heal column sig

Local opinion columnists

Quick revisit shows columns’ accuracy

By From page A8 | May 26, 2014

This is number 5.5 of a series of topical columns titled The Right Stuff to promote thought and ensure accuracy within political campaigns and issues. The Daily Republic on May 19 published a private opinion alleging we fell short of that goal.

To ensure readers have confidence in our reporting, let us review who fell short.

1. Allegation: The Right Stuff column is incorrect to state the President Barack Obama has violated the Constitution, that intimations of unconstitutional actions are just propaganda.

Wow. Do I need to quote Article I of the Constitution, which says, “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States?” Or Article II that states the executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States. If that is not clear, let me remind readers that 42 previous presidents understood their job was to enforce, not change, laws written by Congress.

Obviously, both Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are in violation of the executive requirements and their oaths of office by only enforcing laws they like. Do citizens want to void the separation of powers after 200 years of success? May I remind readers that Jerry Brown as California attorney general refused to defend a California law in court and the people did nothing? Wake up!

2. Allegation: The Right Stuff complained about Obama for “failing to support Georgia’s appeal against Russian takeover.” We did not say Obama. That paragraph was defining failed American leadership and included recent failures – repeated failed negotiations with North Korea by several U.S. administrations, Georgia, a former Soviet Republic that unsuccessfully sought help during President Bush (43)’s administration, and Ukraine, which surrendered its inventory of nuclear weapons (third largest in the world) on commitments signed by the U.K., U.S. (President Bill Clinton), and Russia.

The agreement specified the signatories to, “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine”; “to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”; “to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression.”

What respect do we earn from the world with the weakness at Syria and Ukraine? The Russian press ridiculed our “sanctions.”

3. Allegation: The Right Stuff complaint that the administration was “surrendering European security by canceling the missile radar defense in Poland” is invalid because Obama moved a site to Romania and upgraded the missiles.

Check the Internet for Missile Radar Defense Program in Poland and read CNN report of Sept .17, 2009. The Poles were forced to revise their security program and a Polish ministry official identified the shelving of the program as, “This is catastrophic for Poland.” Not only Poland, but other former allies are building new defenses, because they cannot trust the United States.

4. Allegation: Obama almost begged to keep forces in Iraq to the new regime, but Iraq refused to sign the agreement (Status of Forces Agreement). Consider Obama’s many promises to withdraw forces from Iraq immediately and realize that we do not know anything about the SOFA negotiations. If anyone believes that Iraq refused sincere offers of assistance, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale at a good price.

The truth is that after peace had become almost real by 2009, the country is now in deep trouble as anyone with knowledge of warfare expected. We spent 4,400 lives in seven years to bring Iraq peace, but terrorists killed 8,800 people last year alone and the rate is increasing this year.

Thankfully, FDR and Truman did not make this mistake.

Earl Heal is a Vacaville resident and member of The Right Stuff Committee, a committee of the Solano County Republican Party. Reach him at [email protected]

Earl Heal


Discussion | 26 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • JagMay 26, 2014 - 8:12 am

    Great facts Earl, Lets hope we get the true republicans take over come November and not the rino,

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 8:19 am

    Earl, the fact that Obama used Executive Actions is in no way different than every other president. If you want to claim that he has violated his oath of office, you need to put that into historical contex and claim that all of our presidents have done the same, starting with George Washington. If you do that, you just look like a kook. To do otherwise, you just prove the point that your "right stuff" column is pure foxian propaganda. It looks like you skirted that point yet again today.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 8:23 am

    Mike, that is correct and there was only one president, William Henry Harrison not using it only because he died 32 days into office..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 8:27 am

    CD, i would say he used Executive Action to leave office befote his term expired.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 8:29 am

    OH, OUCH! ;)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 8:31 am

    FDR 3,522…damn communist!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 8:33 am

    What? Too soon?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 8:34 am

    HA! HA! Brutal dude!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 8:39 am

    As for allegation number two, which you say was not about obama, i would ask you, what would you have us do in all the world's hotspots? Do we go in, guns ablazin anywhere where trouble rears its ugly head? Or do we try diplomcy first and shoot second? I get it, you dont like the guy, but, as a monday morning quarterback, what would you have done?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 8:46 am

    As for 3 and 4, moving a missile site equals our allies not trusting us, equals far fetched at best and you dont think that Iraq didnt want to keep the invading forces in their country? What about Afghanistan? Do you think they want us to stay there? Do you read the newspapers? Yes, we wasted a lot of lives and treasure. You blame the wrong man.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 9:01 am

    Mr. Heal #3, agreements with Russia made this decision simple. You’ve taken a lot of liberties and the story is much deeper. Score another for Obama. FDC, I’m not attacking the messenger, look it up.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 9:33 am

    Earl, sorry about the double negative. Let me make it simple for you: Do you really think the Iraquis and Afghans want to have the invading army stay in their countries? How would you feel if the Russians came here to make our country safe? Would you want them to stay, or leave??? Offering your readers a bridge does not further your "argument."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895May 26, 2014 - 12:17 pm

