Obama administration: Get ready for nuke attack

“We have to get past the mental block that says it’s too terrible to think about,” W. Craig Fugate, administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said in an interview, according to the New York Times. “We have to be ready to deal with it.”

What's he talking about? Why, a major U.S. city being hit by a nuke, of course.

Along with gropedowns and naked photo scanners at U.S. airports, the Obama administration is boosting our security by not-so-subtly getting the word out about surviving a nuclear blast.

Apparently, the government's big plan to save us all is to have us hunker down in our cars and basements, because according to new studies, that will work if happen to find ourselves near a nuke blast.

If this all sounds a little familiar, you're probably flashing back to the "duck and cover" drills of the 1950s. That's rather appropriate now that Obama's START treaty would resurrect the Cold War by returning us to a policy of Mutually Assured Destruction with Russia.

Ah, yes. Some days, you can just inhale all that hope and change in the air.

How about we just tax Democrats?

When President Obama agreed to keep the Bush tax rates, my wife had to slap me, hard.

I was about this far from saying something nice about the man from Kenya finally doing something right.

The impulse soon passed.

While the tax rates don't represent a cut anywhere except inside the Beltway, they need to be extended just to keep taxes from going up and crashing the economy a second time. For this reason, Obama's agreement seemed like a momentary but welcome flash of reason from an increasingly irrational administration.

But like any bill involving Democrats, the main reason for the agreement became buried under tons of pork before the Senate Democrats could bring themselves to vote for it earlier today.

And not even the threat of losing unemployment extensions can keep the House Democrats from trying to drain the blood of the dead by raising the so-called estate tax, proving once again it's not about the little guy, it's about Nancy Pelosi's continued use of Air Force planes as her personal taxis.

Lost in the shuffle are the long-term unemployed, who still can't find jobs and who are about to lose their benefits in a lovely Christmas present wrapped in a federal bow if the House doesn't act.

Unlike many conservatives, I have no problem with extending such benefits. If we don't, those same folks will just end up on welfare and we'll still be paying for them.

But the way the game is played, whenever someone starts talking about cuts to the federal budget, politicians present the public with the choice of cutting Social Security or welfare, unemployment or Medicare. But those are false choices.

There are literally trillions of dollars being wasted by our government that could be eliminated without touching our social nets, or even our military preparedness. Start with cutting congressional salaries and benefits, then proceed to shut the many worthless and largely unconstitutional agencies we pay for, such as the EPA or Department of Education (which just sucks up money from local schools across the land).

And while we're at it, a little justice should be served up against the Barney Franks, Chuck Schumers and other Democrats whose committees set up banks, along with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to fail, plunging us into this economic mess.

Now that would be a Christmas present I'd like to open.

Soldier's Gay Agenda Exposes U.S. Secrets

Just in time for the Pentagon to begin leaking preliminary positive findings of its study on the planned "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal comes the revelation of yet more classified documents given to Wikileaks by a young, gay private. That the Obama administration has allowed Wikileaks to continue over the past several months is an oddity and an embarrassment, but the obvious hurry to pass the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" during the lame duck session is irresponsible and potentially dangerous. The arrest of Pfc. Bradley Manning last summer pointed out what damage could be done by someone in a position of handling sensitive information who places himself before his country. This is the real question that should be asked about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." By repealing the policy, are we encouraging schismatic political activism in the ranks of the military, which must run on strict discipline? After all, the military exists for national defense, not to serve as a dating service. And it's not just about gays that the question should be asked. Army Maj. Nidal Hassan killed 13 of his coworkers at Fort Hood while shouting "Allahu akbar," the cry of Muslim terrorists the world round. There were plenty of signs Hassan was going to flip, but they were ignored by the Army because of political correctness, which probably also played a role in why Bradley was put in a position to get away with stealing thousands of documents. If Congress is going to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," it needs to make sure the military has the legal backing to ask the questions it must to protect its personnel and its mission. Anyone who puts his personal agenda ahead of his country should not be allowed to wear a military uniform.