No Republican’s in Congress have the intestinal fortitude to start proceedings for impeachment of Barack Obama, or at the very least, begin legal proceedings against VP Joe Biden and Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta. Why you ask? Here is an article printed in the Wall Street Journal by Leif Babin a former Navy SEAL officer who served three tours in Iraq, earning a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars and a Purple Heart. He left active duty six months ago.

*****************

America’s premier Special Operations force is once again in the headlines after a team of Navy SEALs rescued two hostages from captivity in Somalia last week. Elite U.S. forces have carried out such operations periodically over the past decade, always with skill and bravery. The difference in recent months is that the details of their work haven’t remained secret. On the contrary, government officials have revealed them for political gain—endangering our forces in the process.

The floodgates opened after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last May, and the Obama administration’s lack of discretion was on display again at last week’s State of the Union address. As President Obama entered the House chamber, in full view of the cameras, he pointed to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and exclaimed: “Good job tonight, good job tonight.” Clearly something had happened that he wanted the world to know about.

After delivering his speech, which included multiple references to the bin Laden raid, the president again thanked Mr. Panetta. “That was a good thing tonight,” he said as if to ensure that the viewing public, if they missed it initially, would get it a second time around.

Sure enough, shortly thereafter, the White House announced the successful rescue of the hostages in Somalia by U.S. Special Operations forces. Vice President Biden appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” to highlight the success the next morning, and Mr. Panetta also publicly praised it. Then came the “anonymous U.S. officials” to provide extensive details of who conducted the raid and how. As with the bin Laden operation, the top-secret unit that carried it out was again front-page news, as were its methods and tactics.

Our special operators do not welcome this publicity. In fact, from conversations I’ve had in recent days, it’s clear they are dismayed by it.

Adm. William H. McRaven, America’s top special-operations commander, wrote in his 1996 book “Spec Ops” that there are six key principles of success in special operations. Of paramount importance—especially given the risk and sensitivity of the missions and the small units involved—is what the military calls “operational security,” or maintaining secrecy. If the enemy learns details and can anticipate the manner and timing of an attack, the likelihood of success is significantly reduced and the risk to our forces is significantly increased.

This is why much of what our special-operators do is highly classified, and why military personnel cannot legally divulge it to the public. Yet virtually every detail of the bin Laden raid has appeared in news outlets across the globe—from the name of the highly classified unit to how the U.S. gathered intelligence, how many raiders were involved, how they entered the grounds, what aircraft they used, and how they moved through the compound. Such details were highly contained within the military and not shared even through classified channels. Yet now they are available to anyone with the click of a mouse.

It’s difficult for military leaders to enforce strict standards of operational security on their personnel while the most senior political leadership is flooding the airwaves with secrets. The release of classified information has also opened a Pandora’s box of former and retired SEALs, special operators, and military personnel who have chosen to violate their non-disclosure agreements and discuss intricate details of how such operations are planned and executed.

We’ve already begun seeing specific examples of strategic harm from the post-bin Laden leaks. In June, Pakistan arrested several individuals who allegedly provided information to the CIA in advance of the raid. One of those charged with treason was a Pakistani doctor, Shakil Afridi. This Sunday, Mr. Panetta confirmed to “60 Minutes” that Dr. Afridi had provided “very helpful” intelligence to the CIA. That may have condemned Dr. Afridi to death or life imprisonment.

Such disclosures are catastrophic to U.S. intelligence networks, which often take years to develop. Recklessness not only puts lives at risk but could set U.S. intelligence-collection efforts back decades. Our ability to carry out future operations is significantly degraded—something not lost on Pakistan.

A week after the bin Laden raid, then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates expressed dismay about Washington’s loose lips, telling a town hall meeting of U.S. Marines at Camp Lejeune: “Frankly, a week ago Sunday, in the Situation Room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out bin Laden. That all fell apart on Monday—the next day.”

Do the president and his top political advisers understand what’s at stake for the special-operations forces who carry out these dangerous operations, or the long-term strategic consequences of divulging information about our most highly classified military assets and intelligence capabilities? It is infuriating to see political gain put above the safety and security of our brave warriors and our long-term strategic goals. Loose lips sink ships.

*****************

Thank you for your unwavering service and courage Mr. Babin.

How so many American citizens can applaud Obama, bundle millions in campaign donations, support him and vote for him is hard for me to understand. I can’t get my arms around the fact that so many anti-Military, anti-American’s would like to see our country destroyed yet call themselves patriots and American. It’s unthinkable but we all better understand that Barack Obama needs to be run out of office. Barack Obama is an enemy of the United States of America.

Meaning of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

UPDATE!!

Below the fold of this post I wrote about the killing of Osama bin Laden and how Barack Obama has been taking credit fo the end of that terrorist leader. The press also went out of its way to credit Obama. I won’t rehash that but now with the killing of Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi in Libya we have the MSM and Obama taking credit for what was significantly less US and Obama involvement in a battle led by Libyans with support from France and England with US drones and military intelligence.

Let’s remember that Obama did not want engagement in Libya and noted that the US would “lead from behind” whatever that means. Now that Gaddafi is dead and buried, with an election cycle coming up, we have the press still giving credit to Obama.

Scott Stantis at the Chicago Tribune pokes fun at Obama the Assassin in his political cartoon. However, even James Taranto visits and revisits the Obama terrorist killer theme. Mr. Taranto insists Obama foreign policy is successful while the Middle East is invoking more Sharia Law, Islamist are winning elections and even the Muslim Brotherhood seems to be the leading “political party” in Egypt.

Last Friday Taranto wrote at OpinionJournal.com:

Who’d have thought Barack Obama would end up killing more Arab tyrants and terrorists in just the past two years than George W. Bush did in three? He’s no peacenik, he’s a killing machine.

The LA Times wrote:

“For a president who promised to end the gunslinger ways of his predecessor, Barack Obama has proven himself comfortable with the use of lethal force.”

The paper counts Gadhafi as another “notch” on Obama’s “lethal-force belt,” along with Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki and others. Really?

Taranto wasn’t finished sticking to his obsession that Obama is a terrorist killer in yesterdays column:

The Obama we’ve seen since he took office is the real Obama (for better as well as worse, as any number of dead terrorists and dictators can testify–or rather could testify if Obama hadn’t caused them to be killed).

Obama gave the order to kill bin Laden after having the knowledge of his location in Pakistan for 8-months. He dithered along to make a decision and is only lucky the al-Qaeda leader didn’t escape during the Obama decision making. Other terrorists killed during military confrontation has nothing to do with Obama as the military was already engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan and had set up some drone operations in Yemen and Somalia.

My comment and question to Mr. Taranto in his Friday column went like this:

- Does Obama get credit for Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood entering the picture?

- Does Obama get credit for all the chaos in Afghanistan?

- Does Obama get credit for what follows in Iraq when he fully abandons it?

- Does Obama get credit for Syria and the murders against civilians there?

- Does Obama get credit for the economic crisis in the US?

- Does Obama get credit for Iran continuing to build nukes?

- Does Obama get ultimate credit for Fast and Furious?

- Does Obama get credit for __________________ fill in the blank and then ask yourself….

- Are we better off then we were in 2008 as a country?

If anyone answering this question is an Obama Zombie then explain and substantiate. Then crawl back under your rock.

Let me add to my list on “Does Obama Get Credit” as I read two links at Drudge:

Transitional government leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil said “Islamic Sharia law would be the “basic source” of legislation and existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified.”

In Tunisia “Islamist party Ennahda is expected to win the most votes, though it is not clear if it will gain a majority.”

In fact, the Islamists did win the majority in Tunisia.

For this Obama probably wants credit – but only behind closed doors.

Saul Alinsky would be proud.

Obama doesn’t mind taking credit for things he has little to do with except the US economy and the spread of radical Islam in the Middle East. The mainstream media doesn’t mind depicting Obama as a foreign policy genius and military strategy expert.

The fact is Barack Obama couldn’t lead a whore to bed.

********** Original post below********** (May 8, 2011)

We’ve all seen the story’s about the killing of Osama bin Laden and if you missed it welcome back to the world. Anyone really paying attention noticed how Barack Obama has been taking credit for a great deal since last Sunday.

I’ve set the record straight on who is really responsible for locating and killing bin Laden and discussed that the war on terror is not over.

However, the Obama pathology who taking credit for other peoples hard work seems to be endless. Obama’s arrogance and self-praise are only preceded by his rudeness.

Debra Burlingame lost her brother on 9/11. He was a pilot of the jet that crashed into the Pentagon, Chic Burlingame. This past Thursday afternoon on the Fox News Channel America live, Martha MacCallum was talking to Debra Burlingame at Ground Zero as she was part of the 9/11 families that met with Barack Obama. Martha MacCallum asked Ms. Burlinggame, “You have had very major differences with the [adminstration] over so many of these issues. Did you take this opportunity to speak to President Obama about that? Did you have one-on-one time with him?”

