It’s almost hard to believe the response to this one lone Israeli flag and this one teenage boy carrying it. Thank God those police were there. That mob would have killed him if they hadn’t been; there’s no doubt in my mind of that. And they would’ve called themselves the victims in the situation, too, just like the Gaza “freedom flotilla”.

His name is Daniel Pereg.

A loud and angry mob of pro-Arab demonstrators outside the Israeli consulate in Los Angeles on Tuesday became even more enraged when one, lone Jewish high school student with a yarmulke and a large Israeli flag marched fearlessly alongside them.

The young man, whose name was later learned to be Daniel Pereg, seemed to be unmoved by the angry curses hurled at him by the American-Arab crowd. Though protected by a line of policemen, it appeared he could be attacked at any moment.

Reporters asked him afterwards about his unusual presence, and he explained, “I came out because I want to defend Israel… They [the soldiers attempting to divert the flotilla ships - ed.] were attacked, and they had the right to defend [themselves]. These people [on the boats] were not humanitarians; their ship was armed with knives, batons, and all kinds of things to attack the Israelis with. There is a naval blockade on Gaza, and they [the soldiers] were just doing their job of enforcing it… Hamas is a terrorist organization trying to kill Israelis.”

Asked if he is affiliated with any group, he said, “Just Judaism and Israel, that’s it.”

Asked how he knows that the ship was filled with arms, Daniel said, “I know from the news; I’m an informed person.”

This contrasted with the Arab-Americans who appear at the end of the video. One girl said that a Palestinian state alongside Israel would not satisfy her, as “there should not be an Israeli state! The Israeli state does not even exist!”

Another Arab-speaking American explained, “The only reason Israel is doing this is because they got kicked out from, uh, the German whatever, whatever happened to them. So they’re trying to take out their anger on someone else.” Asked about the Bible and the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel since the times of King Solomon, he lowered his voice and said, “I don’t know about that.”

I especially like how Jews can supposedly live in Palestine and everything would be OK, according to the girl at the end of the video. After all of the violence Palestinians have waged against the Jews, I’m sure they’ll let Jews live in Palestine peacefully… peacefully, of course, meaning the peace you get after you’re dead. Israel cannot win in this situation no matter what they do, and they’ll never please everyone. So they need to just keep doing what they’re doing and defend their country and their people, and just ignore what’s said about them. They know the truth. And so do the naysayers.

As for this young man, Daniel, God bless him. It takes a lot of courage and conviction to stand tall against a mob like that.

Hat Tip: Sister Toldjah

—–

Follow Cassy on Twitter and read more of her work at CassyFiano.com and Hard Corps Wife.

But don’t celebrate just yet.

The economy added 431,000 jobs in May, but nearly all of them were temporary workers hired by the Census.

The private sector added 41,000 workers, according to the report issued Thursday by the Labor Department, while the unemployment rate dipped from 9.9 percent to 9.7.

The 41,000 workers hired by the private sector is a much lower total than what had been forecast by private analysts and could serve as a disappointment to the Obama administration, which had expected a strong report.

… Census 2010 added 411,000 temporary employees in May, according to the Labor Department.

So almost all of the new hires last month were A.) temporary and B.) government employees. And remember, in April the private sector grew with 224,000 new jobs. In May, that’s down almost 200,000 jobs. Not exactly news to cheer about. I mean, let that sink in. 95.5% of all new hiring was for temporary, government jobs.

The private sector should be growing by 100,000 jobs a month to keep up with population growth. That’s only happened once — in April. The economy is not recovering. No wonder record numbers of people are signing up for food stamps.

People have started exiting the work force again as well – 322,000 people. And this caused the unemployment rate to go down. Great news, huh?

I honestly am not sure how we can survive another two years of Obama as president. Liberals, of course, have got to be loving this news. More people signing up for welfare, more people working for the government… we can basically sum it up by saying that government expansion is rolling along right nicely. The question is, how do you scale it back? It’s not so easy to get the genie back in the bottle once it’s out.

–

Follow Cassy on Twitter and read more of her work at CassyFiano.com and Hard Corps Wife.

According to Palestinian Media Watch, the man in the video is Dr. Abd Al-Fatah Shayyeq Naaman, lecturer in Shari’ah law at a university in Yemen.

