In case you have not heard, there is a slim chance the Koch brothers will buy the LA Times and several other "news" papers.

 Kathleen Miles / The Huffington Post:
If Koch Brothers Buy LA Times, Half of Staff May Quit  —  At a Los Angeles Times in-house awards ceremony last week, columnist Steve Lopez addressed the elephant in the room.  —  Speaking to the entire staff, he said, “Raise your hand if you would quit if the paper was bought by Austin Beutner's group.”

And we are concerned about this,  why ????? These reporters have not done their jobs in so long,  they have forgotten what real journalism is all about.   

Proof of Obama's continued Benghazi cover-up (see the video)


Problem:  Darrell Issa,  chairman of the House committee in change of investigating the Benghazi cover-up,  has sent two letters  (April 16 and April 26) complaining about threats against those who wish to testify and requesting a pathway to classified information that is needed by those who would testify.  It is not reasonable to assume that Obama is telling the truth,  at this point.  Of course he “is aware.”  For crying out loud,  he knew he was going to call on Ed Henry,  first,  in this morning’s presser and he knew that Fox News had broken this story yesterday,  Monday the 29th. 

Brief comment on Obama's morning "news" conference, in which questions were asked and self-serving answer were given.

 Of course,  everyone is talking about Obama’s “red line”  and his implied promise of action should that line be crossed.  The first question of the morning’s presser was about this red line.  In answer to that question, he made it clear that the ensuing consequences and his promise to change his “calculus” as to Syria was about the world’s reaction to the crisis,  not his or the United States acting in some sort of unilateral way. 

We all knew that on the day he made his statement,  he was playing the role of tough international leader.  We also knew that he was just kidding. 

How much international leadership has been surrendered under this president is not yet known,  but it is substantial to the point that there is no more inconsequential leader in this world than B. Obama.  His statement to  “lead from behind”  is evidence of his nonsensical approach to leadership and  has proven to be the path to sheer and laughable irrelevancy.  In short our country is a joke and that is all on Obama. 

He has lost the war in Afghanistan even before he cuts and runs from the region.  He has,  in effect,  returned Iraq to the hands of its radicalized neighbors and internal forces within that nation,  making a mockery of the Bush victory and the lives lost in winning that war.  His Mid East policies have added to the destabilization of that region in ways not seen in American politics. 

He shows no concern for the Innocents in Africa as they continue to be butchered by Muslim killers.  He has deserted informants  who gave us Ben Laden and left the principles of freedom behind in his lust to partner with a Muslim world that denies women their civil rights and liberties,  as well as freedom of speech and the [free] expression of religious faith.  His Cairo speech in 2009 remains a complete mystery as to why he ever took the time to give that speech  --  a magnificent opportunity squandered in a sea of  misguided academia and self-serving headlines,  and nothing more.  

In short and following this morning’s press conference,  we now know that Obama has no intentions of getting involved in Syria beyond his ability to talk.  Sadly,  so does the rest of the murderous hordes in the Middle East.  

Obama threatends whistleblowers on Benghazi

The accepted M.O.  as regards B Obama includes the notion that he is an immature political theorist with no “new” ideas,  bent on an agenda of social justice that benefits the rich in his world and punishes the rich in the world of his opposition;  a man both thin skinned and vindictive.  His decision to administer the Sequester in the most hurtful manner possible,  is proof of this last point.  With the comments below,  and his threats against those who know the truth about Benghazi,  give us a second example. 

Fox News reports:
At least four career officials at the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have retained lawyers or are in the process of doing so, as they prepare to provide sensitive information about the Benghazi attacks to Congress, Fox News has learned.
Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official and Republican counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, is now representing one of the State Department employees. She told Fox News her client and some of the others, who consider themselves whistle-blowers, have been threatened by unnamed Obama administration officials.
“I'm not talking generally, I'm talking specifically about Benghazi – that people have been threatened,” Toensing said in an interview Monday. “And not just the State Department. People have been threatened at the CIA.”
Toensing declined to name her client. She also refused to say whether the individual was on the ground in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, when terrorist attacks on two U.S. installations in the Libyan city killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.
However, Toensing disclosed that her client has pertinent information on all three time periods investigators consider relevant to the attacks: the months that led up to the attack, when pleas by the ambassador and his staff for enhanced security in Benghazi were mostly rejected by senior officers at the State Department; the eight-hour time frame in which the attacks unfolded, and the eight-day period that followed the attacks, when Obama administration officials incorrectly described them as the result of a spontaneous protest over a video.
“It's frightening, and they're doing some very despicable threats to people,” she said. “Not ‘we're going to kill you,’ or not ‘we're going to prosecute you tomorrow,’ but they're taking career people and making them well aware that their careers will be over [if they cooperate with congressional investigators].”  . . . .  read the full article from

Obama and company lost the gun fight on Capitol Hill. Now, they are getting their backsides kicked over Sequester.

