Warnings from the Right and Left

In wake of North Korean missile launch, Joe Lieberman and Sarah Palin hammer president on proposed missile defense cuts

North Korean missile launch, as seen from space. (PHOTO: Associated Press)
Former President Ronald Reagan drastically stepped up defense spending, but did not want nuclear war. Instead, he wanted to achieve the same idyllic goals embraced by Barack Obama and liberal Democrats–world peace–but looked to do so in a feasible, realistic way that would render nuclear weapons and defense systems unneeded rather than simply echo the unrealistic fantasies of tweed-clad academics who meet in smoky faculty lounges and merely hope for the mutual eradication of all such weapons.

Reagan moved toward making nuclear weapons obsolete by increasing the power and scope and strength of the American military, by investing in missile defense systems, by employing a proactive and confidence-inspiring attitude toward foreign policy, and by ensuring through a reduced tax burden and other fiscally conservative economic measures that we would be stronger on an individual level here at home. His goals were ridiculed as impossible by longtime Illinois Congressman John Anderson, among others, who insisted that the only way to cut taxes, increase defense spending and balance the budget was through “smoke and mirrors.”

Like Reagan, former President George W. Bush cut taxes to strengthen the American economy, increased intelligence and defense spending, adopted an aggressive foreign policy, and also made giant steps in terms of missile defense. He was derided for it, dismissed as a “cowboy” by traditionally white flag-waving European powers and called “stupid” by the political left in America. But at the end of the day, George W. Bush kept America safe.

President Barack Obama, however, is doing little more than inviting disaster in the name of political correctness and meaningless outward overseas perception, and with each hour he continues down his current path we move closer and closer to the day where America will learn, firsthand, just how dangerous the combination of arrogance and ignorance truly can be.

And people on both sides of the political aisle are taking notice, as in the past 48 hours both former Democrat Sen. Joe Lieberman and conservative Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin have come out staunchly against Barack Obama’s planned cuts in missile defense spending.

First, when it comes to matters of foreign policy and national defense, I’ve always had a soft spot for Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman.

Today, the former Democrat criticized President Barack Obama’s planned cuts in missile defense systems and spending, saying that such cutbacks would endanger the United States and U.S. interests, and could lead to the perception that America cannot be depended upon by her allies. In a letter penned by Lieberman to President Obama, he wrote that our cooperation on missile defense systems “is now a critical component of many of our closest security partnerships around the world,” and expressed worries that cuts to missile defense spending and defense spending in general “could inadvertently undermine these relationships and foster the impression that the United States is an unreliable ally.”

Liberal Democrats, it seems, know no consequences other than unintended adverse consequences, and this is one that I’ve written about several times here at America’s Right. As I’ve mentioned before, my wife’s family is Polish and many still live overseas. Poland, of course, engaged in a heated internal debate about whether or not to get mixed up in plans to host the American missile defense system. On one hand, the Poles feared reprisal from Russia, but on the other, the nation has never forgotten the lessons of the Westerplatte.

At the end of the day, Poland stuck its neck out in support of former President George W. Bush and his missile shield, only to watch as the new American president suspended the plans after Poland’s intent was already conveyed to Russia and to the rest of the world. High and dry, Barack Obama left Poland, for no reason other than to perpetuate his idyllic worldview of a planet free from nuclear weapons–and, presumably, free from all evil, poverty, death, destruction, and capitalism–regardless of the consequences.

Secondly, even though it was a single comment from Saturday Night Live’s Tina Fey which set the tone for much of the derisiveness toward Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin during last year’s presidential direction, Fey’s refrain of “and I can see Russia from my house” underscores much of why Palin is in a unique position to discuss missile defense.

In fact, Palin is charged with command over the 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard, the only National Guard unit on permanent active duty, and because of her proximity to Russia–thank you, Tina Fey–and to North Korea is privy to matters of national defense and security which other governors and legislators may not necessarily be exposed to.

Such a unique position as Alaskan governor should have added weight to a press release offered yesterday by the governor’s office in Juneau which the mainstream press, hesitant to offer anything which could even slightly portray Palin as competent, seemed to inexplicably overlook. From the release:

“I am deeply concerned with North Korea’s development and testing program which has clear potential of impacting Alaska, a sovereign state of the United States, with a potentially nuclear armed warhead,” Governor Palin said. “I can’t emphasize enough how important it is that we continue to develop and perfect the global missile defense network. Alaska’s strategic location and the system in place here have proven invaluable in defending the nation.”

Governor Palin stressed the importance of Fort Greely and the need for continued funding for the Missile Defense Agency. The governor is firmly against U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ proposed $1.4 billion reduction of the Missile Defense Agency. Greely’s isolated location in Alaska as well as its strategic location in the Pacific allows for maximum security and development of the country’s only ground-based missile defense complex.

