Category: NY Analysis

Americans opening up their latest energy bill are, in some cases, being forced to choose between paying it or putting an adequate amount of food on the table.

The shock and hardships endured by Americans from their current energy charges, at home, at the gas station, and even in the products they buy is directly due to the influence of environmental extremists, who have caused massive harm to both personal and national finances and international relations.

The reality is that “alternative” energy sources can, currently, only provide about 20% of the world’s energy needs, and that will not change until major technological innovations occur, which will not happen for many years. It is as if, in the year 1776, someone had suggested that in a century or so the automobile would be invented and proceeded to shoot all the horses.

Despite that reality and that timeline, the extremists have successfully assaulted fossil fuels and nuclear energy without regard to the harm they are causing. It is apparently of no consequence to them that they have fueled—pardon the pun—international crises, harmed national economies, and devastated family budgets. 

The dramatic increase in both your energy bills, and the inflationary prices in everything else, are the specific and direct result of the Biden Administration’s assault on American energy independence at the behest of environmental extremists. On day one of his reign, Biden killed the Keystone XL pipeline. He then stopped energy development in a portion of Alaska, and forbade further energy development on federal lands. This left the U.S. dependent on foreign nations to fulfill our energy.

It also dramatically started an inflationary cycle. Everything you eat, buy, or use takes energy to produce, manufacture, and transport to you or your store. The hike in food prices is as related to energy policy as much as the cost of gasoline for your car.

The leftist politicians who buy into anti-fossil fuel policies cannot feign ignorance of the devastating impact they have on the population. In 2008, Barack Obama clearly stated “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” He should have added that the price of everything else would “skyrocket” as well.

Bureaucrats haven’t been coy about this, either. Also in 2008, Energy Secretary Steven Chu’s said he was attempting to “figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

There is no practical way in which, under current technology, “zero emissions” can be achieved in any realistic manner.  A total reliance on solar and wind, even if feasible, would require that up to 20% of the entire U.S. landmass would have to be covered in solar panels and wildlife-killing wind turbines, an environmental disaster in and of itself.  Since solar panels and wind turbines have relatively short lifespans, the problem of disposing those used and non-biodegradable devices will result in a further crisis.

A Wall Street Journal analysis reports that:

“Costs will continue to rise if politicians remain bent on achieving net-zero emissions globally. Bank of America finds that achieving net zero globally by 2050 will cost $150 trillion over 30 years—almost twice the combined annual gross domestic product of every country on earth.”

In addition to massive inflation, extreme environmental policies are responsible for deteriorating international relations.

The late Senator John McCain once said that “Russia is a gas station masquerading as a nation.” Biden’s anti-fossil fuel policies are a gift-wrapped present to Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin’s aggressive actions towards Russia’s neighbors are fueled by the vast riches it has gained from the sale of energy. As environmental extremists slash energy production in the West, Putin gets wealthier, and his uses that wealth to build his military.