So several days before the Gaza flotilla incident occurred, the flotilla commander was saying that he was planning on a confrontation and that they were seeking martyrdom. It seems an easy conclusion to reach that the people aboard the flotilla knew exactly what they were doing, were counting on their boat being boarded, that they wanted to provoke the IDF soldiers into violence, and that there was nothing humanitarian about their mission at all.

Considering the multiple videos the IDF released showing how their soldiers were ambushed, you’d think this would be an open-shut case. Once you add in the apparent premeditation of violence, how could anyone continue to blame Israel for this? (That’s a rhetorical question, by the way.)

The IDF’s account of what happen continues to hold. They thought they were going to be facing peace activists bringing humanitarian aid. It couldn’t have been further from reality, and they were ambushed as soon as they set foot on board. The soldiers did everything they could to avoid using lethal force, but were given no choice.

Of course, the left will do anything they can to demonize Israel, so they will ignore and manipulate the facts of the situation. (Don’t call them anti-Semitic, though!) The fact is this: Israel’s actions were perfectly justified. The Gaza blockade was in effect, the flotilla knew this, and was intent on running the blockade after being told to turn back. IDF soldiers boarded the ship, and we all know what happened. What were they supposed to do? Let the ship run the blockade without knowing if there were weapons on board that could be smuggled to Palestinians and then used to kill innocent Israeli civilians? (And of course, several caches of weapons were found on board.) Once faced with violence on board, should they have just stood there and let themselves be slaughtered? Apparently, these are the only two options for Israelis from the left: let people smuggle whatever they want into Palestine, a country filled with backwards, bloodthirsty, homicidal maniacs intent on eradicating all Jews from the planet, or when confronted with violence, choose not to fight even in their own self-defense. (Again, don’t call them anti-Semitic though! They love Israel!) Because Israel chooses to not allow themselves to be annihilated, they are always the bad guys in the eyes of the left, no matter what. This case is just another example of that.

It won’t matter to them that the commander of the Gaza flotilla said ahead of time that he was going to use violence against the IDF. It won’t matter to them that all of the deaths on board that flotilla were in self-defense. The narrative is already set. Anything to benefit Palestine is inherently good, because Palestinians are leftist-certified victims. Anything Israel does to prevent the destruction of their country is bad. It’s despicable, and every single person out there demonizing Israel for this incident should be ashamed of themselves.

Israel did exactly the right thing in this situation. Even the UN Security Council didn’t explicitly condemn Israel, as shocking as that is. It’s a sad statement of the culture in this country when a significant number of people in the United States sympathize more with terrorist organizations like Hezbollah than they do with Israel, the only functioning democracy in the Middle East.

–

Follow Cassy on Twitter and read more of her work at CassyFiano.com and Hard Corps Wife.

This weekend is the one-year anniversary of George Tiller’s horrible murder, and of course, this means that the pro-abortion fanatics are out in force. This time, they’re complaining about states that require women to view ultrasounds before having an abortion. That complaint isn’t particularly new, but now, it’s being called emotional torture.

Staff members interviewed at three of the seven abortion clinics in the state estimated that 30 percent to 70 percent of women chose to see ultrasound images. But they said it was uncommon for women to be dissuaded.

It had happened occasionally, they said, when a sonogram revealed a multiple pregnancy or when a woman was already deeply unsure about her choice.

But a number of women at the Birmingham clinic, which was the site of a fatal bombing in 1998, said they simply did not want to subject themselves to images that might haunt them. “You almost have to think of it as an alien,” said Carmen, 28, who was there for her second abortion in three years.

Like other patients, Laura, who has a 17-year-old son, said she took offense at the state’s implicit suggestion that she had not fully considered her choice.

“You don’t just walk into one of these places like you’re getting your nails done,” she said. “I think we’re armed with enough information to make adult decisions without being emotionally tortured.”

This makes the assumption that all women take the time to think an abortion through, that they all know week-by-week how the baby is growing in their uterus, that they have received medically accurate information. This is suspect at best.

Take Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the United States. Approximately one third of Planned Parenthood’s clients are girls under the age of 18. Just how informed are they expected to be? Not only do these girls usually have no clue whatsoever about what they are about to go through, they don’t usually have medically accurate information. Pro-life activist group Live Action gained fame from investigating Planned Parenthood’s willingness to cover up the sexual abuse of minors with their Mona Lisa Project. They’ve now started a new undercover investigation, The Rosa Acuna Project, to find out if Planned Parenthood is giving medically accurate information to their clients.

