AMERICAS'S GENOCIDE MARCHES ON!!!

It is proper that we morn the death of almost 5,000 gallants warriors who have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. The deaths in Georgia this past week are also disturbing, as were the deaths due to Katrina, 9/11/01 and all the natural disasters that caused the loss of life.

But why are there so few who morn the loss of over one million unborn and partially born babies? Even the head of Planned Parenthood acknowledge that the baby in a mothers womb, where it should be the most protected place in the World, is a human being. But she said further, that we have a RIGHT to kill it!!!!

By a bizarre twist of logic and a unbelievable interpretation of the Bill of Rights. The USA Supreme Court has opened the doors to killing of the unborn and even the born, called partial birth for the sake of convenience.

Allowing abortion is not acceptable to me at anytime. There is the adoption option always available. That way so many would be parents would not have to go to foreign Country's to adopt a child!
I confess it is plausible that in the case of a life threatening condition to the mother's life, abortion is possibly the only option. But I have a problem even with this, because if a pregnant woman is shot and killed and her baby in her womb dies. The killer is charged with two murders!!
Try and explain this logic if you can. Most abortions are done for convenience. And it is appropriate that I include in this Blog a quote from a man of God, Father Corapi in this dialog.

THE IMPENDING SUICIDE OF A ONCE GREAT NATION
©2008 REV. JOHN A. CORAPI, SOLT, STD
www.fathercorapi.com
A large number of endangered, unwanted, and unborn children held a town hall meeting
on the 4th of July--alarmed at the brutal and untimely killing of millions of their brothers
and sisters in recent years. That the murderous war waged on them had the full force and
respectability of the law made their plight all the more terrifying.
Their complaint was humble and it was simple. They were not distressed by rising gas
prices, or the deteriorating economy in general. They were not even frightened by the
exponential increase of natural disasters. The threat of global warming or global terrorism
did not greatly disturb them.
They had become an endangered species, and little had been done to answer their
terrified and silent screams from the womb. They decided that the barbaric treatment that
they and their fellow unwanted unborn human beings have had to endure for perilous
decades was unconscionable and unbearable. They cried out to their Creator for
inspiration and protection, and then unanimously they put forth a declaration. It began as
follows:
“When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the
political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the
powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of
Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they
should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF-EVIDENT, THAT ALL MEN ARE
CREATED EQUAL, THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH
CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, THAT AMONG THESE ARE LIFE, LIBERTY
AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS….”
THAT AMONG THESE IS LIFE; THAT AMONG THESE IS LIFE; THAT AMONG
THESE IS LIFE!
The first and pre-eminent right is the right to life. This truth the Founding Fathers were
sure of, and anyone with any common sense at all is equally sure of it. 232 years after the
Declaration of Independence was signed the amount of common sense that seems to be
operative in many spheres of influence—most notably the courts and the political arena--
can easily be poured into a very small thimble.
The United States of America seems to have a death wish, and we have traveled far down
the road to having that wish realized.

Unfortunately the light that shows the way to righteousness seems to have been dimmed, and we are heading down the slippery slope to darkness.

CRISIS FOR NATO?

Aug. 15th, 2008 | 10:28 am

While the Democrat Congress dithers over legislation to solve the USA's energy crisis, even though we have enough crude oil off our shores and ANWR to supply decades of crude oil. The Russians are using naked agression to solidify their dominance in the oil supply business.

Any one who believes that Putin and company are attacking Georgia because Georgia attacked the break away province of South Ossetia, is in "la-la land!
The Russians want to get back the pipe line that runs through Georgia to the Baltic sea. The only pipeline the Russians don't control, and one that supplies the USA with badly needed crude oil!

After Russia's invasion of Georgia, what now for the West?
At least for now, the smoke seems to be clearing from the Georgian battlefield. But the extent of the wreckage reaches far beyond that small country.

Reuters reports that the US has delivered aid but no military support to besieged Georgia!
Russia’s invasion across an internationally recognised border, its thrashing of the Georgian military, and its smug satisfaction in humbling one of its former "fiefdoms" represents only the visible damage.


