Conduct Unbecoming
Section 147.10 would have been problematic for the former president as well:
Improper or illegal involvement with drugs raises questions regarding an individual’s willingness or ability to protect classified information. Drug abuse or dependence may impair social or occupational functioning, increasing the risk of an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
…Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include:
(1) Any drug abuse;
(2) Illegal drug possession, including cultivation, processing, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution…
Even ignoring his “I didn’t inhale” defense during the campaign, there were many credible rumors of extensive use of cocaine by Bill Clinton, his half-brother Roger, and many Clinton associates (including White House employees) that again would probably have surfaced in a serious FBI check, and almost certainly resulted in a rejection of his clearance application.
The current president has a different problem. Ignoring his admitted drug use in his youth, which would not in itself be disqualifying, Section 147.3 discusses the issue of allegiance to the United States:
Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include: (1) Involvement in any act of sabotage, espionage, treason, terrorism, sedition, or other act whose aim is to overthrow the Government of the United States or alter the form of government by unconstitutional means;
(2) Association or sympathy with persons who are attempting to commit, or who are committing, any of the above acts…
Emphasis mine.
Barack Obama was a “red diaper baby” — both of his parents were communists, as was his mentor in his youth, Frank Marshall Davis. That in itself would not be disqualifying — one cannot choose one’s parents, after all, and youthful associations are often outgrown. What is troubling is that, as Obama admitted himself, he later “chose his friends carefully,” seeking out, among others, the Marxist professors in college. As Stanley Kurtz has amply documented, his entire life was one of deliberate radical associations, perhaps the most notorious being leftist terrorist Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, who found the Manson butchery admirable, and the Maoist Mike Klonsky, not to mention Reverend Jeremiah “God damn America” Wright. No normal citizen applying for a clearance would get one with these kinds of associations. Of course, a person with such associations would not likely even apply for a job that required one, absent perhaps a desire to commit espionage.
The Founders probably never expected a president to have as much power as a modern president does — they actually circumscribed the duties quite strictly (e.g., only Congress could declare war). Also, they envisioned the president being selected by the states, that the process would not be as dependent on individual voters as it has become today, and that the press would live up to its own constitutional responsibilities to act as some sort of filter. Thus they likely expected, perhaps naively, that the Electoral College would only select for the office actual gentlemen, bestowed with some minimal amount of probity, rather than scoundrels. Accordingly, the only constitutional qualifications they placed on presidential eligibility were being a natural-born citizen, at least thirty-five years of age, and able to fog a mirror. Given how much power has accreted to the office over the past two centuries, it is both amazing and ironic that an ability to get a basic security clearance is not a job requirement.
Several employees of the current president just lost their clearances (and likely their jobs) for behavior that was mild compared to that of one of his predecessors, who got one not by dint of a background check, but simply by electoral acclaim (much of which might not have occurred had the media itself done a proper background check in both cases, instead of covering up for them).
Perhaps it’s time to at least think about upgrading the Constitution with regard to this issue.
This is a bizarre and biased piece of guilt by association, however by your own weird assumptions George Bush would never get clearance either.
Back the claim up; what would have denied him clearance?
How about alcohol abuse and an arrest for DUI to which he pleaded guilty?
This could easily be used as a disqualifier as it shows un-controllable tendancies.
I hate to say it but the OP is right.
That was sufficiently far in the past that it wouldn’t have been an issue. The guidelines provide mitigating criteria as well.
George Bush would never get clearance
Completely false. A 10-year old (plus) DUI, with nothing else related, and clear evidence that the subject no longer consumed alcohol at all, would be a total non-issue.
Yeah, and there’s just a faint possibility that military service, as a fighter pilot no less, with an honorable discharge, just might have tipped the scales to a YES.
More like, SLAM DUNKED the scales to a yes.
One DUI will not disqualify you.
Try again.
you’re equating a dui to illegal drug use?
