabouts unclear

Bergdahl was captured after he finished his guard shift at a combat outpost in southeastern Paktika province in Afghanistan.

 

Since his capture, four videos of the Idaho native have been released.

But the last video was sent in February 2011, and it's unclear where Bergdahl is being held now.

He was a private at the time.

 

The army has been giving Bergdahl promotions that would have come to him had his army career gone as planned. If he returns home safely, the army will give him all the back pay that he has earned while in captivity.

 

His father has rarely spoken to the media.

Bowe Bergdahl, an adventurer and gentleman

 

Resolution close?

In his exchange with Murphy, he said he believed "we are getting closer to a resolution."

But, he added, there seems to be a disagreement among the Taliban about the direction forward.

 

"It appears at least several parties want to arbitrate captive SGT Bowe, several others ... want to keep fighting until every single Westerner is out," the father said.

 

Last year, Bergdahl's parents led the Rolling Thunder ride in Washington, and said the family holds out hope for his safe return.

 

"Bowe, your family has not forgotten you, your hometown has not forgotten you. Your state of Idaho has not forgotten you, and thanks to all of you here today, Washington D.C. has not forgotten you," his father told a cheering crowd.

 

"We love you, we are proud of you. Stay strong, never give up. We pray for the day that we welcome you home," he said.

 

Flanked by riders wanting to offer support for the safe return of his son, Bergdahl spoke separately to CNN. He sported a long beard and wore a bandana imprinted with "POW." His son's official status is listed as "missing/captured."

 

"The beard is a chronology," Bergdahl said, "of my son's captivity since June 30, 2009."

Adam Kokesh on Sequestration vs. Marine & Navy "readiness."

FYI - From Adam Kokesh/AdamvstheMan.com and YouTube.com.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

War with North Korea is not the answer.

FYI - From Kevin Carson/C4SS and The Daily Anthenaeum. -ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues" War with North Korea is not the answer By Kevin Carson In a C4SS op-ed on the Korean "crisis" ("I’m Already Against the NextWar, and You Should Be Too," April 4), Tom Knapp wrote, regarding his negative impressions of North Korea:"most of what I think I know about it is really just what other governments choose to tell me. And those other governments routinely lie – to everyone, about everything, day in and day out, as a matter of policy …" The current war scare drummed up by the US government (and by cable news – if there’s any difference) fully bears out Knapp’s skepticism. Let’s take a closer look behind the official version of events in Korea over the past several decades: The standard framing of the Korean War is an unambiguous, unprovoked aggression by the North, beginning with a sudden and massive invasion across the Demarcation Line. But in fact the years leading up to the war featured constant cross-border incursions by both sides, often involving thousands of troops. The North Korean version of events was that the Seoul regime had conducted a large-scale artillery bombardment across the border on the 23rd and 24th, followed by a surprise South Korean raid on the town of Haeju. The American military status report at nightfall June 25 said the North Koreans had captured all territory three miles south of the Imjin River — except for the area of the "Haeju counterattack." John Gunther, in his biography of MacArthur, recounts being informed by a high-ranking member of the American occupation on the 25th: "A big story has just broken. The South Koreans have attacked North Korea!" As war broke out, South Korean dictator Syngman Rhee ordered the massacre of at least 100,000 leftist dissidents with the acquiescence of the US military command. The victims included tens of thousands of political prisoners imprisoned by Rhee in the preceding years. The regime emptied its prisons, lined up the prisoners and shot them, dumping their bodies into hastily dug trenches. US military officers were present at some of these mass killings; the US military actually photographed some of them. By way of background, the Korean system of governance that had emerged in the vacuum left by Japan’s 1945 withdrawal was a loose federation of self-governing communes, in which the large and influential Korean anarchist movement played a major role. Soviet and American military authorities, in their respective spheres, quickly put an end to this. The Americans, obviously suspicious of anarchists or leftists of any kind, encouraged dispossessed aristocrats to form a military regime which imprisoned by the tens of thousands the anarchists it had dispossessed and, in a few years’ time, took advantage of the war to finish them off once and for all. Fast forward to the present: Kim Jong Un’s threats of nuclear retaliation against American targets take place against the backdrop of large-scale joint US-South Korean naval exercises inside NorthKorean territorial waters. The US claims them as South Korean waters based solely on a demarcation line unilaterally drawn by the United States at the end of the Korean War. The US-drawn line is not confirmed by any treaty or recognized by any international body. And by the normal standards for calculating territorial waters under international law, North Korea’s claims to the waters in which the exercises took place are entirely legitimate. So, viewing events from outside the distorting ideological prism of official US statements and their parrots in the media, what really happened is that North Korea responded to an enormous provocation and a credible threat by warning of retaliation in the event of attack. "OK," you may be saying. "But even if all that stuff’s true, responding to an offshore provocation in North Korean waters with bluster about nuclear targets in the US is kind of nuts, isn’t it?" Well, it’s certainly immoral. For one state to respond to another state’s military aggression by killing, or threatening to kill, its civilian population is monstrous. And if it’s monstrous, it’s monstrous when anyone does it. It would also be monstrous if some purely hypothetical country, the only country in the world with atomic weapons, used them to kill several hundred thousand civilians in two Japanese cities. It would be monstrous if some purely hypothetical country with hundreds of long-range bombers had had, as its official military policy, making first use of nuclear weapons and hitting every major population center in the USSR in retaliation for a conventional incursion into Western Europe. The US government is a state. And lying – deliberately, shamelessly – whenever it serves their interests is what states do. Don’t let millions die for a lie.

