Turns Out We Can’t Beat the Russians

Anyone thinking that Obama might find his backbone and actually stand up to Putin’s imperialism better think again:

“Our question was: Would NATO be able to defend those countries {the Baltic states}?” Ochmanek recalls.

The results were dispiriting. Given the recent reductions in the defense budgets of NATO member countries and American pullback from the region, Ochmanek says the blue team was outnumbered 2-to-1 in terms of manpower, even if all the U.S. and NATO troops stationed in Europe were dispatched to the Baltics — including the 82nd Airborne, which is supposed to be ready to go on 24 hours’ notice and is based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

“We just don’t have those forces in Europe,” Ochmanek explains. Then there’s the fact that the Russians have the world’s best surface-to-air missiles and are not afraid to use heavy artillery.

After eight hours of gaming out various scenarios, the blue team went home depressed. “The conclusion,” Ochmanek says, “was that we are unable to defend the Baltics.”

The active Russian Army is stated at 395,000 – Poland, the closest nation with a large military force has 120,000 troops. Germany, next closest, has just under 61,000. The French army, a little further off, has 115,000. That works out to 99,000 less than the Russian army, when you combine them all together. Small wonder that even with the US Army in Europe augmented by the 82nd Airborne that we can’t get the job done – and this probably supposes that we could get the French and Germans to go along (getting the Poles to go along wouldn’t be difficult).

The thing about an army is that you just never know when you’re going to need one – which is why you’re supposed to keep a top-notch one in being at all times, even when it doesn’t seem particularly necessary. For decades now the Europeans have continually reduced the size of their military force – they got it into their heads that there would never be another major European war. Now we’ve got the Russian bear trying to rebuild the Russian Empire and no one has an army in being capable of stopping the Russians. The only way to actually stop Putin if, say, he decided to occupy Estonia is to declare war on Russia, build up a massive army, and then invade. This is not something which is going to recommend itself to European and American politicians.

Welcome back to the real world, folks. We’re in quite a pickle, right now. Not only does no one respect of fear us, but we simply do not have the military power to make anyone respect or fear us. On the other hand, our military is now almost perfectly politically correct – with only a few Marines still to be forced into line. Great, huh?

51 thoughts on “Turns Out We Can’t Beat the Russians

  1. Cluster September 21, 2015 / 8:08 am

    ….we simply do not have the military power to make anyone respect or fear us

    Correction: We simply do not have a President to make anyone respect or fear us. NOBODY has any respect for our current President. He has lied repeatedly to Americans and governed against their wishes on many domestic issues, and is a complete coward on the international stage. Case in point:

    “At night we can hear them screaming, but we’re not allowed to do anything about it,” the Marine’s father, Gregory Buckley Sr., recalled his son telling him before he was shot to death at the base in 2012. He urged his son to tell his superiors. “My son said that his officers told him to look the other way because it’s their culture.”

    Rampant sexual abuse of children has long been a problem in Afghanistan, particularly among armed commanders who dominate much of the rural landscape and can bully the population. The practice is called bacha bazi, literally “boy play,” and American soldiers and Marines have been instructed not to intervene — in some cases, not even when their Afghan allies have abused boys on military bases, according to interviews and court records.

    If we no longer fight to stop child rape regardless of who the perpetrator is, we have certainly lost our moral compass. Of course when the President’s party is willing to shut down the government in defense of harvesting organs from late term aborted babies, why should any one be surprised?

    • Bob Eisenhower September 21, 2015 / 7:44 pm

      New topic, I did NOT guess Walker to be the first one out. Daaaang!

  2. Retired Spook September 21, 2015 / 8:37 am

    I keep thinking back to this moment in March, 2012 when Obama got caught on an open mike.

  3. Amazona September 21, 2015 / 10:10 am

    The United States was once a beacon of freedom and opportunity. We fought for freedom, for ourselves and for others. We honored our word, we defended our allies, and we had respect.