A DUI is illegal drug use. Alcohol is a drug. But Dubya should have been disqualified as a CFR member, as the stated goal of that subversive group is to overthrow the US Constitution and institute a New World Order. If this was Paris, near the end of the eighteenth century, such would find themselves waiting in line at the guillotine.Further, those who announce that “Islam is a great religion” make themselves both intellectually and morally suspect.
Why yes, it is guilt by association:
“(2) Association or sympathy with persons who are attempting to commit, or who are committing, any of the above acts…”
Associating with known terrorists is a disqualification, it’s explicitly written into the regulations. Associating yourself with someone who’s dedicated to overthrowing our current system, even on an un- or semi-related issue (education) is intentionally a disqualifying reason. Particularly when so many other of your associations also want to do away with the current system.
I have been interviewed several times in my life by various gov’t agencies regarding other peoples pending jobs (or military positions, pilots, EOD) and guess what? Most of what they ask is about the persons associations, and your general perceptions of them.
He had a clearance when he was in F-102′s, genius. Those things were armed with nuclear tipped Genie AIRs.
No, not in the Guard.
Liberals often cite this “guilt by association” excuse. If it is a random association – e.g., a former domestic terrorist happens to live in my neighborhood – that is legitimately “guilt by association.” If I choose to make this person a friend, then the “guilt by association” excuse has less credibility. We can then consider the rule: once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, three times is a trend. If I repeatedly associate with radicals, the “guilt by association” excuse is totally bunk.
This is sacrilege to the small minded left. His association with Bill Ayers would immediately disqualify him from receiving ANY clearance. He is not even qualified to empty the trash at the Pentagon. The minions of the left have no honor or sense of duty. They cannot comprehend.
Your user name is well chosen.
There is a time limit on things that can deny security clearance. Generally, things that happened more than ten years ago can’t be used against you, though there are a few exceptions.
Rev. Wright was recent.
There is good reason why obama would not get clearance. He is a communist. His giving of State secrets to our enemies constitutes treason.
Don’t forget the transfer of authority from the State Dept to Commerce to allow the sale of super comptuers to the Chi-Comms by the Clinton administration. Also included was satellite delivery technology that allowed the development of multiple warhead delivery system. This advanced their technology by 40 years. Thanks Bill and Hillary!
And also don’t forget that he gave nuclear material to North Korea, for “energy production only” wink wink nudge nudge….
Obama couldn’t have gottn a clearance because the investigation would not be completeable. They would have needed to find and interview people who knew him in college, and all his college transcripts would have been reviewed. Neither of these things can be found.
I recently saw a video of a younger Obama speaking to some college kids. In it he said — twice — that he was born in Kenya, not the United states. The same video has Michelle saying the same thing. It’s clear that the rules are too loose for candicacy and that the MSM is complicit in hiding essential facts about a man who at heart is a political gangster.
He actually could have been lying about being born in Kenya. I’m thinking academic fraud (scholarship for foreign student) is more his style. Regardless, I’m still one of those people who believes that he’s not a natural born because his father (at least on his birth cert – I think Frank Marshall Davis is his father) was a British subject.
Please provide your source for that video. I would think that a video like that would change everything….
Please provide a source, as best you can. I’m sure there are LOT of us who would love to see that video!
Post the video numbnuts
Yet another reason Obama would not qualify for a security clearance: his social security number does not pass E-verify, and is most likely fraudulent since he has never lived in CT. Obama also claims to have visited “Pock-ee-stahn” in the 80′s. The problem there is, Americans (with American passports) were not permitted to travel there during that time frame. If Obama had a dual citizenship and traveled on a different country’s passport, I imagine that would be a red flag, but I’m not positive.
1. Yoyo
Really, what exactly was Bush accused of?
Who did Bush associate with who was a communist or terrorist?
When did Bush go abroad and apologize for this country?
Don’t say something that can’t be backed up.