They have not done so.

The counselors give manipulative information filled with lies to clients who are scared or confused or unsure. Why? Because they don’t want women choosing to not have an abortion. Abortions are lucrative. Planned Parenthood doesn’t benefit if a woman decides to keep her baby.

And why would seeing an ultrasound before an abortion be emotional torture to a woman? Well, because most women aren’t prepared for the emotional roller coaster ride they’re about to go through with an abortion, for the anguish, regret, and guilt that many women feel. Many women aren’t prepared to confront the life they’ve just destroyed. An ultrasound forces them to confront that reality. Is it perhaps emotional torture because women are killing their children? Because women cannot bear to look at an ultrasound and see the life they are about to take away?

Bernard Nathanson is a prime example of this. Nathanson was once a pro-abortion activist who helped to found the National Abortion Rights Action League. NARAL was originally created to repeal abortion laws, and succeeded with the Roe v. Wade decision. Nathanson says he has performed over 75,000 abortions in his lifetime. However, with the advent of the ultrasound, he found that he couldn’t ignore the barbarity of abortions anymore, and became a staunch pro-life activist.

Ultrasound images are so powerful that Nathanson made two documentaries, The Silent Scream and Eclipse of Reason. The Silent Scream shows an ultrasound of an abortion being performed on a baby eleven weeks after conception. Eclipse of Reason shows a late-term abortion being performed, and is even more horrifying. These ultrasound images were strong enough to convert Dr. Nathanson, the father of the pro-abortion movement still in action today. How would viewing an ultrasound be to an expectant mother who is confused, scared, and probably already feeling slightly guilty? Of course it would be emotional torture. She would look at that ultrasound and it would be like a knife going through her heart. It’s emotional torture because deep down, they know that they’re killing their child, and it’s heartbreaking.

Why would abortion advocates have such a problem with women being forced to view the ultrasound? Apparently, during first trimester abortions, women weren’t much dissuaded from the abortion because an unborn baby at, say, five weeks kind of looks like a little tadpole or something, and not like a baby. Once you start looking at second and third trimester abortions, however, the images are much harder for women to see. And regardless of when in the pregnancy the abortion takes place, women who are unsure about their choice are definitely swayed by viewing the ultrasound. The abortion lobby doesn’t want fewer women to have abortions, so making women view the child they’re about to kill doesn’t sit well with them — not because they care about the welfare of women, but because they don’t want to lose a potential sale. A woman who is already confused and scared and unsure about the choice to have an abortion who views the ultrasound is much more likely to change her mind than the woman who doesn’t see her baby first.

Deep down, their conscience will tell them that this is wrong, but they don’t want to admit that to themselves. That is what brings on the feelings of emotional torture. And it’s what pro-abortion activists don’t want women to know. The abortion lobby does not want women to be fully informed about the realities of abortion, because if women were, a much greater number of them would walk away. So pro-abortion activists try to keep women in the dark, while screeching that they’re only fighting for women’s rights.

But is it really pro-woman to keep women in the dark?

–

Follow Cassy on Twitter and read more of her work at CassyFiano.com and Hard Corps Wife.

Governor Christie on Tuesday told a borough teacher to find another job if she did not feel she was compensated enough as he defended his state budget cuts and promoted a plan to cap annual growth in property tax collections.

He also told an 89-year-old former mayor she’d have to wait until next spring for a rebate she’d been getting for more than a decade in the late summer. And he told a parent that cuts to services, including the local library, are needed because “we are out of money.”

A largely friendly crowd of about 150 people turned out in a church gymnasium to hear Christie deliver a half-hour talk that trashed greedy public employee unions and state laws that handcuff local officials trying to control spending.

He then opened the floor to questions. A few were softballs, including the declaration by Clara Nebot of Bergenfield that Christie is “a god” to her relatives in Florida.

But borough teacher Rita Wilson, a Kearny resident, argued that if she were paid $3 an hour for the 30 children in her class, she’d be earning $83,000, and she makes nothing near that.

“You’re getting more than that if you include the cost of your benefits,” Christie interrupted.