“Our early opposition to reduced funding for the Missile Defense Agency is proving to be well-founded during this turbulent time,” Governor Palin said. “I continue to support the development and implementation of a defensive missile shield based in Alaska. We are strategically placed to defend the critical assets of the United States and our allies in the Pacific Theater.”

Anybody who is surprised by Barack Obama’s funding priorities–for example, pulling $1.4 billion from missile defense but gladly offering more than $5 billion to organizations like ACORN–should be given a strict talking-to for the failure and refusal to pay attention during last year’s election, where his disdain for all things military was discussed by a wide variety of fair or right-leaning media outlets, including here at America’s Right.

On May 21, 2008 for example, I wrote that Obama’s “laissez-faire attitude toward the Global War on Terror and national security, combined with his twisted, suicidal faith in the hearts and consciences of some of the most evil men in the world, should worry every American who values their freedom — not to mention their head.” With that sentiment, I included a short video:

To say that Obama’s movements toward American disarmament (while adaptation to changing technologies and a changing world is certainly needed, stepping down missile defense and shelving the F-22 fighter jet go against such a concept) were somehow surprising is to ignore everything that we have learned about Barack Obama, even what we have learned from Barack Obama himself. Conservatives everywhere need to wake up, and need to prepare to explain to possible fence-sitters exactly where this president goes so wrong.

In the meantime, I continue to find it amazing how, on so many issues, former president George W. Bush still remains the preferred scapegoat among blame-shifters small and large on the American political left, even months after the election of the liberal Messiah. I’ll tell you what, though — Bush may not have been able to properly pronounce the word “nuclear,” but at least he understood that word’s geopolitical importance and the threat such weapons could present.

And between you and me, I’d rather have an American president who mispronounces “nuke-u-lar” than an ignorant, idyllic, naive Neville Chamberlain type whose bedside Webster’s Dictionary in the White House residence is perpetually open to “detente.”




    May I please repeat myself?

    President Undermining Strategic Safeguards Youthfully

  2. tm says:

    Standing Ovation Jeff.

  3. MUJERLATINA says:

    You asked us a couple of days ago: how do you say ‘heartless and ignorant’ in Spanish. Today I reply: ‘delincuente e ignorante = Obama.’ I will also add: ‘sin remordimiento…’

  4. Gail B says:

    That does it! Whether AKA Obama is “legitimate” or not, he needs to be removed from the White House. NOW!

  5. goddessdivine says:

    All I have to say, is, that video is SCARY.

  6. Let us move forward says:

    I believe it will take a nuclear Pearl Harbor for all Americans to wake up. It has been 64 years since the bomb was used on a city and the last surface test was in the 1950′s?

    The majority of the American public and most of the World today has no idea what devastation a single weapon can produce. One weapon could wipe out Israel.

    Before now, the biggest worry was a bomb smuggled in and detonated inside the States. Now the new nuclear powers will be able to use missiles. The entities controlling the new bombs will hardly be rational.

    The nuclear attack is going to happen. We will see an atmospheric detonation. The question is where and how soon.

    Find those old civil defense pamphlets and find out what you can do to protect yourself if there is an attack. We should be working on an early warning system and informing the public of the potential danger as well as working on the defense shield. Our defensive capabilities could very well stay ahead of developing missile technology.

    Now I know how my parents felt in the 50s and 60s.

    If the attack is on the United States, will Mr. O be willing to push the button to retaliate? Or will he take a “hit” for us?

  7. Ken says:

    Gates’ new prioritization makes a lot of sense.

    “But, it is important to remember that every defense dollar spent to over-insure against a remote or diminishing risk – or, in effect, to “run up the score” in a capability where the United States is already dominant – is a dollar not available to take care of our people, reset the force, win the wars we are in, and improve capabilities in areas where we are underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I will not take.”

  8. Anonymous says:

    If Barry Borak Hussein Soetoro Obama is not the fore runner to the anti-Christ I will eat your socks. Just come visit me in 2020… and I’ll do sock soup.


    John is spinning in his grave. I feel that even if the Korean missile test had been in Cuba the administraation would have panzied to it as well.

  10. Anonymous says:

    I don’t why folks are outraged by these ridiculous decisions being made by this administration. It was quite obvious from the start what this president’s agenda would be. His questionable past relations alone should speak for itself. It’s not like he’s hidden his agenda. In fact, he’s been extremely forthright. Go ask Dr. Khalid Monseur or the Saudi’s who financed his college education at Harvard. Go ask Tony Resko- who is now tied in with the Gov. Blago case…. and the list goes on…
    they will tell you… There is an agenda here. And it may not be the one you want to hear. Therefore, don’t be surprised. Just organize.

    Attend your local Tea Party on April 15th.

  11. CAL says:

    The problem with Lieberman is that you cannot have it both ways. Obama justifies his huge new spending by reducing spending in other areas – well that means defense. So while Lieberman is voting for all this ridiculous new spending, he is putting defense spending in jeopardy. So, yes, I am glad that he is speaking out on missile defense, but he needs to back his words with actions and not vote for new government spending that will bankrupt this country and keep us from financing our ability to protect ourselves.

