Join Congresswoman Renee Ellmers and support Frank Williams candidacy.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / September 17, 2012

September 17, 2012

Congresswoman Renee Ellmers, who defeated longtime incumbent Bob Etheridge in North Carolina's 2nd Congressional District two years ago, is coming to southeastern North Carolina today (Monday, Sept. 17).  Congresswoman Ellmers will be the guest speaker at two events to benefit my campaign:

• Luncheon at Jerome's in Shallotte:  12:00 noon.  Click here to pre-register online.  Click here to RSVP on Facebook. 
• Reception at BlueWater Grille in Wrightsville Beach:  5:30 - 7 p.m.  Click here to pre-register online.  Click here to RSVP on Facebook.

Please join us at one of these events!  The cost to attend each event is only $20 per person, and sponsorship opportunities are available.  Click the links below to pre-register online. If you would like to pay at the door, please reply to this email and RSVP. If you have not already pre-paid, you can pay at the door (personal checks or cash). 

There are a few things you should know about Congresswoman Ellmers.  Prior to being elected to Congress, she worked as a nurse and served as the clinical director of the Trinity Wound Care Center in Dunn.  Additionally, her husband is a physician.  

Based in no small part on her background and insight as a healthcare professional, Renee decided to run for Congress after the passage of ObamaCare.  From her campaign website:  "In 2009 she and her husband attended a Town Hall meeting to hear Congressman Bob Etheridge speak on behalf of President Obama’s health care plan. Later, as a volunteer, she became an outspoken critic of government-run health care and decided to run for Congress in 2010."

I hope to see you today!

Sincerely,

Frank Williams
Candidate for Brunswick County Commissioner

Robeson Republicans need more room -- and more respect!

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / September 16, 2012

 By Dr. Phillip Stephens
 

We’ve all heard it. Robeson Republicans met in a phone booth. But times change.

According to a Jan. 23, 1956, The Robesonian article, six local Republicans attended a fundraiser in Winston-Salem for President Eisenhower. They were referred to as the “Phone Booth Boys.” The reason was simple.

Local Republicans sought a meeting place at the county courthouse about 60 years ago. As a joke, the county manager, W.D. Reynolds, offered them the phone booth, which in his opinion would hold the expected turnout. The joke stuck.


Today things are different for clear reasons. Republicans have been playing to full houses lately supported by conservative Democrats.

Gubernatorial candidate Pat McCrory recently visited Lumberton for a fundraiser. The local money raised and crowds addressed by Republicans like McCrory have been unprecedented in recent years.

Robeson led the state in approving Amendment One with 86 percent of the vote. That percentage is not obtained in Robeson without a lot of Democratic support. And it’s a Republican issue because the Democratic Party supports same-sex marriage so strongly it was added this year by unanimous vote to the party platform.

And if more evidence is needed, look no further than the public backlash against discretionary fund spending. The only commissioners voting to immediately cut the fund and return the remainder to the general budget are Republican David Edge and a Democratic commissioner in a tight race with a Republican.

Finally, Republicans are impacting management philosophy beyond the concept of a phone booth.
It has been said there would have been no Reagan without Carter. Well, in that context change has certainly come to Robeson just as Obama promised. Sunday voting is simply an acknowledgement of this turning tide. Maybe even a last-ditch effort. It also is a risky proposition.

Church congregations across the county were the reason that Robeson led the state in protecting marriage. Not Republicans. Not Democrats.

So although the Democratic Party values issues contrary to these congregations, such as abortion and same-sex marriage, Sunday is the day they chose to remind folks to vote Democrat.

Maybe it’s a brilliant idea, like buying a high-priced kitchen gadget, which requires a live presentation to justify the hard sale. It works.

Either way, conservatives will use the Sunday voting issue to further illustrate the growing contrast between conservative congregations and the Democratic Party. How different is the Democratic Party today?
Well, the DNC platform committee recently removed the word “God” in the context of “God-given potential” from the party platform.

It passed a floor vote. Some recognized that God probably didn’t need to be removed. But it would require a two-thirds majority vote to reverse the decision. The vote to reverse the decision was far short of two-thirds but the chair passed it anyway. So although “God” was restored to the Democratic platform, it was restored amid boos from delegates. This isn’t our father’s Democratic Party anymore.

But social issues and platforms will not decide the election. The economy will. And honestly, Republicans would be better off to not concentrate so much on the social issues. To be fair, if you’re going to be the party of less intrusive government then why intrude in private lives?

So while Democrats try to paint Republicans as religious zealots and bigots — which is odd if you understand the history of both parties but that’s another story — Democrats are quietly moving away from their traditional roots. Clearly, local Democrats have started supporting Republicans who represent the traditional values Democrats once championed.

Georgia Democratic Sen. Zell Miller said it best. He never left the Democratic Party. The party left him.

Things always seem to change slowly in Robeson, so maybe that’s the point. Robeson Democrats are the same great folks they’ve always been and it’s not local Democrats who are changing. They aren’t leaving the party. Slowly, their party is leaving them as well.

As a result, Republicans have outgrown the phone booth.