    None of that is true today. None of it. The closest thing we offer the world now is the “opportunity” to line up at a trough and become part of a Dependent Class, while the Productive Class is ordered to feed, clothe and house it. Freedom is only a word now, lost in history, as it has been redefined as the “freedom” to chose our genders, to hijack words like “gay” and “queer” and “marriage” to mean things they were never intended to mean, to issue Wanted posters for Americans with bounties offered for their deaths, to call for the murder of our police officers, to wallow in crudity and obscenity and profanity, but it no longer means freedom from the tyranny of the mob or of the Central Authority and it no longer means freedom of religion if you are a Christian.

    We scorn and disdain our old allies, while bowing to our enemies and going so far in appeasing them that we end up siding with them against the peoples and nations we once called friends. Our word is meaningless, as is our own Constitution, as the Ruling Elite simply make laws or ignore laws.

    We not only do not have respect from others, we have no respect for ourselves. The nations we grovel to in search of acceptance openly despise us and call for our destruction, while pocketing the money we give them and plotting our end. We not only stand by and tolerate the sexual abuse of children, we openly and in many cases proudly finance the slaughter of children, and their dissection, often while still living, into body parts for sale. The military men and women who once represented our dedication to freedom are now instructed by their officers to turn the other way and ignore vicious and violent attacks on the weak and innocent.

    This is evidently what it takes to make a Michelle Obama finally—FINALLY—respect this nation, but it is what it takes for me to feel shame for it.

    • Cluster September 21, 2015 / 10:47 am

      Very well put. And now we see the Pope of all people, ignoring the civil rights abuses of Cuba and demonizing capitalism, an economic model that has elevated the living conditions and the lives of the lower class far more than any other economic model in the history of this planet. In my opinion the Pope is a charlatan and a coward who is embracing the elitist doctrine in the hopes of keeping his Church relevant and to maintain the revenue stream.

    • Mark Moser September 22, 2015 / 3:36 pm

      “We” don’t do anything like that. I did not vote for these lawless heathens. They don’t represent me and they don’t even bother pretending to. If they followed the Constitution, which last I checked was still the supreme law of the land, then I might be culpable for some of their actions as an American, but they don’t, so I’m not.

      We have a huge problem on our side of the house too. The establishment is either incompetent or playing for the other side. Either way, no solution looks to be forth coming. Pitchforks, hoods and torches may be the only hope left for freedom loving people. I’m sure it’s not Trump and his pet squirrel.

  4. Amazona September 21, 2015 / 11:36 am

    I am so tired of Pope Francis. I am less harsh than you about his motives, as he may well be another of those fuzzy-minded well-meaning but ignorant dupes who create so much chaos and havoc, but the man is a mess. He is the head of the Catholic Church. Period. He is infallible, according to Church doctrine, ONLY in areas of Church doctrine. It is increasingly clear that when he steps outside the very narrow confines of specific Catholic doctrine he is an idiot.

    However, he is an idiot with an international pulpit, which makes him a very dangerous idiot.

    It is people like this who don’t even bother to compare two simple equations: Which is better for the dignity of a man and the welfare of his family, a job which pays him so he can provide for that family or lining up for handouts from others to feed them and house them and clothe them? Because THIS is what it comes down to, and this is the primary difference between capitalism and socialism. One of the cardinal sins is envy, yet the Pope’s anti-capitalism bias is really based not on what is best for the person employed by the capitalist but by the malignant envy of those who have more and the resentment caused by this envy.

    We do have to remember that American, and by extension Western European, capitalism is different from that of South America and other parts of the world, where there is no opportunity to rise, no meritocracy, and the “capitalist” is just another tyrant with total power over those who have no possibility of changing their lives. One would think that a presumably educated and intelligent man would understand this, and promote the American style of capitalism, in which a man could arrive penniless and with only the shirt on his back, start with a fruit and vegetable cart, and end up employing hundreds of people, each of them with the same opportunity. One with the worldwide pulpit of the Pope has the opportunity to educate people, to explain that the word “capitalism” does not mean the same thing in every nation, to encourage people to support governments which encourage and enable true capitalism in its best sense.

    Power does corrupt, and I think the power of the papacy has corrupted this man to the point where, like Obama, he is too in love with the sound of his own voice and the prospect of being a messiah.

    • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 12:49 pm

      What is capitalism? In modern America it is Boeing using its clout as a major donor to politicians to help ensure the Iran deal gets a pass…so they can sell advanced jets to people who want to kill Americans. Lenin was a liar in most things, but he never spoke truer when he said that capitalists would sell them the hang-man’s rope. Capitalism is also moving our jobs to China not really because it is so much cheaper (given energy and other costs, such as the cost of sending the stuff back here) but because it is just easier to do business in a place where a few well-placed bribes allows you to do anything you want.

      It is true that Pope Francis grew up in a nation where this sort of thing was more rampant and insidious than in the United States – but the United States is heading towards the Argentine model, not away from it, and it is our large banks and corporations which are leading the way. But it must always be kept in mind that the Catholic Church has never been in favor of capitalism – it can’t be, because a capitalist system holds that the central purpose of work is profit. Not that profit is bad, but if profit is held to be above all other considerations then you get things like lubricating the Congress to get a deal which allows you to sell jets to bloodthirsty tyrants. Better for Boeing not to make that money – even, if some other airplane manufacturer makes the money. In other words, if the people who ran Boeing were Catholic, they wouldn’t have worked to maximize profits, but would have worked to make a good profit by doing what is right. That is the difference between a Capitalist system and a Distributist system. Equally, the Catholic Church has always condemned socialism – and the concept of government hand-outs and welfare dependency. We must, of course, provide for the poor…but the way to provide for the poor is to make it so that there is work for the poor…and work which pays enough so that a man or woman, working hard and living frugally, can save enough money to pay for retirement and leave a legacy for the children (one thing about both modern capitalism and socialism, by the way, is that both systems favor fiat money…in other words, both systems favor inflationary monetary policy which precisely steals the money saved by the poor…which encourages them, under both system, to be profligate while young and dependent while old).

      Now, a lot of people got on the Pope for being in the same place as Raul Castro – who made a communist speech. Given that Castro is a communist, I’m rather surprised that anyone is upset that he made a communist speech. Whatever the content of the speech, it wasn’t the Pope making it. Is the Pope only supposed to be present when a politician will give an orthodox, Catholic speech? He’d have to limit his travels to Malta and the Philippines. The Pope is in Cuba not to lend aid to Castro’s communist regime – but to preach the Gospel and try to get the Church a bit more freedom to operate in Cuba. It is, perhaps, too much to expect Castro to convert back to his old faith…but any bit of freedom secured for the Church in Cuba means that must less of Cuba is under communist domination. Just as in Poland in the 1980’s, that little bit of freedom can lead to great things…including the end of the communist regime. It will certainly do better than just injecting capitalism – we were told that if capitalism came to China, they’d move towards liberty. How’d that work out? Not so well…but if we could get the Church to be free in China, that would mean something (and that is why China so diligently suppresses the Church).

      • Cluster September 21, 2015 / 2:23 pm

        ….because a capitalist system holds that the central purpose of work is profit.

        Wrong. The central purpose of a capitalist enterprise is to make a profit, and that is for the purpose of retaining jobs, and/or expanding jobs for the people who do the work. Without profits companies are unable to expand and/or even retain employment, and more importantly, pay taxes that feed the government. While their may be some unscrupulous capitalists that is an indictment on the person, not the system. You don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water because the fact of the matter is, capitalism not only creates a higher standard of living for all classes, it also inspires innovation that will lead us to a better future. No other economic system even comes close to matching that record, and people like the Pope should be telling the truth.

      • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 5:52 pm

        They do have to profit – indeed, if they don’t, there’s no point in doing the work. But profits uber alles is what we’ve got…and thus our manufacturing is done in China and we’re witnessing the GOP make sure that the Iran deal can go forward so that Boeing can sell jets to Iran.

