Jasper Journal

The Secretary of the Navy announced the  other day that a new amphibious ship that  is being built for the navy will be named the USS Gabrielle Giffords. Are they serious? I have nothing against Ms Giffords but is it appropriate to have a ship named after someone who was in congress for only  five years, did nothing extraordinary, but had the misfortune of being shot by a lunatic? Now the fact that she was a democrat congresswoman might have something to do with this if you consider the other ridiculous ship names announced by this administration.

Have you heard of the USS John Murtha? Yes , sadly we have a Navy ship named after a disgraced, corrupt, politician. But hey , he was a long time democrat, so what the heck.  Its only a military thing and who cares what the military  think.  Would you want to serve on board the John Murtha? Would you want to go into harms way on the Gabrielle Giffords?  To some, a name may not mean much; however if one is looking for inspiration and tradition,  I really don’t think these two compare to  service members who gave their lives, or presidents who have led  our nation.  But as Paul often says, “wait, there’s more.”

Yes, the administration really chose well when they named another ship the  USS Cesar Chavez. Hard to believe but here we have a labor activist who described his two years in the navy as the worst two years of his life. Talk about inspiring! I would definitely want to be on board the Chavez; How about you ?

If you haven’t noticed, the administration and the Secretary of the Navy are using this as a way of honoring democrat notables.  At this rate,  I don’t think the Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed can be far behind. But wait a minute, lets not stop there. Lets really honor the people behind this administration: USS Saul Alinsky;  USS Jeremiah Wright; USS Jesse Jackson; and lest we be accused of being  prejudiced against lunatics, the USS Al Sharpton.

There are so many better  examples of selfless sacrifice and heroism in the Navy and Marine Corps that it is truly an affront to ignore these individuals in favor of political tributes.  But that’s what this administration is all about: politics.  Please God do not grant these people another four years. They are mocking our institutions, attacking the capitalist system,  weakening the military, and showing a disregard for the constitution. As we begin President’s Day Weekend, let’s think of how we can work together to find a suitable , electable, candidate to stop the madness.

Finally, before we go tonight, I would like to give a Jasper Journal “shout- out”  to  one of our regular contributors, Beth, who recently celebrated a very special day in North Carolina. Thanks for being part of the blog family. Have a great weekend! See you Monday.

An editorial in Friday’s Washington Times on another Chicago style scam by this administration really got to me. Once again, it involves a Justice Department, led by a deceitful Eric Holder, that is increasingly being used as a partisan  political tool . It is hard to have faith with these people when more and more they prostitute the system and corrupt institutions we desperately need to protect us.  And they are cutting the military because there is not enough money? The editorial is below. When will the formerly mainstream media talk about this?

Washington Times. Friday , Jan 6th

“The Justice Department has been empowered to use millions of dollars intended to go to victims of racial discrimination to enrich pressure groups with close White House ties. It’s another revelation of the means the Obama administration is using to divert funds to political cronies.

Information obtained by the public interest group Judicial Watch has exposed the details of this latest shady deal. On Dec. 28, the United States District Court for the Central District of California issued a consent order in the case of the United States v. Countrywide Financial Corporation et al. Under the terms of the settlement, Countrywide will pay $335 million to 200,000 blacks and Hispanics who took out home loans between 2004 and 2008. The Justice Department claims they were charged higher interest rates than white borrowers not because of poor credit scores but solely because of their race. The payment is intended to “compensate allegedly aggrieved persons for monetary and other damages they may have suffered.”

The aggrieved parties may not be the only beneficiaries of this substantial payout. According to the terms of the consent order, any money not distributed within two years will be given to “qualified organizations that provide services including credit and housing counseling, financial literacy and other related programs targeted at African-Americans and Hispanics.” This could include “non-profit community organizations that provide education, counseling and other assistance to low-income and minority borrowers … .”

The trick of course is defining what organizations are “qualified.” This matter is left to the Justice Department, which admits there are no particular guidelines governing who gets the handouts, and no follow-up as to how the money is actually being spent. This is a shocking lack of accountability, and the practice of giving awards to interest groups that weren’t parties to the original complaint is an affront to the American sense of justice.

Organizations beholden to the Democratic Party and to President Obama in particular stand to gain millions of dollars, which could then be shifted into use for political purposes. It’s another manifestation of the intentional, institutional corruption of American politics. The public has been forced to fund corporate handouts and sweetheart deals to political donors such as occurred in the Solyndra loan debacle. All these efforts are aimed at propping up those in power and seeking maximum benefits for their friends. It comes at the expense of working Americans, the economy and the legitimacy of the political system.

The Countrywide deal is the Justice Department’s latest contribution to reducing the United States to the status of a banana republic.

The Washington Times

The following article is from Paul, responding to recent developments in the Persian Gulf. Thanks Paul,  and a pleasant weekend to all! See you Monday.

“Last Wednesday, Iran stated that it considered the aircraft carrier USS Stennis, which had just departed the Persian Gulf, to be a threat.  It further warned the ship not to return to the Gulf.  The Iranian statements come after a show of military force in the Gulf, to include surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missile firings.  All this activity is to demonstrate that for Iran, closing the Strait of Hormuz would be as easy as “Drinking a glass of water.”

It is not clear if the Iranian threats are mere bluster and rhetoric, or if Tehran really believes that it has the ability to close the Strait.  To be sure, Iran could impose a temporary disruption of maritime traffic, with a concomitant surge in insurance rates and oil prices.  Should it do so, there is no doubt that the United States would order its forces to reopen the Strait.  This is a case where NATO would probably be willing to commit forces to fight alongside us, given European reliance on Persian Gulf oil.  Should Iran engage US/NATO forces, the result would be an unmitigated disaster for Iranian forces.

There are some missions at which the US military does not excel, for a variety of reasons (equipment, rules of engagement, cultural training, expertise, collateral damage issues, etc).   For example, the Armed Forces struggle with nation building, peacekeeping, and many types of counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism operations.  The mission in which the US military does excel is conventional, high-technology warfare.  This is exactly the warfare domain in which the Iranians would engage us and for once we hold the trump cards.

In 1988, Tehran made the mistake of attacking US Navy assets, which were shelling Iranian oil platforms in the southern Persian Gulf.  The US action was in response to Iranian mining of the Gulf, which had damaged the destroyer USS Samuel B. Roberts.  The Iranian Navy sortied to do battle with the US Navy; when the smoke had cleared, three Iranian fast gunboats, one speedboat, and one frigate had been sunk.  Another Iranian frigate, the Sabalan, was hit by a US 500-pound bomb, and was spared from sinking only when the US called off further attacks on the ship as a de-escalation symbol.  Not a single US asset received any battle damage.

While Iranian military capabilities have certainly improved since 1988, those of the US Navy have improved even more.  If Tehran attempts to engage US forces in the Persian Gulf, it will be an unusual case of a nation selecting an asymmetric strategy which plays to an adversary’s strengths and its own weaknesses — in short, suicide.  The Iranian Navy and Air Force will die trying to keep the Strait of Hormuz closed, and they will die in vain, just as they did in 1988.”