You will be glad to know that the Administration has lost every major political battle since the beginning of 2013. 

There have only been two such battle,  but this feckless bunch of Utopian amateurs have lost both.  The first was the butt kicking they took over the gun reform issue and,  now,  they are getting destroyed over Sequester. 

Their plan was to use Sequester to bring shame and blame upon the GOP,  but the plan failed  . . . . . .  Obama’s plan to destroy the GOP, failed and is failing.  Why?   For starters,   Americans know that the GOP offered to give Obama full control over the spending cuts necessary as a result of the Sequester.  They know he was given this option and turned it down.  Folks know this bill (the Sequester) was the doing of Obama,  personally,  and no one else.  He is the author  of this idiot’s idea.  Folks know that the bill cuts only the growth of federal expansion.  There are no ultimate cuts to any federal agencies,  not one.  

The FAA is a perfect example.  All the “pain” doled out to the flying public,  because of “forced layoffs,”  is not the result of less money and the Sequester.  The chart in this post,  from CNBC,  demonstrates the fact that,  after Sequester cuts are implemented,  the FAA has more money than Obama has asked for the FAA in his budget proposal.  The FAA only needed flexibility in administering the Sequester cuts.  Yesterday,  before congress took a week off “work,”  it gave the FAA that flexibility and,  walla,  the "passenger waiting crisis"  is over.  

You should know departmental flexibility is all that needs to be added to the Sequester  --  something that Obama intentionally omitted.  

Sarah Palin reveals the fact that Obama is the first sitting president to speak to Planned Parenthood in a Facebook entry read by 4 million Americans. I call this "news."

There’s no such thing as a coincidence. Today [April 26] I’m looking forward to speaking at a pro-life women’s resource center in Nevada. I intend again to remind women that we are strong enough and capable enough to choose life and work together to create a culture that empowers everyone to live to the fullest. How ironic that on this same day President Obama will be headlining a gala event for the highly controversial and repeatedly discredited organization Planned Parenthood. He's the first sitting president to speak to them, but then again he’s also the first president who is so radically pro-abortion that as a state senator he refused three times to vote in favor of legislation that would simply provide medical attention to babies born alive from botched abortions. Considering the role Planned Parenthood has played in looking the other way while the mass murdering abortion doctor Gosnell butchered babies born alive from his horrific infanticide procedures and abused his women patients, it’s perhaps not surprising that this same president sees nothing wrong with allowing his name to be so openly associated with this organization.

Please take a look at the following excerpt from Jonah Goldberg’s book “Liberal Fascism” for information about the racist and eugenicist origins of Planned Parenthood, then ask yourself again why in the world our president would “bless” the cruel underlying efforts of an organization like this. Do you want him to spend your family’s hard earned tax dollars funding this culture of death? Surely there are people of good conscience within Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion centers who will feel the imperative within themselves to find other ways to help women in their time of need. There are so many better answers than merely eliminating the most precious, promising ingredient we have on earth – innocent human life. May efforts to cull the defenseless and vulnerable not be “blessed,” instead may God bless those who decide that respecting a culture of life in America is the only way to get us out of the mess we’re in.

News Busters is reporting a split between Frank Luntz and heavyweights Limbaugh and Mark Levin. Count me in on Rubio/Luntz side of this argument. Time for Rush and Levin to read up on what Rubio is trying to do.

'GOP' Pollster Frank Luntz Denounced Limbaugh, Levin as 'Problematic' for GOP Future

By:  Tim Graham | April 25, 2013 | 07:11

The leftists at Mother Jones are brandishing another secret tape. Pollster Frank Luntz, denounced as too conservative by liberals when he turns up on liberal networks, told a group of college students at the University of Pennsylvania this week that Rush Limbaugh and right-wing talk radio are "problematic" for the GOP and that he and Mark Levin were “killing” Marco Rubio for his immigration proposals.

Democrats have “got every other source of news on their side. And so that is a lot of what's driving it. If you take—Marco Rubio's getting his ass kicked. Who's my Rubio fan here? We talked about it. He's getting destroyed! By Mark Levin, by Rush Limbaugh, and a few others.” This might be a surprise to anyone who's listened to Rubio's actual interviews on conservative talk radio.

Why the FBI deserves an "F" as the watch dog against in-country terrorism

FBI failings documented by the Boston media. 

Special anti-terrorism intelligence units in Massachusetts were not even alerted that FBI agents had investigated Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s possible terror ties in 2011, the Boston Globe reports.

The Boston Regional Intelligence Center and the Commonwealth Fusion Center in Maynard, where information about potential security threats are analyzed, were both unaware that the FBI had interviewed Tsarnaev during its three month investigation triggered by warnings from the Russian government about his radical Islamic ties.
From the Boston Globe,  we also learn that the Boston Police Department was never advised of the FBI’s investigation of the Tsarnaeu brothers. 
From we learn  
“The homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano, acknowledged on Tuesday that the return of 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev into the US in 2012 was not flagged. "The system pinged when he was leaving the United States. By the time he returned all investigations had been closed," Napolitano said at a Senate hearing.” 
Four "flags" that were not posted by the FBI
She went on to comment that the brothers were investigated without turning up any red flags,  when,  at a time,  the older brother had a web site that featured radical jihadist ideas. She was defending the FBI for a job well done,  but many of us heard her admitting the investigative failings of that intelligence body.  The FBI did not know when the older brother came back from Russia.  It did not red flag his seven month stay in that country.  It was not aware of his radical website and,  it did not know of his expulsion from a local mosque in January of this year,  because of a radicalized rant within that meeting hall. 
FBI not aware of the law and caused the end to its own interrogations. 
From Fox News,  we learn that the FBI “interrogations” of the younger brother were cut short,  in part,  because the  . . . . .  ah  . . . . . FBI signed a criminal complaint,  and in so doing,  set in motion the demand for the administration of the Miranda Rights and the end to its opportunity to question without a lawyer present.  I am saying that, as it turns out,  if the FBI had not sign a criminal complaint,  there would have been no demand to end the interrogations. 

No surprise; Obama has vowed to continue support of Planned Parenthood. We don't understand why this news.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama vowed Friday to join Planned Parenthood in fighting against what he said were efforts across the country to turn women's health back to the 1950s.

Editor’s notes:  of course,  besides the admission that this fight has nation-wide support,  Obama chooses to ignore the deaths of millions upon millions of unborn children;  “fetuses” he calls them as he is unable to bear calling them what they are,  “unborn babies.” 

Somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 million premature infants have been eliminated by State run facilities over the decades.   And the defense for such a travesty?  The “health of the mother.”  Of course,  the  physical health of the host parent is in question less than 10 % of the time,  yet that continues to be their defense.  It is all about sex without consequences.  Who cares if a woman wants to live as she chooses?  I certainly don’t,  but when an unborn and defenseless life is at stake,  I and millions of others,  care deeply. 

Obama is our most deeply flawed president when it comes to the murder of the defenseless.  He simply could not care less and his record on abortion proves the point. 

What is most disturbing is the fact that his position is all about politics.  He could support an agenda that gave assistance to women who did not want to keep their children, but,  instead,  he gives the green light to anything from murder of a surviving abortion victim and late term abortions to the funding of abortions on demand,  world wide. 

One question that is never asked is this:  what about the fathers involved in this horror story?  Do none of them have the courage to stand up for their unborn children?  Me?  I would never get close to considering a marriage to a woman who has no compassion for the children she might bear.  

9:11 am pt: The House has just past a bill to end air traffic delays caused by Obama's Sequester. Of course, Obama could have done this on his own, but chose to politicize the Sequester issue. You do know he is losing the Sequester blame game, right? (No article)

Four past presidents and one pretender.

<<<< Four gracious presidents and one bent on using any opportunity to tout his policies and his presidency.  Obama was without grace,  self serving and stayed in his presentation.  

President Obama was more formal than the other speakers and less confident than usual, as if he knew he was surrounded by people who have something he doesn't. "No matter how much you think you're ready to assume the office of the president, it's impossible to understand the nature of the job until it's yours." This is a way of seeming to laud others when you're lauding yourself. He veered into current policy disputes, using Mr. Bush's failed comprehensive immigration reform to buttress his own effort. That was manipulative, graceless and typical.  --  Peggy Noonan in the WSJ

Editor's notes:  they gathered at the George Bush library,  on Thursday;  four retired presidents and B Obama.  None are more to the Left than Jimmy Carter,  yet,  he chose to give George Bush his due credit without any self aggrandizing commentary.  None are more self centered than Bill Clinton,  but his comments were more than gracious;  in fact,  his comments were pleasant and,  in terms of speaking,  he was the star of the day.    George W side-stepped any self-defense opportunities and gave the quote of the reunion:  

Life is doing service

And then there was B Obama.  His comments were stiff and  without grace.  Peggy Noonan's comments evidence the fact that I was not the only startled with the manifest immaturity of B Obama at this dedication.  He chose to tout his own policies under the guise of giving Bush credit for his initial influences.  Of course,  we all know to what extent Obama has gone to demonize GW and that realization got in the way of me, at least,  giving him any credit as he spoke.  Feckless and immature are words used on this blog to define Obama;  nothing happened yesterday,  to change that opinion. 

Some (mostly Democrats) in Congress want their staffers exempt from ObamaCare as if their hardship is of greater concern than that of the larger population.

According to some in this morning’s new,  Boehner has not been a part of this scheme.  Those politicians involved in this hypocritical nonsense,  argue that their staffers don’t earn enough to pay either the cost of health care or  the fines for not doing so,  and with that complaint,  our politicians prove themselves willfully ignorant of the [identical] complaints of the people.  This is a Democrat bill to the exclusion of the GOP and proves the political theory that argues for Democrat One Party Rule to the exclusion of all who oppose their point of view.   They have moved to criminalize opposition speech and failed,  to end discussion transmitted over the air-waves via the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” and failed,  and have,  on every turn,  worked against the demonstrable will of the people in its (the Democrat Party) pursuit of  Utopian and communal national/world goals. 

Understand that if Boehner was involved in such talks,  early on,  he has left that negotiating table.  From all reports,  Reid continues to work for this exemption. 

Read this excerpt from Politico with caution: 

The Politico reported:
Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, sources in both parties said.
The talks — which involve Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Obama administration and other top lawmakers — are extraordinarily sensitive, with both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides. Discussions have stretched out for months, sources said.
A source close to the talks says: “Everyone has to hold hands on this and jump, or nothing is going to get done.”
Yet if Capitol Hill leaders move forward with the plan, they risk being dubbed hypocrites by their political rivals and the American public. By removing themselves from a key Obamacare component, lawmakers and aides would be held to a different standard than the people who put them in office.

It is becoming clear that the FBI should have known about the Boston Bombers. Speaking of not knowing, FoxNew reports the FBI is scurrying around trying to figure out what is coming next. Why don't they already know?

<<<<  He was in the FBI data base,  just taking up data space and little more,  apparently.  He travel to Russia and remained in that country for several months before returning home.  Intelligence was defeated in tracking him because he changed his name.  Who would have thought that our once robust intel system could be defeated with such a mundane task as changing one's name?  And Obama may be the only man in America who does not know that jihad Islam is at war with our country.  Anyone feel more protected because Obama  is in charge??  

In a story broken by non-American press, Reuters, gives us this:    tThe name of one of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was listed on the U.S. government’s highly classified central database of people it views as potential terrorists. But the list is so vast that this did not mean authorities automatically kept close tabs on him, sources close to the bombing investigation said on Tuesday.  

Tsarnaev, 26, was killed in a police shootout early Friday, while his younger brother Dzhokhar, 19, was captured later that day. Prosecutors say the brothers, ethnic Chechens who had been living in the United States for more than a decade, planted two bombs that exploded near the finish line of the marathon on April 15, killing three people and wounding more than 200.
The sources said Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s details were entered into TIDE, a database maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center, because the FBI spoke to him in 2011 while investigating a Russian tip-off that he had become a follower of radical Islamists.