Illustration: Pixabay 

After 27 years as a Supreme Court Justice, Stephen Breyer decided to retire late in January of this year.  Breyer, at 83 years old, was originally appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1994, and is the oldest member of the Court at present. Breyer’s decision does not appear to have been spontaneous. “Liberal activists have urged him for months to retire while Democrats hold both the White House and the Senate… Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, urged Breyer to retire in a Washington Post op-ed article in May…(t)he progressive group Demand Justice hired a truck last year to drive around Washington with the sign: ‘Breyer Retire. It’s time for a Black woman Supreme Court justice.'” Did Joe Biden happen to see that truck while wandering around DC? Probably not –  “On the campaign trail, Biden vowed to nominate a Black woman should a Supreme Court vacancy arise, a pledge he reaffirmed after Breyer’s announcement.” According to The Hill, “Biden said he would consult with senators from both parties, leading legal scholars and Vice President Harris before settling on a nominee…’I will listen carefully to all the advice I’m given, and I’ll study the records and former cases carefully…I’ll meet with the potential nominees, and it is my intention…to announce my decision before the end of February.'” True to his word, at the end of February, President Biden picked Ketanji Brown Jackson – a black woman – as his nominee to replace Breyer on the US Supreme Court. According to Ballotpedia, Brown Jackson was “born in 1970 in Washington, D.C.  She then moved with her family to Florida, where she graduated from Miami Palmetto High School in 1988. She received a bachelor’s degree in government, magna cum laude, and a J.D., cum laude, from Harvard University in 1992 and 1996, respectively. She served as the supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review from 1995 to 1996.”  She has served as a Law Clerk to Justice Breyer; has been a federal public defender; was appointed to be a Judge of the Federal District Court in DC in 2013 by President Obama; and was elevated to the DC Federal Court of Appeals in 2021 by President Biden.  Both times, she passed Senate confirmation without difficulty. On the surface, Brown Jackson would seem to be a candidate who could garner a good deal of bipartisan support.  But according to Fox News, “(m)issing (from most news reports) are details like her work drafting an amicus brief on behalf of pro-abortion organizations in a buffer zone case in which she repeatedly disparaged the peaceful and often prayerful clinic protesters as engaging in ‘in-your-face’ and ‘chaotic’ activity that somehow fell short of ‘pure speech.’ She also represented several Guantanamo Bay detainees as a public defender and continued that representation on a pro bono basis after moving back to private practice. That was before her tenure as vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission, during which the Commission reduced its sentencing recommendations for crack-cocaine offenses, advocated the repeal of mandatory-minimum sentences, and raised concerns about demographic disparities in sentencing.” These actions while in her legal practice reveal someone with a clear left of center viewpoint.  But it is Brown Jackson’s record as a judge that reveal a few things about her judicial philosophy that may be of concern to Constitutional conservatives. According to BuzzFeed.News, “(a)s a district court judge, Jackson presided over a set of challenges by federal labor unions to three executive orders issued by Trump that gave agencies new directives about how they should handle collective bargaining. Jackson in August 2018 rejected the administration’s argument that the court lacked jurisdiction over the case and ruled that the bulk of the challenged orders violated federal law…The DC Circuit later reversed her on the front-end jurisdiction issue and dismissed the case.” In September of 2019, “a coalition of immigrant rights group’s challenged the Trump administration’s plan to expand the category of undocumented immigrants eligible for fast-track deportations…(Brown Jackson) issued a preliminary injunction blocking the changes…(t)he DC Circuit later reversed Jackson’s injunction.”  Further, “(i)n October 2020, Jackson sided with immigrant advocacy groups who sued the Trump administration over a lesson plan used to train federal immigration officers who screen potential asylum seekers slated for fast-track deportations. The challengers argued the language adopted in 2019 wrongly raised the bar too high for the initial round of vetting to see if a person had shown a ‘credible fear’ of persecution in their home country. Jackson agreed. The Justice Department decided not to pursue an appeal. “One of Jackson’s most famous decisions came in late 2019, when she concluded that then-president Donald Trump’s first White House counsel Don McGahn could not claim absolute immunity against a congressional subpoena to testify in the Russia investigation…(b)acked by the Justice Department under Trump, McGahn argued that current and former senior advisers to the president enjoyed absolute immunity against congressional subpoenas, that the president had the final word on when to assert that immunity, and that courts lacked authority to intervene. Jackson rejected all of the DOJ’s positions. Her opinion was stacked with sweeping declarations about how every person, including the president, ultimately is bound by the law… The case ping-ponged around the DC Circuit for the next year and a half on the question of whether the court had authority to hear it.  The first time it went up on appeal, a three-judge panel ruled 2-1 to dismiss the case, but then the full court sided with Jackson and ruled it could go forward. The Trump administration raised a second challenge on different grounds, and the DC Circuit again ruled 2-1 to toss it out. Before the full court could weigh in again, McGahn reached an agreement to testify, ending the legal fight.” Much like her activities as a lawyer, these decisions while on the DC bench show a pattern of sympathy towards progressive priorities, such as allowing faster acceptance of illegal immigrant applications for asylum, and the manipulation of federal law to support outcomes that either blocked action by the Trump Administration, or forced Trump Administration members to testify in the now-discredited investigation into “Russian collusion.” Perhaps Joe Biden really did  “study the records and former cases carefully” before selecting his nominee. Like Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MI), it would be easy to dismiss Joe Biden’s nominee as “a ‘beneficiary’ of affirmative action.”  However, such a simplistic view ignores the fact that even if Brown Jackson did receive opportunities for advancement due to her status as a black woman, she still had to do the work required to maintain those positions.  Her record as a lawyer and a judge, while exhibiting a leftward, anti-Trump slant, cannot be minimized so easily. Of course, Brown Jackson is smart enough not to tell you in advance how she will rule as a Judge. During her confirmation hearings for the DC Court of Appeals, when asked to “describe the importance you place on working with colleagues who may have different views,” Brown Jackson stated that “(b)ecause the D.C. Circuit often address complicated and potentially contentious legal issues, the ability to listen with an open mind to other points of view, and to be respectful even if a judge ultimately disagrees with another judge’s analysis or conclusions, is crucial to the effective operation of the court, and, ultimately, maintains public trust in the court as an institution.” Nonetheless, given her published opinions, Brown Jackson will no doubt serve as another progressive voice on the Court, chipping away at the measures taken by Republican Administrations and the laws enacted by Republican Congresses for decades. As in the McGhan case, she will use “sweeping” legal language and broad concepts to disguise her real motivations. Unlike Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who exhibited “a view that progress toward equal justice and greater liberty, when carried out by courts, is more likely to last when it is taken in small, careful steps rather than via radical changes,”   you can instead expect Brown Jackson to be “a judge who will deviate from the text of the Constitution and statutes without hesitation to ensure the left’s preferred policy outcomes.” Judge John Wilson (ret.) served on the bench in NYC.

