Today the Senate of the United States will have less than eight hours to debate a proposed Bill that will effectively turn over one-sixth of our economy to the Federal Government from the Free enterprise system.


Tonight the Democrats who have a majority of 60 senators will start the process of steam rolling this Socialist tax filled Bill over the objections of a majority of the American public who have expressed their disdain for the so-called “Government Option”.

Some of the Senators actually believe that they are doing something good, but unfortunately the majority of the “princely” elected representatives are doing the will of the “messiah” Obama!

And any thinking person who has read either of the books written by Obama and studied his legislative record and history in Illinois before he clawed his way into the U.S. Senate, will realize that we have as president a man who believes the Constitution is flawed because it limits what the Federal Government can do “and does not address the re-distribution of wealth”!

Where has this philosophy of government come from? I and many scholars who have studied the progress of the Leftists in the USA note that many of the ideas that Obama
has employed since he took over the Oval Office came from the same place where Obama took his pre-law education, Columbia University.

The following is an article about the two Phd.’s from Columbia who developed the “scheme” that I believe is the road map for Obama and his sycophants.

Social theorist, welfare rights activist, and political science professor Frances Fox Piven was born in 1932 in Calgary, Alberta. Raised in New York, she was naturalized in 1953, the same year she received a BA in city planning from the University of Chicago. After receiving an MA (1956) and a Ph.D. (1962) from that institution, she moved to New York where she worked as a city planner and then as a research associate for one of the country’s first antipoverty agencies, Mobilization for Youth (MFY) on New York’s Lower East Side.

In 1965 Piven and her MFY colleague Richard Cloward began a career of formulating the theoretical underpinnings of anti-poverty and welfare rights movements with the publication of a paper entitled “Mobilizing the Poor: How It Can Be Done”.

Cloward and Piven ”apply social analysis to organizing strategy” to find ways to take advantage of changing social, economic, and political conditions to benefit the poor. Their work was instrumental in the founding of such organizations as the National Welfare Rights Organization and HumanSERVE, a voter-registration project that culminated in the “Motor-Voter” Act of 1994. Piven has taught at Columbia University (1966-72), Boston University (1972-82), and the City University of New York (1982-). With Cloward, she has co-authored numerous articles and nine books including Regulating the Poor: The Functions of Public Welfare (1971), Poor People’s Movements (1977), and Why Americans Don’t Vote (1988).

There is a liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress – with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why? One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.Just a few examples are the Social Security , Medicaid and Medicare plans that are either bankrupt or on the verge of bankruptcy!

Then there is the Post Office, Amtrak and the failure of the Stimulus Bill to stem unemployment that is now at 10.2%!

I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent – the failure is deliberate. Don’t laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer Saul Alinsky:
“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

Their strategy( and apparently Obama and the Congressional Democrats)is to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation’s wealth.

In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of “crisis” they were trying to create:
By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.

No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:

1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.

Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their “rights.” According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, “one person was on the welfare rolls… for every two working in the city’s private economy.”

Transferring the Health Care industry from the Free Enterprise system will create thousands if not millions of Federal and State administrators,aka beauracrats, replacing decision makers in the Insurance Industry and the Medical system that are now working in the private fee for service sector!

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: CLOWARD-PIVENS, CONGRESS, health care bill, obama, socialism

AFRICAN-AMERICANS SHOULD BE PRO-LIFE

I moved to South Florida in the late fifties, and was witness to the massive invasion of Cubans that were fleeing from the Communist Castro oppressive take over of Cuba. The thousands of young men and women arrived here with nothing but the clothes on their backs, and were desperate to find work, any kind of work to keep from starving. Many had relatives who had he foresight to leave Cuba before Castro took over, and they provided many with shelter, but many were put in camps for refugees under the massive bridge in downtown Miami. At the time the wave of Cuban immigrants hit South Florida. The bellhop, waiters, parking attendants and all service personnel were African-Americans. But the Cubans were willing to work for less money, and gradually they took most of the Hotel jobs.




Fast forward to the 1980s and the Mexicans seeking work and a better way of life started the illegal crossing of the borders of California, Arizona and Texas. At first it was a trickle but soon became a wave that has grown to and estimated 12 million illegals that successfully crossed the border into the USA! These mexicans also were willing to work for less than Americans in the fields and the many businesses that did not require particular skills.