Rep. Ron Paul Answers The Iran Nuke Question.

FYI - Rep. Ron Paul on the Danny Bishop Show.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Senator Rand Paul to President: "Where The Hell Where The Marines?"

FYI - From The Washington Times and Senator Rand Paul.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

PAUL: Where were the Marines?

Buck stops with Obama in Benghazi security breach

By Sen. Rand Paul

Monday’s foreign policy debate between President Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney was designed to help voters better understand each man’s vision for America’s role abroad. While I have publicly taken issue with both candidates on aspects of their foreign policies, there is no question that Mr. Romney remains the right choice for Americans on Nov. 6.

However, it is also clear neither candidate adequately addressed the gross intelligence failure in Libya that left four Americans dead, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens. Too many important questions remain unanswered concerning Mr. Obama’s entire mishandling of the recent siege of Benghazi.

I would like to take this opportunity to ask the questions Americans want answered.

The first and most pressing question for Mr. Obama remains: Where the hell were the Marines?

Two of the most potentially vulnerable or dangerous American embassies are in Iraq and Libya. In Iraq, we have roughly 17,000 people guarding our ambassador. Not all of them are Marines, but some several hundred are, and they guard our ambassador behind a 10-foot-high walled fortress. In Iraq, we cannot afford to take any unnecessary risks with our diplomats and go to great lengths to ensure that there are plenty of armed personnel between our representatives and any potential threats.

In Libya, there were no uniformed Marines guarding our ambassador. Originally, there was a 16-person security team led by Col. Andrew Wood, who had requested to stay in Libya. In July, Stevens sent memos to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee requesting an “extension of tour of duty (TDY) personnel.” Stevens was referring to Col. Wood’s 16-man team, which was scheduled to leave in August.Stevens requested on Aug. 2 — just six weeks before his murder — to keep security personnel in Libya “through mid-September,” calling the conditions there “unpredictable, volatile and violent.”

Col. Woods has also said that he repeatedly requested to remain in Libya because he felt both the environment and the ambassador were unsafe. Now, after the tragic fact, no one knows what happened to Stevens‘ original request.

Why was the security team that both Stevens and Col. Woods requested sent home? Who made this decision?

What happened to the plane, Mr. President? There was supposed to be a DC-3 available to help people get out of Libya or to travel around the country as needed. But that plane was taken away on May 4. On May 8, just four days later, the State Department spent $108,000 on a new electrical charging station to “green up” our embassy in Vienna.

You have to ask: Was this “green” initiative more important than the security of our embassy in Libya? We spent about $1 million on electric cars to make a political statement in Vienna, but we somehow couldn’t find the time or resources to have just one Marine guarding our Libyan embassy, much less a much-needed 16-man personnel team. We spent $100,000 on an electric car-charging station to show Vienna how green we are, but did not keep a plane in Libya that could have been instrumental in transporting our own diplomats to safety.