As bad as the bloodying of Georgia is, the broader consequences are worse. The United States fiddled while Georgia burned, not even reaching the right rhetorical level in its public statements until three days after the Russian invasion began, and not, at least to date, matching its rhetoric with anything even approximating decisive action. This pattern is the very definition of a paper tiger. Sending Secretary of State Condeleezza Rice to Tbilisi is touching, but hardly reassuring; dispatching humanitarian assistance is nothing more than we would have done if Georgia had been hit by a natural rather than a man-made disaster.


The European Union took the lead in diplomacy, with results approaching Neville Chamberlain’s moment in the spotlight at Munich: a ceasefire that failed to mention Georgia’s territorial integrity, and that all but gave Russia permission to continue its military operations as a “peacekeeping” force anywhere in Georgia. More troubling, over the long term, was that the EU saw its task as being mediator – its favourite role in the world – between Georgia and Russia, rather than an advocate for the victim of aggression.


Even this dismal performance was enough to relegate NATO to an entirely backstage role, while Russian tanks and planes slammed into a “faraway country”, as Chamberlain once observed so thoughtfully. In New York, paralysed by the prospect of a Russian veto, the UN Security Council, that Temple of the High-Minded, was as useless as it was during the Cold War. In fairness to Russia, it at least still seems to understand how to exercise power in the Council, which some other Permanent Members often appear to have forgotten.


The West, collectively, failed in this crisis. Georgia wasted its dime making that famous 3am telephone call to the White House, the one Hillary Clinton referred to in a campaign ad questioning Barack Obama’s fitness for the Presidency. Moreover, the blood on the Bear’s claws did not go unobserved in other states that were once part of the Soviet Union. Russia demonstrated unambiguously that it could have marched directly to Tbilisi and installed a puppet government before any Western leader was able to turn away from the Olympic Games. It could, presumably, do the same to them.


Fear was one reaction Russia wanted to provoke, and fear it has achieved, not just in the “Near Abroad” but in the capitals of Western Europe as well. But its main objective was hegemony, a hegemony it demonstrated by pledging to reconstruct Tskhinvali, the capital of its once and no-longer-future possession, South Ossetia. The contrast is stark: a real demonstration of using sticks and carrots, the kind that American and European diplomats only talk about. Moreover, Russia is now within an eyelash of dominating the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, the only route out of the Caspian Sea region not now controlled by either Russia or Iran. Losing this would be dramatically unhelpful if we hope for continued reductions in global petroleum prices, and energy independence from unfriendly, or potentially unfriendly, states.


"It profits us little to blame Georgia for “provoking” the Russian attack. Nor is it becoming of the United States to have anonymous officials from its State Department telling reporters, as they did earlier this week, that they had warned Georgia not to provoke Russia.
Ethnic violence has been a fact of life since the break-up of the Soviet Union on December 31, 1991 – and, indeed, long before.We are facing the much larger issue of how Russia plans to behave in international affairs for decades to come. Whether Mikhail Saakashvili “provoked” the Russians on August 8, or September 8, or whenever, this "rape" was well-planned and clearly coming, given Georgia’s manifest unwillingness to be “Finlandized” – the Cold War term for effectively losing your foreign-policy independence". source:John Bolton


By its actions in Georgia, Russia has made clear that its long-range objective is to fill that “gap” if we do not. That, as Western leaders like to say, is “unacceptable”. Accordingly, we should have a foreign-minister-level meeting of NATO to reverse the spring capitulation at Bucharest, and to decide that Georgia and Ukraine will be NATO’s next members. By drawing the line clearly, we are not provoking Russia, but doing just the opposite: letting them know that aggressive behaviour will result in costs that they will not want to bear, thus stabilising a critical seam between Russia and the West. In effect, we have already done this successfully with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Second, the United States needs some straight talk with our friends in Europe, which ideally should have taken place long before the assault on Georgia. To be sure, American inaction gave French President Sarkozy and the EU the chance to seize the diplomatic initiative. However, Russia did not invade Georgia with diplomats, but with tanks. This is a security threat, and the proper forum for discussing security threats on the border of a NATO member – yes, Europe, this means Turkey – is NATO.


Now is the time to find out if NATO can withstand a potential renewed confrontation with Moscow, or whether Europe will cause NATO to wilt. Far better to discover this sooner rather than later, when the stakes may be considerably higher. If there were ever a moment since the fall of the Berlin Wall when Europe should be worried, this is it. If Europeans are not willing to engage through NATO, that tells us everything we need to know about the true state of health of what is, after all, supposedly a “North Atlantic” alliance.
Is the "EU" now more important to Europeans than mutual defense through NATO?
SOURCE: LONDON TELEGRAPH




Tags: aggression, commentary, Europe, Georgia, NATO, Russia

RUSSIAN CHUTZPAH ON DISPLAY!!!

Russian investigators have launched a criminal case on charges of genocide in connection with the events in South Ossetia. Russia’s Interfax news agency reports that the Russian General Prosecutor's Office has said Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili may also be put on trial.

Igor Komissarov, deputy chairman of the Prosecutor’s Investigation Committee, said it had "initiated a genocide probe based on reports of actions committed by Georgian troops aimed at murdering Russian citizens, ethnic Ossetians, living in South Ossetia."

Speaking at a joint media briefing with French President Nicholas Sarkozy, President Medvedev said double standards are inadmissible when evaluating the actions of politicians who are guilty of mass killings of civilians.

“The situation when one, who committed thousands of crimes, is characterised as a terrorist, and another as a president of a sovereign state, is very strange,” he said.

Meanwhile, Marina Gridneva, a spokesperson for the General Prosecutor's Office, told Interfax that Russian law allows for foreign citizens to be brought to trial if they have committed a crime against Russia’s interests.

She said that evidence of murder, following the attack of Georgian troops in South Ossetia, may be used as a basis for future charges against Saakashvili.

This despite the claims by Georgia's President Saakashvili who insists he's not overstating anything about the carnage caused by the Russian invasion, and lamented Wednesday that the West ignored his warnings that Russia was planning a military operation in Georgia as "exaggerations." It is no exageration that "These are Russian tanks outside of Gori, shooting at our military bases," Shota Utiashvili, a spokesman for Georgia's internal ministry, said via a phone interview.

As rumors spread that at least 10 Russian tanks were parked on the outskirts of Gori, many returning cars stopped or turned back. Inside, the city looked empty—just a few elderly pedestrians could be seen in the central Stalin square, where a day earlier five people, including a Dutch journalist, had been killed by a missile. At Gori University around the corner, all the windows were broken and the walls cracked.
"Now look what they're doing. This has already exceeded my worst expectations."
This despite the fact that a cease fire, brokered by the French, was agreed upon by both presidents.
Saakashvili,graduated from Columbia University Law School,and his bold language and flamboyant manner helped drive the "Rose Revolution" that brought him to power after disputed elections in 2003.He is pro-American, and this irritates Putin and his puppet Medveded. Who is also known as a leader of "the clan of St.Petersburg lawyers", one of the political groups formed around Vladimir Putin during Putin's presidency.

“Russia’s attack on neighboring Georgia over two tiny separatist provinces is really about something much bigger. Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s desire to restore the former USSR’s might. Russia’s ill intentions clearly are on display in Georgia. In a fit of nationalist fury, it wants to teach Georgia and other former satellite countries that once made up the Soviet Bloc that its pro-Western rapprochement days are over.

What better way than to invade a former republic, humiliate its leaders and then taunt the West for failing to come to its aid? As if that wasn’t enough, Russia immediately began threatening its other neighbors. A top Russian diplomat ominously warned Monday that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Poland would ‘pay’ for criticizing Russia’s ‘imperialist’ policy toward Georgia. Russia’s claim to support independence from Georgia of tiny South Ossetia and even tinier Abkhazia is simply phony. Georgia, with its strategically important oil pipeline, has grown close to the U.S. —even sending troops to Iraq.

Putin is obviously furious at growing U.S. and NATO ties with Eastern Europe,and he wanted to emasculate Georgia’s military while deposing its pro-American President Mikheil Saakashvili. With his attack, it looks like he’s succeeding. The symbolism of the invasion, coming at the start of the Beijing Olympics, is unmistakable. This is Russia’s wake-up call to all of us. Communism may be dead, Putin is saying, but Russia isn’t.”

Back he in the USA "Obamamessia" had this to say about the naked aggression in Georgia: “We should continue to push for a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate end to the violence. It’s a clear violation of the sovereignty and internationally recognized borders of Georgia.” —Barack Obama
Perhaps Obama's knowledge of the UN does not include Russia's veto power of any resolution made!!!


The principles are simple: Georgia is an independent nation and deserves the right to self-determination, no matter her neighbor.
Russia does not have the right to invade a sovereign nation because it desires power and control in the region. American policy toward Russia and Europe should flow from these truths. And no amount of bullying should change that policy!!
SOURCE:PAJAMASMEDIA.COM

DO WE HAVE THE FORTITUDE TO STAND UP TO THE RUSSIANS

Russia has never, ever been part of the free World Group. No Russian leader has ever seemed convincingly interested in joining the western world and act as a responsible member of an international community. There was that brief, promising time, when Boris Yeltsin came close, and then backed away!

But none before and certainly none after have been interested in joining the rest of the world. We are seeing Russian belligerence hold true. In this case, instead of purely militaristic aims, we are seeing a Russia planning on an energy control over Europe, and willing to resort to killing a neighbor to achieve those aims. This is why Russia under Putin had planned the attack on the Georgian state, during the opening of the Olympics, to further control the energy supply to the rest of Europe.

Certainly the weakling states of the European Union haven’t the guts nor the military to force Russia to behave herself. Just as certain, the members of the EU have no will to stop Russian plans to control all energy in the region. Only the U.S.A. has displayed the will to oppose moves such as Russia’s in the world today and even that will is anemic

The election-year rhetoric has made me think about the Cuban revolution.

In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change from the Batista regime, so when a young leader came along, every Cuban was receptive to “change”!.
When the young Cuban revolutionary leader spoke, he was eloquent, and passionate denouncing the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said, ‘Praise the Lord.’ And when the young leader said, ‘I will be for change and I’ ll bring you change,’ everyone yelled, ‘Viva Fidel!’

But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner’s guns went silent, the people’s guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education, it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented, Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over, more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes.

Georgia’s president Mikheil Saakashvili has been watching the American elections closely. Like the rest of the world, what he sees is a man(Obama) who presents and even weaker foreign policy stance than the policies of Bill Clinton in the form of Barack Obama.

President Saakashvili has observed the devotion to “talking” that Obama hails as some sort of panacea to world conflict, and the Georgian president knows that this means that, regardless of past assurances, America cannot be trusted to help him protect his people should Obama become president.

President Saakashvili understands that an Obama presidency will be a nod to the Russians that absolutely anything they do will be met with “diplomacy” hot air and nothing else, effectively giving the expansionist Russians the green light to do what ever they want to do with no fear of reprisal.

Will we in America fall for a young leader who promises change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America ?
Would we?

source:Publius Forum

UNITED STATES MEDIA BACKS "DO NOTHING" ADVOCATES

While main stream television and the news services like Associated Press, publish articles proclaiming that the USA cannot do anything to stop the naked aggression in Georgia by the Russian "Bear".
The cries of betrayal seem to have fallen on deaf ears here in the U.S.

Anne Gearn leads off her article about our only friend and comrade in arms in Iraq, with these words: "As a Russian jet bombed fields around his village, Djimali Avago, a Georgian farmer, asked me: “Why won’t America and Nato help us? If they won’t help us now, why did we help them in Iraq?” Later in her article she sums up why she takes the position that the United States can do nothing but talk,

"Bush has put Moscow on notice that U.S. relations with Russia would suffer if the conflict continued, but Russian leaders know that Washington needs their cooperation on a host of world problems. They know, too, that the American public has no stomach for war in an obscure corner of the globe and that Bush will be out of a job in five months.

If most Americans have decided that aggression against one of our allies is to be ignored, we are already at the point of being a nation that nobody and no nation fears to offend or attack. The phrase, "better red than dead comes to mind!

A similar sense of betrayal coursed through the conversations of many Georgians here yesterday as their troops retreated under shellfire and the Russian Army pressed forward to take full control of South Ossetia.


As a Russian jet bombed fields around his village, Djimali Avago, a Georgian farmer, asked me: “Why won’t America and NATO help us? If they won’t help us now, why did we help them in Iraq?”


Perhaps our nation wouldn't be so willing to stand by and watch the Russians begin their take over of the freedom seeking people of the counties located along the Baltic Sea - Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania that are known as the Baltic States. These three countries were occupied and annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940 but gained their independence again when the Soviet Union fell in 1991.
If the USA media had not been the mouth piece for the anti-Vietnam and Anti-Iraq war leftists in this country.

We are rapidly approaching the state of obsolesencence and anemic defeatism!!!

Naked Agression As In The 1930's

In the middle of the night of August 31, 1939, Nazis took an unknown prisoner from one of their concentration camps, dressed him in a Polish uniform, took him to the town of Gleiwitz (on the border of Poland and Germany), and then shot him. The staged scene with the dead prisoner dressed in a Polish uniform was supposed to appear as a Polish attack against a German radio station.

Hitler used the staged attack as the excuse to invade Poland.

This was after 1938 when Germany took over Austria On March 13, 1938(termed the Anschluss) - a contingency specifically disallowed in the Versailles Treaty.


Adolf Hitler wanted more land, especially in the east, to expand Germany according to the Nazi policy of lebensraum. Hitler used the harsh limitations that were set against Germany in the Versailles Treaty as a pretext for Germany's right to acquire land where German-speaking people lived. Germany successfully used this reasoning to envelop two entire countries without starting a war.

The French and the British handed Germany a large portion of Czechoslovakia at the Munich Conference in September 1938. Hitler then took the rest of Czechoslovakia by March 1939.

Why was Germany allowed to take over both Austria and Czechoslovakia without a fight? The simple reason is that Great Britain and France did not want to repeat the bloodshed of World War I. They believed, wrongly as it turned out, they could avoid another world war by appeasing Hitler with a few concessions (such as Austria and Czechoslovakia). Great Britain and France had not clearly understood that Hitler's goal of land acquisition was much, much larger than any one country.

Today we have a very similar situation developing in Georgia, as Russia, using the excuse to aid the "break away"Ossetia province, in the quest to rejoin Russia. But the tanks and bombers are not limiting their targets to the area of conflict. The Russian army and navy have attacked Georgian cities with bombs, and have sunk a Georgian military naval vessel in the Baltic sea.

Russian planes have reportedly bombed military targets in the suburbs of the Georgian capital Tbilisi, just hours after the city of Gori was said to be under "massive" attack. An explosion was heard in the centre of Tbilisi around 4.40am...The first bomb struck the village of Kodjori some 10km from Tbilisi where the base of a special forces battalion was located, he said. The second bomb struck an air traffic control centre located 5km from the centre of Tbilisi, he added. Gori was said to be under attack from Russian artillery and planes, with ground forces preparing for an assault. Georgian interior ministry spokesman Shota Utiashvili said: "There was massive bombing of Gori all evening and now we are getting reports of an imminent attack by Russian tanks. "Gori is being bombed massively from the air and from artillery as well." He said Russian troops "are not there yet but it looks like they are getting ready for it". source:The New Media Journal


Georgia is the region's best hope for democratic development. If the Rose Revolution fails, we will wait a generation or more for another chance for positive change. Critical principles, including sovereignty and territorial integrity, are at stake. Russia is seeking to redefine the rules of post-Cold War European security to its advantage.Not unlike Hitler did after the Versailles Treaty took the Sudaten Land away from Germany,


Georgia is considered America's Allie, U.S. prestige is on the line. The Rose Revolution was animated by American values. Tbilisi has pursued American-style economic reforms, has 2,000 soldiers in Iraq and wants to join NATO. The region is waiting to see whether and when Washington will step in. If we don't try to stop Russia's overstepping, countries in the region -- from Azerbaijan to Central Asian energy producers -- will recalculate accordingly.

There is one way to stop this Russian power play for Georgia: solidarity. Working with our allies in Europe, we should draw a clear line and tell Moscow that there will be real consequences in its relations with us if it does not stop its aggressive course.

We need Moscow to reverse its creeping -- and illegal -- annexation of Abkhazia. In the longer term, we need to establish an authentic peace process that can resolve the conflict for good.And since Germany has already sided with Russia on this conflict. The heavy lifting will once again be on our backs!Especially since the useless UN issued this statement today:"“We regret it has not yet been possible to agree a Security Council statement on this issue,”

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is finally engaged in this issue personally.Now President Bush should contact Vladimir Putin, with whom he believes he has a close relationship, Putin is still the mastermind of this anti-Georgia campaign.

If Moscow subjugates Georgia and then shifts its sights to Ukraine, that should be free to choose their own paths and to become normal democratic societies, including joining the European Union or NATO, if they so choose. That is why we should stand up for Georgia today. Accepting Moscow's demand for a sphere of influence was wrong in 1945 at Yalta, and it is wrong again today.

There is World War III in the air, in the conflict between Georgia and Russia. This "little war"could destabilize a region critical for Western energy supplies and ruin relations between Russia and the West.

This latest round of Russian aggression started after the West recognized Kosovo's provisional independence in February and NATO bungled the issue of offering Georgia and Ukraine a membership action plan at its Bucharest summit in April. Moscow has since launched a creeping annexation of Abkhazia, including a series of illegal moves to strengthen its military hand and to provoke Tbilisi into actions that could lead to further Russian military intervention.

Many in the West are tempted to look the other way. This crisis is, after all, inconvenient. Russia has a new president who many hope could be more liberal and open to the West. We also need Moscow to be aligned with the West in the United Nations on issues from Iran to North Korea to Zimbabwe. This is an situation where the USA must take a tough stance. It would be only too easy to equivocate, blame all parties a little and call for more diplomacy.And less you doubt, the man to deal with is KGB agent Vladimir Putin, not Dmitry Medvedev!!

IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK!

The Obamamaniacs want you to believe that Barrack is a centurist who will rid this country's government of greedy lobbyists and corporate greed. He promises to spread the wealth around to all by raising taxes on the "rich" and instituting government programs that will make the poor richer.

What his backers and the main stream media doesn't tell you, is that his is not a new message.
This idea of redistribution of wealth is what Marx and Engels brought to Russia from Germany in the early 1900's.

If you listen to his words and know even a modicum of history you will think you are listening to a hard core Socialist of 1917. "In arguing for a heavier mix of government, he assumes that capitalism unfairly favors the rich, almost exclusively so, and fails to spread prosperity".
"The rich in America have little to complain about," he carps. "The distribution of wealth is skewed, and levels of inequality are now higher than at any time since the Gilded Age."


Obama cites data showing a yawning gap between the income of the average worker and the wealthiest 1%. He thinks it's government's job to step in and close it — "for purposes of fairness" — by soaking the rich, among other leftist nostrums.
"Between 1971 and 2001," he complains, "while the median wage and salary income of the average worker showed literally no gain, the income of the top hundredth of a percent went up almost 500%."

But such a snapshot comparison would be meaningful only if America were a caste society, in which the people making up one income group remained static over time.
Of course that's not the case. The composition of the rich and poor in this country is in constant flux, as the income distribution changes dramatically over relatively short periods. Few are "stuck" in poverty, or have a "lock" on wealth.
Obama would discover this if only he'd put down his class-warfare manuals and look closely at the IRS' own data.


Barrack Obama the lawyer-organizer could use a crash course in economics. His economic plan's assumptions, based on long-discredited Marxist theories, are wildly wrongheaded.
President Kennedy understood that a growing economy is like a rising tide that "lifts all boats." Obama, on the other hand, thinks some are lifted and others lowered, as if the economy were a system of locks operated by a cabal of evil capitalists.
He also fails to understand how taxes change behavior. He thinks raising taxes on the most productive members of society won't "curb incentives to work or invest." Even TV news anchor Charlie Gibson knows better.
During a primary debate, the ABC host took Obama to task for proposing a doubling in the capital gains tax. History shows, he pointed out, that raising the cap gains rate actually ends up costing the government revenue".

Obama, who never admits he was or is wrong responded with this: "Well, Charlie," he argued, "what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness." My comment is what is fair about confiscation o a man's hard earned money to give it to some one else? Who needs Robin Hood? We need a President!
source:IBD editorials