Obama loses, 5 to Bush's 0

Like I have said countless times,  he is going to get us all killed before he is finished.

Some in the Muslim community are trying to do the right thing - this coming from a conservative pundit.

 A quick note about Muslim America   some are trying to do the right thing.

The dead killer,  Tamerlan Tsarnaev was kicked out of a local mosque in January of this year,  because of a radical,  hate filled rant,  and,  yesterday,  we have news that the mosque will not bury this pathetic and cowardly murderer. 

Can we trust these people?  Who knows,  but it must be noted that,  at least on the surface,  they are trying to do the right thing.  His removal from the mosque,  in January,  was an event well before public pressure  would have demanded such action.  And because of that incident, among others,  we can believe,  with caution,  that many within the American Muslim community are trying to do right by this great country.  

Why Hillary Clinton is disqualified from being our next president.

According to an USA Today article,  the House report on the slaughter at the Benghazi Embassy,  was the result,  in part,  of failed policies within the Hillary Clinton’s State Department. 

The report reads:  Senior State Department officials, including Clinton, approved reductions in security at the facilities in Benghazi, according to the report by GOP members of five House committees. The report cites an April 19, 2012, cable bearing Clinton's signature acknowledging a March 28, 2012, request from then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz for more security, yet allowing further reductions.”  

Of course,  Hillary testified that she had no knowledge of the March request for increased security or why she approved a reduction in security funding for the embassy.  It was her State Department;  those were her approving signatures denying security request and cutting back on funding;  it was she who shared in the pre-election deception that found Obama pretending that Libya as a model of his new Middle East policy and the war on terror was over. 

And she wants to be president  ??!!

Why not support the new immigration bill?

 It appears that the Senate has the votes to pass their version of the immigration bill,  in spite of the fact that these feckless leaders,  Republican and Democrat alike,  have no intentions of reading the 800 page bill before the Senate vote. 

And therein is my reason for not supporting this bill  . . . . . .  I have no idea what it says,  what additional regulations are added against the business community,  the total bill within this bill for unrelated “pork,”   how many additional agencies will be created,  the cost of this  bill,  where this money will come from,   or,  whether the border will be “closed” before this bill becomes law.   

Anyone think these considerations important?  One thing for certain,  the past four years has revealed a congressional process that is wholly ignorant of the laws it passes.  The failure to read a bill before passage is not a practice that began with the advent of the current empty suit acting (read: “pretending”) as our president.  Our congress has been following this practice for years,  if not  decades.   

As a conservative pundit,  I have come to believe that we are much too focused on the Obama Administration when criticizing the way Congress does its business and its penchant for spending money.  

With this Senate bill,  all I can say is,  "Here we go again." 

The two young terrorists guilty of the Boston bombings? They were radicalized in their own home. Listen to their mother in a CNN phone interview.

Proven false claims direct from the militant environmentalist community.

In 1970, the first Earth Day was celebrated — okay, “celebrated” doesn’t capture the funereal tone of the event. The events (organized in part by then hippie and now convicted murderer Ira Einhorn) predicted death, destruction and disease unless we did exactly as progressives commanded.
Behold the coming apocalypse as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:
  1. "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."  — Harvard biologist George Wald
  2. "We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation." — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner
  3. "Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction." — New York Timeseditorial
  4. "Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years." — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich
  5. "Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s." — Paul Ehrlich
  6. "It is already too late to avoid mass starvation," — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day
  7. "Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine." — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter
  8. "In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half." — Lifemagazine
  9. "At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable." — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
  10. "Air certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone." — Paul Ehrlich
  11. "By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won't be any more crude oil. You'll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill 'er up, buddy,' and he'll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn't any.'" — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
  12. "[One] theory assumes that the earth's cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun's heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born." — Newsweek magazine
  13. "The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age." — Kenneth Watt
Quotes from "Earth Day, Then and Now," by Ronald Bailey, May 1, 2000.

Corn syrup and coal greater [existential] threats to this country than terrorism.

There is no evidence for the “facts” Biden cites in this video interview,  but,  hey,  when you don’t know how to deal with real threats,  you talk nonsense just to take up air-time. 

And the debate begins with regards to the war on terror. Liberal point of view: there is no terror except for what is existentially attached to individual criminal offenses such as the Boston bombings.

