Red Flag Warning: Ted Turner - Candidate for Supreme Jerk of the Century

This will be short and terse. Mr. Ted Turner "Creator" of CNN and owner of Ted's Place Steakhouse has made an unforgivable verbal flub. In an interview with Piers Morgan, CNN, he indicted that having military suicides exceed combat deaths was "good".

TURNER: I think the global policeman should be the United Nations. And I don't think we should need one. I think we should use courts the way we do in civilian life. It's time to put war and conflict behind us and move on, and start acting like civilized, educated human beings.

MORGAN: You made the point to me in the break there, more American servicemen have --

TURNER: -- are dying now from suicide over there than are dying in combat.

MORGAN: That's shocking, isn't it?

TURNER: Well, what -- no, I think it's -- I think it's good, because it's so clear that we're programmed and we're born to love and help each other, not to kill each other, to destroy each other. That's an aberration. That's left over from hundreds of years ago. It's time for to us start acting enlightened.

Go to the site and read the whole transcript (near the bottom of the interview). Morgan made it worse by immediately asking what it was like to give away a billion dollars. She too is guilty of insensitivity and brainlessness. She should have at least scolded Ted for such a callous view. By her failure to do so, does she agree with Ted, suicides by our Soldiers is "good"?

This despicable man who reaps billions from fellow American's who have protected his freedom believes having military deaths, from both combat and suicide, will cause us to give up our military to the UN. Well, we've seen what the UN can do. Either nothing or send in "police forces" who rape, pillage, and steal from the very people they are suppose to protect.

Sorry Ted. This is one Vet who will never again patronize your steakhouse. Go Eat That!

Red Flag Warning: What I see in Mitt that I don't see in Barack

Two debates are enough for the Watchman. The third, I suspect will confirm what the Watchman has already concluded.  Mitt Romney is presidential timber.

This comes as no big surprise to most of my friends, family, and co-workers.  I already lean hard right of center, almost libertarian in some respects, so the decision is not a giant leap of faith or roll of the dice. No, after careful consideration, Mitt is my man for the presidency. What do I see in Mitt that I don’t see in Barack?

Watching the debates and noted Mitt had a high emotional quotient or EQ in today’s business lingo. When it was his turn to take a seat or stand quietly, he was like a rock. Focused intently on what the President said, and in one of the best poker faces I’ve seen, he hardly moved a muscle. Without letting on he was deep in thought and then was prepared to respond with cogent analytical responses.

Some might find that approach cold and sterile.  Think though for a moment into the future. Consider President Romney sitting across from Russian President Putin with that same steady, controlled attentiveness.  How might the outcome of such a meeting be different from one with President Obama who seems to wear his EQ on both sleeves?  My bet is Romney would be a tough cookie to negotiate arms controls, economic issues, and human rights.  Consider the practice he’s had in negotiating business deals with other hard, steely eyed businessmen. Think that might be a factor missing in Obama?

Romney doesn’t have a need to be liked. He’s comfortable in his own skin and seems to move with ease among the other equally powerful people he comes across.  President Obama appears to have this yearning to be accepted and liked, thus his trips to Letterman, Stewart, and the View, all fellow travelers who fawn on him unabashedly. He is like my dog, can’t possibly get enough attention or petting, and sulks if no treat is forthcoming.

Another aspect I see in Romney that is missing from the President is his vision. Romney sees the future for what it will be, based on realities of what is within the realm of the possible. Romney’s five point plan is sufficiently detailed to let you know he’s thinking ahead just enough to sketch out the general ideas and will add the fine print in conjunction with congress.   I suspect he has a picture of what many of his initiatives will look like in his mind’s eye, yet doesn’t want to paint the full scene until he knows how the lay of the land will be on January 20.  Romney seems energized by the challenges and the harder it gets, the harder he gets. I see discipline and a dogged stick-with-it approach to work. He works.

Obama on the other hand, sees the future for what he hopes he can change it to be based on realities of what HE believes he can make possible. When the picture he sees in his mind’s eye begins to get blurry or too difficult to paint, he gives up in the ugly phase, looses interest, as he is not getting the right “strokes” from his followers.  Look at the developmental history of his single achievement, Obamacare. At several junctures he appeared totally disinterested and was throwing in the towel. When it got too hard he turned it over to Pelosi and Reid to do the hard slogging. I don’t see Obama as a looser or quitter, just a bored smart guy who looses focus when the mission bogs down. He plays.

I see Mitt with a heart that beats hot for America and Americans. Even his 47% comment really held much truth to it in terms of they are indeed firmly in the safety net, so he’s not worried about them. It’s the other 53% who are footing the bill he’s concerned about. The 47% should be too!  But more importantly, Romney desires for all to succeed, not just a few winners picked by government run amuck.  Barack focuses on the status quo, keeping the 47% down and growing it more where possible. He said he wants to spread the wealth and doesn’t believe independent business builds their success without government’s direct unseen hand in the operation. I see Barack with a vacuous heart, beating hot for the all powerful state and ignorant masses.

I see Mitt as a wise judge of people’s character and abilities. Look at his pick for a VP running mate, Paul Ryan. Mitt is unafraid to put people on his team that may shine brighter than himself. I see Mitt picking men and women, all from binders filled with highly qualified people, who will lead their departments with dignity and honor.  I don’t see Obama picking the best and wisest. If you look at each of his major cabinet team and the many Czars, they all have one thing in common: They shine less brightly than Obama, second or third string to Barack. Obama has to be the smartest guy in the room, bar none.  Just imagine what kind of pick he would make to the Supreme Court. Is there any left leaning legal scholar brighter than himself?

Lastly, but not completely as I keep finding more about Romney that I admire and less from Obama, I see Romney as a man of faith.  I am not a Mormon, but I am aware of their disciplined lives and their single-minded faith that God is God of the universe and we all must await His judgment. I see Mitt as a humble man before his God. I don’t see that at all in Barack.