Reader Mail

Clearance Denied

Obama's security risks. 95 percent confusing. Judah couldn't run the VA any better. Plus more.

10.20.08

Send to Kindle

RED FLAGS GALORE

Re: George H. Wittman's Obama Couldn't Be Cleared:

This article should get the widest dissemination possible. There is no better way to defeat America that by having a friend at the top.
-- Don Varnum
Holden, Maine


Mr. Wittman brings up a subject that has bothered me for years. Not only could Obama not be cleared, I'm willing to bet half the U.S. Congress and Senate couldn't get cleared for Rrumors in the private sector! I have held a security clearance for the past 29 years. If I got caught doing anything remotely resembling the stunts pulled, the leaking/stealing/unapproved destruction of classified documents, the shady financial dealings... that pathetic lot routinely gets away with, I be looking at free room and board for the rest of my life. I understand why, and have no problem with my being required to pass very extensive back ground checks and polygraph tests to simply have access to facilities I work in, let alone documents. It scares the hell out of me to think of some of the elected "officials" who are given access to sensitive information with NO, or absolute minimal background checks.
-- Greg
Waterford, Virginia


George Wittman concludes his entirely reasonable argument with the rhetorical: "Something is wrong here." Well, sure it is, but it's been wrong since the Good Lord was a corporal and it isn't going to change. Look at the politicians that have "served" this wonderful land: from well before Alger Hiss to the present, the halls of Congress have been worn down by the trod of untrustworthy feet. More than that, access to sensitive, classified and secret information has been granted to people that couldn't keep a secret if their lives depended on it. And quite frequently they do. That's the way it is in a democracy; the people elect who they see fit to elect and sometimes it all goes to smash. We get close-hold technology transferred to unpleasant or downright ugly foreign countries, sometimes for purely filthy lucre, sometimes for filthy lucre and philosophical agreement. Doesn't matter much really, America takes the hit and Americans live in risk. Perhaps Mr. Wittman could write his next article though on the query: Which of our major political parties inflicted more instances of this kind of corruption on our people? Just curious.
-- J.C. Eaton
Chetek, Wisconsin


Why, do we, American citizens sit idly by and not do something?

Who is in charge?

Why was this not investigated before he was allowed to run for the highest office in our land?

What can we do to get some answers?

It certainly concerns me and people like me. We hear the rumors. We get the emails. Is it just rumors? Is this just a part of the campaigning? How do we know what is truth and what is lies?
-- Marcie Oliver
Gun Barrel City, Texas


Not only is it unlikely that Obama could obtain a low level security clearance, he would be barred from working with nuclear weapons or commanding a nuclear equipped a nuclear weapon equipped unit be it Army, Navy, Air Force or Marine Corp due to his confessed use of cocaine.

The facts are set forth below:

Ref A. The United States Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) for Nuclear Weapons. (DODD 5210.42 Nuclear Weapon Personnel Reliability Program (PRP)

It is still the age of Nuclear Weapons and presidential candidate Barack Obama wishes to have command of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world.

My brother, a retired Naval officer who has served with nuclear weapons duties on four certified nuclear capable ships; and commanded one of them -- is thoroughly familiar with the national laws and Department of Defense regulations with respect to the personnel assigned duties with Nuclear Weapons. He advised that the DOD instructions are detailed and include the following:

"It is DoD policy that:

"1. The Department of Defense shall support the national security of the United States by maintaining an effective nuclear deterrent while protecting the public health, safety, and environment. For that reason, nuclear-weapons require special consideration because of their policy implications and military importance, their destructive power, and the political consequences of an accident or an unauthorized act. The safety, security, control, and effectiveness of nuclear weapons are of paramount importance to the security of the United States...

"Only those personnel who have demonstrated the highest degree of individual reliability for allegiance, trustworthiness, conduct, behavior, and responsibility shall be allowed to perform duties associated with nuclear weapons, and they shall be continuously evaluated for adherence to PRP standards...

"illicit drugs such as heroin, heroin derivatives, cocaine, 'crack,' phencyclidine (PCP), lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), 'ecstasy,' or other 'designer' drugs, amphetamines, barbiturates, or other narcotic drugs not prescribed by proper medical authorities, and anabolic steroids shall render an individual ineligible for admission to or retention in PRP duties. The individual shall not be certified into the program or shall be permanently decertified, and those actions shall be made a matter of permanent record..." (DODD 5210.42 Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reliability Program [PRP]).

