Air Force drops 'So Help Me God' from oaths

The Air Force Academy has admitted they removed the phrase “so help me God” from three oaths in the 2012 edition of their official cadet handbook, Fox News has learned.
The revelation came after more than two dozen members of Congress sent a letter to Academy Supt. Lt. Gen. Michelle Johnson demanding that she explain why the phrase was removed.
The lawmakers contend the 2012 edition of the Contrails Cadet Handbook excludes the phrase ‘so help me God’ in the Cadet’s Oath of allegiance, the Oath of Office for Officers and the Oath of Enlistment.

Air Force Academy spokesman Maj. Brus Vidal told me the omission was a simple mistake.

“The Constitution does not require that this phrase be scrubbed from the oath,” read the letter drafted by Rep. Jim Bridenstein (R-Okla.) and signed by 28 lawmakers. “The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the establishment of religion’ however, the inclusion of the phrase ‘so help me God’ in an oath of service does not rise to this level.”
Bridenstein said “editing the oath for all Academy students is extreme and unnecessary, and does a disservice to the countless individuals who wish to include the phrase as a solemn reminder that they are pledging their fidelity to God and country.”
Air Force Academy spokesman Maj. Brus Vidal told me the omission was a simple mistake.
“It was an editorial oversight,” he said. “We learned within the last few weeks there was a problem.”
Vidal said there was no reasoning behind the omission and there was no forethought.
“Whoever was doing the editing didn’t catch it,” he said.
He said next year’s edition of the Contrails Cadet Handbook will be revised and will include the phrase “so help me God.”
Last month, the Air Force Academy was embroiled in another controversy involving “so help me God” after they decided to make it an optional part of the Honor Oath. The revision was made following a complained from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
The lawmakers directed Johnson to provide information on why changes were made to the Honor Oath and why a poster bearing the words “so help me God” was removed from the Academy.
MRFF President Mikey Weinstein had filed a complaint about the poster. Approximately 68 minutes after he complained, Johnson ordered the art work removed. That decision did not set well with lawmakers.
“We ask that you restore the poster bearing the oath in full to its original location as an honorable reflection of the oath of service,” the lawmakers wrote.
After the Honor Oath was revised, Johnson released a statement affirming the right of Airmen to “freely practice and exercise their religious preference – or not.”
“Here at the Academy, we work to build a culture of dignity and respect,” she stated.
Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, said he’s received calls from concerned parents of cadets – lamenting the change in the oaths.
“This phrase is a deeply-rooted American tradition – begun by George Washington as the first president of the United States and now stated by many who take an oath of service to our country,” Crews said. “The removal of this phrase is a disservice to the countless men and women who wish to include this phrase as a solemn reminder that they are pledging their fidelity to God and their country.”
And while Crews said he respects the right of cadets not to say the word ‘so help me God’, he pointed out the law requires that the words remain part of the oath.
If that’s the case – why were they removed and who gave the order?
Let’s hope these lawmakers can root out the anti-religious forces that have infiltrated the Air Force Academy. It’s high time someone put a stop to the religious cleansing of the Armed Forces.

Medical Miracle

Pelosi, fellow Democrats jump in to defend president over ObamaCare

California Rep. Nancy Pelosi -- one of President Obama’s most ardent Capitol Hill supporters -- and other Democrats on Sunday defended the president’s handling of ObamaCare amid widespread criticism, particularly his pledge that Americans could keep their health insurance.
“Democrats stand tall in support of the Affordable Care Act,” Pelosi said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
The House minority leader’s comments follow a particularly bruising week for the president and his signature health care law that included the acknowledgement that only 106,000 Americans have so far signed up for ObamaCare, in large part because of the problem-plagued healthcare.gov website.
The report was followed by the president on Thursday qualifying his promise before he signed ObamaCare into law in 2010 that Americans could keep their existing health plans.
“There is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate,” he said during a press conference in which he proposed a one-year extension on existing health plans that failed to garner overwhelming support.
Pelosi, the former House speaker, also dismissed questions about fellow Democrats up for reelections in 2014 having to defend ObamaCare to voters back home.
“I don't think you can tell what will happen next year,” she told NBC, adding Democrats nevertheless won’t run from the issue.
Pelosi suggested Republicans will have to answer for their part in the partial government shutdown that she says hurt the economy.
She also downplayed 39 House Democrats voting Friday on a bill to allow insurance companies to continue offering plans that don’t comply with ObamaCare, saying a similar number of them voted on legislation to delay the law’s employer mandate.
New Hampshire Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte said later in the show that ObamaCare is rife with problems, even by the president’s own admission, regardless of what Pelosi might say.
“No matter how Speaker Pelosi tries to spin this, [ObamaCare] is a mess,” she said.
South Carolina Democratic Rep. James Clyburn told CNN's "State of the Union" that most party members who voted in support of the House Republican bill Friday did so to "insulate themselves against sound bites."  
Many of them are in competitive races next year and don’t want GOP challengers to have campaign ads portraying them as unwilling to fix the ObamaCare problem, Clyburn appeared to suggest.
New York Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand told ABC’s “This Week” that Obama can regain the public’s trust.
“Of course he can,” she said.
Gillibrand also said she didn’t feel misled by the president but allowed, “He should have just been more specific.”

