Government Zero: No Borders, No Language, No Culture (10 page)

Susan Rice must have known about the 2009 NCIS findings in June 2014 when she infamously described Bergdahl as having “served with honor and distinction.” Just like Obama, she sounded like a guilty child caught in a lie when she followed
with “And we’ll have the opportunity eventually to learn what has transpired in the past years.” How can this woman still be employed as national security advisor?

As I tell my listeners on
The Savage Nation
, follow the bouncing ball. When you step back and look at who the administration has purged and who it has defended, there is an unmistakable pattern. Effective leaders in the war for Western civilization, like General Petraeus, Major General Carey, or Vice Admiral Giardina, are purged based on spurious, trumped-up charges. War heroes like Maj. Mathew Golsteyn are purged, despite no charges being brought against them at all.

If you are too critical of Islam or too devoted to Christianity, like Lt. Comm. Wes Modder, you are a target. The Progressive-Islamist alliance will bend over backward to attack you, including using gay activists to entrap you.

Contrast that with the treatment of an accused deserter. The White House has stood by Bowe Bergdahl, promoting him from private to sergeant during his absence, despite knowing he was likely a deserter since the day he walked off his post five years ago. President Obama literally stood next to Bergdahl’s father, who appeared on the White House lawn in the beard of a Muslim cleric, sending Bergdahl coded messages in Arabic.
¹⁰

And by the way, Nidal Malik Hasan, a devout Islamist and perpetrator of the Fort Hood massacre in 2009, who killed thirteen people, including a pregnant woman and her unborn child, while wounding over thirty others, has still not been executed for his crime in 2015. How is that for military justice?

This is how transparent the Progressive-Islamist alliance has become. It is openly flaunting its sympathies, while actively weakening the only institution that stands between us and the maniacs overrunning the Middle East.

As egregious as the military purges is the administration’s appointment of wholly unqualified civilian leadership in the cabinet. I have yet to find any evidence that Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James has ever piloted a plane. There is no mention in any bio I can find of her having a pilot’s license or having ever taken lessons. As far as I can tell, she’s never even flown a Piper Cub.

We do know she got violently ill while riding along on the USAF’s Thunderbirds last year.
¹¹
Granted, flying an F-16 isn’t a requirement of her job as air force secretary, but what qualifications
does
she have relevant to this job? She has no military experience whatsoever. According to her official bio, she has held staffer jobs in Congress and executive positions for a defense contractor. She was an assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs under Clinton.
¹²

Don’t misunderstand me. I am aware that this is a civilian position, as it should be. A bedrock American principle, enshrined in our Declaration of Independence, is that the military should at all times be subordinate to the civil power. We have laws on the books prohibiting anyone from being appointed secretary of the Army, Navy, and Air Force within five years of their active duty.

Still, that doesn’t mean it is a good idea to appoint a secretary of the Air Force who has never even flown a plane, even in civilian life. The combined military experience of this administration’s secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force is two years. Only Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus has served at
all. But as we’ve seen with Secretary McHugh, they are willing and able to advance the Progressive-Islamist agenda.

That may be the reason the administration picked James for her job. She has one qualification that trumps all others for the Obama administration. She’s a true believer in this administration’s quest to remake the military into a progressive social club.

This past March, Secretary James unveiled her “sweeping plan to increase opportunities for women, minorities and enlisted airmen.”
¹³
In addition to lowering height requirements and other standards, her plan quite explicitly calls for quotas,
particularly in the pilot ranks
. She might call them “diversity and inclusion requirements,” but they are quotas just the same. This means she will require a certain number of female and minority pilots, regardless of whether they are the best candidates for the positions.

Retired colonel Terry Stevens, who actually served thirty-five years in the Air Force, including eight years in personnel, wasn’t buying it. “If you’re going to do that instead of picking the best qualified of any applicant, then you’re actually downgrading the quality of the force,” Stevens said.
¹⁴

This isn’t just theoretical nonsense to be debated at a think tank seminar. All of this adds up to a weaker military on the battlefield. Our pilots’ hands are tied trying to fight ISIS. The dearth of actual airstrikes was one of the factors contributing to the Islamic State’s victory at Ramadi. This is what happens when you have a sorority running the military. According to the
Washington Times
:

The sorority girls decide when our air force pilots can release a rocket. I suppose it’s difficult for them to manage everything, given their important work cooking the books to prove global warming, proving racism by white cops causes inner city crime, and proving homophobia is everywhere. Meanwhile, ISIS now controls Ramadi. You can watch their victory parade on YouTube.

This is just more of the same from an administration who wanted to lower the physical standards for admission into the Marine Corps. That was a reaction to the revelation that almost half of the female recruits were unable to perform the minimum requirement of three pull-ups. Never mind that their fellow soldiers might be in more danger on the battlefield if they had to depend upon soldiers physically unable to perform their functions. Diversity trumps battle readiness in the new progressive military.

This past April, the long experiment with integrating women into combat ended when the last two female recruits washed out of the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course, after failing to complete the Combat Endurance Test. The female recruits were already granted lower physical fitness screening standards, but had to match male performance on this phase of the test. They were unable to.
¹⁶

One can only guess what the progressive answer to this predictable outcome will be. I suppose the Combat Endurance
Test will be waived as a requirement next. Then, maybe they can waive the requirement that Marines be able to fire a service weapon. Doesn’t that offend the antigun crowd?