What has this got to do with the pro-life issue? Well, many Blacks soon became a minority group that accepted abortion as a way to keep from having children despite their pastors protestations that abortion was wrong. Although many joined White people who embraced the concept of being a welfare mother who lived off the State and Federal government subsides. AS a result Hispanics outnumber blacks as the largest minority group in the USA for the first time since the government began counting the nation’s population more than two centuries ago. The U.S. Census Bureau’s anouncement confirmed what many have treated as fact for some time. Even so, it’s a symbolic milestone for a nation whose history has been dominated by black-white racial dynamics. Increased racial and ethnic diversity is adding a new dimension to everything from product marketing to political campaigning. There are 38.8 million Hispanics in the USA, according to the latest Census Bureau estimates released Wednesday. The figures, as of July 1, show a 9.8% increase since the Census was taken in April 2000. The U.S. population grew 2.5% to 288.4 million in the same period. Hispanics accounted for half of the national increase. Non-Hispanic blacks, including people who say they’re black and another race, grew at a much slower rate than Hispanics, up 3.1%, to 36.6 million. Hispanics make up 13% of the nation’s population. The number of Asians also surged. They’re up 9% to 13.1 million. The population gains by Hispanics reflect a society that has already embraced Spanish TV and election ballots in Spanish.



The Hispanic population is soaring because of immigration and higher birth rates. The above illustrates the clout that Hispanics have in Washington. Including the drive for amnesty! While the Hispanics have grown in numbers the Blacks have joined the genocide that is abortion. The following is a report printed in CNSNews.com today by a Black female gynecologist, “(CNSNews.com) – Abortion kills more black Americans than the seven leading causes of death combined, according to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 2005, the latest year for which the abortion numbers are available. Abortion killed at least 203,991 blacks in the 36 states and two cities (New York City and the District of Columbia) that reported abortions by race in 2005, according to the CDC. During that same year, according to the CDC, a total of 198,385 blacks nationwide died from heart disease, cancer, strokes, accidents, diabetes, homicide, and chronic lower respiratory diseases combined. These were the seven leading causes of death for black Americans that year. A total of 49 jurisdictions reported their abortion numbers for 2005 to the CDC. These included all 50 states–except California, Louisiana, and New Hampshire–and New York City and the District of Columbia. Of these 49 jurisdiction, only 36 states plus New York City and the District of Columbia reported the number of abortions by race. Of these 36 states, Georgia reported the largest number of abortions–18,325–among African-Americans. Idaho and Montana reported the fewest, 16 and 17 respectively. Among the large states not reporting abortions by race–and thus where the number of blacks killed by abortions is not included in the national total of 203,991–are California, Florida, Illinois and the rest of New York state outside of New York City. According to the CDC, the total of 203,991 blacks killed by abortion in 2005 also does not include those aborted by “private physicians’ procedures.”



Every year since 1969, the CDC has amassed abortion data by state or area of occurrence, requesting information each year from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City. The CDC attempts to collect data on abortions by the age, race and marital status of the women who undergo them as well as the type of abortion procedure. In 2005, a total of 820,151 legal abortions were performed in the 49 jurisdiction that reported abortions to the CDC, according to the “Abortion Surveillance” report, which is published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, or MMWR, for Nov. 28, 2008. (Scroll up to top of report) The report states, “Approximately 1 in 5 U.S. pregnancies have ended in abortion,” and also notes some limitations on the data: “The overall number, ratio, and rate of abortions are conservative estimates; the total numbers of legal induced abortions provided by central health agencies and reported to the CDC for 2005 were probably lower than the numbers actually performed.” The report states that there were 203,991 blacks killed by abortion, which comprises 35.5 percent of all abortions reported for that year.



Rev. Clenard H. Childress, Jr., founder of BlackGenocide.org, told CNSNews.com that according to numbers gleaned from statistics provided by the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion group, 1,784 blacks are aborted each day. Also, he notes on his Web site that three out of five African-American women will obtain an abortion. Childress said the information and sources on his Web site have never been challenged by abortion-access supporters. “This is because they can see that themselves, and they know them probably to be far worse than we’re reporting. The facts come from the pro-abort/pro-choice community,” he said. “You want to go to a reliable source where people can’t dismiss what you’re saying,” Childress said. “Yet the Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, Urban League, and the National Action Committee of Al Sharpton fail abysmally to report not only the decimation but the health ramifications which are questionably very pertinent and provable,” said Childress. “It would be one thing if we were talking about something hypothetically, but these are actual empirical proofs. … We simply want the health issues of abortion to be discussed,” Childress added. Time for Blacks to decide that Right to Life is good for political clout if not just for the moral travesty that abortion is to the most unprotected children in the USA. A child in the mother’s womb!



Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: abortion, AFRICAN-AMERICANS, HISPANICS, politics, STATISTICS

IT IS TIME TO ADMIT WE HAVE A LIAR IN CHIEF AS POTUS

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

Thursday, November 19, 2009

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” .GEORGE ORWELL

We expect and receive grandiose statements, promises that the person making them never can make during political campaigns. The truth is lost in the quest to win the votes of the electorate.