From the White House to the streets of America’s cities, the progressive ideological concept of not responding adequately to those who do harm to the innocent has wreaked havoc. 

The Obama Administration’s semi-pacifist foreign policy proved disastrous. When Beijing assaulted the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone, the 44^th President didn’t even lodge a diplomatic protest. When Russia invaded Crimea, he responded with only weak sanctions. In a move duplicated recently in Afghanistan, all U.S. forces were withdrawn from Iraq, a move that gave rise to the rise of the ISIS caliphate.

Currently, with another progressive in the White House, a new round of violence is under way.  Moscow has invaded Ukraine, and threatens a much wider war. Biden refuses to take the most effective countermeasures, including opening up U.S. energy or timely delivering massive military supplies. China is preparing to assault Taiwan. Iran, despite being already bound by non-nuclearization treaties, is developing atomic weapons.

A similar response occurs to crime throughout America’s cities where progressive district attorneys exist. The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund  reports that “ [the] failure to keep criminals locked up had tragic consequences.”

Concepts such as defunding police forces, and especially bail “reform,” have endangered public safety on a massive scale.

Examples abounds. in New York, the completely Democrat controlled government attacked the use of bail. As the new policies were being proposed, the  Court Innovation.org noted that “In January 2020, New York State put into effect sweeping criminal justice legislation, strictly curtailing the use of cash bail and pretrial detention… In New York City, 43 percent of the almost 5,000 people detained pretrial on April 1, 2019 would have been released under the new legislation. Outside of New York City, the effects could be even greater. Of the almost 205,000 criminal cases arraigned in New York City in 2018, only 10 percent would have been eligible for money bail under the new law.”

In San Francisco, the newly elected District Attorney, Chesa Boudin, told Jacobin magazine that “Our system of mass incarceration is grossly disproportionate to our problem with crime and public safety. In fact, the way we arrest and lock people up actually makes us less safe, creates more crime. For too long politicians have falsely equated victims’ rights and public safety with conviction rates and length of sentence…”

The failure of soft on crime policies, whether in foreign affairs or in America’s cities, is clear. Examples from New York and California are well known. The Manhattan Institute examined a few other jurisdictions. In Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati, Ferguson, Mo., and Riverside, Calif., investigations led police to scale back proactive policing. Each of these jurisdictions saw sharp drops in police-initiated interactions, such as pedestrian stops; as a result, “almost 900 excess homicides and almost 34,000 excess felonies” occurred over a two-year period.”

Nation-wide rates of violent crime have skyrocketed.  The refusal to incarcerate, or to keep incarcerated, offenders defies the evidence.  The U.S.  Bureau of Justice Statistics outlines the statistics:

• About 6 in 10 (62%) prisoners released across 34 states in 2012 were arrested within 3 years, and 7 in 10 (71%) were arrested within 5 years.
• Nearly half (46%) of prisoners released in 2012 returned to prison within 5 years for a parole or probation violation or a new sentence.
• Eleven percent of prisoners released in 2012 were arrested within 5 years outside of the state that released them.
• Eighty-one percent of prisoners age 24 or younger at release in 2012 were arrested within 5 years of release, compared to 74% of those ages 25 to 39 and 61% of those age 40 or older.

New Jersey Assemblyman Bob Andrzejczak, in a letter to the Lexington National Insurance organization, noted that his states bail reform “has been an absolute disaster. The public safety needs of citizens in New Jersey have suffered far greater than could have been imagined. The costs to the state have increased exponentially and, even worse, the constitutional rights of many of the accused are being infringed.”

Illustration: Pixabay

What steps can a political party, desperate to keep their near-total control of Washington and most major cities, take when their policies have spectacularly failed and their popularity is close to hitting rock bottom?

Short of admitting its mistakes and engaging in a total reversal of almost all of its policies, the only way to remain competitive is to change the rules of the game. Eliminate or prevent safeguards that insure honest balloting. Label everyone that disagrees or even openly discusses its’ failures a “domestic terrorist,” “racist,” or “moron,” and then use the full power of the federal government, supported by a sympathetic media, to harass them.

At home, the southern border has been opened wide, exposing the nation to extraordinary expense, dangers from criminal cartels, human traffickers, disease, and those from across the planet who seek to do harm. The once dominant U.S. energy industry, which not only kept domestic prices low but provided international allies with the ability to thumb their noses at Moscow, has been slashed. Absurd policies have emptied store shelves, and brought inflation to massive highs. If all this sounds like the old Soviet Union, or current day Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea, it’s not coincidental. The socialist policies that wrecked those nations are to a significant extent those that have been adopted by the ruling American Progressives that seek to change election laws.

In our once-great cities, leftist District attorneys ignore public safety and established laws as they release criminals onto the streets and refuse to seek incarceration. The once magnificent American public educational system has been co-opted by radicals seeking to defame the nation, push propaganda, and wrest control of young minds away from parents.  

Abroad, the weakness exuded by a White House that sees the American people as more of a threat than the aggressive militaries of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea has encouraged the despots of Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang to take advantage by threatening their neighbors and preparing for actions which resemble those that initiated World War 2.

Obviously, all of those results would cause a shattering blow to the ruling Progressive ideology in upcoming elections. So how do they avoid losing? Change how people vote, and even bring in voters who are not even American citizens as has been done in New York. Indeed, so desperate are New York’s leftists to control elections that even after state voters rejected a ballot initiative to alter election rules, the governor is seeking to do so by other means. Democracy is an obstacle to the Democratic Party’s goals.

The audacity of the move is outrageous. The allegation that showing proof of identity is somehow a racist act is absurd on its face. The concept of same day registration, which would eliminate all possibility of preventing fraud, defies common sense. But it doesn’t even stop there. Unwilling to obey the separation of powers enshrined in the U.S. Constitution or the right of people to regulate their own local affairs, a dramatic power-grab by Washington politicians seeks to federalize election rules.  

The D.C. politicians behind this are so intent on illicitly preserving their power that they are seeking to destroy long-standing Senate rules to do so.  Those rules, by the way, have been vigorously supported by the same Senators who now want to eliminate them in an urgent bid to keep control.

President Biden has called the bid to change voting laws as a “turning point” for America.  He is absolutely correct. If passed, the ability of American citizens to determine who runs the nation will become obsolete.  It will be replaced by professional political hacks, party professionals, and radical activists who will use techniques such as ballot harvesting, multiple registrations of the same individuals in different districts, and the use of massed, unsecured and unverified mail-in ballots to pre-determine the outcome of all future elections in favor of those who are contemptuous of the principles of individual freedom, the rule of law, and the concept of one person, one vote.

Our Nation is in deep peril. We are in a fight for our survival as a Constitutional Republic like no other time since our founding in 1776. The conflict is between supporters of Socialism and Marxism vs. supporters of Constitutional freedom and liberty. 

During the 2020 election an “Open Letter from Senior Military Leaders” was signed by 317 retired Generals and Admirals and, it said the 2020 election could be the most important election since our country was founded. “With the Democrat Party welcoming Socialists and Marxists, our historic way of life is at stake.” Unfortunately, that statement’s truth was quickly revealed, beginning with the election process itself. 

Without fair and honest elections that accurately reflect the “will of the people” our Constitutional Republic is lost. Election integrity demands insuring there is one legal vote cast and counted per citizen. Legal votes are identified by State Legislature’s approved controls using government IDs, verified signatures, etc. Today, many are calling such commonsense controls “racist” in an attempt to avoid having fair and honest elections. Using racial terms to suppress proof of eligibility is itself a tyrannical intimidation tactic. Additionally, the “Rule of Law” must be enforced in our election processes to ensure integrity. The FBI and Supreme Court must act swiftly when election irregularities are surfaced and not ignore them as was done in 2020. Finally, H.R.1 & S.1, (if passed), would destroy election fairness and allow Democrats to forever remain in power violating our Constitution and ending our Representative Republic. 

Aside from the election, the Current Administration has launched a full-blown assault on our Constitutional rights in a dictatorial manner, bypassing the Congress, with more than 50 Executive Orders quickly signed, many reversing the previous Administration’s effective policies and regulations. Moreover, population control actions such as excessive lockdowns, school and business closures, and most alarming, censorship of written and verbal expression are all direct assaults on our fundamental Rights. We must support and hold accountable politicians who will act to counter Socialism, Marxism and Progressivism, support our Constitutional Republic, and insist on fiscally responsible governing while focusing on all Americans, especially the middle class, not special interest or extremist groups which are used to divide us into warring factions. 

Additional National Security Issues and Actions: 

• Open borders jeopardize national security by increasing human trafficking, drug cartels, terrorists entry, health/CV19 dangers, and humanitarian crises. Illegals are flooding our Country bringing high economic costs, crime, lowering wages, and illegal voting in some states. We must reestablish border controls and continue building the wall while supporting our dedicated border control personnel. Sovereign nations must have controlled borders.

• China is the greatest external threat to America. Establishing cooperative relations with the Chinese Communist Party emboldens them to continue progress toward world domination, militarily, economically, politically and technologically. We must impose more sanctions and restrictions to impede their world domination goal and protect America’s interests. 

• The free flow of information is critical to the security of our Republic, as illustrated by freedom of speech and the press being in the 1st Amendment of our Constitution. Censoring speech and expression, distorting speech, spreading disinformation by government officials, private entities, and the media is a method to suppress the free flow of information, a tyrannical technique used in closed societies. We must counter this on all fronts beginning with removing Section 230 protection from big tech. 

• Re-engaging in the flawed Iran Nuclear Deal would result in Iran acquiring nuclear weapons along with the means to deliver them, thereby upsetting Mideast peace initiatives and aiding a terrorist nation whose slogans and goals include “death to America” and “death to Israel” . We must resist the new China/Iran agreement and not support the Iran Nuclear Deal. In addition, continue with the Mideast peace initiatives, the “Abraham Accords,” and support for Israel. 

• Stopping the Keystone Pipeline eliminates our recently established energy independence and causes us to be energy dependent on nations not friendly to us, while eliminating valuable US jobs. We must open the Keystone Pipeline and regain our energy independence for national security and economic reasons. 

• Using the U.S. military as political pawns with thousands of troops deployed around the U.S. Capitol Building, patrolling fences guarding against a non-existent threat, along with forcing Politically Correct policies like the divisive critical race theory into the military at the expense of the War Fighting Mission, seriously degrades readiness to fight and win our Nation’s wars, creating a major national security issue. We must support our Military and Vets; focus on war fighting, eliminate the corrosive infusion of Political Correctness into our military which damages morale and war fighting cohesion. 

• The “Rule of Law” is fundamental to our Republic and security. Anarchy as seen in certain cities cannot be tolerated. We must support our law enforcement personnel and insist that DAs, our courts, and the DOJ enforce the law equally, fairly, and consistently toward all. 

• The mental and physical condition of the Commander in Chief cannot be ignored. He must be able to quickly make accurate national security decisions involving life and limb anywhere, day or night. Recent Democrat leadership’s inquiries about nuclear code procedures sends a dangerous national security signal to nuclear armed adversaries, raising the question about who is in charge. We must always have an unquestionable chain of command. 

Under a Democrat Congress and the Current Administration, our Country has taken a hard left turn toward Socialism and a Marxist form of tyrannical government which must be countered now by electing congressional and presidential candidates who will always act to defend our Constitutional Republic. The survival of our Nation and its cherished freedoms, liberty, and historic values are at stake.

We urge all citizens to get involved now at the local, state and/or national level to elect political representatives who will act to Save America, our Constitutional Republic, and hold those currently in office accountable. The “will of the people” must be heard and followed. 

Signed by: 

RADM Ernest B. Acklin, USCG, ret.  

MG Joseph T. Anderson, USMC, ret.  

RADM Philip Anselmo, USN, ret.  

MG Joseph Arbuckle, USA, ret.  

BG John Arick, USMC, ret.  

RADM Jon W. Bayless, Jr. USN, ret.  

RDML James Best, USN, ret.  

BG Charles Bishop, USAF, ret. 

BG William A. Bloomer, USMC, ret.  

BG Donald Bolduc, USA, ret. 

LTG William G. Boykin, USA, ret.  

MG Edward R. Bracken, USAF, ret. 

MG Patrick H. Brady, MOH, USA, ret.  

VADM Edward S. Briggs, USN, ret.  

LTG Richard “Tex’ Brown III USAF, ret.  

BG Frank Bruno, USAF, ret. 

VADM Toney M. Bucchi, USN, ret.  

RADM John T. Byrd, USN, ret.  

BG Jimmy Cash, USAF, ret.  

LTG Dennis D. Cavin, USA, ret.  

LTG James E. Chambers, USAF, ret.  

MG Carroll D. Childers, USA, ret.  

BG Clifton C. “Tip” Clark, USAF, ret.  

VADM Ed Clexton, USN, ret. 

MG Jay Closner, USAF, ret  

MG Tommy F. Crawford, USAF, ret.  

MG Robert E. Dempsey, USAF, ret.  

BG Phillip Drew, USAF, ret.  

MG Neil L. Eddins, USAF, ret.  

RADM Ernest Elliot, USN, ret. 

BG Jerome V. Foust, USA, ret.  

BG Jimmy E. Fowler, USA, ret.  

RADMU J. Cameron Fraser, USN, ret. 

MG John T. Furlow, USA, ret.  

MG Timothy F. Ghormley, USMC, ret.  

MG Francis C. Gideon, USAF, ret.  

MG William A. Gorton, USAF, ret. 

MG Lee V. Greer, USAF, ret.  

RDML Michael R. Groothousen, Sr., USN, ret. 

BG John Grueser, USAF, ret.  

MG Ken Hagemann, USAF, ret.

BG Norman Ham, USAF, ret.  

VADM William Hancock, USN, ret.  LTG Henry J. Hatch, USA, ret.  

Effective and beneficial about impotence drug viagra no prescription uk also called Generic vardenafil . The fat is as well rich in oleic acid, which is the similar as that in olive oil and the nourishing Omega 3 type fats. levitra in india http://icks.org/data/ijks/1482460255_add_file_3.pdf But, it is necessary for the men to have tadalafil 20mg mastercard the strong erection. How long does Kamagra work? Kamagra is prepared with an active ingredient known as Sildenafil citrate, a PDE-5 inhibitor. buy cialis line

BG James M. Hesson, USA, ret. 

MG Bill Hobgood, USA, ret. 

BG Stanislaus J. Hoey, USA, ret.  MG Bob Hollingsworth, USMC, ret.  MG Jerry D. Holmes, USAF, ret.  MG Clinton V. Horn, USAF, ret.  LTG Joseph E. Hurd, USAF, ret.  

VADM Paul Ilg, USN, ret.  

MG T. Irby, USA, ret. 

LTG Ronald Iverson, USAF, ret. 

RADM (L) Grady L. Jackson  

MG William K. James, USAF, ret.  LTG James H. Johnson, Jr. USA, ret.  ADM. Jerome L. Johnson, USN, ret. BG Charles Jones, USAF, ret. 

BG Robert R. Jordan, USA, ret.  

BG Jack H. Kotter, USA, ret. 

MG Anthony R. Kropp, USA, ret.  RADM Chuck Kubic, USN, ret.  

BG Jerry L. Laws, USA, ret.  

BG Douglas E. Lee, USA, ret.  

MG Vernon B. Lewis, USA, ret. 

MG Thomas G. Lightner, USA, ret.  MG James E. Livingston, USMC, ret. MOH  MG John D. Logeman, USAF, ret. MG Jarvis Lynch, USMC, ret.  

LTG Fred McCorkle, USMC, ret.  MG Don McGregor, USAF, ret. 

LTG Thomas McInerney, USAF, ret. RADM John H. McKinley, USN, ret. BG Michael P. McRaney, USAF, ret.  

BG Ronald S. Mangum, USA, ret. BG James M. Mead, USMC, ret.  

BG Joe Mensching, USAF, ret.  

RADM W. F. Merlin, USCG, ret.  RADM (L) Mark Milliken, USN, ret.  MG John F. Miller, USAF, ret.  

RADM Ralph M. Mitchell, Jr. USN, ret.  MG Paul Mock, USA. ret. 

BG Daniel I. Montgomery, USA, ret., RADM John A. Moriarty, USN, ret., RADM David R. Morris, USN, ret.  RADM Bill Newman, USN, ret.  

BG Joe Oder, USA, ret.  

MG O’Mara, USAF, ret.  

MG Joe S. Owens, USA, ret.

VADM Jimmy Pappas, USN, ret.  

LTG Garry L. Parks, USMC, ret.  

RADM Russ Penniman, RADM, USN, ret. 

RADM Leonard F. Picotte, ret.  

VADM John Poindexter, USN, ret. 

RADM Ronald Polant, USCG, ret.  

MG Greg Power, USAF, ret.  

RDM Brian Prindle, USN, ret.  

RADM J.J. Quinn, USN, ret.  

LTG Clifford H. Rees, Jr. USAF, ret.  

RADM Norman T. Saunders, USCG, ret.  

MG Richard V. Secord, USAF, ret.  

RADM William R. Schmidt, USN, ret. 

LTG Hubert Smith, USA, ret. 

MG James N. Stewart, USAF, ret.  

RADM Thomas Stone, USN., ret.  

BG Joseph S. Stringham, USA, ret.  

MG Michael Sullivan, USMC, ret.  

RADM (U) Jeremy Taylor, USN, ret.  

LTG David Teal, USAF, ret.  

VADM Howard B. Thorsen, USCG, ret.  

RADM Robert P. Tiernan, USN, ret.  

LTG Garry Trexler, USAF, ret.  

BG James T. Turlington, M.D., USAF, ret. 

BG Richard J. Valente, USA ret.  

MG Paul Vallely, USA, ret. 

MG Russell L. Violett, USAF, ret.  

BG George H. Walker, Jr. USAR Corp of Engineers, ret.  MG Kenneth Weir, USMCR, ret.  

BG William O. Welch, USAF, ret.  

MG John M. White, USAF, ret. 

MG Geoffrey P. Wiedeman, JR. USAF, ret.  MG Richard O. Wightman, Jr., USA, ret. 

RADM Denny Wisely, USN, ret. 

RADM Ray Cowden Witter, USN, ret. 

LTG John Woodward, ret.