The President-elect is "safe and secure"

Recalling how the liberal extremists who control the media ridiculed and denigrated President Bush and Vice President Cheney for the U.S. Secret Service and military protection they each received on September 11, 2001, I couldn't wait to see the media's reaction to the extraordinary protection extended to the President-elect during . . . hold on now, during a . . . power outage!

So, I looked and looked, researched and researched, and I could not find a single story noting the President-elect's cowardice as an unnamed federal agency, the resources of state and local Hawai'ian law enforcement and the U.S. Secret Service all jumped into hyper-action in order to protect the President-elect as a power outage interrupted his Oahu vacation.

And thus is how it will be for the next four years.

The hysterically funny skit you will not see on NBC's Saturday Night Live is President-elect Obama sitting in a chair in his study, deep in thought (he's so thoughtful, you know), and suddenly the lights go out and he falls to the floor crying and wailing for protection.

And a letter I sent this morning under the title, "Biden, Clinton, Daschle and now President Clinton vindicate Bush":

Editor,

As if President-elect Obama's selection for his Administration of three United States Senators who voted for war (Biden, Clinton and Daschle) was not enough vindication of President Bush's decision to commit U.S. troops to a multi-national force tasked with ousting Saddam Hussein, President-elect Obama may further validate Bush's decision by conferring a foreign policy assignment on President Clinton (A wrong role for Bill Clinton, editorial, December 28).

For, it was President Clinton who, on December 16, 1998, said (italics the letter writer's for emphasis), " . . . Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten . . . the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons . . . I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again . . . that is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team . . . I have ordered . . . strikes against Iraq. They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction . . . we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems . . . the credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program . . . the best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government, a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort . . . the decision to use force is never cost-free . . . there will be unintended Iraqi casualties . . . if Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors . . . And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them . . . ." (End of letter to the editor that also mocks the delusional who think the Gen. Shinseki selection was a repudiation of Bush.)