Verne Strickland interviews Andy Yates on Romney/Obama, McCrory/Dalton, radical Muslim turmoil in Middle East

 By Verne Strickland  September 16, 2011  

We bring in one of our all-time favorite conservative political pundits – Andy Yates of Huntersville NC – for an exclusive USA DOT COM interview.

ANDY YATES:

A new Rasmussen Poll shows Romney in front 51-45 in NC. This is a very strong sign. Only 50% go to the polls, and less than are 3% undecided, so NC broke for the Romney side. This indicates that Demo convention in Charlotte had little effect on what happens in NC. You can come here and have your big party but actually get hurt in NC. The Democrats wanted to show how liberal they are in NC,  but that doesn’t play well here. This actually is a plus for conservatives here because it’s a good side-by-side comparison of the two parties. Also it brings out into the open what the feelings of the voters are on a local level, compared to what the national Democrat Party stands for.

 This isn’t the Democrat Party of Sam Ervin, it’s the Democrat Party of the extreme liberal Far Left and I don’t think anything could highlight that more to North Carolinians than holding their convention in our State where they try to take God out of the platform and then rejected three times to put God back in, and the chair finally ruled that it passed, and I think it shows how out of touch the national Democrat Party is with North Carolina values. I think that’s going to hurt them dearly. 

What about the riveting and treacherous events roiling the Middle East?

Obama seems totally out of touch with the traumatic happenings in the Arab World. What’s your take on how this will affect him? It is sad and shocking how unprepared and weak our president is in light of this current crisis. He looks like an  eighth Algebra I student having to take a college Calculus course. HE doesn’t seem to have a clue what’s going on and acts like he’s frozen in place. It goes back to Jimmy Carter in the 70s – it’s not just the economy now, it’s foreign policy. 

Jimmy Carter actually collected Obama recently on Obama’s traditional role with Egypt. Obama doesn’t even seem at the Carter level on foreign policy, which is very scary. What’s going on over there is very scary, and that’s made worse by our having a weak president who seems inept and bumbling. It shows that the 4-year Barack Obama apology tour has had little effect on the positives of the Middle East. 

Finally, Andy, give us your take on the McCrory/Dalton race for Governor.

I don’t want people to quit working, because anything can happen at this point in the election campaigns, but in my opinion you could stick a fork in Walter Dalton and take him out of the oven – he’s done. McCrory has just out-classed him, out-campaigned him, out-worked him, Barring something totally unforeseen, I don’t see any chance at this point for a Walton Dalton victory. We’re about seven weeks to go before the election and with a 24-hour news cycle that’s a lot longer than it used to be. 

Pat McCrory has done an excellent job of putting out a positive message about his vision for what he wants to do in North Carolina. He’s showing people his record of leadership as Mayor of Charlotte, whereas all Walter Dalton can give you is a rehash of the failed policies of Beverly Perdue. Dalton has no new original ideas, and is not impressing anyone.

We are seeing what people in the Charlotte area have known for a long time – Pat McCrory is a true leader who will get things done, he’s a visionary, and I think too that all Walter Dalton could be is a second term for Beverly Perdue, and there are very few people in North Carolina who would want  that. 

 QUESTION TO PONDER:

COULD OBAMA BE LETTING THE ARAB CRISIS GO OFF THE RAILS TO ABSORB THE HEADLINES AND DIVERT ATTENTION FROM THE JOBS AND ECONOMIC FAILURES OF HIS ADMINISTRATION?

Rouzer Ride to Victory: Sept. 29, New Hanover Co. GOP HQ, Independence Mall, Wilmington NC

Official: No Marines in Libya at time of Benghazi attack

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / September 16, 2012

U.S. ambassador and three others killed by militants

By Kristina Wong

The Washington Times

Saturday, September 15, 2012

No U.S. Marines were in Libya when protesters stormed a diplomatic mission in the eastern city of Benghazi and killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans late Tuesday, a senior Obama administration official said Saturday.

The official’s comments were intended to correct previous statements by administration officials who said a small contingent of Marines was stationed at State Department facilities in the North African nation.

The U.S. diplomatic compound breached Tuesday by Libyan protesters in Benghazi had a relatively light security posture compared to diplomatic facilities in other conflict zones.

Marines are guarding diplomatic facilities in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen, Defense Press Secretary George Little told reporters Thursday.

“The State Department has the lead for embassy security around the world. Naturally, if they ask for our advice in given situations, we’ll offer it up, no question about it,” Mr. Little said in response to a question about who plans security at embassies and diplomatic facilities.

Part of the reason Marines were not stationed at the Benghazi compound is that it is not an embassy or consulate, but a “diplomatic mission,” officials said.

In some conflict zones, State Department officials work in buildings other than embassies or consulates in order to conduct “expeditionary diplomacy” — establishing an initial presence and building a relationship with locals, as in post-revolution Libya, officials said.

Senior administration officials described the facility in Benghazi as an “interim” one that the State Department had acquired before the fall of dictator Moammar Gadhafi, consisting of a main building and several ancillary buildings, as well as an annex farther away.

The Pentagon has deployed a 50-man Marine platoon to the Libyan capital of Tripoli to protect U.S. citizens and the embassy.