When Wilson, who has a master’s degree, said she was not being compensated for her education and experience, Christie said:

“Well, you know then that you don’t have to do it.” Some in the audience applauded.

Christie said he would not have had to impose cuts to education if the teachers union had agreed to his call for a one-year salary freeze and a 1.5 percent increase in employee benefit contributions.

“Your union said that is the greatest assault on public education in the history of the state,” Christie said. “That’s why the union has no credibility, stupid statements like that.”

Surrounded by reporters after she spoke, Wilson said she was shaking from the encounter, and worried she might get in trouble for speaking out.

It’s about time someone calls out the teachers unions. Christie is right, they are the single greatest assault on public education. They’re the single greatest assault on the free market in general, actually.

As for teachers, I’ve never been able to sympathize when they complain about not getting paid enough. So you have a master’s degree? So what? You aren’t happy with your salary? There are thousands upon thousands of people who can’t find a job at all and would be happy for any salary. I seem to remember that once upon a time, you weren’t guaranteed to make what you wanted to make. It’s up to the employer. You can choose to work for the salary they’re offering, or you can find a job elsewhere. That isn’t any different for teachers. Why is it that public school teachers feel like they automatically deserve a ridiculous salary, just by virtue of being teachers — like this teacher’s $83,000? Christie spoke nothing but the truth. If she wants to make $83,000, then she can feel free to quit teaching and try to find a job that pays that. Shockingly, teachers never do this, despite their caterwauling about how horribly they get paid (which is actually higher on average than other white collar workers).

I always wonder about Christie. He frankly seems too good to be true. Is it just an act to pander to the TEA partiers? I guess only time will tell. In the meantime, if he keeps doing what he’s doing, he’s got a good shot at running for president one day.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!

Sarah Palin is the feminist Left’s favorite target. It seems strange to anyone not entrenched in a radical, extremist feminist agenda. Feminists once fought for equality between the sexes — the right for women to vote, giving women a fair chance to go to college and get a job without fear of discrimination, and the choice to either stay at home with her children or work full-time. Fighting for equality has long since fallen by the wayside though, and the leftist agenda has fully set in. Women like Sarah Palin and Michelle Malkin, therefore, cannot be feminists.

Daring to call Sarah Palin a feminist will make radical modern feminists’ heads explode. Currently screeching with rage is Jessica Valenti, angry that someone might think that Sarah Palin is indeed a feminist.

Seriously, y’all – how many times does it have to be said? Sarah Palin is not a feminist. I thought we had covered Palin’s gross appropriation of feminism and feminist rhetoric during the election, but media coverage of Palin’s recent speech for the anti-choice PAC the Susan B. Anthony List has reignited the debate. (Incidentally, the whole thing about Anthony being pro-life has been debunked.)

So, simply declaring oneself a feminist is all that it takes to be a feminist? Methinks not. Under this standard of feminism anyone – a racist, a misogynist, etc – could be a feminist just because they identify as such.

Sarah Palin’s crime against modern feminism is that she is a political conservative who is pro-life. This makes her anti-woman, because all conservatives are apparently anti-woman. Valenti writes:

[W]hile I’m sympathetic to the idea that abortion shouldn’t be a litmus test for feminism – I believe, for example, that one can be personally pro-life and feminist – there is simply no way that you can advocate for the limitation of other women’s rights and access to health care and call yourself a feminist.

The line about being “personally pro-life” is meant to mislead. You can’t be personally pro-life and still support abortion, and Valenti knows it. This is exactly why Valenti phrases it this way. It comes across as a much more moderate position, yet still argues that all feminists must support abortion. The feminist Left believes it isn’t good enough to just believe in equality between the sexes. You have to toe the “progressive” line, as Amanda Marcotte recently showcased in an interview, saying that real feminists are devoted to a very specific set of issues.

Interestingly, Valenti’s screed against Palin is so extreme that not all of her readers could get behind her. Feministing usually serves as a leftist echo chamber, but several commenters actually disagreed that all feminists need to think a certain way in order to be considered feminists. Valenti had to jump in to defend herself five times before closing commenting on the post.

Perhaps it’s because she isn’t following her own rules of feminism. In her book, Full Frontal Feminism, Valenti had this to say about people defining what feminists should be:

[L]ike many feminist authors before her, Valenti quickly expands feminism to include a wide array of liberal pet causes. If you don’t agree with them, guess what? You’re not really a feminist — you’re an anti-feminist. According to Valenti, feminists demand government-funded preschools and universal childcare, think American culture “breeds a society where rape is expected and practically okayed,” and proudly wear shirts that say “I don’t f*** Republicans.”

Valenti vents that she’s “so f***ing sick and tired of people telling [her] how to be an appropriate feminist.” Maybe so, but Valenti is happy to dish out a feminist litmus test herself.

So it isn’t OK for someone to tell Jessica Valenti what makes an appropriate feminist, but it’s OK for her to tell other people what makes an appropriate feminist? Quite the hypocrite, I see.

Here are some more quotes from Full Frontal Feminism in which Valenti defines what women should and shouldn’t do when it comes to marriage:

You may not like me for saying this…but engagement rings piss me the hell off. It’s a frigging dowry! …the only purpose of an engagement ring is to show that you “belong” to someone, and that your man makes bank.

For the life of me, I will never understand why a woman today would change her last name. It makes no sense whatsoever. You want future kids to have the same last name as you and your hubby? Hyphenate, [expletive]! Or do something, anything, but change your last name. It’s the ultimate buy-in of sexist bulls***. It epitomizes the idea that you are not your own person.

And here we get to the heart of “progressive” feminism. Today’s feminists like Jessica Valenti are the least “pro-choice” people on the planet … and I don’t mean [just] when it comes to abortion. They want to dictate everything about the lives of American women. If you don’t live exactly the way they want you to live, then you’re “anti-woman” and an “anti-feminist.”

Change your name to your husband’s when you get married? You’re a slave to the patriarchy and an anti-feminist. Personally and politically pro-life? Anti-woman! Believe in small government, fiscal responsibility, and the free market? ANTI-FEMINIST! Believe in closing the borders and enforcing our immigration laws? Don’t believe in universal health care? Think global warming is all a fake? These all make you an anti-feminist, too.

Sad, isn’t it? A movement that once fought for equality for women now doesn’t want women to think for themselves. Someone like Sarah Palin, who quite literally has it all, should be a perfect example of a feminist. She’s got a loving marriage and a wonderful family. She is the breadwinner in her family and is one of the most powerful women in the country. But she doesn’t wallow in patriarchal victimhood; she’s a conservative, she’s pro-life. She doesn’t toe the Jessica Valenti and Amanda Marcotte line, and therefore, she can never be considered a feminist. If you need an example of how the feminist movement has been hijacked by radicals, this is it.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!

With that, Cooking with the Troops was born.

Cooking with the Troops, Inc., is a non-profit organization devoted to providing a culinary change of pace to U.S. and Allied troops along with educational and related opportunities for those transitioning out of service and into careers in the food and beverage industry. While the primary focus is on the wounded, injured, and ill — and associated caregivers — operations are intended to cover the full range of those who serve, their families, and those who provide medical and related care.

… Operations will be phased in over time, and will start with culinary events — barbecues and special events — held within the continental United States and expand overseas at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center and elsewhere as resources become available. The former will build off of the barbecues done at Walter Reed Army Medical Center since 2007 by Bob Miller, while the latter will build off of Cooking for/with the Wounded events done by Blake Powers through Soldiers’ Angels.

The barbecues will be family-oriented events that provide a relaxed and comfortable experience for the wounded and their families, and caregivers. The focus will be to provide something different for them to eat and to do, while allowing maximum interaction with both those putting on the event and others. Preliminary talks are underway with Baen Books to have them participate both by donating books to give out and to have one or more of their authors attend the event and sign books while there. While these talks are ongoing, Baen Books has already pledged $100.00 towards the next barbecue event. This and other draws will be explored and expanded if warranted. The low-key interaction and ease of cooking will encourage both learning and participation by those attending, and allow them to learn about other educational opportunities.

The special events will not be as low key, but will seek to encourage indirect and direct learning and participation by those attending. The goal with special events is to recruit guest chefs to do events both in the United States and overseas (Landstuhl primarily) so that a wide variety of cuisines, techniques, and career possibilities are presented. The guest chefs will be encouraged to do formal and informal sessions on their career, how they got started, and other information that will be of interest. One of Food TV’s Iron Chefs and one of the approximately 60 Certified Master Chefs in the US are two potential guest chefs who have expressed interest in taking part.

