What Happened, Mr. President? | Bill O'Reilly
20 Reasons To Dislike The Democrat Party | John Hawkins
Outside Money Could Change Massachusetts Senate Race | Heather Ginsberg
Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point | Michelle Malkin
Acting IRS Commissioner Doesn't Know Who's Responsible, Objects to "Targeting" as "Pejorative" Term | Guy Benson
Boom: Obama Administration Knew of IRS Targeting in June of 2012 | Guy Benson
CBS News: Benghazi Counterterrorism Response Team "Ruled Out From The Start" | Guy Benson
Surprise: Obama Poised to Promote Susan Rice | Guy Benson
No matter how many heavyweights Obama trots out to support his plan, it will still be contrary to the national security interests of the United States. As critics of the treaty have noted, it would place severe restrictions on U.S. missile defense, and its verification measures are wholly inadequate. It would leave Russia with a decided advantage in tactical nuclear weapons with nothing accruing to our benefit in return, and it ultimately seeks to disarm the United States at a time when rogue nations and terrorists are getting ever closer to acquiring nuclear capabilities, not to mention the dangerous regimes that already possess them.
In addition, Obama's meaningless promise to add $4 billion more toward our nuclear arsenal is not only unenforceable; it would come at the expense of other important defense expenditures. Plus, as The Heritage Foundation has noted, "the billions in 'modernization' are actually being dumped into federal labs and universities without spelling out a clear military mission for their activities."
This is all about Obama's effort to take America down to size and to show the rest of the world that we are no longer the big bad evil aggressor we were before he took office. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs let the cat out of the bag when he admitted that passing this treaty is crucial to international relations.
Obama is already on record lamenting that we are still a military superpower, is Mirandizing terrorists on the battlefield, has changed the war on terror to "overseas contingency operations," refuses to consider Islamic radicalism to be the driving force behind many acts of domestic terrorism, and is insisting on trying terrorists in civilian courts (already with disastrous results).
We mustn't close our eyes on this one, folks.
