Sunday, September 28, 2014

OBAMA'S ORDERS ARE INSANE -- OUR TROOPS SHOULD REFUSE TO GO TO AFRICA TO FIGHT EBOLA. IT IS A DEATH SENTENCE

OBAMA'S ORDERS ARE INSANE -- OUR TROOPS SHOULD REFUSE TO GO TO AFRICA TO FIGHT EBOLA. IT IS A DEATH SENTENCE

Verne Strickland September 29, 2014

This is hard-scrabble stuff here, friends. And it takes a Laura Ingraham to tackle it and get it out. I believe her charge. Obama is a deeply conflicted and bitter man who blames America and the white man for most of what ails Africa and the global plight of black people. That is sick -- indeed, he is sick -- and what he is proposing to do lacks any rational explanation. Our U.S. military is trained to fight -- to kill enemies of America -- not to face death by a deadly African virus. His orders are bogus, malevolent and vengeful. Our troops should refuse to go.


On her Friday show, radio talker Laura Ingraham offered a critique of President Barack Obama’s use of the U.S. military, particularly as it pertains putting servicemen and women in harm’s way, including in Ebola-stricken regions in western Africa.
  Ingraham questioned the motivations of Obama on using U.S. troops as part of the effort to take on Ebola, suggesting it was out of a resentment for so-called America’s “privilege,” which as she pointed out may stem from “his father's rage against colonialism.”
“You get the sense with President Obama the U.S. military is used not as often to protect America’s interest in the world – national security, the homeland or even our allies,” she explained. “Instead, the military is just another tool in his arsenal to level the playing field, right? I mean, in other words, Africa really deserves more of America's money because we're people of privilege. We're people of great privilege, so we should do what we can, we the American taxpayers, to transfer wealth over to Africa. It's his father's rage against colonialism, as Dinesh D'Souza wrote about, and maybe this is a way to continue to atone for that.”
“I mean, there’s all kinds of things we could do short of sending 3,000 troops there,” she continued. “And frankly, if you’re a left-wing activist in the Saul Alinsky tradition, if a few American military personnel have to be exposed to the Ebola virus to carry out this redistribution of the privileged's wealth, then so be it. But again, given what they do on our border and given what they’re not doing in stopping travel into the United States from affected areas or terrorist countries, I’m just not taking their claims that they’re representing all of our interests over there all that seriously. I think our military is used as a force for quote, ‘global good,’ not necessarily because it is absolutely the most crucial thing they can do for our country.”
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

On her Friday show, radio talker Laura Ingraham offered a critique of President Barack Obama’s use of the U.S. military, particularly as it pertains putting servicemen and women in harm’s way, including in Ebola-stricken regions in western Africa.

Ingraham questioned the motivations of Obama on using U.S. troops as part of the effort to take on Ebola, suggesting it was out of a resentment for so-called America’s “privilege,” which as she pointed out may stem from “his father's rage against colonialism.”
“You get the sense with President Obama the U.S. military is used not as often to protect America’s interest in the world – national security, the homeland or even our allies,” she explained. “Instead, the military is just another tool in his arsenal to level the playing field, right? I mean, in other words, Africa really deserves more of America's money because we're people of privilege. We're people of great privilege, so we should do what we can, we the American taxpayers, to transfer wealth over to Africa. It's his father's rage against colonialism, as Dinesh D'Souza wrote about, and maybe this is a way to continue to atone for that.”
“I mean, there’s all kinds of things we could do short of sending 3,000 troops there,” she continued. “And frankly, if you’re a left-wing activist in the Saul Alinsky tradition, if a few American military personnel have to be exposed to the Ebola virus to carry out this redistribution of the privileged's wealth, then so be it. But again, given what they do on our border and given what they’re not doing in stopping travel into the United States from affected areas or terrorist countries, I’m just not taking their claims that they’re representing all of our interests over there all that seriously. I think our military is used as a force for quote, ‘global good,’ not necessarily because it is absolutely the most crucial thing they can do for our country.”
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor