Category Archives: 2016 Election

Looking Towards 2016

2016 election

There has been a lot of discussion lately about the upcoming Presidential election in 2016. While it is still early, potential candidates on both sides have announced their intentions. Other potential candidates are being coy about whether they will run for President. The Iowa Caucus is set for February 1, 2016, followed by the New Hampshire primary election on February 9, 2016.  Let’s take a look at who has thrown his or her hat in the ring while speculating on who has not.

Democrat Candidates


Formed an Exploratory Committee

Jim Webb – Former US Senator from Virginia and former Secretary of the Navy under President Reagan

Likely to Run

Hillary Clinton – Former First Lady, former US Senator from New York and former Secretary of State under President Obama

Possible Candidates

Joe Biden – US Vice President and former US Senator from Delaware

Jerry Brown – Governor of California

Andrew Cuomo – Governor of New York

Martin O’Malley – Former Governor of Maryland

Bernie Sanders – US Senator from Vermont

Note: Senator Sanders is an Independent but if he were to run for President he would run as a Democrat.

Mark Warner – US Senator from Virginia

Elizabeth Warren – US Senator from Massachusetts

Potential Vice Presidential Candidates

Julian Castro – Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and former Mayor of San Antonio, Texas

Republican Candidates


Formed an Exploratory Committee

Jeb Bush – Former Governor of Florida

Lindsey Graham – US Senator from South Carolina

Marco Rubio – US Senator from Florida

Scott Walker – Governor of Wisconsin

Likely to Run

Ben Carson – Head of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Children’s Center

Chris Christie – Governor of New Jersey

Carly Fiorina – Former CEO of Hewlett-Packard

Mike Huckabee – Former Governor of Arkansas

Rick Perry – Former Governor of Texas

Mitt Romney – Former Governor of Massachusetts and 2012 Republican nominee for President

Rick Santorum – Former US Senator from Pennsylvania

Possible Candidates

Ted Cruz – US Senator from Texas

Bobby Jindal – Governor of Louisiana

John Kasich – Governor of Ohio

Sarah Palin – Former Governor of Alaska and 2008 Republican nominee for Vice President

Rand Paul – US Senator from Kentucky

Donald Trump – Real estate magnate

Who do you like? Who do you dislike? Which candidates on both sides do you think will actually run? If Hillary Clinton does become the Democrat nominee who do you think would be able to beat her? Who on the Republican side should not run? Discuss your opinions and predictions here.




Debate: What Should Be Done About ISIS?


The terrorist group ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) has been in the news lately for its brutal pursuits towards establishing its goal of a caliphate (a single Islamic state based on sharia law) in Iraq and Syria. ISIS claims religious authority over all Muslims across the globe, and therefore seeks to bring Muslim regions under its direct political control. ISIS has made advances in its goal of controlling Iraq, and in June 2014 it seized control of Mosul and Tikrit.


On June 29, 2014, the leader of ISIS and its self-proclaimed caliph,  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, declared the establishment of a new caliphate. In July 2014, Al-Baghdadi urged Muslims to unite and capture Rome in order to own the world. On August 4, 2014, ISIS came to the town of Sinjar, forcing its Yazidi population to flee into the mountains for fear the they would be killed. That week, ISIS soldiers kidnapped 400 Yazidi women to sell as sex slaves. On August 7, 2014, ISIS took control of Qaraqosh, the largest Christian town in Iraq, warning Christians to leave, convert to Islam or die. When ISIS took over Mosul, it bombed Christian churches in that city, confiscated Christians’ property and crucified Christians who refused to cede to ISIS’ demands. ISIS is slaughtering Christians and beheading children in its effort to extinguish Christians from Iraq. ISIS’ takeover of Iraq has forced over 1 million people to flee their homes.

ISIS has distributed brochures to Muslims residing in Great Britain, urging them to join ISIS. ISIS has made propaganda videos set to music, which include images of severed heads, crucified Syrian soldiers and mass executions. ISIS also has a gift shop, selling T-shirts and hoodies emblazoned with the ISIS emblem.  If that weren’t enough, ISIS soldiers and sympathizers have taken to social media to post direct threats to the United States and its citizens.

ISIS tweet

ISIS tweet 2

ISIS tweet 3

Even a New Jersey resident has flown the ISIS flag outside of his home there.

In response to an emboldened ISIS, President Obama authorized limited, targeted airstrikes in Iraq against ISIS, as well as humanitarian airdrops to Iraqi refugees. However, this has not been enough. Why has the United States not used all of its might to destroy ISIS? How should the United States handle this growing threat? What should be done about the terrorists who are posting direct threats to the United States on Twitter? How should we protect the Christians and Yazidis from these terrorists? What should be done about ISIS?


Benghazi is Not a Phony Scandal


The September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya has raised a lot of important questions. This attack occurred on the eve of the 2012 Presidential elections, making those questions particularly interesting. The administration has tried to dismiss Republican concerns over what happened that fateful night by calling the attack a “phony scandal.” As an American citizen, I find such a description of an attack that left 4 Americans to fend for themselves and die offensive.

New evidence has come to light via White House emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Judicial Watch, in which it is clear that the administration has been engaging in a cover up from day 1 over what happened in Benghazi. The administration blamed the attack on a spontaneous demonstration in response to a You Tube video, even though they knew that this was not the reason for the attack.  In addition, the administration removed reliable security detail from the Benghazi compound and replaced it with Libyan security personnel, who Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens deemed unreliable. The cause of the attack in Benghazi did not fit the administration’s narrative that Al Qaeda was on the run.

Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer stated that the newly released White House email on the Benghazi talking points is the “equivalent of what was discovered with the Nixon tapes.” Krauthammer is correct. At least President Nixon had the decency to resign once the truth about Watergate came to light. In contrast, this administration keeps covering up each lie with more lies rather than take responsibility for what happened. The reason that Benghazi is so important is that, by covering up what happened, the Obama administration is demonstrating its willingness to use the military and intelligence agencies to lie in order to win an election. Lying to the American people seems to be a pattern of this administration. Remember this?

In lying about what really caused the attack in Benghazi, this administration is in essence telling us that they would rather put politics above the security of the American people. This is not only true of President Obama, this is also true of former Secretary of State and possible 2016 Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.  Secretary Clinton deliberately repeated the lie to the families of the Benghazi victims and to the American people about a You Tube video being the cause of the Benghazi attack. She also lied to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, claiming that she had no knowledge of the security situation in Benghazi. However, House Republicans released a report stating that Clinton signed off on denying additional security to the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi. So which is it? Was she unaware of the security situation in Benghazi, or was she aware, but did not want to admit her knowledge of the situation?

Even if Clinton was not directly responsible for responding to cables from the Benghazi consulate requesting additional security, the buck stops with the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State is responsible for organizing and supervising all employees in the State Department and is responsible for the supervision of interdepartmental activities of the U.S. government overseas.

Clinton has a pattern of lying. In fact, she was fired from her job with the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate investigation for lying and for unethical behavior.  Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has said that Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State leading up to the killing of 4 Americans in Benghazi, including Ambassador Stevens, are “inexcusable, it was a dereliction of duty, and it should preclude [Clinton] from holding higher office.” Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) has stated that, in regard to Clinton, “anyone who would just throw away 200 years of military ethos and leave our men behind to be murdered” should “never be considered as a commander in chief.”

While Clinton certainly deserves blame for denying security requests that led to the deaths of Ambassador Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith and Glen Doherty, what about President Obama? Where was he that fateful night? Former National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor admitted that President Obama was not in the White House Situation Room the night of September 11, 2012.

The White House was careful to release this photograph of President Obama and his national security team monitoring the raid that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden on May 1, 2011.


Why was no such photograph taken during the Benghazi attack released?

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) announced this week that the House will finally form a Select Committee on Benghazi. Here are some questions to which the Select Committee should get answers:

If there is no cover up with regard to the Benghazi attack, then why did there have to be a lawsuit to obtain relevant White House documents? Why was additional security to the Benghazi consulate denied? Did President Obama sign a Cross Border Authority as only he could do as Commander in Chief so that the military could get to Benghazi? Many people talk about a stand down order, but what if no order to go into Benghazi was ever given? Who was in charge that night? Where was Secretary Clinton that night? Why was the military not prepared to come to Americans’ aid in an unstable country on September 11 of all dates?

