WHO DOES THE AMERICAN MEDIA WANT TO WIN IN THE MIDDLE EAST?

I believe president elect is either making a really bad mistake, or showing his animus for USA /Israel long standing relationship, by sending emissaries to "dialog" with Hamas.
It has been the policy of the United States to not have any kind of diplomatic relation with terrorists groups or countries.This is a policy re-enforced by the belief and fact that terrorists cannot be trusted to back up anything they say or promise other than to wage guerrilla warfare against their avowed enemy!

Yet despite the fact that Obama has not even been sworn in as President, he is acting as though he is in charge by sending his representatives to begin dialog with Hamas!

Iran, which provides funding and training to Hamas, the crisis represents an almost existential battle in its quest to become a regional superpower, in which Hamas plays a key role as an extension of Shiite Iranian influence.

"Iran stands to gain more influence if Hamas survives, because Hamas is a direct auxiliary for Iran—an Iranian foothold on the Mediterranean," said Oussama Safa, a Mideast analyst who heads the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies.

"Crushing Hamas in Gaza means chasing out the influence of the Iranians from this part of the region." Why then, if this analyst is correct does Obama want to give more credence to this terrorist group? Could it be an indication that Obama's foreign policy attitude is that the USA can talk fruitfully to any group whose avowed purpose is to destroy Israel and those who support it?

Neville Chamberlain tried this approach with Adolph Hitler in 1933, and failed miserably when Hitler went back on his promise to Chamberlain and invaded the Sudetenland!
The long shadow of Iran, which has much to win or lose from the outcome of the battles raging nearly two weeks after Israel launched its devastating onslaught to stop Hamas rocket attacks.

For too long,the long shadow of Iran, which has much to win or lose from the outcome of the battles raging between Hamas and the IDF nearly two weeks after Israel launched its military advance to stop Hamas rocket attacks on Israel.These attacks have intermittently gone on for months, and there is no way to stop them than to erradicate those doing the launching and those providing cover for the launching. Sometimes it is from momes and sometimes from Mosques and schools. Terrorists who train children to handle rocket launchers and AK-47s have no regard for civilians on either side.

Unfortunately most main stream Media sources here in the USA play up the loss of civilian lives being inflicted by the Israeli attack. This is nothing but propaganda for Hamas, and is a product of the Left wing bias of the Media against Israel. This type of collateral damage was never highlighted when WE fought the Germans in WWII. Bombers fire bombed German cities day and night near the end of the war killing hundreds of thousands in a fiery death in such places as Hamburg and Dresden, but not a peak from the media.

Now the media and the intelligentsia seems to have change their collective minds about killing during war. They highlight the killing of who may or may not be followers of the Hamas terrorists as though this was a new war crime being committed by the Israelis. The Media used this approach during the hard fighting years in Iraq also.
There is no doubt in my mind that the killing of innocent civilians is a tragedy of all wars, but the constant harangue of the numbers killed each day is just another left wing propaganda stunt to undermine support for our only ally in the Middle East!

Hamas, a Sunni fundamentalist movement, is important to Iran, because it helps give Iran credibility among Arabs, said Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, of the Lebanese American University. "Playing the Palestinian card is a way of winning Arab hearts and minds. Hamas is a bridge for Iran to the Arab Sunni world," she said.

She does not rule out the possibility that Iran would open a second front in the Gaza conflict, by encouraging its well-armed Hezbollah ally to take action along Israel's northern border if Hamas appeared to be in danger of collapse.

"If Hamas were to be defeated, it would be a grave blow for Iran," she said.Source:Chicago Tribune

So enough with the bleeding heart stories of civilian casualties. If the IDF fails, there will be millions killed in Israeli cities when groups like Hamas obtain the nuclear weapons that Iran is fabricating while I write this blog!

THE SEMANTICS OF POLITICAL SPEECH

Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, who said: "Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things."

It seems to me that semantics is a big part of PEBO and VPEB have prepared the public for their brand of "Change". In a speech earlier this week vice-president elect Biden said "we are at war" when he was asked about the economic situation in the USA.
Yesterday the President elect Barrack Obama said he intended to "rebuild America". From my viewpoint both of these statements could mean many things to many people. My take on the we are at war statement is that the Obama 750 billion dollar stimulus proposal is a declaration o war against the taxpayers and the wage earners of the USA. The 700 billion dollar stimulus package that president Bush allowed to pass has been a dismal failure, and has set the stage for the devaluation of our dollar. This of course precedes the eventual inflation of goods and services as the dollar value depreciates.