As you can see, Cooking with the Troops is going to be a great charity. I’ve already signed up to volunteer at one of the barbecues this summer. Right now, they’re looking for a few good artists to help design an official logo, and there will be some great prizes for the winners!

A brand new organization needs a lot of things, but none is ultimately more central to getting operations started than a logo/artwork that visually defines the organization. A good logo or artwork truly is a thousand words, if not many, many more. It tells you almost everything you need to know about the people it represents, and often does so without any words at all.

We need something that can do that. Something that sums up what we are, what we do, and what we hope to do for the troops and their families. Something that combines the seemingly highly separated areas of cooking, combat arms, and maybe even education. Artwork that can be printed full color for print applications, but also done as a one, two, or three spot colors onto mugs and other items.

To make it even more interesting, this needs to be something that can be used almost anywhere: t-shirts, chefs coats, chefs hats, business cards, coins, pins, letterhead, and more. This means that if it is artwork, we need to be able to separate out the central, key component to use small. If it is a logo, it needs to be able to fill all those roles legibly no matter how small or how big.

Your challenge, should you decide to accept it, is to create something that can stand for our mission and the four key goals, and do it within those parameters. You then have to submit it as noted below by noon Eastern time 25 June 2010.

First prize will win a knife donated by Michael Williamson, author and edged weapon maker, a jumbo barbecue set from the Spice House, an autographed Gretchen Wilson DVD, a jar of barbecue sauce from Concrete Bob, a feature about you on the Cooking with the Troops website and maybe more!

Judging the contest will be Chris Muir, the creator of the Day by Day comic strip, Damon Shackelford, creator of the military Delta Bravo Sierra comic strip, and John Cox, author and fine art purveyor.

To enter the contest, e-mail your submission to artcontest@cwtt.org. All submissions must be received by noon Eastern time, June 25th 2010. You can enter up to three designs. For more information and to read the rules of the contest, simply go here.

So, for all of you creative readers out there, get designing! Send this to any artists you know! Help get the word out about this great new military charity!

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!

No, I found nothing about this to be funny or entertaining at all.

Here’s what happens: On a search to find the source of all dirty jokes (which eventually leads them to Virginia) Peter, Quagmire, and Joe pass through Washington, DC where they see the Washington Monument, the Obama Monument (it’s black) and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. This is the part that is going to ruffle some feathers. Standing in front of the Memorial are two Vietnam Vets and a Vietnamese man who calls the Memorial a “scoreboard” and says “aw, what happened to your friends? Hey I know that guy, I killed him, he cried like a bitch. Vietnam! Undefeated!”

Here’s the video.

Real classy. Let’s make fun of Vietnam vets who gave their lives in service to their country. That’s pretty sickening, and not even remotely funny.

Seth McFarlane should apologize. He won’t, but he should. The man is completely ungrateful for the sacrifices of men and women who ensure that he has the freedom to make fun of them. Maybe he should go spend some time in Cuba, China, or Venezuela. Maybe then he’ll be more appreciative of the freedoms kept safe for him and all Americans by our heroic men and women in the military.

Cross-posted at Hard Corps Wife.

Eleven days after the botched plot to bomb Times Square, the Obama administration on Wednesday slashed some $53 million from the city’s terror-fighting budget.

“For the administration to announce these cuts two weeks after the attempted Times Square bombing shows they just don’t get it and are not doing right by New York City,” fumed Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

To top it off, the news arrives as President Obama comes to town today amid buzz he will meet with the very cops who helped thwart the bombing.

Obama will also be tapping the city’s deep pockets for the Democratic Party.

“The President seems more interested in raising money for political campaigns than providing New York the money it needs to defend itself against Islamic terrorism,” said Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.), the top Republican on the Homeland Security Committee.

Bingo, Rep. King.

This has apparently been in the works since December, but one would think that after New York was the subject of an attempted terrorist attack, he would reconsider. Even Chuck Schumer is astounded by this. Obama clearly doesn’t understand the concept of homeland security, and I’ve got a feeling that he probably wouldn’t care even if he did. He’s perfectly fine trying to squeeze more money out of New Yorkers for himself, but he isn’t willing to spend a little to keep them safe. If this administration, the most spend-happy administration in decades, isn’t willing to spend money on something, then you know it’s got to be low on their priority list.