The president now says the buck stops with him. Fair enough. So, President Obama, again: Where the hell were the Marines? Where was the plane? Saying the buck stops with you sounds good, but you have to follow through.

We’ve seen this kind of government incompetence before.

Once the initial shock and horror of Sept. 11, 2001, began to subside, the finger pointing commenced. Everyone agreed that our intelligence had failed — massively — but no one would claim responsibility for this failure. Reports of possible terrorist attacks had been repeatedly ignored, including the FBI turning down search warrants from their Minnesota branch that could have potentially provided us valuable information.

Still, after the worst terrorist attack in American history, no one was held accountable.

In 2001, 3,000 innocent people lost their lives — but not one government bureaucrat lost his job.

The siege of our embassy and the murder of our diplomats in Benghazi should never have happened. But these events did happen, and this administration continues to be reluctant to give us answers and provide accountability.

As a member of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, I am calling for hearings and a full investigation into what really happened in Benghazi, how our intelligence failed and how, ultimately, we failed to protect our own people.

What happened in Libya was inexcusable. I’m tired of hearing too many government officials make too many excuses. Those responsible must be held accountable and those at fault should be fired.

The president now says, “The buck stops here.” It’s time for him to prove it, and if he won’t, it is time for Congress to do its job and get to the bottom of it.

Sen. Rand Paul is a Kentucky Republican.

Read more: PAUL: Where were the Marines? - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/24/where-were-the-marines/#ixzz2AMSdgv7N 

Gov. Gary Johnson's Statement On The Foreign Policy Presidential Debate.

FYI - From GaryJohnson2012.com.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Gov. Gary Johnson Releases Statement On Foreign Policy Presidential Debate.

 

LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE GOV. GARY JOHNSON RELEASED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO MONDAY NIGHT’S DEBATE:

“With only two weeks to go before Election Day, it is more clear than ever that the views and concerns of millions of Americans are being shut out of this campaign by the Republicans and the Democrats. Let’s have a debate not about how much longer to remain in Afghanistan, but about why we shouldn’t bring our men and women home now. No one on the debate stage is challenging the fundamental premise of endless foreign intervention. Rather, we have two candidates agreeing with one another about flawed foreign excursions we cannot afford.

“And remarkably, we heard a continuation of the fallacy that we can somehow balance the budget while spending more on defense. It doesn’t add up.

“There is a candidate who will, in fact, challenge the status quo. But the Republicans and Democrats don’t want the American people to hear from that candidate. Doing so would spoil the ‘two-party party.’”

The Buck Stops Here! - President Obama MUST Take Responsibility For Libya!

FYI - From Tim Shoemaker/CampaignForLiberty.org.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

“The Buck Stops Here”

by Tim Shoemaker 

The tragedy in Libya on September 11, 2012 with the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens has the makings of a political firestorm this fall. The event has resulted in a spirited House Oversight hearing(while the rest of Congress is out campaigning), generated accusations of a cover-up, exposed questionable “intelligence,” and spawned a myriad of unanswered questions regarding embassy/consulate security, and the State Department’s prioritization of funding (the U.S. Embassy in Vienna, Austria received funding to “go green” while the consulate in Benghazi was denied requests for additional security personnel).

From the beginning, the administration’s response was muddled – first blaming a poorly made YouTube video negatively depicting the prophet Muhammad for inciting riots, before eventually admitting it was an act of terrorism.

Now, in an effort to deflect blame from President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told CNN that she takes responsibility for what happened in Benghazi.

Perhaps that’s honorable; but what about Truman’s famous motto: “The Buck Stops Here”?

In Truman’s farewell address, he stated poignantly, ”The President–whoever he is–has to decide. He can’t pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That’s his job.”

Others will probably remember Bush’s less eloquent way of putting it, “I’m the decider…”

The President has to be held accountable for the decisions and actions of his subordinates, particularly when he was citing bad intelligence about the YouTube video inciting anti-American violence at the United Nations. It’s bad enough the nation’s chief diplomat, Susan Rice (U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.) took to the Sunday talk shows blaming the YouTube video nearly a week after the tragedy, but when the President does it? That’s on a whole new scale.