Having just completed my 2-year refresher on things that might result in a clearance being revoked or never granted, I can testify that having a valid foreign passport or dual citizenship would both be invalidating..
If you’re saying having a valid foreign passport or dual citizenship means one can’t obtain a US security clearance, then you are seriously misinformed.
There are different levels of security clearances. SDN’s point is valid, depending on the level of security clearance.
And depending on the country of origin, and depending on what access is required, and depending on station, and depending on…
There are Canadians at NORAD who have very high clearances.
As to SDN’s point, I’d need to know exactly what it is in order to comment on its validity. I made a guess at it, and stated it was wrong. If the guess was wrong, then please correct it.
It’s called a liason officer, genius. We have reciprocal agreements covering similar things with all of our allies. That doesn’t mean that they have the same clearances federal employees and contractors have.
There are Canadian nationals, individuals who were born in Canada, who hold dual US-Canadian citizenship, and who hold US clearances, and work at NORAD. Genius. There are others of the same type, from other countries, who similarly work for US defense contractors and hold US Clearances.
You do know what the “C” in TS-SCI stands for right?
“You do know what the “C” in TS-SCI stands for right?”
Compartmented. I don’t get your point…
My point is that a dual citizen can be judged to not be a threat to US national security as a result of access to classified information, even highly sensitive classified information, if that information is compartmentalized. If the access, and the nature of the information, is such that the dual nature of the individuals citizenship is accounted for.
Dual citizenship would conflict with the requirement that the President be a Natural Born Citizen.
The federal government does not recognize any such legal entity as a “dual citizen”. In theory, citizenship in another nation cancels citizenship in the U.S. However, since the SCOTUS ruled that the fed.gov cannot revoke citizenship (Afroyim v. Rusk), the matter lies in a legal limbo, unenforced but still the legal position. It’s an awkward mess.
Valid foreign passport? Likely disqualifying.
Dual citizenship? Depends on the country, and the means of acquiring citizenship. Having dual citizenship with Poland or Israel is not the same as having dual citizenship with Pakistan.
Had a buddy in OCS who’d been in his college choir. Toured Europe including Moscow in the mid-Sixties. He had a separate investigation to see if he qualified to be an Infantry second lieutenant.
My father was investigated at Benning in 43 because the little town in which his father had been born had gone out of business. No records. Cue the bass in the key of ominous. He said to look in the county records, which turned out.
Thing is, those Krauts were pretty slick, putting a family in upstate New York in the early nineteenth century in order to infiltrate the US Army in 1943.
From which we can see that there’s more responsibility involved in being a second lieutenant of Infantry than being POTUS. Or, at least, more is expected.
Your post makes no sense at all. And by the way, the idea that Germany posted sleeper agents in New York the early 1800′s for activation in 1943 is hilarious.
please check your sarc settings, re; the german sleeper cell in NYS.
Funny. My husband mentioned this a few months ago.
When he went into the *Peace Corps* in the mid 60s his neighbors from 20 years previously (when he was a kid in a neighborhood he no longer lived in) were interviewed by the FBI!
And that was after he already had gotten a Top Sectret clearnace from the DOD 9Navy Department).
His question exactly — how in the world would someone like Barack Obama be given access to the top secrets of the United States given his close (and we do mean close) associations with terrorists and people seeling to undermine the UNited States?
The security clearance process is such a dysfunctional, Kafkaeqsue mess that saying the President couldn’t have gotten one is not particularly damning. In point of fact, it reveals pretty profound innocence of the cleared working environment to assert that the guidelines you quote would have been disqualifying. I’ve known people who were former prostitutes, or who ran guns for Mexican gangs, who also sailed through the security clearance process in no time. While people who have admitted to relatively minor indiscretions have been arbitrarily denied a clearance. I know a 9/11 truther who is fully cleared at CIA, and one of the most sensible and conscientious Christian men I ever knew was denied a clearance by NSA for what reason nobody knows (and they don’t say).
In short, the whole column is a case of trying to get a lot rhetorical traction from a vehicle the writer doesn’t much understand. I’d actually bet that Obama would get a clearance quicker than anybody that works for PJM–not because he deserves it, but because the process itself is a sick joke in which adjudicators are allowed absurd leeway and have zero accountability.
I get it; you’re basically saying that affirmative action would once again come to his rescue!
Amen to that, while at Defense Mapping Agency I knew people I considered insane or mentally deficient who had high level clearances.
You worked with Maxine Waters?
Claim: “Barack Obama would not have earned the most basic security clearance until he was elected president.”
False: You are being dishonest. Clearly Barack Obama held a security clearance before that when he was Senator and a mere candidate. It might have been accurate to say he would not have earned one had he never been elected to federal office.
Sarah Palin had a higher security clearance than BH Obama during the election.
During the 2008 election, most folks with hands-on experience in LOCAL jurisdiction screening/hiring processes agreed Obama would never have passed the most basic stages.
Too many unknowns coupled with too many disqualifying associations.
In other words, it’s likely your local firefighters, EMTs, police officers and emergency dispatchers have undergone a far more rigorous qualification and security clearance process than BOTUS (no that’s not a typo).
You’re joking? Senators get clearances? Oh, no. We’re doomed. If a senator can get a clearance, so could my dog, if I had one. Or even if I don’t have one.
- No formal vetting process for Commander in Chief
(although desirable, I can’t think of a method for doing this that couldn’t be corrupted. Maybe the Founders couldn’t either…)
- Elections that have become mostly popular-personality contests
- an Executive Branch that rules, rather than administrates – and so attracts those whose who are attracted to power more than service
..we’re surprised at what we get,why?
Sheriff Joe down here in AZ has said exactly the same thing about President Obama – that he would not be hireable by Maricopa County, given his record, or, more accurately, lack thereof. Maybe not surprisingly, his investigative posse has caused his department to be under a lot of scrutiny by the DoJ.
Some of the problems that Sheriff Arpaio pointed out:
- apparently computer generated long form Hawaiian birth certificate
- fraudulent social security number registration
- fraudulent selective service registration
- missing government records for days that coincidentally coincide with his mother potentially leaving this country for his birth
- inability to completely determine when Obama was in this country and when he wasn’t as a child.
- evidence that family of known domestic terrorist (Ayers) allegedly paid for much of Obama’s secondary education. In other words, relationship between Obama and Ayers/Dorhn was much closer than portrayed during election. Also, that they considered him to be a “foreign” student.
As for Clinton – also add in the way that he avoided the draft. He essentially lied to the selective service.
As for drugs – friends of mine and I all had DoE “Q” clearances, which are different, but still extensive FBI investigated clearances. One had a cocaine conviction from maybe a decade earlier. That took some explaining, plus a drug test. Mild marijuana usage in college just took an explanation.
But, what was notable about the FBI clearance investigations was that they didn’t dwell on the first order references that much, but rather on the second, etc. level references. Figured that you would pick your first level references carefully. Highly likely that Clinton’s sexual history would have come out, along with Obama’s documentation issues, and once the red lights (like his mismatched social security number and selective service registration) started to go off, the investigation would get serious. Who is this guy, who had such a carefully constructed past? Why are relevant days of government records missing? And, the politics of his parents would not have helped his cause.
False: You are being dishonest. Clearly Barack Obama held a security clearance before that when he was Senator and a mere candidate. It might have been accurate to say he would not have earned one had he never been elected to federal office.
I think that you are mistaken there. Some of the members of Congress have had some security clearance work done, and some (like John McCain) have had full security clearances (when he was a field grade officer in the Navy). But clearance has long been an issue in Congress. A lot of sensitive classified information is only disclosed to a small number of cleared Members. For example, some intelligence information is only disclosed to four members, one from each party in each chamber. My memory is that Sen. Rockefeller was removed and replaced as the Democratic member in the Senate after a leak was traced to him.
Security clearances are an executive branch thing, and it is only because the other two branches have a need to know what the Executive is doing, that they too have cleared members. The FISA Court has a high enough clearance to get access to the NSA information being surveiled. That sort of thing.
Members of Congress (both Houses) have security clearances by virtue of their election. They get special access to do budgetary work, review work and hold hearings. This also applies to work going on in their State or District, as that is part of the oversight of Senators and Representatives as well.
The Leadership of both parties in both Houses also tend to concentrate additional access for matters of urgent National Security and have a select few that are briefed in times of crisis, as well.
Access is granted not by background but election for Representatives and Senators, and if any member desires access to a program or project it is extremely difficult to turn them down based on that elected status. If you want civilian control over the military and INTEL apparatus, that is what you want, after all… which means the American people should choose their representatives very well, and not just on political affiliation.
Clinton and obama shouldn’t be mentioned in the same breath. Bubba is a nutty liberal in the tradition of millions of others.
obama is a marxist ideologue and a master once-in-a-millenium criminal who would start a holocaust to get another free lunch for himself and his pals.
You are very much mistaken. Both Clintons are equally hard-corp Marxists. The Marxist plan is to advance their cause by degrees. This is why you didn’t see Clinton being as OBVIOUSLY Marxist, but then, have you forgotten Hillarycare?
Willy was certainly slicker about it, but there is no difference in ideology.
Your comments concerning Bill Clinton particularly are spot-on. At the time of the impeachment proceeding I was completely dismayed that the hearings got so sadly sidetracked away from the national security implications.
I doubt it would ever get passed, but it would be great if we had a requirement that presidents, vp’s, cabinet members, and congress-folk are required to pass an security check commensurate to the clearance level of the information they will be seeing. I cannot imagine that this has not erroded national security already many times.
The upshot is, our presidents are not being properly vetted, most particularly by the very people who should be digging up backgrounds: the press. We no longer have a trustworthy press in this country, which is tragic. If not for the internet, we wouldn’t even be able to see the cliff we’re about to be led off of.
“..people who should be digging up backgrounds: the press.”
I disagree. The press is in no official capacity, nor has any legal authority, to properly vet anyone for the public’s knoweldge. They are a business entity that attempts to sell goods to the public. Nothing more, nothing less. Wasn’t it “Newsweak” that was sold for $1 a few years ago? NYT seems to cut staff every year now. Seems many people stopped buying what they were selling.
“We no longer have a trustworthy press in this country, which is tragic.”
Yes. I would say they are nothing more than the propaganda arm of certain parties at this point. They are not interested in the truth, but selling a false narative to support an existing dogma.
Another disqualification:
Michelle Obama, “For the FIRST TIME in my adult life I am proud of my country.”
If that had come out of the mouth of either Mrs. Bush, imagine the outcry from the media.
But, those women probably never held a job in their lives, either.
Not a biased article at all. The both of them might be rejected at non-gov’t jobs too, though in liberal precincts (Silicon Valley etc) would probably be welcomed warmly.
Perhaps the Admin’s seeming pattern of stirring the ‘Birther’ controversy is, in some measure, an attempt to deflect from the even-more-startling evidence regarding the social security card and the draft registration fiasco. If so, it has worked..
I can think of one scenario in which a person would meet all sorts of radical terrorist wannabes and travel to no-go countries, yet STILL get a security clearance: if he were doing so under the auspices of the FBI (as a “mole” or informer) and/or the CIA (as a field agent).
After reading all of the comments to date, I think it would be a good idea to have a minimum security clearance for Presidents and all candidates for federal offices–however I have no idea how to create such a program without it becoming corrupted by partisanship. That minimum security clearance should be very specific and exact; if this then cleared, if that, then failed. No interpretation allowed. It would require a Constitutional Amendment, of course, and could not be tailored to exclude somebody specific, like Obama. And it would have to include a list of required documents. I’m not a ‘birther;’ I’m not convinced either way, but I would love to have this kind of controversy killed. Pick three or four data points for natural born citizen and require that they be given before forming an exploratory committee. Pick three or four criteria that disqualify one; a felony conviction, association with known or declared enemies of the United States, etc. Somebody smarter than I am would have to pick them. Such an amendment would have to be very clear and concise, and the criteria would have to be perfectly exact. The rest of the vetting could be left to the people, but there ought to be a minimal level of probity required of anyone running for president. In the 18th century that minimum level was the gentleman standard, which was destroyed by Regency/Victorian sentimentalism the following century, and no longer exists in quantity. We can’t depend on that, so must pick different minimums.
Great post. Probably should be required reading (and comprehension) by the masses. Yet, sigh, the masses indeed are probably too long gone to get anything like a Constitutional amendment passed for this purpose. Like I’ve said before, Obama is more a symptom of American decay than a cause…like water that seeps into existing cracks and makes them larger with freezing until whole structures collapse.
I’ve added to your list and would appreciate if anyone else can add more to it.
1. Samizdat
Obama and Clinton have made such a hash of our international relations and credibility it is laughable when the uninformed speak glowingly of our policy. The Falklands screw up is just the latest in a long series of disasters. Here’s a partial list:
-Attempting to woo Mullahs and failing to support Greens in Iran, in fact letting them be slaughtered in the streets without a word of support or condemnation.
-”Reset button” diplomacy with Russia, that was a joke – they had the wrong translation
-Ending theater missile defense with Poland and the Chk republic, that could be a disaster for them – he bowed to pressure from Russia
-President bowed to Saudi Arabia prince s and the Emperor of Japan, no President ever bows to anyone
-Failure to either fully surge or withdraw from Afghanistan, putting our troops in grave danger
-Failure to extend status of forces agreement with Iraq (they must think we are so stupid)
-Discarding 30 year relationship with Mubarak for “democracy” that is turning out to the muslim brotherhood who have named Israel as their #1 enemy and want to annihilate. He threw Mubarak under a bus that will probably kill him. His promise was that everyone will love us.
-Fast and Furious, US planted guns being used to kill a US border agent, Brian Terry, and over 200 Mexican citizens and it isn’t over yet so not sure how many more people will be killed by our guns illegally sent over to Mexico, by our government. No one is taking responsibility and no one has been fired.
-Keystone pipeline refusal – this is a pay back to Buffett because now whatever we have will be shipped by the trains that he has a huge money interest in
-Engagement with North Korea. Have the Americans any idea that NK is raising feral children? They have no ethics, no morals, no loyalty raised like dogs by the government and will do anything for food because they are being starved
-Pushing obamacare that will take over 1/6th of our economy and only passed it because of brides to some of the dems and they did not allow any opposition in the debate
-GSA – he is head of the government – the White House held the information about all of this debacle for over a year before it came out (can you imagine what they will do with health care?)
-Threatening the Supreme Court in order to stop them from finding his obamacare unconstitutional (does anyone think he was tipped off by his appointees on the Supreme Court?)
-Has never focused on JOBS and the ECONOMY, but promises always
-Giving the Queen of England an Ipad/pod(?) with his speeches on it (an you imagine the nerve?)
-Making recess appointments when the congress was not in recess
-Ending the space program (is that so that the Chinese and Russians will control space? The implication is scary)
-Suggesting that after the election he will do the Russian’s bidding
-Suggesting that he does not know Hilary rosen – “some person on tv”, but never telling that he has met with her in the White House 5 times, and she has visited the white house over 35 times. In fact, over 3X’s what General Patraious (sp)
-His DOJ refusing to persecute the black panthers for threatening voters and allowing them to put a bounty on the head of Zimmerman – dead or alive.
-Allowing farakan to say anything about “whites” and threatening them and not saying a word. However, going after Ted Nugent, the country singer and patriot, who has done nothing to harm or threaten anyone
-Allowing a known and committed communist (van jones) into the inner circles of the White House (brought in by the woman who really runs the country – Valerie Jarrett.
-Allowing Jarrett to override the secret service, so that (can’t remember their names) couple could attend the white house dinner
-His complete lack of understanding how to pronounce corpsman
-His mention of visiting 57 states
-Always taking the other side against the police
-Allowing some vulgar entertainers to perform in the White House and not condemning their offensive words
-17 vacations costing millions – allowing his wife to take a separate plane so that she can arrive a couple of hours before him
-Over 90 golf games
This President and his hapless Secretary of State are hopelessly out of touch with reality in international affairs. They repeatedly show themselves untrustworthy, a very bad reputation to have in the world of sovereign states.
You should have included:
-making a head of government, PM Netanyahu, wait while he had supper;
-giving a medal of freedom to Mary Robinson; one of those responsible for the 2001 Durban anti-Israel hatefest;
-making his first phone call to a foriegn head of government to Mahmound Abbas of the PLO;
-making threats to Iran about their nuclear program in 2009 he never followed up on;
-asking Iran for our crashed drone back, making a further laughingstock out of the US.
All this is pure crap. Obama is a usurper, he is not a ‘natural born citizen’ which has resulted in numerous forged and fraudulent documents to avoid that discovery. This is treasonous activity at the highest level and deserves a life prison sentence or death by firing squad. You laugh, that is how bad this is. We have the Constitutional crisis of the century and everyone is running from it only because they perceive this 6.75% African/Negro to be our first “black President.” What a effen hoax!!
Here we are talking about a damn security clearance, are you all nuts?? This should really scare the poop out of you, the United States Congress are in full enabling mode as well as the media out of fear this exposure will lead to a loss in the November 2012 election. What a bunch of bozos and criminals to boot.
The folks participating at Pajamasmedia should be in full battle mode for crying out loud. We need to force this usurping criminal to resign and then prosecute his sorry butt before he can make another drastic military decision that will affect all of us. God help us, what the hell are we thinking about.
Did you know that there are high ranking military personnel declaring the same thing I am declaring. Here are a few names for you sorry bunch to google. Major General Paul Vallely, Navy Commander Charles Kerchner, Navy Commander Walter Francis Fitzparick, III, Col (PH.D) Lawrence Sellin, LTC David Earl-Grael, Brigadier General Charles Jones (AF), LTC (MD) Terry Lakin. That should keep you busy for awhile. Right this very moment Attorney Larry Klayman, a top flight lawyer with reputation is fighting to keep Obama off the ballot in Florida. This is one of about 10 ballot challenges going on around the country. Have you heard this on the news lately or read about it here at Pajamasmedia. NOPE!!
You’re absolutely right – the entire “conservative” commentariat has failed, including Fox, National Review, Salem Radio, Townhall, etc. A decent blog covering these issues is American Thinker – that’s http://www.americanthinker.com/
The points made for no granting a clearance are quite valid. By virtue of the been there, done that thing, if anything pops up. You are frog marched out of the facility. Updates to your status are frequent for obvious reasons.
This should apply to the elected as well. would thin out the ranks rather quickly.
Silly citizen, what country do you think you live in? The SS agents haven’t lost their jobs, and will not lose their jobs. They will end up in some corner of the .gov which doesn’t require a clearance, with all pensions and benefits intact.
Besides being close friends to leftist terrorists Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, you never really hear about Obama’s relationship with Calypso Louis Farrakhan, probably one of the most dangerous domestic terrorists in this country. Obama couldn’t get anywhere in Chicago without the support of the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan. Yet nobody seems to talk about this relationship, especially since Farrakhan is a close personal friend of the Reverand Wright. Anybody with all of these people in their history would never get a security clearence, let alone access to some of the most sensitive security materials on this planet. So sleep well tonight, folks, knowing that a good friend of Louis Farrakhan is running this nation. How did it ever come to this in America?