Barack Obama is unfit for command.
-- E. Patrick Mosman
Pleasantville, New York


As a Radioman (Seaman 3rd Class at the time) in the Navy I was cleared for the highest level of security in the handling of encrypted messages and encryption communication equipment. As Mr. Wittman describes, my family and friends told me they had been visited and talked to by investigators before that clearance was granted. I have no doubt had my associations even approached Barack Obama's, I would have been kept out of that very secretive arena.
-- Jim Jackson

 

I have to ask George Wittman if he is so dense as to think the CIA, FBI, DOD and Secret Service haven't vetted this guy extensively? I ain't voting for him, but the whole premise of the article is based on ZERO facts and only the opinion of the writer.
 
As bad as the Liberal media is at spinning things, you have to go and outright make things up, which is even worse. You should be ashamed of yourselves. I hope you pray for God's forgiveness tonight and that he might give you the strength to find and write about the truth.
-- Andrew Zabilla

 

How in the world can Obama run for president, without his background with drugs and connections being checked? How much scrutiny do Congress people get? Please air this as much as possible, to find out why they aren't checked, completely, from birth certificate, schooling, on up, as we don't want to be living in a socialist/communist nation.
-- The Moore Family
Newark, Ohio


My husband applied for a job at the CIA in 1967. We had to be in Washington for three days of interrogation and interviews. Included in this ordeal were lie detector tests, a psychiatric examination and many months of investigation during which they questioned practically everyone we ever knew or lived near. Obama never, never would have passed the entrance exam for the CIA, because of the nefarious characters that he "palled around" with. My husband did receive an offer; the letter for which is proudly in his collection, but he turned down the job; they didn't pay enough money for us to afford to live in the DC area, even at that time.
-- Bette S.
Miami, Florida


When I was in the Marine Corps, I worked in a communication center and had to have a top secret clearance. The investigators talked with everyone of my school teachers back to first grade. They also talked to all of my neighbors at every address that I had lived. They also talked with anyone that my neighbors said was my friend. I couldn't believe how thorough they were. How can they just hand over top secrets material to someone that hasn't gone through any investigation?
-- Kenneth W. Breeden, Sr.
Sweetwater, Tennesse

 

Great article. I am a member of the U.S. Army and have a secret clearance and currently going through the top secret phase. I also edit the Topix website on U.S. Politics and Baghdad. Many soldiers have raised this question on there and all of us agree with you. Needless to say I did post a link for your article on Topix.
-- Sgt. Nathan Fernandez
Coraopolis, Pennsylvania

 

TAX...GIFTS?
Re: Philip Klein's Searching for Obama's 95 Percent:

Thank you Philip Klein for exposing the illusion about Obama's plan to give 95% of Americans a tax cut. This is exactly the message that all voters must hear because it is the truth. Obama will be sending handouts to those who pay no taxes -- welfare! It's redistribution of wealth and it is un-American. Please continue to shed light on this illusion.
-- Rachel Clark
Cedar Park, Texas


My question is which 95% will get a tax break?

Here is what I heard: 95% of working Americans, 95% of working families, and 95% of Americans.

My question is which is it? Americans? Working Americans? Or working families (would this include illegal aliens)?
-- Annette Royster
Walkersville, MD


Anything that cuts my taxes is called a tax cut! No matter if it is a credit, rebate, deduction, or whatever, if it cuts the amount I have to pay in, it is a tax cut. I guess semantics can be played with any claim, and especially, with many of McCain's. McCain's benefits of any sort, as usual for Republicans, will go to the very wealthy and the corporations, as Republican policies notoriously want to keep the lower income people "in their place!"
-- Mary L. Grabski


Mr. Klein is correct to point out that Senator Obama's tax proposal does not cut marginal tax rates; that is, the tax that Americans pay on the next dollar of income. The Wall Street Journal article, which Mr. Klein cites, defines a tax cut as "letting you keep more of what you earn," a definition which fails to distinguish -- much like Mr. Klein's article -- between marginal and effective tax rates. In practice the rate at which you are charged on your next dollar of income is directly related to the percentage of your income which goes to the government. And while Mr. Obama's tax plan would not lower Americans' marginal tax rate, it lets them keep more of what they earn after they have filed their taxes rather than before.

The Wall Street Journal's point is grounded in an appeal to fairness, not in tax policy. The point of contention is not that Obama does not cut taxes but that the government would be providing tax refunds to Americans who do not share in the tax burden. Like any tax policy, its fairness must be weighed against the economic good it would do; in this case, Obama's tax plan incentivizes attending college, saving more, and providing health care.
-- Roman Rozenfeld


Great article. I've been trying to figure out for a while now how you give a tax cut to people who pay no taxes. Furthermore Obama says nothing about how every American will end up paying more for consumer goods when corporate taxes are raised (and thus the government gets more revenue). Government has come up with ingenious ways to get more tax money without making it look like they do.
-- John Viehe

 

VETERANS' EXPERIENCE
Re: Judah Friedman's Eugene the Veteran:

This is excellent! I wish that all the celebrities would read this and really work to make a difference in ways that truly matter!
-- Adina
Bogota, New Jersey


Mr. Friedman has no idea of what he talks about. With the stroke of his pen he slanders the thousands who show up every day at Veterans Hospitals around this country to work with our veterans in their healthcare needs and problems.

