The last thing America's Traitor Media would report is that we are winning in Afghanistan.  Yet that's what's happening.  NATO forces - combining US, Canadian, Australian, Polish soldiers plus 1,000 French (!) - have been rolling up the Taliban in a ball over the last several months. 

The "resurgent" Taliban that Democrats like John Kerry claimed today (9/14) are "running amok across entire regions" of Afghanistan are in reality being wiped out.  Victory over them is quite near.

Taliban guerrillas are being killed by the gross - dozens, scores, at a time, hundreds a week.  Over 500 have been killed in one single district (Panjwayi) west of Kandahar (the main city in southern Afghanistan) in the past two weeks alone.  It's being called The Great Taliban Turkey Shoot.

Have you noticed that many government regulations are so complex and vague that it is impossible to know if you are in compliance?

Examples are the 70,000-plus pages of Internal Revenue Service regulations and the reported 30,000-plus pages of Obamacare regulations. Who do you think has a self-interest in all this complexity and vagueness?

The Food and Drug Administration was set up to protect us from consuming bad food or drugs. It has morphed into an agency that keeps potentially beneficial drugs from us, and now is even banning our ability to know what diseases to which we may be prone, and thus, blocking our ability to take potential corrective or preventative action.

The FDA has gone from being a protector to a destroyer of health and liberty.  Other overreaching government regulators are also squeezing liberty out of existence.  Here are some examples.

What is Hamas doing?

Hamas isn't going to defeat Israel.

It isn't going to gain any territory. Israel isn't going to withdraw from Ashkelon or Sderot under a hail of rockets.

So if Hamas can't win, why is it fighting?

One reason is that Hamas has every reason to take heart from the responses it has received from Mr. Obama.

If you have ever been before a judge for any reason, did you think about whether the judge was appointed by a Democrat or a Republican?

Probably not. People expect judges, regardless of political leanings, to be fair and competent -- and for the most part, this expectation has been fulfilled in America, unlike many other places in the world.

The action by the Senate Democrats last week, though, to kill the long-standing agreement that required a 60 percent supermajority vote for the confirmation of a federal court judge (with the exception of the Supreme Court) and change to a simple majority vote causes many to fear the increased politicization of the federal judiciary.

The immediate cause of the Senate action in changing its rules appears to be the desire of the Obama administration to appoint three new federal judges to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. This court is often viewed as the most important appellate court, in part because many of the cases involving alleged federal government overreach go to that court.

That's why Obama wants to "pack" it with liberal judges.