Obama's statement that he intends to rebuild America is even more scary from my viewpoint. His idea and the leftist idea logs who backed him of remaking our Country is to make the Federal Government the main source of our lives from "cradle to grave", This is nothing but Socialism masked as the "savior" needed to rescue a desperate populace. And it is not unfamiliar in the annals of history. Despots like Putin, Hugo Chavez, the Castro brothers, Hitler and Idi Amin to mention just a few, all came to power as "saviors" for people who were in desperate times.

I do not believe that Our Country is in as desperate a condition economically as the Leftist Media and the Obamaites would like you to think it is. There is no doubt many people have lost their jobs, but the Obama stimulus package indicates that he will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. The problem is the jobs will be under the control of the Federal government, not in the free market that would help the economy grow. You say jobs are jobs, but I say jobs that are government jobs must be paid with taxpayer dollars. Jobs in the free enterprise private sector are paid from the profits of the employer and contribute to the tax base and the economic growth of the Country. A big difference!

Another indication that the "rebuilding of America" is not good thing for people who believe the Free Enterprise system and our Constitution are important to the success of our Country. The statement by Rod Emanuel that I quoted at the beginning of this blog indicates that Emanuel's remark is evidence that liberals are now coming out of the closet. They'll no doubt still deny the liberal label, but they'll apologetically embrace liberal policies in a way they wouldn't have before.
And Obama's appointment of a TV personality doctor as Surgeon General is cause for alarm. This Brain Surgeon has no knowledge of bio-terrorism techniques or how to respond to possible pandemics.

Then there is the selection of the new CIA director. As Oliver North said in todays Blog;"From Moscow to Tehran, Caracas to Beijing, London to New Delhi, in virtually every world capital, foreign leaders and their intelligence services are making judgments about the next leader of the Free World. They learned something about his wisdom, seriousness and maturity this week when he picked Leon Panetta, a man with intelligence-deficit disorder, to head the CIA". This sends a message to our enemies, and there are many, that Obama intends to emasculate the CIA. This will certainly reduce the covert abilities of the CIA that has helped keep US safe for the past seven years!

In conclusion the CHANGE seems to me to be more about the same old Clinton Administration officials appearing again with different labels, and the portent of an attack on the power of the Free Enterprise system by replacing it with an expanded role for Federal Government control!

THE AWSOME POWER OF SCARE TACTICS

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

For a few days the president elect has been acting as though he has already taken his place in the Oval Office. Today he is a giving a economic policy speech at a George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia where excerpts from his speech indicate that he is sounding the alarm bells about the state of the economy.
There is no disputing that the economy is in a recession, but the dire forecasts that Obama and his minions are predicting if the Congress and the people do not go along with his stimulus package of over a trillion dollars, that he says "the private sector cannot do what needs to be done".

Still, his remarks shed no new light on the details of his plan that could cost as much as $775 billion over two years. He said little about the unprecedented red ink and rising debt confronting the government, even after spending days reassuring the public and Congress that he is committed to tackling long-term deficits after the economy rebounds

The speech essentially called for "dramatic action" as he attempted to convince taxpayers as well as wary lawmakers that "only government" can supply the short-term boost needed to pull the economy out of recession.

He said that his almost $800 billion dollar package, if not passed, could result in "a bad situation that could become dramatically worse."
Obama warned the unemployment rate could reach double digits and the nation "could lose a generation of potential and promise". The words were hardly reassuring to an already scared to death public!

The problem I have is not only with his scare tactics but with the whole way he and his supporters want us to believe that printing more money and throwing it into the fires of inflation will result in a sound economy.

We already have a trillion dollar debt! A trillion is a $1 followed by 12 zeros. $1,000,000,000,000! "Let me put it this way.If you had a full time job counting to a billion 9-5 regular work days, and you counted by seconds it would take 3 generations of people to count to a billion.A trillion is a thousand billion.It would take 3000 generations (more than humans have had so far existed) to count to a trillion! Source Wikia

On top of a $700 billion financial rescue, a $17 billion auto bailout and the first $150 billion stimulus (that's the one approved right before the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression).
So where does it end?
Obama had said Tuesday he anticipates "trillion-dollar deficits for years to come." But even the cascade of noted economists calling for a big package say the country cannot sustain such deficits much longer.

The national debt already has topped $10 trillion -- or $35,000 per person. And the bigger it gets, the more the country has to pay in interest every year.

"In the end, Beijing is gonna become Obama's banker," said Peter Morici, a University of Maryland business professor who testified at the auto industry hearings in November. Source:WOKV WEB PAGE

In November with his economic team in place, Obama tasked his aides with assembling an ambitious measure to not only swiftly pump money into the battered economy, but also create 2.5 million new jobs, send a tax cut to the poor and middle class, and make massive government investments in energy-saving and other technologies designed to pay for themselves in the long run.

