RNC's Bold Ultimatum
The lapdog media isn't backing down in its thinly veiled attempts to prop up their next candidate for 2016: Hillary Clinton. Both NBC and CNN are planning projects, which many have described as nothing more than a “kiss” to Hillary Clinton. The film projects are set to air before the 2016 election, when Hillary is expected by many to be the Democrat nominee for president. It's no coincidence that the talk of her becoming the nominee becomes a roar and then suddenly two networks decide to do a movie or mini-series on her. The media is in the process of anointing their next leader. The Republican National Committee has decided to fight back in what chairman Reince Priebus calls “political ads masked as unbiased entertainment.” Priebus' letter to NBC Universal and CNN International gives the networks an ultimatum: Pull production of the projects by the RNC's summer meeting August 14th or the RNC will pull its participation of any 2016 prima ry debates hosted by the networks. If you will recall, the primary debates garnered strong ratings in the last election cycle. CNN has responded to Priebus' ultimatum by saying, “Should the GOP decide not to participate we would find it curious, as limiting their debate participation seems to be the ultimate disservice to voters.” Would the loss of debate participation on CNN and NBC be all that troubling? After all, these primary debates have become nothing more than a way for the lapdog media to ask wedge questions on issues that will eventually be used to pin them down if they become the candidate in the general election. I'd much prefer to see candidates participate in townhalls where you, the American people, can ask them questions rather than the liberal media with an agenda. These debates too often have become about the moderators and the networks and not about the issues. While this issue over Hillary Clinton's media love-fest may the straw tha t broke the camels back, perhaps the RNC should be looking to change the nature of primary debates anyway.
Fort Hood Trial Begins
The trial of the Fort Hood shooter, Major Nidal Hasan, begins today. Almost four years ago, Hasan opened fire at the military base in Fort Hood, killing 13 people and wounding 32 others. It was the worst non-combat attack on a military base in US history. The shooting remains disheartening and controversial for many reasons, one of which being the fact that the Obama administration insists on labeling the shooting as nothing more than “workplace violence.” However, there is plenty of evidence to show that this was more than that: This was an act of terrorism in the name of radical Islam. With all that the Obama administration still considers this an incident of “workplace violence.” This is an outrage to many. In fact, more than 130 people, including victims of the shooting, have joined in a lawsuit to sue the federal government for damages. They argue that Hasan's radicalization was known but ignored because of “political correctness.&r dquo; This administration has a history of ignoring facts in the face of political correctness and radical Islam. It seems willing to deny truth and facts at the expense of American lives. Just look at the belabored attempt by this administration to convince us that al Qaeda has been decimated and is on the run, only to leave four Americans to die in Benghazi.
I Have Another Issue
In looking closer at the Fort Hood shooting, perhaps what is equally infuriating to many, particularly the victims, is the willingness of the government to coddle Hasan. For example, he has been allowed to grow a beard, even though the Army forbids it. A local NBC affiliate points out that Hasan has received extraordinary treatment while in jail, including helicopter rides to and from the jail thanks to taxpayer dollars. He has also continued to receive his military salary, collecting close to $300,000 since the shooting. While this is military protocol, some have pointed out that if civilians work for the defense department and are accused of a crime for which a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed, they could see their pay suspended after just seven days. Why not consider that in this case? The real injustice lies in the fact that while Hasan collects his salary, the victims and the families of the victims of his shooting are denied certain benefits and military decorations because of the Obama administration's insistence that this was not an act of terrorism. Hasan will be representing himself at the trial and given the chance to cross-examine victims of his own shooting. In his opening statement, he said the evidence will show that he is the shooter. He also apologized for any “mistakes” he's made as an imperfect Muslim, but did not apologize for filling American soldiers. For more on this, click here.