2014?

Democrats feel political heat despite ObamaCare ‘fix’

President Obama's fix to reverse millions of insurance cancellation notices may have eased slightly the pressure he faces, but Democrats at state level still face political trouble and fear what it may mean for the 2014 midterm elections.
One such Democrat is West Virginia Rep. Nick Rahall. The 19-term veteran, a perennial target in a GOP-shifting state, was one of many Democrats who recited to constituents Obama's assurance that they could keep insurance coverage they liked under the 2010 health care overhaul.
This promise proved untrue and ignited an uproar that eventually forced Obama to reverse himself and on Thursday propose the fix that he claims will allow consumers to keep their plans. The debacle has sent many Democrats scrambling into political self-preservation mode ahead of the 2014 elections.
Rahall was among 39 Democrats who, despite an Obama veto threat, voted Friday for a Republican measure that would let insurers continue selling policies to individuals that fall short of the health care law's requirements. It was approved 261-157.
"I'm concerned about my integrity with voters who have returned me here for 38 years. They know me enough to know I wouldn't purposely mislead them," Rahall said this past week. "They have that confidence in me, and I want them to continue to have that confidence in me."
Republicans have been emboldened by Obama's reversal and the Democrats' scramble for cover, with GOP strategists digging through old statements and video clips in the hope of capturing Democrats offering the same promises that landed Obama in political trouble
An example of this is Oregon Rep. Kurt Schrader – a Democrat who has criticized the president over the botched ObamaCare rollout. According to Politico, Schrader found himself the target of Republicans after it was revealed that language on the congressman’s website stating, “If you are insured and happy with your coverage, nothing changes,” had been deleted.
"There's nothing more damaging than when your word is devalued and people think they were misled," said Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., who heads the National Republican Congressional Committee. "And especially damaging is when it actually affects you and your family. So in terms of degree of impact, this is off the Richter scale."
Top Democrats, who need to gain 17 seats to retake the House majority, brush off the suggestion, saying that next November's elections are still far away. They say by then, the health care law will be to their advantage because it will be working well.
Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., who leads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said his party will focus the campaign on the economy, Democratic efforts to fix it and the GOP's preference for cutting Medicare and granting tax breaks to the wealthy.
The Republican emphasis on ObamaCare's problems "from a partisan perspective gins up the Republican base. But it alienates independent and moderate voters," said Israel, who said those voters "are more interested in solutions."
“For consumers who want to keep their health care plans, President Obama has offered a commonsense fix – and Democrats worked hard to make sure that pledge is supported,” Jesse Ferguson, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee deputy executive director, told Politico. “Republicans are now being unmasked as dishonest after they doubled down rhetorically on the importance of helping Americans keep their plan – but opposed President Obama’s fix because of their knee-jerk ideological obsession with opposing everything with President Obama’s name on it.”
Other Democrats are not so confident.
Martin Frost, a former Texas Democratic congressman who headed the House Democratic campaign committee, said many people still may lose their coverage because state officials have ample power over insurers. And he said the Obama administration cannot allow additional foul-ups.
"If I were still in Congress, I'd be concerned," Frost said.
Sensing an edge, the GOP plans to cut commercials featuring Democrats' promises that people could keep their health insurance.
America Rising, a GOP political action committee that compiles research on opposition candidates, is collecting video of Democrats' comments on the law. Some conservative groups are already running television spots, with Americans for Prosperity airing ads attacking Rahall and Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., while defending Rep. Dan Benishek, R-Mich., for opposing the law.
"It forces thousands to lose the plans they love and the doctors they know," says the 30-second spot running on television and radio in Rahall's district.
Though Democrats opposed the Republican measure 153-39, the vote was evidence of the pressure they feel over canceled policies.
On Thursday, Obama took the blame for the confusion, saying, "That's on me," not congressional Democrats. House Democratic leaders told reporters later that day that they had nothing to apologize for.
Even so, most House Democrats felt Obama's action was not enough and demanded a vote on a Democratic proposal.
"They want to be on record," said Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa. "Members are not judged by administrative fixes. Members are judged by their voting records."

Seattle voters elect socialist to city council

SEATTLE –  Seattle voters have elected a socialist to city council for the first time in modern history.
Kshama Sawant's lead continued to grow on Friday, prompting 16-year incumbent Richard Conlin to concede.
Even in this liberal city, Sawant's win has surprised many here. Conlin was backed by the city's political establishment. On election night, she trailed by four percentage points. She wasn't a veteran politician, having only run in one previous campaign.
But in the days following election night, Sawant's share of the votes outgrew Conlin's.
"I don't think socialism makes most people in Seattle afraid," Conlin said Friday.
While city council races are technically non-partisan, Sawant made sure people knew she was running as a socialist -- a label that would be political poisonous in many parts of the country.
Sawant, a 41-year-old college economics professor, first drew attention as part of local Occupy Wall Street protests that included taking over a downtown park and a junior college campus in late 2011. She then ran for legislative office in 2012, challenging the powerful speaker of the state House, a Democrat. She was easily defeated.
This year, though, she pushed a platform that resonated with the city. She backed efforts to raise the minimum wage to $15; called for rent control in the city where rental prices keep climbing; and supports a tax on millionaires to help fund a public transit system and other services.
During her campaign, she condemned economic inequality, contending that some people aren't benefiting from the city's declining jobless rate, ongoing recovery from the recession, and downtown building boom.
"She's passionate about her values," Conlin said.
Research showed no socialist candidate had won a citywide office in the past 100 years. The last socialist candidate to make it into the general election was in 1991 and was defeated, said Scott Cline, the city's archivist. Bailey Comment: No doubt that America is now going downhill fast.