National-security correspondent Eli Lake wrote on September 21 – ten days after the attack – that the official story was falling apart. By the 26th, he published a story citing anonymous intelligence officials who told him evidence showed within 24-hours that these were terrorist attacks organized by an al-Qaeda affiliated organization. Last Monday he wrote about a cable sent from Chris Stevens on the day he died. Most notably, it did not contain any mention of the YouTube video, or any planned protests at the consulate — as Lake points out, two key points of the official story.

At some point, the Obama Administration must be held accountable for what happened in Libya, come clean, and tell the American people the truth.

In the end, President Obama must take responsibility for the actions of his administration. The buck stops at his desk.

UPDATE: This afternoon, Obama’s campaign spokeswoman told Fox News that President Obama “takes responsibility for the safety and security of all diplomats serving overseas.” It’s one thing to have your campaign staff take responsibility for you… I’d still prefer to hear it from the President himself.

Interestingly enough, the President had that opportunity this morning, but walked away from reporters in silence.

GOV. GARY JOHNSON: ROMNEY PROMISES MORE WAR, MORE INTERVENTION.

FYI - From GaryJohnson2012.com.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Gov. Gary Johnson: Bring Our Troops Home Now

 

GOV. GARY JOHNSON: ROMNEY PROMISES MORE WAR, MORE INTERVENTION

Oct. 10, 2012, Albuquerque, NM — Speaking to students at the University of New Mexico Tuesday in Albuquerque, Libertarian presidential candidate and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson called Mitt Romney’s Monday foreign policy speech a “collection of promises to keep America embroiled in unnecessary wars and the same ill-advised interventions abroad that have done nothing to make the U.S. more secure.”

Johnson, who has called for bringing American troops home immediately from Afghanistan, said, “When you drill through the rhetoric Gov. Romney is using to try to distinguish his foreign policy from that of Barack Obama, you really don’t find a difference. He’s just trying to sound tougher about it.

“Romney talks about our ‘gains’ in Iraq being eroded now that our troops are gone. Does that mean he wants to send them back? And what gains? In terms of foreign policy, the war in Iraq was a mistake to begin with, and it should surprise absolutely no one that the pro-Iran regime we helped install isn’t being as obedient as we would like. And today, we learn that Iraq is buying $4.2 billion worth of arms from Russia. Wonder whose $4.2 billion they are using?

“Likewise, Gov. Romney’s vague plan for getting our troops out of the Afghanistan morass sounds pretty much like Obama’s, with a goal of ‘successful’ transition to the same Afghan security forces who have developed a disturbing habit of turning their weapons on our own troops. Both the Obama and Romney definitions of ‘successful’ will be interesting to see. The prudent approach to Afghanistan is simple: Bring our troops home now, and stop trying to fix a country that has defied fixing for generations.

“Regarding Syria, Libya and the rest of the region, Gov. Romney has fully committed himself to the fundamentally flawed idea that America can somehow manage the outcomes of revolutions and turmoil over which we really have no control. U.S. interventions and management over the past couple of decades have done nothing but galvanize anti-U.S. sentiment in the Middle East and beyond. To promise a continuation of those failed interventions, and suggest an even more aggressive approach, is just foolhardy.

“Sadly, there is no debate in this campaign between the Democrat and the Republican on foreign policy. The only real distinction Gov. Romney drew in his speech at Virginia Military Institute was to criticize Obama’s plan to reduce military spending, which is in fact the best idea Obama has had in a very long time. We are bankrupt, and if we are to ever get control of government spending, military spending will have to be cut, and cut substantially. Those cuts can be made without endangering our basic defense — if we simply stop playing ‘offense’ and involving our military in the internal affairs of nations on the other side of the globe.”

Iran To United States/IAEA: Let's make a deal, with conditions.

FYI - From F. Michael Maloof/World News Daily's G-2 Buliten.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Iran: Let's make a deal, with conditions

WASHINGTON – As negotiations have dragged on over Iran's nuclear program, and the West continues to tighten the sanctions screws, Tehran wants to make a deal.

The Iranians have offered to cap uranium enrichment at five percent and allow the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, to undertake intrusive inspections of its facilities if the West drops its sanctions.