Of course, they’re trying to dance around the issue, too.

Homeland Security Department spokesman Matthew Chandler begged to differ with New York’s interpretation, insisting his agency is “actively engaged in supporting New York City’s first responders and overall preparedness.”

He argued that in 2009, the administration gave the area more than $457 million for “terrorism and other threats.” He blamed Congress for appropriating less money for 2010, and an administration official said if New York includes the cash it got from the economic stimulus bill passed in 2009, it’s actually getting $47.3 million more than last year for ports and transit protection.

King was unimpressed by that math, arguing the stimulus cash is a one-time payout that won’t be repeated.

“That’s a story they’re coming up with at the last minute, because an hour ago they were saying they couldn’t give us the money because Congress only allocated $300 million,” he said. “Actually, Obama only asked for $250 million.”

It’s always someone else’s fault. It’s never Obama’s fault, or the administration’s fault. It’s because of George Bush, or Congress, or the ignorant hick Tea Partiers — anyone except themselves.

New York is the number one terror target, and our clueless president is cutting anti-terror funding. If you need the definition of an amateur who doesn’t care about protecting the lives of Americans, look up Obama’s name in the dictionary.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!

U.S. troops in Afghanistan could soon be awarded a medal for not doing something, a precedent-setting award that would be given for “courageous restraint” for holding fire to save civilian lives.

The proposal is now circulating in the Kabul headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force, a command spokesman confirmed Tuesday.

“The idea is consistent with our approach,” explained Air Force Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis. “Our young men and women display remarkable courage every day, including situations where they refrain from using lethal force, even at risk to themselves, in order to prevent possible harm to civilians. In some situations our forces face in Afghanistan, that restraint is an act of discipline and courage not much different than those seen in combat actions.”

Soldiers are often recognized for non-combat achievement with decorations such as their service’s commendation medal. But most of the highest U.S. military decorations are for valor in combat. A medal to recognize a conscious effort to avoid a combat action would be unique.

We already have non-combat achievement awards. Marines, for example, get the Navy Commendation Medal. Adding a specific medal for refusing to fire is ridiculous and absolutely could send the wrong message. The VFW agrees:

A spokesman for the 2.2 million-member Veterans of Foreign Wars, the nation’s largest group of combat veterans, thinks the award would cause confusion among the ranks and send a bad signal.

“The self-protections built into the rules of engagement are clear, and the decision to return fire must be made instantly based on training and the threat,” said Joe Davis, a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. “The enemy already hides among noncombatants, and targets them, too. The creation of such an award will only embolden their actions and put more American and noncombatant lives in jeopardy. Let’s not rush to create something that no one wants to present posthumously.”

We already have rules of engagement to tell troops when they can fire and when they can’t. Their training embeds that into them. And frankly, the fact that this award is even being considered worries me. We’re getting a softer, gentler military every day it seems. We have the greatest military in the world, but what does it matter if their hands are tied and they’re rewarded for inaction? There’s a reason that the highest awards are for valour and courage. The military’s primary job is to kill people and destroy things. It’s not a diplomatic or peacekeeping organization. Yet here we are, encouraging them to do the exact opposite of what they are basically supposed to be doing. It’s ludicrous.

This is also a massive propaganda victory for Al Qaeda and the Taliban. They already use human shields because they know we avoid killing civilians. If they know that troops are now being rewarded for not firing on civilians, how long will it take for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters to use more civilians as human shields? We are also currently fighting an enemy unlike any we’ve ever fought before. They don’t wear uniforms, they don’t engage in structured combat. We can’t be encouraging our troops to second-guess themselves in order to potentially save civilian lives, because guess what? The enemy combatants all look exactly like the innocent civilians. Our troops need to make that judgement call. They shouldn’t be encouraged to hold their fire, even at potential risk to themselves, because all that will do is lead to the deaths of more of the best among us. If instituted, this will turn into one of the most posthumously awarded medals, I’ve no doubt.

The other thing that bothers me about this is the idea that holding fire is somehow courageous. What takes courage and valour is engaging in combat. That’s why combat action medals are the most prestigious.

With the Obama administration, we apparently don’t need a military of finely trained killing machines, feared and respected around the world. We need a military that’s more like the UN, absolutely useless and unable to stomach the realities of war.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!