House Republicans introduce resolution to impeach Attorney General Holder

A group of congressional Republicans introduced a resolution Thursday to call for the impeachment of Attorney General Eric Holder, alleging Holder had committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” during his tenure as head of the Justice Department.
The resolution was introduced by Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, who claims Holder has committed “the offenses of lying to Congress, refusing to comply with a subpoena, and failing to fulfill his oath of office.”
Olson cites Holder’s unwillingness to cooperate during the investigation into the botched Operation “Fast and Furious, his refusal to prosecute those involved IRS targeting of conservative groups, his failure to enforce laws including the Defense of Marriage Act, and his “false testimony” about the DOJ’s monitoring of Fox News journalist James Rosen as articles that are grounds for impeachment.
“For nearly five years, Attorney General Holder has systematically deceived Congress and destroyed the credibility of the Justice Department in the eyes of the American people,” Olson said in a statement.
Olson was joined by 19 other Republican representatives in the resolution.
One House Democrat spoke out against the resolution before it was introduced Thursday, calling it “the most fundamental abuse of the impeachment power.”
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a former federal prosecutor who led the Senate in the impeachment of a federal judge in 2010, said the articles of impeachment in the resolution are simply a list of “debunked conspiracy theories.”
“It is the height of irresponsibility to use the Congress's power to impeach office holders – a power that has been used very rarely and judiciously – to settle political scores,” Schiff said. “The House Republican Leadership should disavow this misguided effort immediately; it is far more damaging to Congress and its impeachment authority than to anyone in the administration.”
The DOJ did not respond to requests for comment from Fox News.

Details emerge about Americans badly injured in Benghazi attack

In addition to the four Americans killed in the Benghazi terror attack last year, at least two other Americans were severely injured in the fighting that night, Fox News has learned.
The injuries were sustained by U.S. personnel after mortars struck the CIA annex rooftop they were defending. Fox News is told that one former government contractor -- who is expected to testify this week along with four other contractors in classified sessions on Capitol Hill -- has had multiple surgeries since the attack and has still not regained full use of one arm.
The blood loss after the attack was so severe that a source close to the contractor said it had been life-threatening.
In addition to former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, who were killed defending the Annex, at least two other Americans were severely injured on the roof top.
 Diplomatic Security Agent David Ubben – who as late as August was still recovering at Walter Reed Medical Center in suburban Washington - was so severely injured fighting alongside the Seals that he has undergone multiple surgeries.  The protocol is often referred to as a “leg or limb salvage.”
Little is known about those who survived the Benghazi attack. The State Department confirmed in March, after multiple inquiries by Fox News, that a total of three diplomatic security agents, as well as a State Department contractor, were among the Americans injured during the terrorist assault which killed the two former SEALs, Ambassador Chris Stevens, and Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith.
The latest details are emerging as the House Intelligence Committee hears this week from contractors who were on the ground in Benghazi. Fox News has learned that they will give their accounts in closed, classified sessions on Wednesday and Thursday.
Two contractors were expected to appear Wednesday, and three former government contractors from the CIA annex are expected Thursday, according to sources familiar with the meetings.
In a press release from earlier this year, the intelligence committee appeared to identify this week's witnesses, adding that they included those who signed a book deal earlier this year. "The Subcommittee will pursue interviews with three additional CIA personnel who are publishing a book and whose public comments suggest possible contradictions with testimony the Intelligence Committee has received on the record," the release said.
The lawyer who represents the authors would not comment on their Capitol Hill appearance, adding that they were part of "an elite security team" in Benghazi.
While the sessions are not open to the public, sources told Fox News that the timeline offered by some of the contractors may differ from the public narrative that there were two distinct waves to the attack -- first at the consulate at approximately 9:40 p.m. local time and then at the CIA annex the following morning, separated by a lull in the fighting.
The fighting was characterized to Fox News as being more "constant, consistent" throughout the attack's seven-hour duration.  If there was no lull in the fighting, it raises more questions about the lack of a significant military response to the Benghazi assault -- during that time, Stevens' whereabouts were unknown.
In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner last week, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., stated that any discrepancies demanded further investigation. "If some answers differ substantially from the established narrative and timeline of the attack, then it would be warranted to take new measures to complete the investigation and synthesize the information obtained by the Intelligence Committees and other committees investigating the Benghazi attack."