Now, we’re going to be downgrading the skill level of pilots as well. Don’t misunderstand me. I believe the jobs should go to the best pilots, whether they are women, men, black, white, Hispanic, or Native American. We need the absolute best talent available piloting our state-of-the-art aircraft and supporting our troops on the ground and ships at sea.

Secretary James sees it in completely the opposite way. She believes we need diversity in the personnel piloting our aircraft, whether the pilots represent the best talent or not. She’ll sacrifice talent to fulfill race and sex quotas. That puts lives at risk. Ask any of our troops on the ground what’s more important to them: the best air cover possible or the most diverse? How would they like the equivalent of a Germanwings copilot in charge of a fighter jet?

Not only are the progressives weakening the military with affirmative action, they are going on the offensive against white soldiers. Approximately one month after Secretary James’s announcement about implementing racial and gender quotas for pilots, a story broke about soldiers at Fort Gordon being lectured about white privilege during a training seminar.

Among other important information disseminated to our troops that day was a Power Point slide entitled “The Luxury of Obliviousness,” which had this to say:

I’m sure the pedantic academics in the White House sorority were very pleased to learn white soldiers were “educated” about their privilege. Meanwhile, back here on planet Earth, the U.S. military has been integrated for almost seventy years. Americans of all colors have been fighting together and dying for each other since before the academic in chief and most of his sorority were born.

Our troops need training, equipment, and team building that helps them survive and succeed in combat. They don’t need divisive nonsense like this building tension between men and women who would otherwise put their lives on the line for each other without a second thought. Ask anyone you know who’s been in combat. There is no white privilege on the battlefield. Bullets and bombs kill and maim in very equal-opportunity fashion.

The Army spokeswoman who responded to the incident said the slide in question was not authorized by any higher command and that the individual instructor had inserted it without permission. That would be a perfectly reasonable explanation if this were an isolated incident. But there is plenty of precedent for this soul-bending propaganda being foisted upon our soldiers.

The military’s “train the trainer” manual, which nobody disputes is authorized by command, is even worse. Warning military men and women about a “White Male Club,” the manual says,

Forget that white privilege is just another divisive, progressive canard used to sow discord among people who would otherwise unite against them. Ask yourself this: Does subjecting soldiers to this kind of training build unity or divisiveness within the unit? Does it make it more likely or less likely that soldiers of different races or genders will trust each other with their lives, as soldiers are required to do every day in combat? Does it make the military stronger or weaker, and America thereby safer or in greater danger?

I don’t think I have to answer these questions for you.

While the war on our military goes on with direct action like purges and divisive policy, it also weakens it indirectly by making our enemies stronger.

It’s become almost routine at this point to see a news story about the administration losing track of weapons that eventually end up in the hands of our enemies. One of the problems seems to be that our Islamophilic president can’t make up his mind whether he is pro-Sunni or pro-Shiite.

All we know is he’s not pro-American. In any of the myriad conflicts the administration has created in the Middle East, you can always depend upon one constant: This administration will do exactly the opposite of what’s in the best interests of the American people.

After some hand-wringing over whether to support Saudi Arabia against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, Obama decided he had to support our longtime ally. But that was only after we learned the Pentagon could not account for
over $500 million in weapons previously donated to the Yemeni government by the United States:

“Compromised” means they are in the hands of either the Houthis or al-Qaeda, both of whom are fighting Saudi Arabia in Yemen, presumably with weapons we supplied. At least in this case they’re not shooting at our own soldiers with guns we provided, as they have in other cases where the administration armed our enemies.

I’m not going to spend a lot of time documenting cases of the administration’s bungling resulting in weapons falling into the hands of al-Qaeda, ISIS, or other extremist groups we’re supposedly fighting against. There are too many. They all relate back to the root cause of the problem, which was the disastrous Arab Spring engineered by Hillary Clinton’s State Department and supported with U.S. covert and conventional military action. By the time you read this book, there will likely have been many more pictures of head-scarfed terrorists posing in front of crates of U.S. ordnance.

Much more damaging has been the administration’s support of Iran. Of all of the Islamist governments in the region, Iran’s has to be the worst, unless you count ISIS as a legitimate government. Yet it is the ninth-century throwback mullahs who are suddenly the U.S. government’s ally of choice over our traditional Sunni allies like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt.

Perhaps that’s one explanation for why Obama refuses to
recognize ISIS as Islamist. How can he recognize the truth about the “religion of peace” while he’s negotiating with the mullahs?

Every step he has taken in the Middle East has furthered Iran’s dominance in the region. Progressives are still claiming ISIS wouldn’t exist if George W. Bush hadn’t invaded Iraq. That may or may not be true. I certainly didn’t support Bush’s invasion then or now. Let’s just say George W. Bush wasn’t his father, in my opinion.

Nevertheless, Obama still had choices when he inherited an Iraq with an elected government and relative stability within its borders. After everyone told him to leave a stabilizing force in Iraq to prevent precisely the kind of development ISIS represents, he pulled out of the country completely. That left a vacuum ISIS was only too happy to fill.