« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Obama could not be a cop or soldier

What is he qualified for?

   OBAMA A SERIOUSLY FLAWED CANDIDATE

Qualified for what? Why hasn’t someone brought this up?

Obama could not pass the background check to become a member of law enforcement at the local, state or federal level because of his self admitted use of cocaine as a young adult.

Law enforcement agencies consider the use of hard drugs an automatic disqualifier because it not only shows a lack of judgment as an adult but also shows a disregard for the laws the officer will probably have to enforce.

The Constitution separates the federal powers between the congress, courts and the executive branch. Congress makes the laws, the courts interpret the laws and the executive branch enforces the laws.

The Democrats are putting up a candidate for the most powerful law enforcement officer in our country who could not even qualify for a local police force or sheriff’s department. (Obama would fail the background check) He would also probably be denied entry into the military for the same reason. So now we could have a Commander in Chief who could not even be a soldier. Don’t believe me? Call a few police departments, tell them you used cocaine as an adult and ask if you can join. Then do the same for some military recruiters.

Obama could not be hired for any federal position that required any security check because of his past associations with William Ayers and Bernadette Dorn; both of whom are unrepentant domestic terrorists. Another association is with Rashid Khalidi (An Obama fund raiser) who is blatantly anti-Semitic, calls the establishment of Israel a catastrophe, and worked for the PLO when it was listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. Government. Khalidi says he supports Palestinian terrorism. (Israel is an ally of the United States)

Some will say this is guilt by association but when people are vetted for positions requiring security clearances, past associations are a very important consideration. Past associations indicate an individual’s ability to use judgment and indicate where their loyalties might be directed. When associations indicate an individual might be sympathetic to others who are opposed to the interests of the United States, background checks would deny the individual security clearance.

So now we have the Democratic Party promoting a candidate for the highest office in the land who is not even qualified to be a law enforcement officer at any level and who could not pass a basic background check for a federal position requiring a security clearance.

I am beginning to think the Democratic Party has moved into the “Twilight Zone” and the mainstream media is hooked to their coat tails. (Especially MSNBC)

R.D. Cook, Lone Pine, CA (Retired law enforcement officer and author of a soon to be released book “A Primer for Conservative Activism”)

Get Alerts