What questions do you think the Select Committee needs to answer? Who do you think the Select Committee should subpoena to obtain such answers?

The day after the attack on Benghazi, President Obama allegedly skipped that day’s intelligence briefing so that he could attend a Las Vegas fundraiser for his reelection campaign.  This timeline illustrates the events leading up to the attack in Benghazi:


The actions of President Obama, Secretary Clinton and the administration show a lack of integrity and a callous disregard for American security. If this attack was covered up just to save face so that President Obama could win reelection, then we should all be disgusted and outraged. The families of Stevens, Woods, Smith and Doherty deserve to know the truth about why no one saved their children that fateful night. All Americans deserve nothing less than the truth about what happened in Benghazi. To call Benghazi a “phony scandal” is despicable. The truth, Mr. President, is anything but phony.

If You Don’t Vote, Then You Can’t Complain

This bears repeating: If you don’t vote, then you can’t complain.

What happens when people do not vote in elections? New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio happens. Only 24% of registered New York voters voted in the 2013 Mayoral election. Why didn’t Republicans vote for his opponent, Joe Lhota? Because they thought a DeBlasio landslide was inevitable. That’s pathetic.

In New Jersey, only 24% of registered New Jersey voters voted in the 2013 Senate special election, in which Cory Booker defeated Steve Lonegan.

Are you really not going to vote because you think a landslide is inevitable? A radical progressive, to the left of Fidel Castro, is now the Mayor of New York City and the former Mayor of Newark, one of the most crime ridden and corrupt cities in America, is now a Senator because of that thought process. This needs to change.

This brings me to a similar point. I often hear fellow conservatives say that they will not vote for a candidate who is not conservative enough and would rather stay home than vote for a RINO (Republican In Name Only). Let’s think about this. I admire people for standing up for their principles and I do think the country would be better off if we had more principled conservatives in Congress. However, a non vote is a vote for a Democrat. A vote for a third party candidate is a vote for a Democrat. Before you all yell at me and call me a RINO lover, hear me out.

The strategy of purging RINOs in the primary elections is an admirable one. I do think that we should all fight for the candidates we want at the primary level. But, if your conservative candidate loses the primary to a RINO, do not stay home in November. You may not be crazy about the McConnells, McCains and Grahams of the Congressional world, but you should still vote for them in the general election. Why, you ask? Two words: Harry Reid. Do you really want Harry Reid as the Senate Majority Leader again? This is the same person who called people who were adversely affected by Obamacare liars. On the House side, I have two more words for you: Nancy Pelosi. Are you going to stay home and hand the Speakership to a person who pushed Obamacare through and continues to defend it to this day? I certainly hope not.

If neither Harry Reid nor Nancy Pelosi are reason enough for you to vote for a less than ideal candidate, then remember that Democrats and Democrats only brought us Obamacare. Democrats only are celebrating the fact that more Americans have become unemployed as a result of this disastrous law. Democrats only want to tax us into oblivion while spending money we don’t have, leaving our children and grandchildren saddled with mountains of debt. Democrats only are using political correctness as a weapon against our First Amendment rights. Democrats only are defending the IRS’ abusive actions against Tea Party organizations. Democrats only are clamoring for the expansion of government power and the welfare state. Democrats only believe that minorities are too stupid to be able to get an ID so that they may vote. Democrats only have repeatedly lied to us and told us that if we liked our health care plan and our doctors that we could keep them. Democrats only have given President Obama a pat on the back for intervening militarily in Libya without Congressional approval. Democrats only are trying to take away your Second Amendment rights. Democrats only celebrated voter fraud by embracing Melowese Richardson.

If you still think that Democrat victories aren’t so bad, I urge you to take a trip to Detroit, a city that has been under Democrat control since 1962.

If you still decide to stay home and not vote because either you live in a blue state and think a Democrat victory is inevitable or because the Republican candidate isn’t conservative enough, and you don’t like the direction in which our country is headed, then you can’t complain. Most states are more conservative then you might think. If you would still prefer to not vote and to remain perpetually aggrieved, then consider joining the Democrat party.  There is no such thing as a perfect candidate, but there is such a thing as sitting back and refusing to participate in the voting process and allowing Democrats to further destroy our country. That is unforgivable.