“If called upon, we would obviously provide support to our State Department colleagues to provide additional security at embassies,” Mr. Little said.

The Video Didn't Do It? Jay Carney says it did. Jay is wrong

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / September 15, 2012

The Video Didn’t Do It

Sep 24, 2012, Vol. 18, No. 02 • By LEE SMITH

       

It was bad enough, two years ago, that Defense Secretary Robert Gates called fringe Florida pastor Terry Jones to ask him not to burn copies of the Koran, or last week, that chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey took his turn to call Jones to ask him to stop publicizing a YouTube video, The Innocence of Muslims.

But then on Friday, White House spokesman Jay Carney told the world that the violent protests in Cairo and Ben­ghazi and elsewhere were a “response not to United States policy, and not obviously the administration or the American people,” but were “in response to a video, a film we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting.” Carney repeated the point for emphasis: “This is not a case of protests directed at the United States at large or at U.S. policy, but in response to a video that is offensive to Muslims.”

Getty Images

Carney’s comments lie outside the range of plausible spin, even by Obama administration standards, and if his bosses believe them—as we fear they do—are simply delusional. But they are not without consequence. Nor are Gates’s and Dempsey’s phone calls. They all send the message to America’s enemies that if you kill our diplomats and lay siege to the our embassies, the first move the American government will make is to denounce .  .  . Americans. Our leaders apparently believe that the way to protect Americans from extremists and terrorists abroad is to tell other Americans to shut up.

What’s next? Where does it go from here? There are more than 300 million ways in which Americans expressing themselves might give offense at those who make it their business to be offended. Maybe it’s some other film, maybe it’s a book or even just a tossed-off phrase that our enemies might seize on to galvanize support for their causes.

Is the White House going to put every American crank on speed-dial so it can tell them to shut up whenever a mob gathers outside a U.S. embassy or consulate?

Reports: Marines not permitted live ammo! State Department mum on issue.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster / September 14, 2012

An Egyptian protester throws a tear gas canister toward riot police 

during clashes near the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, Egypt   (AP)

BY: Adam Kredo   September 13, 2012 4:40 pm

UPDATE: A Marine spokesperson at the Pentagon denied reports that U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition in a statement to Fox News Thursday.

Pentagon Lt. Col. Chris Hughes told the outlet: “The ambassador and RSO (Regional Security Officer) have been completely and appropriately engaged with the security situation. No restrictions on weapons or weapons status have been imposed. This information comes from the Det Commander at AMEMB (American Embassy) Cairo.”

The statement came in response to reports that U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition.

Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit U.S. Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blogs spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any U.S. military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”

Time magazine’s Battleland blog also reported Thursday that “senior U.S. officials late Wednesday declined to discuss in detail the security at either Cairo or Benghazi, so answers may be slow in coming.”

If true, the reports indicate that Patterson shirked her obligation to protect U.S. interests, Nightwatch states.
“She did not defend U.S. sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office,” the report states. “She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines.”

While Marines are typically relied on to defend U.S. territory abroad, such as embassies, these reports indicate that the Obama administration was relying on Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood-backed government to ensure American security, a move observers are questioning as violence in Cairo continues to rage.

Marc Toner, the State Department’s deputy spokesperson, did not respond to a request for comment from the Free Beacon. White House National Security Council spokesperson Tommy Vietor also did not respond to a request for comment.

The U.S. ambassador to any nation ultimately decides whether Marines are authorized to carry ammunition, according to a GOP national security adviser knowledgeable about American embassy protocols.

“In the end, the ambassador of any country has the final call on what to do in a country,” the source said. “The buck stops with you. You make every decision.”

Security procedures are subjective and subject to change depending on locale, the source said. Each ambassador, in consultation with their Regional Security Officer (RSO), sets the policy regarding the rules of engagement, according to the adviser. The RSO is responsible for coordinating all security measures and reports directly to the ambassador in any given nation.

“A decision or order to set rules of engagement that you can’t carry live ammunition and can’t engage violent crowds climbing over your walls and tearing down your flag stems from direct orders from the Chief of Mission and possibly whoever the Chief of Mission reports to,” the source explained.

Given that the siege of the Cairo embassy unfolded over many hours, the source wondered if new orders pertaining to the rules of engagement were ever issued.

Ambassador Patterson was in Washington D.C. during the attacks, according to reports.

“I cannot believe that over an eight hour period that nobody … in that chain of command did not ask those questions of their superiors,” the source said. “These protestors did not just appear and within 20 minutes climb the wall.”

Several sources familiar with foreign embassies in international hotspots who contacted the Free Beacon said that the U.S. government often adheres to a policy of not permitting security officers and other personnel to carry loaded weapons.

Others indicated that in some instances, embassy personnel were prohibited from carrying weapons on embassy grounds altogether.

The Free Beacon will continue to update this report as events warrant.

This entry was posted in Middle East, National Security, Obama Administration and tagged Adam Kredo, Anne Patterson, Cairo, Egypt, Obama administration, U.S. Embassy in Cairo, U.S. Marines. Bookmark the permalink.