I wonder if he has ever placed one of his self-righteous feet inside such a hospital, or does he just like putting them in his mouth?

You know he is ignorant when he states "let's turn the VA into the best mental and rehab facility it can be" thinking our Vets are "nut jobs" first!

His guilt is demonstrated by demanding all our hospitals accept vets with proper ID for any reasons.

Shame on him and all who accept his flawed wishes and slanted views on the VA healthcare system!

The VA has never let me down in my needs, never!
-- R. Philips
Corrales, New Mexico


The problem is that Eugene lives in California. I give you an open invitation to spend a day with me and the veterans I care for in the Midwest. You can't judge the care given by the VA on one individual's story. The care given in private hospitals to veterans with insurance is excellent. The care given in private hospitals to veterans without insurance is criminal. I am proud of the fact that the care I deliver is the same for both. I could give you statistics about care in the VA but they would be nothing but numbers. Contact me and I will show you how care should be delivered to our veterans.
-- Timothy Vaughn


I just read Judah Friedman's article about Eugene the Veteran. Mr. Friedman asked his friend Eugene some questions, but he doesn't let us know what Eugene's answers were. So what did he say? I was very interested to know his opinions on the subjects of the VA. Personally, I think it doesn't sound like a very good system, and I'd like to see Veterans getting care at fine, local hospitals instead of having to commute to VA hospitals that often seem inadequate. What does Eugene think about that?
-- Kathy Mayock

 

BRANDISHING HIS GOV'T-ISSUED SWORD
Re: W. James Antle, III's Barack the Government Slayer:

As is so typical of him, Mr. Antle has once more crafted another finely written piece of political analysis. My thanks to both him and the many other fine contributors to the American Spectator, who collectively provide a well-articulated voice of reason at a time when the choking clouds of political disinformation threaten to engulf us completely. I couldn't help but wonder, though, as I read his article, what Mr. Antle might think of the following perspective.

As a resident of rural Michigan who can receive only three TV stations clearly, I've nonetheless been virtually inundated by the Obama ad to which Mr. Antle makes reference in his opening paragraph. Although I typically watch less than an hour of TV each day, it is aired with such maddeningly frequency that suicide almost seems like a preferable alternative to seeing it yet again Each time I view it, though, I am struck by what appears to be a very clever strategy on the part of the junior senator.

If one critically observes Mr. Obama's advertisements, as well as his performances both in past debates and while on the stump, one can note that he consistently delineates his proposals through the rather myopic window of economics and taxation, just as Mr. Antle's article does. It seems to me that, by doing so, it allows the man to actually position himself as a "government slayer" to all who think uncritically. After all, "I will cut taxes for "95 percent of the American people" really does sound, at face value, so conservatively Reaganesque that many, I think, will mistakenly conclude that the man is serious about reducing the burden of federal taxation. Therein, I believe, lies the cleverness of Mr. Obama's political strategy, for by keeping the public focus firmly on the minutiae of funding his various programs, it provides him with a convenient "smokescreen" to conceal what, to me, is the larger issue he fears being brought to light: a serious discussion regarding the actual constitutionality or, more accurately, the lack thereof, of his socialistic

ideology. Thus, refuting the man's programs from an economic perspective is playing ball on the court of his choosing, for to do so implies acceptance of the supposition that his proposals are, in fact, worthy of debate when, constitutionally speaking, they simply cannot pass muster. Personally, from what I've seen so far, I do not believe that Mr. Obama can be defeated if our national debate and Mr. McCain's political attack upon him continues to remain limited to a narrow, economic perspective.

It is my fervent hope that, in the short time remaining, the conservative media will broaden the scope of their assault on Mr. Obama. Subject his proposals, such as his universal health care plan, to the scrutiny of the Constitution. Make clear contrasts between capitalism and socialism and tie our staggering national debt to the dabbling in socialism we've done thus far. Demand that he cite specific constitutional justification for the creation of his programs. He can't, of course, because the U. S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the size of the federal government and protect against the threat which the expansion and consolidation of political power poses to our individual liberty.