  <<<<<   City University of New York Professor,  Ruth O'Brien complains in an op-ed that "too much force" had been used against Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who was killed by the police.  She sites the injuries to the dead enemy combatant (see pic at end of this post)  as proof of extreme force and camps heavily on the fact of these injuries,  ignoring the news brought into her home by her own children  (yes,  she has reproduced) declaring the worst of the injuries being the result of having been run over and dragged some 30 feet,  by his brother in a desperate escape attempt.  She knew of this fact,  yet charges authorities with misrepresentation and excessive force.
Understand that Obama comes out of this academic class of nitwits.  It is no mere coincidence that in-country terrorism has,  now,  officially increased,  and has done so as the result,  in part,  of a retreating and, thus,  feckless policy of avoidance and denial. 
We have lost the war in Afghanistan because of this “peace at any price” nonsense,  and have put American lives,  in the homeland,  in grave danger as long as political correctness, defined by folks such as this no-nothing professor,   continues. 
Now we have captured the two terrorists from Chechnya who come from the troubled region that is Muslim, but we cannot understand their motives, not yet.  And Obama encourages us to refrain.
This said, the mortuary pictures of the older brother of the two are extremely disturbing, raising questions as to whether the Boston Police Department captured him with too much force. I understand the explanation offered by Katharine Q. Seelye, William H. Rashbaum, and Michael Cooper.  Yet, it does not ring true.  A picture is worth a thousand words that will keep our ears ringing as we recoil from this photo.  Images have a way of searing themselves into our memory in a way that can’t be undone.  We have an emotional memory, not just a rational one that is exemplified by words.
While terrorism is about causing fear — again an emotion — we do have to account for our conduct in these extreme times when adrenaline is running high.
At my home, to at least offset this, we turn off all media.  I couldn’t believe my sons’ explanation when they got home about one brother running over the other one.  So I found a place to read about this, and I recoiled after seeing the picture.  Still, we all know that terrorism, like crime, “leads if it bleeds” with the established media.  The established media fixates on the domestic-violence or crime-of-passion aspect of terrorism, and it, too, inculcates more fear in all of us.  
Text source:  FoxNews and MidknightReview

Jihad was the reason and nearly all Americans know this, all except our president. What does this say as to the effectiveness of America's in-country terror watch.

So,  who is Michael Mukasey?   He is the federal judge who presided in the five year,  “blind sheik” trial,   back in the 90’s  (the first bombing of the trade center).  After reading his article in the Wall Street Journal,  one wonders why Obama continues to follow the liberal script, right down to the dotting of the "i's,  as he plays down the obvious concerning the Boston bombings. One thing for certain,  he is one of the last politicians to come to the table with regard to assessing reasonably placed blame.  

Michael B. Mukasey / Wall Street Journal:
Make No Mistake, It Was Jihad  —  Let's hope the administration gets over its reluctance to recognize attacks on the U.S. for what they are.  —  If your concern about the threat posed by the Tsarnaev brothers is limited to assuring that they will never be in a position to repeat their grisly acts, rest easy.
The very important question remaining is this:  does his timidity,  in this regard,  reflect a less than critical/holistic  involvement in the war against Muslim/Jihadist terror?  

Clearly,  we know less about terrorist plans than we did before 2008,  due to Obama's decision to kill known terrorists rather than work a plan to capture and interrogate.  We simply do not do not interrogate terrorist's captured on the battlefield.   

His unannounced policies (refusing to hand over certain emails) of extended "fairness" to Muslims,  has contributed to the delay of the Fort Hood killer's trial,  a delay that has postponed this slam dunk conviction  for three and half years.  Apparently there is a fine line,  within this Administration,  between "silly"  and "stupid."     

Another issue  that may pre-date Obama's presidency,  finds that all accused and convicted terrorists in this country,  were in this country on expired work visa's with no one searching for them before their particular criminal involvement.

Conclusion:  the first major terror event since 2001 has occurred on Obama's watch and may very well indicate a systemic failure within this Administration.   Make no mistake,  the Boston bombing was jihad,  and Obama must bear some responsibility for this event,  just a George Bush would have been held responsible, had this happened on his watch   . . . . . . . .   there are reasons why nothing like this took place under Bush but did under Obama,  and we need to fix those issues.