Republicans Warned Obama That U.S. Was Leaving Iraq Too Soon in 2011

President Obama
(kencrow.us)

President Obama reportedly said Thursday that the U.S. would need to help the Iraqi government counter the threat of Islamic militants who are overrunning the nation.

He didn’t say what specific role the U.S. might be forced play

We suppose it’s a good thing that Obama realizes that we can’t afford to have an Islamic Republic of Iraq.

What’s sickening is that this never had to happen. The fact is that Obama removed the American military presence from Iraq in 2011, which was far too soon and too risky.

Simply put, the U.S. was keeping the peace. And Obama was repeatedly warned by congressional Republicans that an early withdrawal would invite chaos and increase the potential for another war, which we would probably be forced to participate in.

Unfortunately the president buckled to his friends on the extreme left who wanted us out of Iraq ASAP. This is what happens when the White House listens to the peaceniks instead of the experts.

What’s ironic is that the anti-war crowd was tired of U.S. casualties in Iraq. Before we left, American military deaths and injuries were at a minimum, because the situation was largely under control.

How many Americans will we lose when we’re forced to return to reinstate the peace?

From Newsmax:

“It was something that was avoidable,” said Sen. Jim Inhofe. “It was something that we warned the president about over a three-year period. Now it’s worse than it was before. It’s very depressing.”

“It’s not like we haven’t seen this problem coming for over a year,” said House Speaker John Boehner. “And it’s not like we haven’t seen, over the last five or six months, these terrorists coming in and taking control of western Iraq. Now they’ve taken control of Masul. They’re 100 miles from Baghdad. And what’s the president doing? Taking a nap.”

Perhaps Obama is napping because he can’t stand to stay awake and watch the disaster his stupid decision is causing.

He ought to be covering his head with his pillow out of pure shame.

 

FLOTUS is Mad Kids Don’t Like Her Lunch Program

Apparently, according to Michelle Obama, it’s the Republicans fault that inner city kids are skipping their lunches at school.

Contributor Stacy Washington weighs in:

Via IJReview:

At a fundraiser Monday, Michelle Obama slammed House Republicans who are pushing to grant waivers to schools that are losing money due to her “Let’s Move!” lunch program. The GOP also seeks to ease the law’s requirements when it is re-authorized next year. None of this sits well with the First Lady:

Michelle Obama told donors that Republicans in Congress were dedicated to obstructing not only her husband’s political ambitions but her own efforts to reduce child obesity.

“We all have a right to expect that our hard-earned taxpayer dollars won’t be spent on junk food for our kids,” she said pointing out that parents have a “right” to expect healthy meals in schools.

Michelle pointed out that “her” legislation and “her” national school lunch standards were drafted by “experts” using “sound science,” but that Republicans will continue their efforts to roll back “her” program anyway. And how does she feel about it?

Read the rest here.

No, no it isn’t the Republicans who are opposing your ridiculous lunch standards.  It’s the KIDS!!!  They hate what you are forcing them to eat, so they are skipping lunch.  How’s that for usurping your “authority” FLOTUS?

Bottom Line: Michelle Obama Is Not An Elected Official – So Why Does She Get to Push Her School Lunch Policies on Congress?

Michelle eating
(Cnsnews.com)

First Lady Michelle Obama wants public schools to quit complaining about her new “healthier” lunch standards, and to stick to the program that has left students starving and schools losing money since it was implemented in 2010.

Mrs. Obama made her views known as the House Appropriations Committee considered a plan this week to allow schools to opt out of the federal lunch standards if they’ve lost money for six months.

School lunch directors from across the country have complained in recent years about drastic drops in revenue tied to the standards that force students to take food they don’t want, and tend to throw away. Some districts have even dumped the federal lunch program altogether, opting to go it alone without federal assistance.

Student revolts – including a viral YouTube video – also erupted in several districts as students have dumped their lunches into overflowing garbage cans, rather than choke down the unappetizing food.
[Read more…]

Obama mad at GOP for standing in his way, even though it saves taxpayers a lot of money


(lamps33.hubpages.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – President Obama is accusing congressional Republicans of being the party of “no.”

Obama said the following, according to ABC News:

“We have a party on the other side that has been captured by an ideology that says ‘no’ to everything, because they claim to a rigid theory that the only way to grow an economy is for the government to be dismantled.”

First of all, our federal government is hardly dismantled. Just take a quick look at the website “usdebtclock.org” and you will see how preposterous that idea is.

Thank goodness someone in Washington D.C. says no sometimes. Imagine if the Democrats had maintained control of the House of Representatives in 2010 and Obama’s free spending had continued to go unchecked.

The fact is that the House GOP majority has forced the president into many budget compromises, including the so-called “sequester” budget cuts, which the president warned would lead to great suffering across the nation. As it turns out, the sequester cuts have helped cut billions from the federal deficit, according to new projections.

“Instead of staying on a path to $4 trillion in federal spending, outlays dropped to $3.546 trillion in fiscal 2012, and to $3.45 trillion in fiscal 2013. This was a four percent decline in spending in nominal terms and closer to seven percent in real terms,” according to the National Review.

“The main factor has been falling government spending, which is a positive force for the economy. And the reason government spending is falling is that the budget caps and the automatic cuts called “sequester,” which were part of the under-appreciated 2011 budget deal between Republicans in Congress and President Obama, are working to force down outlays on non-entitlement programs.

“The Tea Party movement revolved in the 2010 midterm elections and helped sweep into the House fiscally conservative Republicans, and the GOP seized the opportunity. This pivotal election radically changed the direction of our fiscal deterioration.”

The President may not get it, but sometimes restraint is necessary when you have a $17 trillion national debt. We can be thankful to the Founding Fathers for giving us a system of government checks and balances, so that forces of reason can be on hand to check big spenders like Obama.

Authored by Steve Gunn