    Jack can speak for himself, but: 1. Are you a constitutional lawyer or scholar? Those folks generally disagree with you. (Well, as much as climatologists agree on climate change.) You can always find a lawyer or constitutional scholar on the Koch bothers’ payroll who will give you the answers you want. Show me a peer-reviewed article that says the president doesn’t have the powers Obama has exercised, and we can have a discussion. 2. So what do you propose we do when we get an appeal from a foreign country to oppose Russian or some other country’s aggression? Yes, there was an agreement regarding Ukraine that, if it remained in effect, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States have all failed to follow. The problem is revolutionary Ukraine is not the same country that signed that agreement. The Russians claim that, and we haven’t gone so far as to claim the opposite. If we did, we would be at war with Russia. Is that what you want? 3. There is a lot more to the Poland story. It may have been catastrophic to the Polish economy that the U.S. presence was being reduced, but not Polish security. They took care of that by joining NATO. Game over. Russia will never invade a NATO country. EVERYONE who fears Russia from the east wants to be in NATO for that reason. They trust us to honor that pact, and that’s what we want. Once Russia’s territorial ambitions wane, they will want to join NATO too! No nation in the world would turn down being under the protection of the world’s last superpower, assuming the price isn’t too high. 4. Iraq could have had a continued U.S. military presence if it wanted. I agree that Obama wasn’t begging though, if that’s your point. We really have little interest in Iraq, which was NOT used as a base for launching terrorist attacks on the U.S., except being able to buy Iraqi oil. Cheney would have preferred to steal the oil, but that wasn’t in the cards, ever, showing what a bumbling, egotistical idi*t he was, and is. So what’s you point on Iraq? That we need to “preserve our gains” there? What gains? Iraq isn’t Afghanistan. The story is quite different over there, as another article in the DR today illustrates.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 12:46 pm

    Thanks, RLW, for the sanity. I notice that nobody from the fringe right cares to back up "the right stuff" swill. What a waste of ink and paper. Aren't there any reasonable people on the right who can explain their positions logically? There is space available.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Weep for Our CountryMay 26, 2014 - 2:16 pm

    Is there "a lawyer or constitutional scholar" on Tom Steyer's or Nanny Bloomberg's or George Soros's or the ACLU's or the SEIU's payroll? If rlw895's nonsense is rated by the pound, he is a clear winner. If it were rated by common sense, his stuff is just so much more hot air. Only an evil agent for the destruction of the Constitution would deny that President Obama has exceeded his Constitutional authority in the exercise of rule making or that his rule-setting underlings have completed destroyed the role of Congress in making laws. Sad, sad day for the country.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895May 26, 2014 - 2:41 pm

    Only an ideologue would deny that Obama is fully within his rights as president. And if he weren't, don't you think the judicial challenges would be all over the place, and successful? Unlike the ACLU, et al., the only way a constitutional lawyer or scholar would come up with a contrary view would be if he has taken money from an ideologue who wants to put lipstick on his pig. It's humorous when people pick up the Constitution without any legal training, read it, and immediately think they know it's "obvious" interpretation. Constitutional law is a full year course in law school, and it enters into almost all the other courses as well.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895May 26, 2014 - 3:43 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rudy MadronichMay 26, 2014 - 2:06 pm

    Wow: we have a love feat going on with Mike, CD, and rlw. The letter to the editor is about what President Obama did or did not not about what other presidents have done in the past nice try but we can all see through your spin on this. I guess this is still all bush's fault?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rudy MadronichMay 26, 2014 - 2:09 pm

    Should read what president Obama did or did not do.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • patrickMay 26, 2014 - 2:23 pm

    RUDY Obama only knows what he sees on the news. ask him---- he is a day late and then a $ short. the buck never stops at his desk

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 2:16 pm

    Rudy, i have no idea what letter you read, but the comments here are about earls column. Nice spin though.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895May 26, 2014 - 2:44 pm

    It's almost too easy, Mike.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 3:09 pm

    It's like they aren't even trying. The intellectual right has abdicated in the unwashed face of the fringe righties. And the fringers know they're mad, but haven't a clue as to why. So they just sputter around trying to make sense of the stuff they hear on Fox. As we have seen, all too often, when you attempt to put a Foxism into sentences, it is very difficult to have it make sense. Ergo, "the right stuff."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 3:14 pm

    Mike, maybe the right fluff would be more appropriate?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksMay 26, 2014 - 2:57 pm

    UH Rudy et al, did you notice the number next to FDR? That was three thousand five hundred twenty two Executive Orders. ALL but one president used them some a lot more than others. Truman used 907, GW Bush used 291 and Obama has used 168 so far. Don't go barking about this as some Constitutional mess against Obama and include all the others out. The rest of the letter is incorrect or misinformation (lies). It makes no difference how YOU spin it Sir, the bottom line is that Mr. Heal was slightly disingenuous from the word "This."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • mike kirchubelMay 26, 2014 - 8:12 pm

    Wow. A complete scuttling of earls article without any attempt to save it. I guess everyone sees it for the trite, simplistic, uninformed foxisms it is. Is the right so devoid of solid issues and people who can intelligently express them that this is what passes for the best and brightest? The D.R. doesn't need a progressive column at all, "the right stuff" is swaying voters' hearts and minds to "anybody but those guys."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2015 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.