        Rush went on quite the rant about the Commie Environmentalist Pope today – one thing he said is a common statement by those defending modern capitalism: if it wasn’t for modern capitalism, we’d all be poor and dying of disease. But modern capitalism is an 18th century development – and rather late in the 18th century, into the bargain; and the real triumph of capitalism in economic policy didn’t come until the Manchester School of the mid-19th century. The bottom line is that before capitalism got roaring, we already had the steam engine, indoor plumbing and a smallpox vaccine. Seems to me that without wild fire capitalism, we would have eventually stumbled upon the electric generator (especially as by the late 18th century a lot of research into electricity had already been done) and thus had everything we need to eventually get an I Pad. It is true that with the advent of full blown capitalism that things moved a lot faster – but in the fast movement we also got the sickening slums of Victorian England, the rise of a discontented working class in Russia and the first mass importation of cheap, foreign labor into the United States: all of these things tending towards the build up of the socialist ideal, which has been nothing but baleful. Perhaps a little slower development would have been better – it certainly could not have been worse. Industrialization is fine – super-duper-industrialization in a few years leads to things like GULAG…or to things like China’s horrific corruption and industrial pollution on an astonishing and increasingly deadly scale.

        There is also a difference between those who first build up the industrial combines and those who take over, later. Alfred Krupp took over his dad’s failing steel mill at the age of 14 and had to put in massive sweat equity to make it a going concern. But hard work and determination he built up his firm into one of the largest manufacturers in Europe (a great deal of the rails which built the initial American rail road system were manufactured in Krupp’s Essen). He died – and his son took over; and proceeded to make himself even richer by bribing various members of the German Armed forces and government agencies in order to secure lucrative contracts from the government…eventually Alfred’s son offed himself when a morals scandal threatened to ruin him socially. Alfred’s grand-daughter then officially took over, but really management of the firm was in the hands of her husband (a former government bureaucrat) and the board of the company (large numbers of which were also former bureaucrats). This allowed Krupp to become even more tightly entwined with the German government, thus allowing the firm to become even more profitable. With the defeat of Germany in World War One, things got a little dicey – but the Krupp firm immediately started planning for a re-match of the war because, hey, you can either make products people want or you can just sell to the government what you bribe the government to want: which is easier? The Krupp firm eventually came to the clever conclusion that Adolf Hitler was just the man they needed and so funded his final political campaigns which gave him absolute power…and massive contracts for Krupp. Good job “capitalists”.

        But that is pretty much how is always goes – if anyone thinks that the people who run our allegedly capitalist enterprises think that they for a moment want free enterprise and limited government, then I’ve got a bridge to sell them in Brooklyn. It is precisely those leaders of capitalism who want to import cheap labor; who want to send our jobs overseas; who want a massive, regulatory State to protect them against competition. Now, to be sure, the supporter of theoretic capitalism will correctly state that this isn’t what he’s about – he wants free markets. Yes. Good. Wonderful. But even if you broke up the whole system today and set up an absolutely free market tomorrow, then in 50 years you’d be right back where you started…because those who enter the market today will build up wealth and then hand that wealth over to people who will only want to do one thing: stay rich. Just like our capitalists of today, they’ll start to back State socialism because that is easier and better for them. This is human nature. Rely on it: people will seek unfair advantage. Not all of them – but enough of them; and as such people lack a sense of honor and decency, it will be them who will do whatever is necessary to game the system in their favor.

        Now, the socialist solution is to idiotically put the government in charge – as if the people who wind up running the government won’t be made up of the same people running the corporations (except even more irresponsible because they don’t even have to make a profit). But because socialists are stupid one way, it doesn’t mean we have to be foolish the other. Neither unbridled capitalism nor socialism is the answer – the answer is a Distributist economy in which small- and mid-sized economic entities are predominant; just as small- and mid-sized political entities have most the power. Things have to be hacked back from time to time – governments and corporations. There is no stasis – no place where it’ll all be swell. We have to look at things as they are and see if they fit into what we want – and if they don’t, then they have to go. Right now, the nutshell of it is that the Department of Commerce and Goldman Sachs both have to go – that is what we need. An end to large concentrations of power. Do that, and we’ll all be better off…

      • Cluster September 21, 2015 / 8:24 pm

        You seem to be obsessed with big business and crony capitalism, which exists of course and needs to be remedied but that’s hardly an indictment on the economic platform of capitalism. I can almost guarantee you that I wouldn’t be typing this on my portable MacBook Air if free market capitalism didn’t exist. But again you’re missing the point, and that is standard of living. No one can argue the fact that free market capitalism has created a higher standard of living for all economic classes, and a society of which people literally die trying to be a part of, so I find it appalling that the Pope has chosen to over look the myriad of human rights abuses throughout the world, particularly in the country he was just in, to take time to lecture the US on the perils of capitalism, and for God’s sakes (pun intended) over air conditioning:


