If Benghazi is a "Side Show" Harry Reid and Jay Carney are the Clowns

Bing West at National Review has a very compelling piece on Benghazi in response to former secretary of defense Bob Gates who on Sunday launched a defense of the Obama administration's lack of response to Benghazi.

The administration is sticking with its "Benghazi is just a circus put on by the Republicans" line, right down to Sen. Harry Reid who today continued to claim that the Republicans are only interested in giving Obama a black eye and taking shots at Hillary Clinton which is why they are trying to find out why four Americans were killed and nobody has been brought to justice.  Reid also continued to blame the Republicans for refusing to fund embassy security, a lie which has been totally debunked by Charlotte Lamb and also here in this Heritage Foundation report.

If Benghaz is a side show, Harry Reid and Jay Carney are the clowns.

On Sunday, Mr. Gates claimed that sending the military in "without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground would have been very dangerous."

From Mr. West's post:

Let’s do a quick review: The CIA did send in seven fighters; four special-forces soldiers in Tripoli were ordered not to pitch in; the Marines on Sigonella wanted to help; and there was nothing more to face than a mob inspired by a video (accoridng [sic] to the administration). But for the Pentagon, the risk was just too great. 

Message to those who were already fighting on the ground in Benghazi: You are on your own. SecDef believes it’s “very dangerous” to go into combat.

I'm not sure what more intelligence was necessary besides the real-time video they had at the Defense Department combined with Greg Hicks on the phone with Hillary Clinton at 2:00 reporting that Ambassador Stevens said they were "under attack."

Are we to assume that our military is no more flexible than that?

What signal does that send to the world?  Go ahead and attack wherever you like because the military needs time to prepare a response, so you can attack freely, or as Jay Carney might say, in an "unfettered" manner.

Any military veterans out there care to respond?

Pathetic.

Read the whole thing.

Coming Up: Cuts to Military Retirement and Benefits

It's back to the Carter years as far as our U. S. military goes.

Two articles of note came on my radar this week.  First this one in which Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen says that pay cuts and benefit cuts are "on the table":

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen warned against taking the "relatively easy" choice of cutting hardware while maintaining the increasing costs of paying and providing ongoing health care to troops and retirees.

"Two of the big places the money is, is in pay and benefits," Mullen told defense reporters at a June 2 breakfast meeting in Washington. "And so when I say all things are on the table, all things are on the table."

DoD. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says that nearly 10% of their budget goes to health benefits for active and reserve members.

In a May 24 speech, Gates said:

"Sustaining … the weapons and the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines who use them is increasingly difficult given the massive growth of other components of the defense budget, the 'tail' if you will -- operations, maintenance, pay and benefits, and other forms of overhead...America's defense enterprise has consumed ever higher level of resources as a matter of routine just to maintain, staff and administer itself."

Mullen confirms, saying that pay and benefits should be cut before programs and personnel.  

This dilemma is a result of Obama's proposed $400 billion in DoD budget cuts proposesd in April over the next 12 years.

The second article that caught my eye explains how Gates is looking specifically at cuts in the military retirement system:

“A more tiered and targeted system, one that weights compensation toward the most high-demand and dangerous specialties, could bring down costs while attracting and retaining the high-quality personnel we need,”

 One proposal still floating around is this one:

The main proposal on the shelf at the Pentagon comes from the 10th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation, released in 2008. It suggests lowering the years-of-service requirement from 20 to 10 while eliminating pension payments immediately upon retirement, which for some troops comes as early as age 37.  Under that plan, troops with 10 to 20 years of service would receive retirement pay starting at age 60, and those with more than 20 years would receive checks starting at age 57.

This is still very much in flux and discussion; how it would be grandfathered in, how each branch of service would adapt these proposals to their own specificbranch, etc.  But now is the time to let your legislator know how you feel about $400 billion in cuts to the military while we continue to expand entitlement programs.  We can pay health care and education costs for illegals but we can't fund our own military?  What's wrong with this picture?

The Traditional Media is Now "Frustrated" With The White House

It would appear that the "traditional media" is getting testy at being dumped by The White House for "the new media." 

This would be the same "traditional media" that helped drive Barack Obama's narrative during the campaign, that covered for him, that refused to chase down the real stories and hunt information on an unknown candidate while reporting instead on his latest HORSE game or his trip to the ice cream shack. 

The White House had a staffer interview Elena Kagan shortly after the briefing announcing her selection.  The interview was then posted to The White House website causing ire and rancor among the press pool who laments that the White House is filtering Kagan's message.  Via CBS News:

While the White House seems to believe the American people deserve to hear from Kagan, it has not made her available to reporters. That prompted some consternation at today's White House briefing.

"It appears that Solicitor General Kagan did an interview yesterday right after the president's announcement," said a reporter. "You've now posted that on the White House Web site. Who did the interview? And can I have one?"

"I think it's -- I think it's on the website if you want to see it," responded Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Soon after, the reporter can be heard saying, an edge in her voice, "So a White House staffer interviewing her."

Gibbs says yes, and the reporter asks if Kagan would like to do another interview.

"She has -- she's not told me that, no," replied Gibbs, prompting the reporter to respond, "Tell her we're deeply frustrated." 

"Deeply frustrated" indeed. That's how many of us felt when the mainstream media refused to investigate or report on the many dark and undisclosed areas in Obama's background.  Forget the birth certificate issue; I'd have been more interested in his associations with Rashid Khalidi, for example, (remember that tape the LA Times refused to disclose?), or those mysterious college transcripts and papers, among other things.

If the mainstream media is frustrated by the stonewalling by The White House they truly have no one but themselves to blame.

North Korea's Missile Launch

Missile experts from Iran are in North Korea to help Pyongyang prepare for its rocket launch, according to reports. Pajamas Media suspects "and doubtless to learn what they can about evading US anti-missile defense methods. " The Iranian delegation consists of fifteen representatives and they have been there since early March.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates feels certain that the launch will proceed and that of course there is nothing the U.S. can do about it. The North Koreans contend that this is to launch a communications satellite but obviously the same technique could be used to launch more deadly weapons. Reports are that a missile could reach all the way to Hawaii.

Asked if the North Korean rocket could reach the US states of Hawaii or Alaska, Admiral Mike Mullen told CNN: "In some cases, yes, they could probably get down to Hawaii."

Gates said on Fox News Sunday "I don't know anyone at a senior level in the American government who does not believe this technology is intended to mask the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile."

That is all troubling enough but the fact that Iran is now in the mix further complicates things. Obama has been making overtures to Iran, extending the open hand of peace, sending Happy New Year messages, etc. But this launch is clearly a violation of a UN Security Council resolution banning them from carrying out ballistic missile activities.

Japan's Air Force has begun deploying units capable of shooting down a rocket but Pyongyang has insisted that any attempt to shoot it down would be considered an act of war. The launch is scheduled to occur between April 4 - 8.

Yet another Biden-predicted-test for Obama. What will he do?