Ms. Burlingame responded: (Emphasis LCs)

I told him that I was aware that Eric Holder was still pursuing possible criminal charges against the CIA interrogators, the very interrogators who got the information in enhanced interrogations from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and al-Libi. As a former attorney, I know that you can’t tell the attorney general what to do. He said, “No, I can’t.” And I said, “But that shouldn’t stop you from offering your opinion. After all, we wouldn’t be here celebrating today if they hadn’t done their job. Can’t you at least give ‘em your opinion?” And he said, “No, I won’t,” and he turned around and walked away.

This is how Obama really feels about victms of 9/11 and the CIA. And let’s not forget Obama had two 9/11 anniversaries to visit Ground Zero but has not. He did back the building of a Mosque close to Ground Zero but waited until now to “celebrate” his killing of bin Laden to prance in front of the victims of that tragic day. It’s all about Obama.

David Beamer, the father of Todd Beamer who died on the flight on 9/11 that crashed into a Pennsylvania field after leading a charge on the terrorists saying “Let’s Roll!”.  Mr. Beamer was also on with Martha MacCallum.  She asked, “What’s your response to how they’re handling things now with the 9/11 families?”

Mr. Beamer also separated fact from fiction and Obama: (Emphasis LCs)

The excessive use of the personal pronoun that he used in his remarks, I really felt that was the beginning of the commander-in-chief putting too much spotlight on himself, taking too much credit for what these remarkable Americans had done.  And of course it’s only now been accelerated to a greater degree in the media.  It’s being hailed as one of the greatest wartime decisions, bold and gutsy, and, quite frankly, under the facts and circumstances, I think it was anything but that.

I think this decision had an inexorable conclusion.  As the information unfolded were straightforward and easy and really had no other choice.

Yes the information was handed to Obama months ago and hundreds of people were involved in finding bin Laden. Obama couldn’t even make a quick decision taking a final 16-hours and even golfing.  This isn’t leadership it’s dithering.

Some in the media are giving Obama credit for increasing the number of Navy SEAL units since 2009 but fail to give credit to Donald Rumsfeld for reconstituting, reorganizing providing the impetus for Special Operations. And Gen. Petraeous was responsible for the surge in Iraq which also used these special units that caught Saddam Hussein late in 2003 and killed his sons Uday and Qusay in a shootout in Mosul earlier that year. These units also later tracked down al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, pinpointing the building where he sheltered for the aerial bombing that ended his life.

Notice these instances occurred under the administration of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld not Barack Obama. In fact, these special units became more efficient in counter insurgency and deployed their methods under the leadership of President Bush.

After the announcement by Obama of the killing of bin Laden we saw interviews on 60-minutes, visits for the first time to Ground Zero, a visit to Fort Campbell, Kentucky all to highlight Barack Obama so he could use those “personal pronouns” I, Me, and My.

But it didn’t stop with the killing of bin Laden, we had the jobs report come out and Mr. Obama didn’t hesitate to call attention to the “his fact” that he created 244,000 new jobs failing to point out that the “private sector” created those jobs not Barack Obama. He also didn’t point out that 68,000 of those jobs were from McDonald’s Corporation and not at their headquarters but for minimum wage jobs in units across the US.

And even with those new jobs Obama failed to mention that unemployment went up, yes up from 8.8-percent to 9-percent. Of course some economists disagree that McDonald’s was a factor but maybe they have a problem reading and interpreting those numbers.

Also 175,000  of those “new jobs” numbers came from the Birth Death Adjustment, an opaque Federal guesstimate of the number of new small businesses being started and those being closed. The net new jobs in the private sector is 7,000.  That’s the net new jobs. A history of Birth Death adjustments which ultimately get washed out in the annual massive downward NFP revision is a replacement job formula.

The broader measure of the unemployment rate, which includes people who stopped looking for work and those settling for part-time jobs, rose to 15.9% in April from 15.7% the previous month.

Also left out of Mr. Obama’s rhetoric is the fact that fewer new businesses are getting off the ground in the US, available data suggest, a development that could cloud the prospects for job growth and innovation.