        A real Christian, in my opinion should be focused on the Christians in the middle east who are being beheaded. He should be focused on the many countries involved in human trafficking. He should be focused on the plight of many Africans who are suffering greatly under their oppressive regimes. He should be focused on helping the current throngs of migrants who are flooding Europe fleeing countries that don’t have free market capitalism, etc., etc.. There are numerous world problems that demand his attention yet here he is in the creature comforts of capitalism lecturing us on our way of life.

        This Pope is a fraud in my opinion. Nothing more than a political hack. But Casper thinks he’s great, so there’s that. I suspect Casper may change his mind though when he finds out that the Pope is against late term abortion. Just a hunch.

      • Cluster September 21, 2015 / 8:40 pm

        And Mark, I don’t consider this is as an indictment on the Catholicism, rather on the Pope as a man. We are all fallible.

      • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 10:11 pm

        I think the Pope has been quite vigorous in defending Christianity. Things like this:

        In a strongly worded statement to American Catholics, Pope Francis declared that marriage between one man and one woman is “under attack from powerful cultural forces,” and urged Americans to defend “those freedoms upon which your nation was founded,” the cornerstone of which is “religious liberty.”

        The message from Pope Francis, signed by Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, was sent to participants in an international conference organized by the Knights of Columbus, which opened Tuesday in Philadelphia. The convention, attended by some 2,000 people, is being held in Philadelphia to prepare for Francis’ visit there next month for the eighth World Meeting of Families.

        and this

        In what has become a common thread for his Holy Week comments this year, Pope Francis on Monday asked for the world not to remain on the sidelines, “mute and inert,” as Christians are persecuted and killed around the world.

        Francis pleaded for “intense prayers” and “concrete and tangible help” in defense and protection “of our brothers and sisters, [who are] persecuted, exiled, killed, beheaded, for the mere fact of being Christians.”

        The pope called those victims modern-day martyrs, greater in number than those of the first centuries.

        “I hope that the international community doesn’t remain mute and inert in the face of this unacceptable crime, which is a worrying drift of the most basic of human rights,” Francis said, adding that he hopes the world stops “turning its eyes away.”…

        The Pope, of course, commands no military force and so can’t come to the rescue of persecuted Christians in a tangible way – and, additionally, you will find the Church walking a very fine line in dealings with Islam because the first people to suffer whenever Muslims get upset at the Pope are Christians in Muslim nations. Its all well and good to talk real tough, but as it will be some poor woman and her children in Syria who pay the blood price for it when he speaks, the Pope does have to be careful. But even with that, he’s made more and more vigorous statements about the matter than Benedict XVI did…and I don’t even recall Pope St. John Paul II making the sort of comments Francis has made.

        You are correct that a lot of people on the left are thrilled with Pope Francis, and a good deal of that stems from the MSM, especially, highlighting statements where the Pope appears to come down on the side of the left (he really doesn’t – no more than he came down on the side of the right in the above quote about marriage). You are also correct that a lot of liberals are in for a big disappointment on some rather crucial-to-the-left issues. The upcoming pronouncement on the family will be especially irritating to the left. But you’ve got to keep your eye firmly on what Pope Francis is about – bringing people back to the Church. Remember, the Pope firmly believes that the Church he leads was founded by God while he lived among us as a man (I believe it, too). Far more important than theological perfection is the mere fact of getting people into the Church and availing themselves of the sacraments. Do that, and in the by and by a great deal of the things which are wrecking our society will fade away. And getting into Cuba and getting even the smallest easement of communist oppression will both help people become Christian, and help Cuba eventually become free.

        Now, as for my fits about capitalism – I understand that you have an idea of it which is very far away from some of the things going on in the name of capitalism today. You dislike the corrupt deals as much as I do. I just take one more step and say it will always be like that whenever someone gets a high concentration of wealth. Wealth is power – and power corrupts. And you can see that corruption day by day in our nation and around the world. Only by breaking up the concentrations of power – wherever they are – can we be free.