Up to this point, Iran is assessed to have developed the capability to enrich uranium up to 20 percent, which is necessary for medical research. This assessment is backed by the IAEA at this point, although Israel believes Iran will reach a uranium enrichment level for nuclear weapons – 90 percent – within a few months.

The intriguing thing, however, is the red line Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu literally drew on a cartoon of a bomb with a lit fuse at the 90 percent level in his recent speech before the United Nations.

His demonstration either inadvertently or purposely undermined all of his brinkmanship comments over the past several months of an impending Israeli military attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Until now, the Israeli government has claimed that Iran is approaching a "zone of immunity" in which a conventional military attack may not be possible and is looking to destroy Iran's nuclear sites, believing the Islamic republic is using its nuclear program to make nuclear weapons.

However, Iran as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT, and as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or the IAEA, has a right to undertake uranium enrichment.

Currently, Iran is assessed by the intelligence community at being able to enrich up to 20 percent. Analysts say that to achieve the 90 percent level of weapons grade enrichment requires technology levels which Iran has not yet achieved.

Under the NPT, Iran could make all the components to make a nuclear weapon, but not put together all of those components into a nuclear bomb.

Analysts say that Iran isn't even near the stage of constructing an actual bomb which would have to undergo underground testing to determine its reliability. They add that Iran also lacks yet other technologies needed to then miniaturize a reliable nuclear weapon that could fit on a missile to deliver the weapon. Analysts estimate that Iran is years from such a capability.

Iran contends, however, that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Because of the international concern over Iran's use of its nuclear program to make nuclear weapons, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued fatwas, or religious edicts, against making nuclear weapons. Such fatwas carry the weight of law in the Muslim world.

Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi has stated that Iran is prepared to "institutionalize" Khamenei’s fatwas.

"We are willing to put in place further mechanisms," Salehi recently told the U.S. think-tank Council on Foreign Relations, referring to the five percent cap on enrichment and allowing intrusive IAEA inspections which it hasn't allowed to date.

In exchange, he wants the West to rescind its series of four sanctions it has imposed on the Iranian economy until Iran halts its nuclear enrichment efforts.

By intrusive inspections, the IAEA can enter a facility without first notifying Tehran.

Iran has begun to feel the effects of the sanctions on its economy as the value of its own currency, the rial, has plummeted against the value of the dollar and euro.

If Israel doesn't attack Iran prior to the U.S. elections in November, and if President Barack Obama should win, it gives him more flexibility to work with the Iranians which Israel contends is just buying the Islamic republic more time to develop enrichment up to the 90 percent level.

Ironically, it is the Western nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT, to which Iran is a signatory – but Israel is not – that allows the Islamic republic to enrich up to that level, along with building other components that could comprise a nuclear weapon. The NPT forbids signatories from putting those components together into a workable nuclear weapon.

F. Michael Maloof, staff writer for WND’s G2Bulletin, is a former senior security policy analyst in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He can be contacted at mmaloof@wnd.com.

Rand Paul: Our System of Foreign Aid is Broken!

FYI - From RandPACUSA.com/Senator Rand Paul.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Rand Paul: Bring OUR Tax Dollars Home & END Foreign Aid!

FYI - From RandPACUSA.com/Senator Rand Paul.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Dear Friends,

Before voting to defeat my bill to stop U.S. taxpayer handouts to Egypt, Libya, and Pakistan, one of my colleagues had the audacity to say he didn't care if my bill was backed by 90% of the American people. 

Well, some of my colleagues might not care what you think. 

But they DO care about their own re-elections. 

So with your support, my hope is TV ads like the one I've included for you below will show my colleagues there's a REAL price to be paid for ignoring the wishes of the American people. 

 

In fact, today I'm happy to announce that - through next Friday - RANDPAC is holding a massive Bring OUR Tax Dollars Home Money Bomb to help run TV ads just like this in up to six critical U.S. Senate races. 

So won't you agree to a generous contribution of $100, $50, $25 - or $10 - TODAY? 

I hope you will. 

After all, if you're like most Americans, you're tired of out-of-touch politicians. 

You're fed up with being talked down to by the very men and women who've sunk our nation in over $16 TRILLION in debt. 