Some senior Democratic lawmakers put the cost of the package as high as $700 billion, a figure Obama's team called premature and several Democratic aides said was unlikely.(note from blogger: now it is 800 and when will it stop growing?

One top Democratic congressional official, speaking on condition of anonymity because talks on the economic rescue measure are ongoing, said in November,it will probably cost between $400 billion and $500 billion over two years.
Well even he was wrong and now it is nearing $800 billion! That is more than 3/4 of a trillion dollars, and Obama says "he will only allow funding for what works"!?

The 700 billion seems to have failed to help stop the downward spiral. Will printing more money that will deflate the value of our dollar help? I BELIEVE IT ONLY DELAYS THE CRASH THAT IS INEVITABLE!

There were 171,478,000 people employed in 1998. In 2008 there were 190,221,00 employed. In 1998 there were 4,484,000 16 years or older unemployed and at the end of November 2008 there were 7,336,00 unemployed. This reflects an unemployment rate at the present time of 6.7%. Not exactly depression type statistics, when you consider the population of this Country has grown from 248.709,80 in 1990 to 305,186,613.Source:United States Census Bureau

We have a population explosion that has taxed the economic conditions in all areas due to the increase of spending for immigrants who have not been able to find year round employment , often due to lack of skills, but that still need medical and other welfare services that tax the economy.

Will a large part of the 3/4 of a trillion dollar package go toward employment of these unskilled people in "make work" government programs like FDR's "WPA."?

In 1933, another new president faced a collapsing economy, and rallied the nation with similar words:

"This nation is asking for action, and action now," said Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his first inaugural address.

Seventy-five years ago, FDR began the New Deal. What was truly new - in fact revolutionary - was his conviction that the federal government had a direct responsibility to create jobs, and to pay for them with tax dollars. Is this a FDR re-do?

At the worst point of the Great Depression, in 1933, one in four Americans who wanted to work was unable to find a job. Further, it was not until 1941, when World War II was underway, that the official unemployment rate finally fell below 10%. IN THOSE DAYS THE NATION WAS LED TO BELIEVE THAT UNEMPLOYMENT WAS UNDER CONTROL!

PRESIDENT BUSH APPEARS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT MEXICAN OPINIONS

Last week, Pennsylvania Republican Congressman Charlie Dent became another influential voice calling on President Bush to pardon two former border patrol agents convicted of shooting an unarmed drug smuggler who was trying to escape across the US-Mexico border. Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are serving more than 10 years each for shooting Osvaldo Davila in the buttocks while he was fleeing from an abandoned van loaded with 750 pounds of marijuana.

So far President Bush has granted 29 pardons for felons. Conspicuous for their absence are two border guards, Compean and Ramos! These are two men who along with hundreds of other men and women who put their lives on the line every time they go on duty. The people who smuggle illegal aliens and DRUGS into the USA across the borders of our border States with Mexico, are dangerous people who carry automatic weapons. They have even been alleged to be accompanied on some occasions with army troops. Even if this is not true, they do not give up easily when cornered by the border agents, and are willing to shoot if challenged.

There is no good reason other than to placate the Mexican authorities and government that president Bush has been cosing up to throughout his term in office to solidify the NAFTA agreements. And only he knows why he allowed these two brave men to be jailed in the first place. If he fails to pardon them before he leaves office he will show his disdain for the protection of our borders, and give further credence to the conspiracy theory that he is more of an Internationalist who dreams of a united USA, Mexico and Canada in a single nation!

He purports to be a devout Christian, and I have no doubt he is. Well the Christian thing to do is to pardon these unjustly jailed border guards, and right a wrong that is a scar on this nations concern for those who wear a police uniform.He does not have a problem with pardoning a member of the mineworkers union who was convicted for his role in bombings at a West Virginia coal mine, a counterfeiter and a bootlegger. Why not pardon two border guards who were doing their job!

SEEING SUNSHINE THROUGH THE STORM OF MADOFF SCHEME

AS A LIFE LONG CONSERVATIVE I WELCOMED THE NEWS THAT THE PONZI SCHEME OF MADOFF PRODUCED SOME FORTUITOUS EVENTS FOR CONSERVATIVES LIKE ME.
The sudden collapse of the Madoff hedge fund, resulted in the revelation that Madoff swindled many clients out of up to $50 billion.Madoff's hedge fund collapse has hurt -- and in some cases fatally wounded -- scores of nonprofit groups and charitable foundations. And it is notable that many of his victims are Leftist organizations.

Madoff is(or was) a heavy donor to Democratic candidates, but his fund also did irreparable harm to the liberal and far-left causes he loves.

At least two major left-leaning charities are closing their doors as a direct consequence of the record-breaking fraud.

The giant Picower Foundation had the misfortune to choose Madoff to manage its more than $1 billion in assets.

The charity has given away more than $189 million since 1999.

A sizable chunk of its funding has gone to abortion groups, including NARAL ($3.2 million), Center for Reproductive Rights ($2.5 million), Planned Parenthood ($2.4 million), and Center for Reproductive Law and Policy ($625,000).

Picower Foundation gave $2.9 million to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a public interest law firm that uses politically skewed definitions of racism to indoctrinate children while smearing conservatives who question racial preference programs. The foundation also gave $200,000 to Project Vote (a.k.a. Voting for America), an affiliate of the radical Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

Another affected charity is the JEHT Foundation, which said it expects to close down in January because its benefactors invested in Madoff’s hedge fund. JEHT, an acronym that stands for Justice, Equality, Human dignity and Tolerance, is a reliable funder of far left causes and has given away more than $72 million in grants since heiress and Democratic donor Jeanne Levy-Church founded it in 2000.

JEHT gave $1.7 million to the ACLU and its foundation, along with $839,500 to the ultra-leftist public interest law firm, the Center for Constitutional Rights. CCR helped to convince the Supreme Court in Boumediene v. Bush (2008) to confer habeas corpus rights for the first time in history on alien enemies detained abroad by the U.S. military in wartime. The decision gives terrorists a green light to manipulate our justice system and flout the well-established laws of civilized warfare.

The Madoff scandal has also ended Madoff’s personal philanthropic efforts.

Madoff Family Foundation, which reported assets of $19.1 million at the end of 2007, has given $110,000 to the anti-poverty Robin Hood Foundation since 2003.

Newsman Tom Brokaw and Children's Defense Fund president and Hillary Clinton pal Marian Wright Edelman sit on the Robin Hood board. The liberal foundation has given ACORN $821,000. George Soros's Soros Fund Charitable Foundation gave the Robin Hood Foundation a $9.8 million community development grant in 2000.

JEHT gave $250,000 to the American Institute for Social Justice, an ACORN affiliate. The Saul Alinsky-inspired Institute trains community organizers and in recent years has served as a shadowy financial clearinghouse, directing $9 million to ACORN and two of its other affiliates. Source:The American Spectator

It is also pertinent to note that JEHT gave $55,000 to Nan Aron’s Alliance for Justice, a group that systematically distorts conservative judges' records in an effort to block their elevation to higher courts. The Alliance helped to torpedo the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork in 1987 and nearly succeeded in "borking" Clarence Thomas in 1991. More recently, the group fought President Bush's nominations of Charles Pickering and Priscilla Owen to federal courts. You see my son there is a God after all!

THE NEW HOME OF THE AMERICAN COMMUNISTS?

For a long time I have felt that the Ecology movement was the new religion for secularists. The Internet even has a web page for "The Church Of Deep Ecology", but lately I have begun to feel that many, not all, Ecology leaders and fellow travelers are members of the resurgent American Communist Party!

This opinion has been reinforced by an article in the Friday edition of Investors Business Daily. The article is entitled "Green Comes Clean".
"In a letter addressed to President-elect Obama and his wife, Michelle, James Hansen, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, makes an appeal for a carbon tax, ostensibly as a means for cutting emissions of carbon dioxide, a gas that's allegedly causing a dangerous greenhouse effect and warming trend.

Hansen suggests that the tax be levied "at the well-head or port of entry" from where it "will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels."

This tax will have "near-term, mid-term, and long-term" effects on "lifestyle choices," Hansen acknowledges. But he seems unconcerned about how such coercion will rearrange the lives and manage the behavior of a people who should be free of state coercion.

Acting either out of boldness or desperation, Hansen goes on to reveal the environmentalist Lefts deeper ambition: a collectivist redistribution of wealth. He recommends that the carbon tax be returned to the public in "equal shares on a per capita basis."

It appears the veil of deception has been lifted. For the past four years we have heard that all the Ecologist wanted was cleaner air, water and prevention of "global warming".
Now it appears the real reasons for the movements attraction for Goreites scam of Carbon Credits is to redistribute the wealth of our nation.
The Ecology "cult" or perhaps I should say, Ecocosophy was articulated over thirty years ago by Norwegian Philosopher, Arne Naesss. He called his movement, Ecophilosophy.

The longer-range, older originators of the movement included writers and activists like Henry David Thoreau, John Muir and Aldo Leopold; more mainstream awareness was closer to the "wise-use" conservation philosophy pioneered by Gifford Pinchot.The long-range deep approach involves redesigning our whole systems based on values and methods that truly preserve the ecological and cultural diversity of natural systems.This leaves little room for our way of life as we know it today, I believe.


In his talk and papers Naess explained the difference between the short-term, shallow and the long-range deep ecology movements in broad terms. He explained that the distinctive aspects of the deep ecology movement is its recognition of the inherent value of all other living beings, and of the inherent worth of diversity of all kinds. This awareness is used to shape environmental policies and actions. Those who work for social changes based on this recognition are motivated by love of Nature as well as for humans. They try to be caring in all their dealings. They recognize that we cannot go on with industrial culture’s business as usual. We must make fundamental changes in basic values and practices or we will destroy the diversity and beauty of the world, and its ability to support diverse human cultures. Source:Alan Dregson "Ecocentrism Home Page


Karl Marx and Engels believed that Capitalism took advantage of the working man, and to level the "playing field" the elimination of private property, repudiation of religion and the redistribution of wealth was the only way to establish a "just" society.

In the first chapter of The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels argued that human history was best understood as a continuing struggle between a small exploiting class and a larger exploited class. At any point in time, the exploiting class controlled the means of production and profited by employing the labor of the masses. In the capitalism that developed alongside democracy, Marx and Engels saw a progressive concentration of the powers of production placed in the hands of a privileged few.
According to Marx and Engels, this was the internal contradiction of capitalism that would spell its doom.( Blogger note: It is the taxation by the unfair internal revenue system and inflation caused by the government "printing" money that has hurt the middle class, I believe)
At the end of The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels wrote that this transfer of power could only take place by force. Marx later retreated from this position and wrote that it was possible for this radical change to take place peacefully.Source: Law Encyclopedia,"Communism" And I believe we are on the peaceful "slippery slope"!

In late 19th century, the terms "socialism" and "communism" were often used interchangeably. However, Marx and Engels argued that communism would not emerge from capitalism in a fully developed state, but would pass through a "first phase" in which most productive property was owned in common,( the government) but with some class differences remaining. The "first phase" would eventually evolve into a "higher phase" in which class differences were eliminated, and a state was no longer needed. Lenin frequently used the term "socialism" to refer to Marx and Engels' supposed "first phase" of communism and used the term "communism" interchangeably with Marx and Engels' "higher phase" of communism.
I believe we Americans are rapidly approaching the first stage of the road to communism.

WE have government bailouts that effectively establish a permanent presence of government in the mortgage, banking and brokerage areas of the private economy.
The Supreme Court has made it legal for governments to confiscate Private property, in direct opposition to the Constitution. The city government of New London, Conn., has run upon hard times, with residents leaving and its tax base eroding. Private developers offered to build a riverfront hotel, private offices and a health club in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood. But there was a bit of a problem. Owners of 15 homes in the stable middle-class Fort Trumbull neighborhood refused the city's offer to buy their homes, but no sweat. The city turned over its power of eminent domain -- its ability to take private property for public use -- to the New London Development Corporation, a private body, to take the entire neighborhood for private development. The city condemned the homeowners' properties. The homeowners sued and lost in the state court, and last week they lost in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The framers of our Constitution gave us the Fifth Amendment in order to protect us from government property confiscation. The Amendment reads in part: "[N]or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Which one of those 12 words is difficult to understand? The framers recognized there might be a need for government to acquire private property to build a road, bridge, dam or fort. That is a clear public use that requires just compensation, but is taking one person's private property to make it available for another's private use a public purpose? Justice John Paul Stevens says yes, arguing, "Promoting economic development is a traditional and long-accepted function of government."Source: Walter Williams

The Russian Revolution of 1917 occurred because Russia was in a period of depression. Since entering the war(WWI) they suffered huge losses, not only by the loss of millions of lives, but also the government had lost most of the support it had from the lower class. Most people that had migrated to the cities in search of work during the war-factories boom, Russia's currency had lost its value to the point where people were burning it for a source of heat rather than a source of buying power. Thousands of people were rioting to be fed by their government.

If the USA government keeps printing money and investing taxpayers yet unearned money to bail out favorite industries like the UAW's Big 3. The inevitable result will be hyperinflation and a near worthless dollar.

All the above scenarios are putting in place a point of tipping for the public. Will we choose Democracy or go the way of the Russians in 1917?