In fact, the words "health care" do not even appear in its text. All Americans must be made fully aware that a vote for Mr. Obama is, in actuality, a vote to abandon the constitutional restraints on government in favor of big-government socialism.

One thing is absolutely certain as we enter the final weeks of the campaign: nothing the conservatives have said thus far has checked Mr. Obama's advance. He now holds the political high ground and more of the same is unlikely to deprive him of this tactical advantage. However, Ronald Reagan used the tactic of philosophical assault successfully in his campaign against Carter. Decades after we've all long forgotten his comments on Carter himself, we can still hear "get the government off the backs of the people" ringing in our ears. His message of "government is the problem, not the solution" is concise, simplistic and absolutely correct. Judging from the electoral support he received in that election, it was apparently also a message that resonated among those who prefer hats made of tin-foil.
-- Thomas Donley

 

EQUALLY IMPOVERISHED
Re: William Tucker's Obama's Drive for Equality:

It's said that every so-called "apolitical" organization inevitably drifts to the left -- I wish I knew who said it, so I could attribute it properly.

But the evidence speaks for itself. The Ford Foundation...the MacArthur Foundation... AARP... the NAACP...any labor union leadership you can name. And now the Nobel committee.

To misquote a song from the play and movie "1776" -- "to the left, always to the left, never to the right, always to the left..."
-- Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida

 

CALL IT BOTH WAYS
Re: Mark Hyman's Obama's Farrakhan Problem:

Can you please write a piece on racist American which we are seeing everyday in this race for the White House? White America (Rep. i.e. Good Ole Boys and Gals) is so quick to point out borderline association with people they fear (Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan etc) when it comes to a Black or African American trying to do something positive in this country. I believe this is due to all the wrong and guilt they have inside. Hey, it's known and seen everyday the racism displayed by White American. As a Black man I am not upset with this attitude being shown, I just wish we can all play on the same field. Write about all the white people who will not vote for a person because his skin color.

It's funny how we would rather suffer as a country than do the right thing -- John McCain is not the right person right now.

Why not write a story about the people in the rallies that shouts "kill him, terrorist, and n****r." Give them the same 15 minutes of fame as Joe the Plumber. We went out of our way to find Joe who represented working class white people. I am sure you can find these people from the Republican rallies who represent a portion of White America that doesn't hide behind close doors to voices their opinions.

I am sure you wouldn't do this because it will show America true colors (White, White and White).

Shame on you.

-- Stacy Demps
Michigan

 

DIANE'S FAVORITE FELLA
Re: Frost's letter (under "All Time Low") in Reader Mail's Did You Ever Have to Make up Your Mind?

I immediately go back to the Clean Ayers column he referenced, wondering what I might have said that frosted him so. No Diane Smith diatribe. So, although he did not read a Diane Smith letter he might have read my mind. I am a little "bummed," as my grandson might say.

Here is a consoling thought for that whippersnapper, frost. While I don't have quite a decade on him, we lived through Jimmy Carter's disastrous four years. I won't cite his many false steps -- and worse, what he has done in his post-presidential years. We endured and re-elected Bill Clinton, knowing who he was and what he was. If his recall is faulty (and I don't think it is) I could ship him my prized collection of American Spectator magazines chronicling the Boy Clinton years, featuring Johnny Chung and his vivid description of what it takes to get through the White House turnstile -- $$. Or Charlie Trie, his bagman. Renting the Lincoln Bedroom, Waco and Janet Reno ordering tanks to ram and set fire to the buildings "to save the children" who she thought might be being molested. Had to kill them to save them.Traipsing through Little Rock, interviewing State Troopers who procured women for him. The rape of Juanita Brodderick ("better put some ice on that") There is not time and space to cover the Monica escapade. If I could have retreated to some uncharted island during those years, I would have.

George Bush is a decent human being who got elected and re-elected and has had a rough eight years, made rougher by criticism from his own party. I, for one, wish him well.

And come November 5 we are going to rejoice in a restrained way, or go into deep mourning as we see wealth redistributed, troops un-funded, Bill Ayers as Secretary of Education and God and Obama know what else... We will have time to reflect on how we wrote our criticisms of our only other choice for the next four years.

Tonight as I saw John McCain at the Al Smith dinner, I wondered why this man could not have shown us his human side, his wry humor and sharp wit these past months, instead of plodding along as though he were a geezer lost from his group on an outing from the rest home.

There, I hope I have cheered frost up a little. He is one of my favorite fellas. And I'll bet he doesn't re-locate after the election. None of the Hollywood people who threatened to, did when Bush was elected.
-- Diane Smith

Like this Article

Print this Article

Print Article