But once the campaign is over, we expect our elected representatives to talk straight to us. No lies are accepted. Except it appears from president Obama and his very large “inner circle”.

The following are direct quotes from the President within the last 18 months. Some I have commented on, the others, as they say at Harvard Law, res ipso loquitur.

1) ”…not because I believe in bigger government — I don’t — not because I’m not mindful of the massive debt we’ve inherited — I am.” Speech to Congress, February 24, 2009

2) “And that is why I have ordered the closing of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and will seek swift and certain justice for captured terrorists…” Speech to Congress, February 24, 2009

3) “My administration has also begun to go line by line through the federal budget in order to eliminate wasteful and ineffective programs.” I wonder if the President knows he doesn’t have a line item veto.

4) “My immediate task is making sure that the second half of that money, $350 billion, is spent properly. That’s my first job.” Press conference February 9, 2009, talking about TARP money.

5) ”It also contains an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability, so that every American will be able to go online and see where and how we’re spending every dime. What it does not contain, however, is a single pet project, not a single earmark, and it has been stripped of the projects members of both parties found most objectionable.” Press conference February 9, 2009 talking about his own economic bill.

6) “Second is recognition of the limits of the judicial role, an understanding that a judge’s job is to interpret, not make law, to approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice…” I thought about putting this first because he was introducing Sotomayor who is on tape saying judges make policy, among other things.

7) “It’s not just enough to change the players. We’ve gotta change the game.” He has appointed over 150 recycled Clintionistas

”I opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. It should be repealed and I will vote for its repeal on the Senate floor. I will also oppose any proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gays and lesbians from marrying.” Either this is a lie or his later position where he opposes gay marriage, take your pick for number eight.

9) “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.” In reference to Rev. Wright 42 days before he disowned him.

10) “To those Americans whose support I have yet to earn: I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President, too.”

Here’s a stimulus success story: In Arizona’s 15th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that’s what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says. The only problem is that there is no 15th district!
There are only eight (8) Congressional districts in the state of Arizona!
Rep. David Obey, D-Wisc, who chairs the powerful House appropriations Committee, issued a paper statement demanding that the recovery.gov Web site be updated.

“The inaccuracies on recovery.gov that have come to light are outrageous and the Administration owes itself, the Congress, and every American a commitment to work night and day to correct the ludicrous mistakes.”

Obama and Democratic leaders say that wiping out waste and fraud in Medicare, including the elimination of more than $100 billion in government subsidies for the Medicare Advantage program in which private insurers supplement standard Medicare coverage, will reduce government health care costs by several hundred billion dollars.

HOW CAN WE BELIEVE OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED CONGRESS WHEN THEY SAY THE HEALTH CARE BILL WILL SAVE MONEY. However, the The federal government made $98 billion in improper payments in fiscal 2009, and we still have six weeks to go in 2009!

The 2009 total up to date for improper payments — from outright fraud to misdirected reimbursements due to factors such as an illegible doctor’s signature — was a 37.5 percent increase over the $72 billion in 2008, according to figures provided by Peter Orszag, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Yet anotther one of Obama’s campaign promises was he would cut waste and fraud to balance the budget and eliminate the deficit he inherited from Bush. Well It’s another record-high for the U.S. National Debt which today topped the $12-trillion mark. Divided evenly among the U.S. population, it amounts to $38,974.34 for every man, woman and child.

Technically, the debt hit the new high yesterday, but it was posted on the Treasury Department website just after 3:00 p.m. ET today. The exact calculation of the debt is a 16-digit tongue-twister and red-ink tsunami:.

The increase in the deficit and debt is attributed to government spending outpacing revenue – both exacerbated by the recession and the government response to it – including hundreds of billions in bailouts and stimulus spending and tax cuts along with decreased tax revenues due to rising unemployment

And there is another promise that Obama made that was broken. He promised that if the Stimulus bill was passed the unemployment would not exceed 8.5%. It is 10.2%!.

Mr. Obama has said he hopes the health care plan pending in Congress will serve to curb the growth in the debt by reducing the amount government spends on health care. But it’s a claim disputed by critics who say it will have the opposite effect.

Remember when the president, as a candidate, promised to post all bills online so we could read them first?

Remember when he promised transparency in all legislation? No more closed-door deals?

Remember when he promised to put government meetings with lobbyists online for everyone to see?

Did you remember he made all those broken promises — and more — in less than two minutes of the same speech? (And, actually, if they hadn’t applauded so much, he could have done it in under a minute flat.)

Peter Andrew the author of “Soda Head” lists 14 lies that Obama told when he had a press conference on his Health Care proposal.

President Barack Obama told no fewer than 14 healthcare lies during his press conference on the “ObamaCare nightmare.” From the Official Obama Administration Scandals List…

1.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 1 7/22/9 – Twice during his press conference, Obama lied saying he inherited from President Bush a $1.3-trillion federal budget deficit. Not true. On July 13th, we reported the deficit had just topped $1-trillion for the first time ever. That is Obama’s deficit. Bush never had a deficit anywhere near $1.3-trillion. Does Obama mean instead that the budget plan would have maybe created such a deficit for him in his own term? He’s certainly not wording it that way! For Obama to say so is an outright lie. Even the Associated Press noted: “Obama is…proposing a budget that assumes a jaw-dropping deficit of $1.75 trillion this year, a quadruple increase from the year before.” – More fuzzy math from this socialist administration.

2.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 2 7/22/9 Obama makes the outrageous claim that the USA is “no healthier than any other nation” despite the money we spend on healthcare. Clearly an unsubstantiated claim.

3.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 3 7/22/9 Obama says the “biggest driving force behind the federal deficit is the skyrocketing costs of Medicare and Medicaid.” Not True. Fox News reported on July 13th the real causes for Obama’s huge deficit: “the huge deficit is caused by, “the huge sum the government has spent to combat the recession and financial crisis, combined with a sharp decline in tax revenues. Paying for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also is a major factor.”

4.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 4 7/22/9 Obama repeated his pledge that his health care plan “won’t add to the deficit. And I mean it!” Later he even added his plan is “designed to lower it!” – So what of the Congressional Budget Office’s conclusion that the House bill does add to the deficit? Democrats and the Obama administration argue that the $245 billion included for doctors — the approximate 10-year cost of adjusting Medicare reimbursement rates so physicians don’t face big annual pay cuts — does not have to be counted in the overall cost of the health care bill. Their only in Washington reasoning is that they already decided to exempt it from congressional “pay-as-you-go” rules that require new programs to be paid for. In other words, it doesn’t have to be paid for because they decided it doesn’t have to be paid for“!!!!!

5.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 5 7/22/9 Obama says his plan “lowers healthcare expenses.” The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says that’s not true. How long until he starts firing the CBO guys just like the inspectors generals he has canned?

6.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 6 7/22/9 Obama says his plan will, “slow the growth of healthcare expenses.” What growth?! You just said it is going to lower the expenses! Apparently there will be growth in expenses just like the CBO said this plan would do.

7.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 7 7/22/9 Obama says the Obama care plan will “improve health care for seniors.” Not true. Rationing care means some get it and some don’t. Those with better chances (younger people) will get the care, the seniors won’t. Also, Obama says he’ll save money by getting rid of “things that don’t make you healthier.” HE gets to decide what those things are, not seniors or geriatric doctors!

8.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 8 7/22/9 Obama lies (David Axelrod repeated the lie on 7/23/9) saying his healthcare proposal “promotes choice.” wrong. The plan eliminates choice by 2013. Those seeking new health insurance will have no choice at all in 2013. They will HAVE TO go with the government-run, socialist healthcare plan. See the 7/21/9 scandal on the list where he said he’s “not familiar” with that part of the plan!!

9.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 9 7/22/9 Obama has the audacity to claim that he’ll pay for 2/3rds of his $1.5-Trillion healthcare plan by realizing “savings” from the fact the government will run healthcare!!! Has the government ever saved us a dime running anything?! What makes him think he can do so now? $600 hammer anyone?

10.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 10 7/22/9 Obama was dishonest with the american people when he claimed the “debt and deficit are deep concerns of mine.” We have demonstrated his deficit deception here. Democrats no longer care about deficits. Even the Associated Press noted: “Obama is not simply proposing a budget that assumes a jaw-dropping deficit of $1.75 trillion this year, a quadruple increase from the year before. He’s trying to redirect strong currents in American society.”

11.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 11 7/22/9 Obama used his own “new math” to claim he reduced the deficit! He said doing nothing would mean a budget deficit of $9.3-Trillion over ten years, something he can’t possibly know. But, he said with his changes it will only be $7.1 trillion in ten years. He is already up to $1-trillion in the first year (and climbing rapidly). So, how does he claim that it will go down so dramatically while he increases healthcare spending? CBS News Chip Reed asked him about it at an earlier press conference (click here to see the video) basically “asking what about years 6, 7, 8 and 9 of his budget when the deficits keep going up, up, up. The president said “we’ll make new budgets by then,” and basically not to worry about it since it is so far away!!” – So, the President is using fictitious future budget cuts from a time when he may not even be president to claim that he is reducing the budget deficit! More blazing deficit hypocrisy. We have been Leading the way Right on this story. Check out what we said on 3/21/9.

12.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 12 7/22/9 Obama again used his own “new math” to make the bizarre claim that he has “cut spending.” It’s more of the “Obama Gap” we reported on April 21st: “addressing congress he promised to get rid of government programs that don’t work and cut out that spending, then he proposes the biggest increase in government spending ever, now he asks his cabinet to cut $100-million in spending. He wants to increase the size of government to $4-Trillion a year, and asked for a cut FROM HIS HUGE BUDGET REQUEST of 1/35,000th of the amount he wants to spend.” – And that is how he claims he has “cut” spending…he cut the size of his gigantic increase.

13.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 13 7/22/9 Answering a reporter question from a very hot news babe (who was that lady?), Obama said he wasn’t actually lying about having health care meetings on C-Span. He had said in the past these types of meetings were held in secret but in his new era of transparency, he would put them on C-Span. The reporter babe saw right through that. Obama says it wasn’t a lie though because he put the first meeting about healthcare on C-Span. The rest were all held in secret. Uhmmmmmmmmm….As O’Reilly said, “I have a master’s degree from Harvard and I don’t understand what the president is trying to say.”

14.ObamaCare Press Conference Lie # 14 – THE BIG ONE 7/22/9 Obama repeated his anti-Jim DeMint lie that the health care debate is “Not about me.” The Fox News Ticker earlier reported that U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley told them the president told a group of democrats, “You’re trying to destroy my Presidency!” The hot-headed response came after the president learned a “large number” of centrist democrats are against his socialist healthcare plan. It really is all about him.

OTHER SOURCES: CALVIN WOODWARD OF THE AP



Tags: potus quotes lies comments

WILL SOCIALISM REPLACE CAPITALISM IN THE USA?“

Socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the object worship of the state. It will prescribe for every one where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say. Socialism is an attack on the right to breathe freely. No socialist system can be established without a political police. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance”. – Winston Churchill


Obama’s decision not to build the Missile Defense System in Poland and the Czech Republic and his Noble Prize have not yet been comprehended from a philosophical viewpoint. It’s time to do it.
The last turning point similar to the current one happened approximately 400 years ago. The Western European society discovered a new hierarchy of values. Feudalism that valued service and chivalry was replaced with capitalism. Wealth became the measure of success, and everyone was to care about his own pocket only. The cult of money replaced all other values, including religious.

Capitalism turned everything upside down and made people more excited about stuffing their bank accounts than anything else. This system turned out to be extremely efficient in terms of production of goods, services, and comfort. America benefited from the system the most, and decided that the rest of the world has to adopt it as well. If some underdeveloped countries are unable to appreciate the benefits of capitalism, they should be forced to do it.
Meanwhile, philosophers say that capitalism is driven not by hard cash, but rather, striving for hard cash. It’s driven not by the production of goods, but rather, striving for consumption of these goods.
If everyone had these values, the “dog-eat-dog” principle would be the major principal in the world history. But America failed to do it. There are plenty of “underdeveloped” people in the world who continue to cherish spiritual values. There are not that many chances left to force them into worshiping money since these “underdeveloped” people adopt western technology and become stronger. The appeal to adopt American values doesn’t work either. Why would we adopt the system if the system is in crisis? Pragmatic America realized that billions of people are not willing to live in the kingdom of hard cash and decided that it would be better off leaving this kingdom itself. Now the USA is talking about introducing elements of socialism. Source: Pravda

What does Obama’s decision not to build the Eastern European Missile Defense System have to do with all of this? Well, it means that it’s not capitalism that’s undergoing the crisis, but the belief in its high-efficiency. And this, in turn, means that America, the bulwark of capitalism, is no longer the boss of the world. And if it’s not the boss any more, it has to be friends with everybody, including Russia. And it’s America’s turn to offer Russia to push the reset button. Or maybe it’s just tired of imposing its rules on others and felt that friendship is more valuable than money and power? If this is the case, we will soon witness another turning point in the world history. The preceeding article was written by an un-named reporter who wrote the article for Pravda, the Moscow version o the Washington Post and New York Times. The mouth piece for the Russian government.

This article portends the coming of Socialism to the USA not for the reasons my blog will outline, but because the American people have decided that capitalism cannot work. You would expect this from a person who lives and works in a totalitarian Marxist state. But the reference to American’s deciding that capitalism does not work is not the reason why we are racing toward the “nanny” welfare State.

The reasons are because we have a man in the Oval Office that is dedicated to attaining power and total control over the lives of Americans, and has a Congress that appears to be afraid to oppose any thing he and his ideologically committed Leftists who surround him!

If Congress passes the Democrat Bill for Universal health Care that leaves out at least 25 million people, but will add over one trillion dollars to the National debt. We will transform 1/6 th of the USA to government control from the Capitalism free enterprise system in a stoke of the pen!

And waiting in the wings of the Congress is the nail that will put the lid on the coffin that buries the free enterprise system The Cap and Trade Bill! This bill should properly be called the Cap and Tax bill, because it not only will give the Federal government control over our lives more fully. It will place limits on the energy output all walks of life starting with your homes and the industry that provides the engine that makes the Capitalism work.
To support the largesse that the Obama administration is providing to his supporters disguised as a Stimulus. The government is running the printing presses in the Treasury dept on a 24 hour cycle turning out paper money that has diminishing value!

If a miracle does not occur next November in the election that will return the Republicans if not to power to a number that can stop the stampede to Socialism by the Democrats and Obama. WE will be well on our way toward the “cradle to grave” Socialism!

Massive Federal debt( presently at 12.03 trillion$) has to eventually devalue our dollar to a point of collapse and roaring inflation that will allow those who have wanted the “New World Order” to attain their goal. With the collapse of the dollar and the inability of the Federal government to pay its way out of bankruptcy lost, and the destruction of the Free enterprising system that provides the taxes that allow the government to function . The people will grasp for anything or any body who will “save” them, and the United Nations is waiting anxiously in the wings for the demise of our system. The body that is controlled by Leftist Countries like Communist China, Russia and Third World South American and African nations would love to take control of the USA!

A KABUKI DANCE IN BEIJING

Kabuki dance is largely credited to Okuni, a miko (shrine maiden) from the province of Izumo. Her story is shrouded in both legends and truth, but she was famed for her skill in singing and dancing, and also for her beauty.The word kabuki is originally derived from the word kabuki, which literally means “to incline, or tilt to one side”. It also carried a connotation of unorthodoxy, which was disapproved of in 16th century feudal Japan. However, with time, it gradually took on the meaning of “avant-garde”, particularly in relation to kabuki dance’s extravagant, even ludicrous, stage costumes and skits.

In English usage, a Kabuki dance is an activity or drama carried out in real life in a predictable or stylized fashion, reminiscent of the Kabuki style of Japanese stage play. Source: Wikipedia

Following a summit meeting in Beijing on Tuesday, Hu Jintao and Barack Obama also spoke of their commitment to working more closely on other major issues like free trade, rebuilding the global economy and tackling nuclear proliferation.

They also agreed to hold joint talks next year on the sensitive issue of human rights, restarting a long-stalled dialogue on the subject.

Appearing at a joint press conference at the Great Hall of the People, the leaders of China and the US emphasised co-operation between the two powers as the only path to resolving some of the biggest issues facing the world.

In carefully scripted statements, Hu and Obama presented a broadly united front, although they did touch briefly on points of ongoing contention in the fields of trade and human rights.

Frank Sieren, an author on China, said the two leaders still do not trust each other.

“President Hu and Obama looked to me like two wrestlers hugging each other but don’t really get forward or backwards, and they were both kind of careful not to lose their face … they don’t want to press each other too much,”

“I think this is the first kind of meeting in China; they’ve met a few times before. So we have to wait [and see] how this relationship will develop, but they look like two guys who won’t have a barbecue soon.”

Hu warned of the need to “oppose and reject protectionism in all its manifestations” – hinting at growing concern in Beijing over recent moves by the US to impose tariffs and raise duties on some Chinese imports.

IN THE TYPE OF DOUBLE TALK THAT WE ARE ACCUSTOMED TO HEAR FROM OBAMA. Here is what Obama had to say about China’s horrid history of human rights violations.

Obama meanwhile reiterated his comments a day earlier about the importance of universal respect for human rights – long an issue of friction between the US and China.

Never the less, the US president said both nations’ joint interests far outweighed their differences, adding that the US-China relationship “goes far beyond any single issue”.

“I do not believe that one country’s success must come at the expense of another,” he said.

The addresses by both leaders were carefully worded, with no opportunity for questions in the joint news conference.

Looking ahead to Copenhagen, Obama said he had agreed with his Chinese counterpart that they should aim for global pact that has “immediate operational effect”.

This kind of comprehensive agreement would be an important step forward in our effort to rally the world around a solution to our climate challenge,” the US president said.

As evidence of joint efforts to reduce emissions, Obama pointed to a recent agreement between the US and China to create a joint clean energy research centre.

He added that both he and the Chinese president had agreed to take “significant” action to reduce carbon emissions, but gave no specific targets.Thus the Kabuki dance in Beijing!

”As the two largest consumers and producers of energy, there can be no solution to this challenge without the efforts of both China and the United States,” Obama said.

From the Chinese side, Hu reiterated Beijing’s insistence on the different “responsibilities” rich and poor nations have in addressing climate change. So, essentially he wants the USA to reduce its way of life and production, and let China keep churning out pollution!

But he added that China had agreed on the importance of working with other states “to help produce positive outcomes from the Copenhagen conference.”He will talk the talk, but will not walk the walk!!

Hu dedicated much of his statement to the ongoing uncertainty in the global economy, saying that while there was some cause for optimism, “the foundation for recovery is not firmly established”.

With that in mind, he said, it was important for both sides to avoid any moves towards protectionism.

In other words he expects that the USA will continue to accept cheap and sometime adulterated drugs, toys and trinkets as well as shoes, caps ,t-shirts and every sport you can think of wearing apparel from the Communist country that pays those who make the goods slave wages!

For his part, Obama said the two leaders had agreed that a sustained recovery depended on both countries following a strategy of more “balanced” economic growth. Let me translate this for you. If we pass Cap and Trade the USA will have no economic growth and that will make him and his Marxist friends happy!

That strategy, he said, would be one “where America saves more, spends less, reduces our long-term debt and where China makes adjustments across a broad range of policies to rebalance its economy and spur domestic demand”.In other words, do nothing concrete!!

Speaking after their meeting, Obama said China’s president had also agreed that Iran must “provide assurance to the international community that its nuclear programme is peaceful and transparent”.

”Iran has an opportunity to present and demonstrate its peaceful intentions but if it fails to take advantage of this opportunity, it will face consequences,” he said.

Hu made no specific mention of “consequences”, but said it was essential that the row over Iran’s nuclear programme was resolved through negotiations.

Communist China has large and growing economic ties with Iran and has been reluctant to support a tougher approach to restrict Iran’s nuclear programme. So once again no action all talk!!.

On sensitive Chinese domestic issues, Hu also called on the US to respect China’s “core interests” – a term that usually implies ending support for Taiwan and for the Dalai Lama, and his Tibetan government-in-exile.

Obama, in response, said that the US stood committed to the “one China principle, but urged China to restart talks with the Dalai Lama’s representatives. No mention by POTUS of the long-standing pact between Taiwan and aggression from Chinese Communists. The Bush administration had the 7th Fleet stationed in Japan and patrolling the Taiwan straights to ward off any attack by China. I guess that just changed!!

The Real Reason For The Trial in New York of Khalid Shaikh Mohammad


Monday, November 16, 2009

Given the availability of military commissions to try KSM and his co-terrorists., I ask why Obama has chosen to bring them to trial in federal court in New York. One searches in vain in Saturday’s Washington Post story on the decision for an explanation. And do not forget that the orders to the attorney General come directly from the White House in such a controversial matter!

No consideration of justice, history or tradition weighs in favor of treating KSM . as a criminal defendant. Against the predictable negative risks and negative consequences, advocates of Obama’s decision offer stupid considerations of public relations. Is this a trail or a public relations skit to make foreign governments like us??

Judging Obama’s treatment of KSM . by its predictable effects rather than its apparent intentions, one arrives at a harsh conclusion. If Obama sought to subvert fundamental American institutions or to confuse the understanding of the American people( upon both of which America’s future depends) he would proceed as announced.

It has been suggested that the Obama administration views KSM as its” allies” in its war against the Bush administration. Which seems to me to an ongoing vendetta!

Obama expects them to make their treatment by the Bush administration, real and imagined, the centerpiece of their defense, with the possible result that Bush, Cheney, and others may be indicted as war criminals by European countries or international courts, thereby satisfying the far left of the Democratic Party, which Obama represents.Think about it! The ACLU and most Leftists believe this lie already!


Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his terrorist co-conspirators ( the perpetrators of 9/11) are now afforded all the protections to which American law entitles them. Now Obama, to whom the decision must be attributable, regardless of the pretense that the buck stops with Eric Holder.Has chosen to bring KSM and his terrorist friends from “Gitmo”. to federal court in New York for a civilian trial as though he and his colleagues were common criminals. Why? Doing so carries with it certain necessary consequences and obvious risks that have already been the subject of informed comment:

Here are the risks and fallacies of trying this trash in New York!
1. Obama confuses the commission of crimes with acts of war. The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon constituted acts of war.

2. Obama cloaks KSM et al. with all the constitutional protections to which American citizens are entitled under the United States Constitution.

3. Obama affords KSM et al. a public forum for the waging of their war by other means.

4. Those who apprehended and detained KSM et al. treated them as enemy combatants from whom valuable intelligence was sought and received. Trying them in federal court creates otherwise unnecessary issues regarding the admissibility of this evidence and provides them another avenue of attack on those defending the United states against them.

5. The treatment of evidence in connection with the trial raises a serious threat that national security will be compromised.

6. The trial of KSM et al. in New York by itself raises severe security risks.
Source: PowerLine.com

One of many puzzling aspects of the Obama administration’s decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others in federal court is the fact that other terrorists will be tried by military tribunals. For example, Abd al-Rahim al Nashiri, who led the attack on the USS Cole, will be tried and sentenced by such a tribunal.

And what is happening in the pre-trail proceedings may be an indication of what is coming in New York.

“There is absolutely no reason for this court to presume that the facts contained in the government’s exhibits are accurate,” District Judge Gladys Kessler wrote in ordering the release of Alla Ali Bin Ali Ahmed. He was repatriated to Yemen after a seven-year stay at Guantanamo, where he was brought as a teenager.

“Much of the factual material contained in those exhibits is hotly contested for a host of different reasons ranging from the fact that it contains second- and third-hand hearsay to allegations that it was obtained by torture to the fact that no statement purports to be a verbatim account of what was said,” Kessler said. She ruled the government failed to prove the detainee was part of or substantially supported Taliban or al-Qaeda forces.There are approximately 250 more detainees in “gitmo” awaiting just this type of Liberal justice!

This raises two questions: If the administration acknowledges that military tribunals are an adequate and appropriate venue in which to try terrorists, why is it so necessary to bring some to the U.S. for a jury trial accompanied by the full load of Constitutional protections? And how did the administration decide which terrorists to give public trials, which inevitably will turn into media circuses, rather than trial by military commissions?

Eric Holder answered the second question, if not the first, in the press conference in which he announced the trials:
“In each case, my decision as to whether to proceed in federal courts or military commissions was based on a protocol that the Departments of Justice and Defense developed, and that was announced publicly in July”.
“Because many cases could be prosecuted in either federal courts or military commissions, that protocol sets forth a number of factors, including the nature of the offense, the location in which the offense occurred, the identity of the victims, and the manner in which the case was investigated. All of these things must be considered. In consultation, again, with the secretary of defense, I have looked at all of the relevant factors and made case-by-case decisions for each detainee”.

Mr. Holder elaborated later in the press conference:

QUESTION: How much of a factor for you was it that in the case of the five 9/11 detainees you’re returning them basically to the scene of the crime?

HOLDER: “Well, that is something that typically happens in the criminal law. The cases are typically tried in the place where the offense occurred, and so that was one of the factors.

There are a number of other factors that went into making that determination, including the nature of the people who were the victims: largely civilians in New York.

In addition to that, this is a matter that, as I said, happened in this country as opposed to overseas, which is different from what we might do with regard to those who are going to be tried in the military commissions.
But that is a fundamental tenet of American jurisprudence, that crimes are tried in the places where they occur”.

This illustrates the perversity of mindlessly applying the criminal law template to terrorist attacks. What is the implication of Holder’s criteria? Put yourself in the place of a would-be terrorist: If you want to garner maximum publicity; if you want to make yourself into a world-famous martyr; if you want an endless platform for disseminating jihadist propaganda; if you want to be treated with kid gloves at all times; what should you do? That’s right: you should organize an attack on American soil that kills thousands. You’ll be rewarded with top-flight legal representation at taxpayer expense and a forum in which to advance the cause of jihad.

Like so many things the Obama administration does, this creates exactly the wrong incentives and needlessly puts American lives in danger. source: John Hinderaker

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey is one of the many distinguished lawyers participating at the Federal Society’s annual national lawyers conference in Washington this past week.
Mukasey did not mince his words about the decison to try KSM in federal court. He called this decision “not only unwise, but based on a refusal to face the fact that what we are involved with here is a war with people who follow a religiously-based ideology that calls on them to kill us.” Mukasey viewed the administration’s approach as “a return. . .to the mindset that prevailed before Sept. 11 that acts like the first World Trade Center bombing, the attacks on our embassies in Africa and other such acts can and should be treated as conventional crimes and tried in conventional courts.”

Mukasey explained some of the difficulties of using civilian courts to try terrorists. These include the discovery process, the public presentation of evidence, and other elements of a trial that “could turn a criminal proceeding into a cornucopia of information for those still at large and a circus for those in custody.”

He also noted that when terrorists like KSM were captured, we did not gather information on the assumption that it would be presented in federal court. Thus, the prosecution is at a disadvantage in proceeding down this road now. (Some will glibly say that this is the Bush administration’s fault for the way it handled KSM, but at that time the adminisration was properly focused on preventing a follow-up attack to 9/11).

Mukasey also pointed to the obvious security issues that will be associated with the KSM trial. All things considered, he concluded: “It would take a whole lot more credulousness than I have available to be optimistic about the outcome of this latest experiment.” Source: Breitbart.com









Tags: commentary, holder, ksm, new york, threats to us, trial