      • Cluster September 21, 2015 / 9:18 pm

        Who decides which life is more important? What if the woman was 50 years old, wouldn’t the baby have more utility in their life span thus more important to the State? Whoever decides which life is more important would have to take that into consideration, right? And what if the woman wants the baby to live?

      • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 10:14 pm

        It is never necessary to save the life of the mother.

      • Amazona September 21, 2015 / 11:22 pm

        But the heart and soul of capitalism is not the very rich—it is the small business, which employs a few or a few hundred, which is most often created from nothing by the motivated and the talented.

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 10:58 am

        Amen. Big business can be just as corrupt as big government. I am always amused by people who condemn big business and look towards big government as the solution. Can anyone say – Bernie Sanders?

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 12:02 pm

        That is the brick wall we run up against in liberals – they can too easily see corruption in corporate America, but they just can’t see it in government America…as if the people running the government aren’t made of the same clay that the people running corporations are. I still remember that conversation a few years back with a liberal when I finally managed to get him to acknowledge that, indeed, a bureaucrat can from time to time be corrupt…his answer was to hire more bureaucrats to keep an eye on those already there…

      • 02casper September 21, 2015 / 11:43 pm

        Mark, I truly consider the Pope a great man. To the point of me rejoining the church.

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:57 am

        Don’t fuss around with it – just get yourself along to Reconciliation and be done with it, already. And welcome home.

      • Amazona September 22, 2015 / 4:31 pm

        “…I truly consider the Pope a great man. To the point of me rejoining the church.”

        This strikes me as the “religious” version of Identity Politics. Identity Politics is a decision to support a political party or movement because of attraction to or admiration of a PERSON, rather than an objective analysis and resulting allegiance to a political doctrine. Here we have someone who is trying to convey the impression that he was once a Catholic and left the Church, and is now thinking of “rejoining the church (sic)” because of an attraction to or admiration of a PERSON rather than an allegiance to a religious doctrine. The Church is the same Church it was when he turned his back on it, for the most part—-its basic doctrine is the same, its history and catechism, so it is not that he has re-examined his reasons for leaving. It’s just an identity thing, a fan club kind of allegiance that evidently depends on personality instead of ideology.

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 5:06 pm

        Casper has no intention of adhering to the Catholic doctrine, rather he wants to be a part of the enamored masses who believe the Catholic Church may soon become the equivalent of Netroots convention. In other words, Casper is a sheep, and an effeminate one at that.

    • Bob Eisenhower September 21, 2015 / 3:53 pm

      Wow, it’s tough to be a Pontiff these days.

      Look, like it or not, this Pope is working to liberalize Catholicism. He is not crazy, he has a vision and is pursuing it. I disagree with a lot of that vision but I do like a leader with vision and I’ll give him leeway to see where it goes (as if I have the power to do anything but “give” him leeway, lol).

      As for him speaking in Communist Cuba, he is doing what every Pope has done in history, he is proselytizing to the masses. He does not care if those masses are in Cuba or Malta, he is going to preach the Gospel to empower and maybe grow his flock.

      • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 5:57 pm

        You can’t liberalize Catholicism.

      • Bob Eisenhower September 21, 2015 / 7:04 pm

        Talk to someone who strictly goes pre-Vatican II and they would say the Church has already been liberalized quite a bit.

      • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 9:52 pm

        Yes – and I’ve run into such; they seem to believe that the Church is the reward for the perfect rather than the medicine for the sick.

      • Amazona September 21, 2015 / 11:15 pm

        I’m with Bob on this. The Church decided to move Left and become PC, as shown by Vatican 2, and it has been downhill since then. Nuns advocating abortion, the Pope granting an audience to Cafeteria Catholic Nancy Pelosi, the creation of seminaries as havens for predatory homosexuals who then saw the Church and its postpubescent boys as a great hunting ground under the protection of the Church, the movement of the once-great Mass into ordinaryland barely discernible from Protestant services—-none of it has been an improvement.

        I also agree with Cluster, in that the real problem talked about in this thread is this Pope. The last thing the Church needs is a rock star mentality, looking to create a legacy.