We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.
-C. S. Lewis
Thirteen words that say it all.
“Had they not been elected president, neither Bill Clinton nor Barack Obama would have been able to obtain even the most basic secret clearance.”
Although I completely agree with you, in all fairness I have to admit that neither would George W. Bush with his past “youthful” indiscretions and DUI charges.
You need to read one of the comments above to get the answer to that.
BTW, do we know if obama sold drugs? Do we know that he’s off them for sure?
He admits he obtained them for others in his book. A little marijuana, a little blow, but never smack… If I had a pot smoking Marxist president, he would look like Barack Obama.
OR Bill Clinton…
Forget about even a ‘Confidential’ clearance – his admission of Cocaine usage prevents President Obama from even obtaining “Trusted Government Employee” status which is required of all Federal Contractors – including janitors in Federal buildings.
Yet for some reason the majority of people in this country thought it would be fine to entrust such a person with the nuclear launch codes. The only conclusion that can be reached from that fact is that more than half the people in this country are completely clueless idiots.
I had never considered this idea before. I got a security clearance when I served in the Army. Both of my parents had security clearances when they were in the Army (My father served 20 years. My mother was forced out after three when she became pregnant in the mid sixties.)
To a point, I agree with what the author of the article says. But I’m not sure altering the Constitutional requirements to run for president is a good idea for much the same reason I don’t support a new Constitutional convention to “update” the American Constitution.
I worry what some people might try to slip in to the mix. What if the liberals managed to slip in some silliness about political correctness or fairness or social justice in how we pick our presidents. I admit, the Republicans would be just as likely to do it, putting in a test about abortion or religion or some such. For this reason alone, I would consider very carefully before going and messing around with making large changes to the Constitution.
WHAT purpose is served by more baggage, more interpretative rendering of the Constitution? The document is spare, simple and broad enough for the purposed intentions of the Founders of the nation. Only after much deliberation and with mature knowledge of the temptations for unscrupulous who lust for power
over “The Lives of Others” unless restrained. Restraints are built into the Constitution. Deliberately built in to assure liberty from State control for the citizens. Restraints in law on the representatives of the citizens.
Recent amendments to the Constitution for “fairness, equality and social justice” are redundant and make it unwieldy. All such amendments of course “for the good of the people. The spiel of con-men since time began.
The paramount problem is the humans who fail to honour their contract signed by their oath to “uphold and defend the Constitution”. Humans selected by the citizens, actively or passively, who are not held accountable for their failure to honour their contract of employment. Examples in N. Pelosi, H. Reid
and WJ Clinton with his surrogate Hillary and their like who make no secret of their contempt for the Constitution and the “will of the People”. Yet are elected again, again and yet again.
Giving defacto permission to arrogate to themselves powers beyond their remit. Escalating in degree and kind throughout the 20h century. Egregiously since the election of 1960 decided in Cook County Chicago. The “shot heard round the
world” for their “revolution of the 1960s”.
J.F.Kennedy’s election, through WJ Clinton, culminated in B.H.Obama. This Obama dubbed by his enablers and drum and bugle corps (core) of academia, TV punditry and legacy Media as “The New Kennedy”. And by some as The Messiah.
Giving fair warning to any observers of their intended New Dawn.
Nothing less than re-establishment in America of a 21st century replica of pre-revolutionary America. That COLONY, Ruled by a distant, detached, Court with little interest in the population of commoners i.e. those in their “Red States” and “flyover country”, except as milk cow. Bread, circuses and “Stars” to light them into the Brave New Olde World. A Court, by any other name, smells
in this 21st century like a Commissariate.
Is this what Americans want in not holding their representatives in government to their contract with them?