And for good reason! 

Congress can't even bring itself to cut four billion dollars in taxpayer handouts to countries who: 

* Look the other way while violent mobs burn our flag and chant "Death to America;" 

* Hardly lift a finger to bring to justice those who murdered four American citizens - including our ambassador; 

* Refuse to protect our embassies, and torture and imprison citizens for acting like the U.S. allies these countries claim to be. 

I know some of my colleagues brush all that aside, not caring what you think. 

But the one sure way to get politicians to start paying attention to the wishes of folks like you is to PROVE there are very real and painful political consequences if they don't. 

And after seeing politicians consistently ignore the wishes of the American people in their mad rush to ram through bailouts and Big Government schemes like ObamaCare during these past few years, I can't think of anything more important. 

So won't you please agree to help RANDPAC run hard-hitting TV ads just like the one I've shown you with your most generous contribution to the Bring OUR Tax Dollars Home Money Bomb? 

Right now, there are six big spending Democrat incumbents embroiled in tough reelection races who voted to keep sending OUR taxpayer dollars to Egypt, Libya, and Pakistan. 

And it's up to you and me to ensure that Bill Nelson (D-FL), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Jon Tester (D-MT), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Bob Casey (D-PA) don't get off scot-free. 

If even one or two politicians go down in defeat at the polls, it will put Congress on notice - and literally DOZENS of other Senators could end up switching their votes next time. 

And so I'm counting on your support. 

So please, agree to your most generous contribution to RANDPAC'S Bring OUR Tax Dollars Home Money Bomb TODAY! 

For liberty, 

Rand Paul 

P.S. RANDPAC just launched a massive Bring OUR Tax Dollars Home Money Bomb to pay for hard-hitting TV ads just like this to ensure six Democrat incumbents who voted to keep our taxpayer dollars flowing to Egypt, Libya, and Pakistan pay the price. 

So please, take a moment to watch the ad, and make your most generous contribution of $100, $50, $25 - or $10 to the Bring OUR Tax Dollars Home Money Bomb at once! 

Gov. Gary Johnson: "End The Wars Now!"

FYI - From GaryJohnson2012.com.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Gov. Gary Johnson: “Bring Our Troops Home Now”

FYI - From GaryJohnson2012.com.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Gov. Gary Johnson: “Bring Our Troops Home Now”

 

LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE GARY JOHNSON AT UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE EVENT: BRING OUR TROOPS AND DOLLARS HOME FROM AFGHANISTAN NOW

Sept. 19, 2012, Durham, NH — Calling Tuesday’s announcement that the U.S. and NATO are essentially suspending joint operations with Afghan forces a “long-overdue acknowledgement of reality,” presidential candidate and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson today called on President Obama to “bring our troops home now.”

Appearing at an event at the University of New Hampshire, Gov. Johnson said, “In recent weeks, we have witnessed the unspeakable tragedy of American service members being murdered by the very ‘security forces’ they are training. More than 50 international military personnel have been killed by Afghan forces this year alone, and we have already had to stop trying to ‘train’ Afghan police recruits.

“The net result of recent developments — and decisions — in Afghanistan is that we are at a very dangerous tipping point. There will undoubtedly be those who wrongly suggest that the purported ‘exit strategy’ of the Obama Administration should be delayed and efforts stepped up to get control of the obvious chaos. That would be a monumental mistake, and a failure to face the fact that, as the British and Soviets before us learned, Afghanistan is not a place we can control or upon which we can impose our will. Instead, now is the perfect opportunity for America to say ‘We’re better than this’ and bring our troops home and out of harm’s way.

“Let us not forget that we went into Afghanistan to uproot Al Qaeda and attack those who attacked us on 9/11. That mission was complete in a matter of months. Yet, we have remained there and engaged in ill-fated nation-building for more than a decade — at absurd costs in lives and treasure. After all that American benevolence, it is absolutely unacceptable to ask our troops to hand weapons to Afghan ‘security forces’, teach them how to use them, and then risk being shot by those same forces with those same weapons.

“By suspending that training and now suspending joint operations with Afghan troops, our military leaders on the ground are facing reality. It is time for our political leaders to do the same, and bring our troops and our dollars home.”