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:56 am

        I wouldn’t put it that way – some liberals got into the Church, but the Church didn’t become liberal. In the aftermath of Vatican II, and with world going off its head morally, some people in the Church decided that it would be a great thing to go along with the world. They did much damage to the Church.

        But, this past weekend at Mass my wife and I noted a nun in habit…which is becoming more common. You will find the pro-choice “nuns” out there…mostly older nuns who bought into the liberal ideas back in the 70’s. The younger nuns are back in habit – and it is those religious bodies who are traditional-minded which are growing by leaps and bounds, while those who got suckered by liberalism are dying out.

        The Church cannot be liberal – it just isn’t possible.

  5. Bob Eisenhower September 21, 2015 / 7:07 pm

    Considering we’ve only had three Popes in the last several decades, his being most Christ-like could be accounted for solely by his waistline.

    • Bob Eisenhower September 21, 2015 / 10:51 pm

      Umm…so Casper’s posts are going to be removed, too? I keep ending up like a street person, talking to myself in these threads.

      • 02casper September 21, 2015 / 11:22 pm

        Apparently a middle aged school teacher from Wyoming scares someone on this blog. I could understand it if I were attacking someone, but I’m not. i support Mark on the pope.

        You “scare” no one. You bore us but do not “scare” us. You are just another troll who tries to get his nose under the tent so you can start in again with your radical left-wing nonsense and attacks on others and push open the door so others of your ilk will think they can come here too. You show your true colors here by attacking Amazona for no reason. //Moderator

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:51 am

        I know – but, he’s still my guy. I’m going Jindal, Cruz, Rubio, flip a coin.

  6. Bob Eisenhower September 21, 2015 / 7:45 pm

    New topic, I did NOT guess Walker to be the first one out. Daaaang!

    • M. Noonan September 21, 2015 / 10:13 pm

      Terribly disappointed – now I’ve only got Jindal left.

      • Amazona September 21, 2015 / 11:09 pm

        ..and Jindal doesn’t have a chance. Nice enough guy, pretty talented, but outclassed by Cruz, Fiorina and Rubio.

      • Retired Spook September 22, 2015 / 4:09 pm

        Jindal had by far the best response to the “would you support a Muslim for President” question.

        “If you can find me a Muslim candidate who is a Republican, who will fight hard to protect religious liberty, who will respect the Judeo-Christian heritage of America, who will be committed to destroying ISIS and radical Islam, who will condemn cultures that treat women as second-class citizens and who will place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution, then yes, I will be happy to consider voting for him or her,” Jindal said.

        “If you can’t, I’ll settle for voting for a Christian governor from Louisiana,” Jindal added.

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:00 pm

        That was a good answer – Jindal has been my guy for President ever since I first found out about him…some years before he became old enough to even run, I believe. I just think that he’s best – unfortunately, I don’t hold out much hope that he’ll be able to do it.

    • Amazona September 21, 2015 / 11:19 pm

      I know. If Walker could have been lifted out of the campaign and just dropped into office, I think he would have made a good president, and I have been a Walker supporter for a couple of years now. But the big show seemed to be a little too big for him.

      BTW, Perry dropped out first. He came into this campaign a lot stronger than last time, and I thought he would have more staying power, as he was looking pretty strong, but I guess he didn’t have the campaign infrastructure to keep it up.

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 11:01 am

        I hope everyone starts to focus on Fiorina, Rubio and Cruz. One of those three should be our nominee. I lean towards either Fiorina or Rubio and I will say again, a Fiorina/Rubio ticket would be unbeatable.

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:46 am

        Can’t say that I’m so confident about Fiorina; but she’s clearly formidable. I think, though, that our Establishment will try for a while to get it for Jeb and when that fails, they’ll stampede over to Rubio, making him our likely nominee. I still think that Jindal is best – and now that Walker is out, he’s the only person in the race that I see will really reform government.

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 11:55 am

        I think you’re underestimating Fiorina. Keep an eye on her.

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:59 am

        She has been impressive – but I can’t forget that she failed to beat Boxer. Now, I realize that it is California…but, come on! Boxer is the most dim-bulb liberal in the Senate!

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 12:57 pm

        A republican winning in the People’s Republic of California is nearly impossible, and she was recovering from breast cancer while she was campaigning.

      • M. Noonan September 22, 2015 / 11:01 pm

        Was discussing this on Twitter today and a CA GOPer gave me four reasons why Carly couldn’t do it. Reasons (2) and (4) were “California”. I noted a fifth reason – “California”. It is hard for anyone with reasonable ideas to advance in CA…

  7. 02casper September 21, 2015 / 11:35 pm

    so amazona, I must really scare you since you have to delete anything I say. BTW, i could have retired this year, but I continue to teach to protect kids from people like you.


    • Amazona September 22, 2015 / 4:39 pm

      For Bob’s sake, as he is new to the blog, I need to point out that casper is a middle school teacher who believes that the Constitution is a “living document” and that believing in the Constitution as it is written means also believing the country should return to slavery and not allowing women to vote. He did say this, though he later denied it, in spite of having his actual post reprinted a couple of times to prove it.

      When I asked if the parents of his students knew of his radical Leftist attitude toward the Constitution, he responded with a very shrill squeal that I was “trying to get him fired !!!!!!!!”

      Now he is stating that he feels his job is “protect kids from people like (me)” which is obviously people who believe in the rule of law, adherence to our Constitution, and the concept that we should first determine our belief regarding the best blueprint for governing the country to establish our political identity.

      Fortunately, he teaches in Casper, Wyoming, a conservative city in a conservative state, so his students most likely come from homes with parents very much like me, who would (and do) find themselves having to re-instruct their children when they come home filled with casper’s Leftist babblings.

      P.S He also lies.

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 5:08 pm

        And remember Rusty who said that he really, really, really believes in the Constitution, but only as a guide post. After all, they didn’t have any elderly poor people back in the days the Constitution was written, so who could have foreseen that?

      • rustybrown2014 September 22, 2015 / 6:23 pm

        You’re a dishonest retard, Cluster.

        Just something to remind us why all of Rusty’s posts are deleted, because he might put up one or two that slide under the radar and then always reverts to this kind of comment. Allowing Casper to post is always a ruse to open the door a little so the other trolls can try to slide in. They travel in packs. //Moderator

      • Bob Eisenhower September 22, 2015 / 6:41 pm


        As you know, I have been trying to keep open dialog, but you are coming on here doing the very thing they all warn me of you. I don’t see any argumentative posts from you in this thread, just vitriol.


        Hello. I guess you are one of the guys I’ve been warned about with whom I keep trying to discuss ideas. While I see warnings about you like I did about Rusty, you have been pretty civil.

        I would love to discuss issues with you. We seem to agree on the topic du thread, but I hope your comments stay civil enough that your posts will be around on the next topic on which we disagree.

      • Cluster September 22, 2015 / 7:28 pm

        Bob, understand that the progressives that frequent this site are wholly indoctrinated in leftist ideology that assumes deep character flaws in their conservative opponents, giving them the false sense of moral superiority they crave and need. They truly believe that conservatives are inherently racist, homophobic xenophobes and all conservative causes are looked upon from that premise, rendering them incapable of civil or reasonable disagreement. Casper recently said that Ben Carson will never be the nominee of the GOP because the base is racist. Straight up. I consider all of them to be completely unworthy of my time. Just FYI

      • Bob Eisenhower September 22, 2015 / 8:47 pm


        I notice the well spoken posts, like these, are not removed. I know the voices against you are many but if you keep things positive and constructive, regardless of things written to you, your posts may stay up. I don’t know that for fact, but I hope so.

        Bob, you need to trust us on this. We used to think the same way and leave troll posts if they were not too offensive, but we finally learned that this just encourages them to come back with more and more vitriol. It would be different if any of them ever had anything of value or interest to say, but all they do is spout recycled Leftist nonsense or engage in vicious personal attacks, usually both at the same time. Any response to any of them brings the rest of them in and within a day or so the blog is swarming with vermin. You sound hopeful of a dialogue with Casper or Rusty but they have proved to us that this will never happen. //Moderator

Comments are closed.