  12. BlueWater says:

    WE NEED A REAL PRESIDENT is very funny.

    What? Quoting Palin? I thought she was just a pro-life chick? Indeed. Pro-Alaskan lives, pro-American lives, and pro-military lives.

    We have one profitable state in the union that isn’t afraid to drill/mine for its natural resources – she should be a lock for King (Queen sounded too wimpy).

  13. $12 says:

    Could we take $12 out of the now stricken missile defense budget and maybe get Barry’s birth certificate printed?

  14. Anonymous says:

    From the greatest speaker and president of our time;


  15. Anonymous says:

    Well, the ONE thing we had to defend this country that no one else had was the F-22, is now gone. Cutting edge technology available to NO OTHER COUNTRY.

    They think nothing about throwing good money after bad to Wall Street, and they can’t seem to justify spending our dollars on defense. This is unbelievable.

    My son procures parts for the F-22. One part (1), considered a critical part, is tested at an offsite facility. No doubt this place will shut down. SHOULD the government change it’s mind about F-22′s it would cost $10M to start this ONE facility back up, that does NOTHING ELSE BUT TESTS one part. These figures along with others were formally drawn up and presented to Gates and, well….

    I guess you don’t need F-22′s when the perceived enemies are the citizens of the U.S. You just need to steal their monies, pass laws to abolish their Constitutional rights, put the military on the streets in spite of Posse Comitatus, control what they watch, say, drive, the kind of light bulbs they burn, the amount of electricity they use, take away their firearms, track their every move with RFID chips…and on and on and on.

    Oh, now it all makes sense why they’d make their biggest cuts on defense.

  16. Ken says:

    Why is everyone talking about a cut to the defense budget? Gates’ recommendations aren’t a cut, they may even be an increase. The F-22 line may end at 187, but the F-35 goes on. The DDG-1000 ends at 3, but DDG-51 is restarted. Midcourse missile defense stops where it is, but SM-3, PAC-3, and THAAD development ant procurement continues. No new nuclear bombers, but a new SSBN to replace the Ohios. More helicopters (and crews) for the Army. More recruiting for the Amry and Marine Corps. More ISR assets.

    These changes aren’t about making cuts, they’re about setting priorities. Right now, what we’ve been doing is wasting our money on extravagant, high-end systems that we don’t need to deter major wars, while neglecting the systems we need in large numbers to win the wars we are in and to respond to crises we end up in the middle of all the time. Our warfighters are dieing in larger numbers than they have to, and are less effective in carrying out their missions because we’ve had our priorities wrong.

    Gates’ new priorities are all about the lessons learned with the blood of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Is it so wrong to want to be better next time?

  17. Anonymous says:

    It's not just 5 billion to Acorn,
    2+ billion to Pakistan, nearly a billion to Hamas. Obama & most Congressional Dems are throwing money everywhere except where it is most needed … USA DEFENSE. Just today the press informed the public that foriegn enities have infilitrated our power grids. They have the capability to hijack our electric (including nuclear), water & sewage at any time for war, to generate a crisis, or extortion. The Pentagon and the Dept of Defense need massive funding and expansion now more than ever. Threats aren't decreasing they are exponentially increasing and it seems that most Dems and Obama just don't get it or do they? Crisis seems to help their cause even as it hurts us all. Jeff, if you haven't seen it yet please read Dick Morris 4/6/09 entry at Dickmorris.com (also available at newsmax) titled The Declaration of Independence Has Been Repealed. (about the G20 agreements) Please cover this in more detail at America's Right. Thanks for the great site it keeps me hopeful.



    Just wanted to tell you again, the CONTENT, photos, artwork and layout of this site are brilliant. You sir are doing good work. It is so nice to have a place to get real insight, and to vent.

  19. whats_up says:

    Just a point of clarification Jeff, Palin is not in command of the 49th Missle Defense Battalion, since it is on permanent active duty it’s chain of command would be regular Army, not Palin. Now she probably does receive defense updates but she doesnt command them.

  20. suek says:

    >>These changes aren't about making cuts,>>

    Not true. Under Bush, the Iraq War was carried "off budget", under Obama, it will be "on" budget, meaning the Defense Department will actually have an effective budget cut of about 8 Billion (with a B) dollars.

    >> they're about setting priorities.>>

    True. Necessary…because the Defense budget has been cut.

  21. Gail B says:


    Have to agree with you on that one. Jeff’s front page always looks like a top-of-the-line, award-winning newspaper. I’ve sat at the computer and studied how he puts it together, and it’s really very nice. It’s admirable.

    When I worked at the newspaper, we had a class on that very thing. Of course, Jeff has a degree in journalism, so he’s had more than I have.

    If you live in his state when he begins to practice law, you’d better behave yourself. His closing arguments are going to be quite persuasive! He can really write!

Speak Your Mind