In the early months of the economic recovery, start-ups of job-creating companies have failed to keep pace with closings, and even those concerns that do get launched are hiring less than in the past. The number of companies with at least one employee fell by 100,000, or 2%, in the year that ended March 31, the Labor Department reported Thursday. That was the second worst performance in 18 years, the worst being the 3.4% drop in the previous year.

And while Obama wants to raise taxes on the so-called wealthy who are also business people with gross, before tax income of $200,000 there is another problem that Obama fails to mention. Some entrepreneurs say it’s not all about financing, though. They express concern about taxes, health-care costs and the impact that wrangling in Washington over the federal budget deficit will have on them.

“I can’t determine what the cost of providing health care for employees would be,” says Kevin Berman, 47, who is starting a local-produce company in Orion Township, Mich., called Harvest Michigan. Starting a company “is harder than it was at any time I can remember.”

So while Obama prances around preening like the ugly duckling who suddenly discovered she was really a swan, the Narcissist-in-Chief is out shining the spotlight on his faux accomplishments.

Let’s not forget that Obama and his erstwhile wife Michelle want to control what and how much you eat. Discussing Cinco de Mayo we have ABC News reporting how the Obama’s welcomed a big crowd to the White House for a Cinco de Mayo reception in the East Room.  Hispanic politicians, Hispanic Americans serving in the Obama administration, and members of a commission on exploring the creating of a new national museum of the American Latino were among those in attendance:

Said Obama: “I asked Michelle the other day, I said, ‘What’s your favorite food’ — because we were sitting around with the girls. She said, ‘Ah, Mexican food.’”

“You do not want to be between Michelle and a tamale,” joked Obama.  “It’s true. It’s true. But she’s moving, though, so she can afford to have as many tamales as she wants,” said Obama in a nod to his wife’s “Let’s Move” healthy campaign.

Let’s us eat cake while Obama tells the rest of us how to live, that we need to sacrifice and how much he has done to make the US safer, track down and kill Osama bin Laden, create new jobs and work to make us eat healthier.

We’re so lucky to have Barack Hussein Obama, “Bragger-in-Chief”, still with no accomplishments, indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Yes, it was an Obama campaign promise, but after personally shooting Osama bin Laden and Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi what else is left. Mission Accomplished!

Except for some major problems with walking away to the neighbor of the hostile Iran, which will undermine US interests in the Middle East in the long-run. However, this was a political decision with election 2012 coming up, to heck with national security.

“As a candidate for President, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end,” proclaimed the erstwhile Obama.

Behind the scenes a failure had taken place that is quietly being put aside by team Obama. The Administration tried and failed to negotiate with the Iraqi government to extend the US troop presence there in order to ensure the country’s security and stability. The sticking point for the negotiations was immunity for US troops in Iraq.

Deputy National Security Advisors Denis McDonough and Tony Blinken said in a White House briefing that this was always the plan.

Up to now the public had been told that negotiations were indeed on track to continue logistical support utilizing a residual support group which would be necessary for Iraqi operations in key areas such as counterterrorism, air support, intelligence gathering, and training.

Heritage Foundation’s James Phillips writes:

Iraqi political leaders didn’t want to risk the political consequences of extending immunity for U.S. troops. And given the Obama Administration’s eagerness to withdraw from Iraq and unwillingness to confront Iran they didn’t want to put their political necks on the line. Now, as a result, U.S. security interests will suffer–bilateral U.S.–Iraqi cooperation in fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq and radical pro-Iranian Shia militias will be limited, and the ability to contain Iran will be weakened.

While now leaving a security vacuum in Iraq the Obama administration via Hillary Clinton at the State Department is already telegraphing warnings to Iran:

“Iran would be badly miscalculating if they did not look at the entire region and all of our presence in many countries in the region, both in bases, in training, with NATO allies, like Turkey.”

Clinton is being burned in effigy in Pakistan and I’m sure in some Iranian quarter that same respect is being shown to the US Secretary of State. But talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. An America withdrawal of troops is the strongest statement sent by Obama and his minions so they can squawk all they want during the Sunday talk show circuit, facts are facts. This is demonstrating yet one more show of United States foreign policy weakness abroad.

I don’t wish to see America troops deployed around the world and particularly in hostile environments. However, after the long fight to secure Iraq, all progress made thus far may be jeopardized.

Barack Obama has now established one more talking point to shore up his feckless political base on the campaign trail but this comes at the expense of US national security.

Remember, in the last presidential election cycle Barack Obama promised he would negotiate with Iran and their terrorist leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. How is that working out?

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines: