JAXConservative

ARE WE HEADED TOWARD INSOLVENCY AS A COUNTRY?

2011-06-11T13:13:00.000-05:00

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

Here we go again: Hoover got us in, and WWII got us out. Bush got us in, and

to his credit, started trying to get us out. Though, mostly he gave money to Wall Street bankers.

In the Great Depression, Roosevelt tried deficit spending, but he and the country ran out of money.So then he stopped in 1937 and the economy nose-dived. It took the humongous spending on the war effort of WWII to pull us out of the Great Depression. The spending was for jobs that lasted four years building airplanes, tanks and guns. This change the economy from depression into overdrive.It was not the WPA or a myriad of other make work programs that Roosevelt fostered. It was the building of a sustainable industrial base that employed millions of people for decades.

Of course after the war, we had to pay off a huge national debt, but during that time, from 1946 to 1980, the economy was quite prosperous. We hit a bad recession when Reagan took office, and his early deficit spending made sense (though he didn’t know it). But then he began to cut taxes and let the companies and the people keep more of their hard-earned money and the economy boomed!

We are now headed into the worst slump since 1938, and you itf you have a false hope that Obama can fix it because he is spending money with the help of an elitist Congress that is only too anxious to “bring home the bacon for his constituents.You are sadly wrong!!

The main thing to remember is that, with consumer spending going down, business is going to lay people off—not hire them. You can’t blame business for this. It’s just a vicious cycle that the economy gets into. And you can’t blame consumers for not spending in bad times. The only way out of this, is for the government not to spend, continue to pay unemployment insurance, or give tax breaks to people that only last for one year.

It is to cut taxes and extend the tax brakes the president Bush signed into law that will expire if not extended before they expire in 2010.

Obama should stop saving the Wall Street bankers, and just let those who perform poorly fail. There is only one thing that is too big to fail, and it is the USA!!

One of the charts above is showing government debt as a percentage of GDP by Curious Cat Investing Economics Blog, Creative Commons Attribution, data from OECD, March 2009.

The USA federal government debt is far too large, in my opinion. We have been raising taxes on future taxpayers for several decades, to finance our current spending. Within reason deficit spending is fine. What that reasonable level is however, is not easy to know. One big problem with the past few decades is that during very prosperous economic times we spent money that we didn’t have,and despite the warnings from economists who are not in the hip pocket of Obama, Congress continues to spend!!

This will only transfer to our children and grand children trillions of dollars of debt that will have to be paid or this country will become a “banana republic” very soon!

By not even paying for what we are spending when times were prosperous we put ourselves in a bad situation when we have poor economic conditions – like today. Even if we did not pay down debt, just by not increasing the outstanding debt while the economy grew the ratio of debt to GDP would decline. Then when times were bad, we could afford to run deficits and perhaps bring the debt level up to some reasonable level (maybe 40% of GDP – though it is hard to know what the target should be, 27% seems within the realm of reason to all but Obama sycophants. But today we have the debt to GDP ratio at 98% when you count in the unfunded guarentees that are included in entitlements!

There is at least one more point to remember, the figures in the chart are based on reported debt. The USA has huge liabilities that are not accounted for. So you must remember that the actually debt is much higher than reported in the official debt calculation.I mentioned them in the previous paragraph.And a Boston College Economist estimated yesterday that our actual debt is 200 trillion when you included unfunded social security, mediare and medicaid!

Now on to the good news. As bad as the USA has been at spending tomorrows increases in taxes today, compared to the OECD countries we are actually better than average. The OECD is made up of countries in Europe, the USA, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The chart shows the percentage of GDP that government debt represents for various countries. The USA ended 2006 at 62% while the overall OECD total is 77%.Most probably because of the financial debacle in Greece. A subject I will discuss later in this post.

In 1990 the USA was at 63% and the OECD was at 57%. Japan is the line way at the top with a 2006 total of 180% (that is a big problem for them). Korea is in the best shape at just a 28% total in 2006 but that is an increase from just 8% in 1990.And rember just 50 years ago they were involved in a War with North Korea and China that many of our brave men and women died to keep them from become Communist!

Iin Europe, Greece has already accumulated a mountain of debt that will be difficult if not impossible to pay off. The government has borrowed more than 110 percent of the country’s economic output over the years, and if investors lose confidence in the bonds, a meltdown could happen as early as next year.

Although this is a country far away we should learn from their experience that spending money you do not have and “fudging” the debt numbers can result in a similar outcome here at home!

When the government borrowers in Athens will be required to refinance €25 billion worth of debt — that is, repay what they owe using funds borrowed from the financial markets. But if no buyers can be found for its securities, Greece will have no choice but to declare insolvency — just as Mexico, Ecuador, Russia and Argentina have done in past decades.Will the USA be far behind?

This puts Brussels the seat of the European government and monetary system, in a predicament. European Union rules preclude the 27-member block from lending money to member states to plug holes in their budgets or bridge deficits.If only we had a law against bailing out States like California and New York!

And even if there were a way for the EU to circumvent this prohibition, the consequences could be disastrous. The lack of concern over budget discipline in countries like Spain, Italy and Ireland would spread like wildfire across the entire continent. The message would be clear: Why save, if others will eventually foot the bill? It says a lot about the future we are preparing, or I should say Congress and the Obama administration is preparing for our future generations with the tax and SPENDING running unchecked!

Central bankers in the euro zone are already speculating, behind closed doors, what would happen if the Greeks started printing euros without ECB approval. There is no answer to the question, and that makes central bankers from Lisbon to Dublin even more nervous than they are already.

The Greeks managed to increase their official gross national product by a hefty 25 percent, partly because they included the black market and prostitution in economic output. This brought down the deficit rate — on paper, at any rate — to 2.9 percent.

The government in Athens received a rebuke from Brussels, but so far, however, the Greek government has shown little inclination to take any significant steps. It does intend to reduce the deficit, but only to 9.1 percent next year. This is far too little for many European foreign ministers. As the new Greek finance minister, Giorgos Papakonstantinou, recently announced, the country will need at least four years to get its deficit under control “without jeopardizing the economic recovery.” If only we here in the USA could predict that we could get the deficit under control in four years!

With the debt approaching 13 trillion over the next ten years there is a good possibility that we will become insolvent and our money will be worthless if the brave few that oppose BIG government can succeed in repealing the Health Care Bill and stopping Cap and Trade bills, but I am afraid it is a fait complete!
Soon we will have to decide whether it's "guns or butter"! And with the present administration it will decimate the military to further their march to socialism. Then who will protect us?

When the government deficit will have reached about €400 billion, or about 150 percent of GDP. Servicing that amount of debt, even at current interest rates of about 5 percent, will make up at least one-third of government spending.

A London investment banker is betting on the continued decline of prices for Greek bonds in the short-term, while simultaneously waiting for the right time to start buying the securities again. He jokes: “If someone has €1,000 in debt, he has a problem. If someone has €10 million in debt, his bank has a problem. And the bank, in this case, is Europe.”
Will we be next?

Source: Telegraph uk.com

THE STATE OF THINGS IN GOLF COURSE OWNERSHIP

2010-10-23T10:04:00.000-05:00

Magnolia Point sold, new owners to meet with uneasy residents

Long-term ownership is still an unanswered question.

Posted: October 23, 2010 - 12:00am

Advertisement

By Debra W. Buehn

After a recent and unexpected change in ownership, the future of Magnolia Point Golf and Country Club is up in the air, leaving members and residents to wonder what's next.

And the 23-year-old upscale residential development and golf club in Green Cove Springs may yet change ownership again.

"Right now it's still so fresh, we're just trying to get our arms around it," said Roy Gulick, a longtime resident who has been active in many organizations there.

Gulick and other residents and golf club members hope to learn more at a 6:30 p.m. Thursday meeting with Magnolia Point officials at Clay High School.

Residents and club members learned late last month via an e-mail that club owner Joe Wyzkoski had signed his deed over to Floribec International Inc., which had acted as Wyzkoski's lender and mortgagee since he bought the club in 2004. The e-mail was signed by Thomas Schad, a German attorney and president of Floribec International Inc., who has been associated with Magnolia Point since he opened it in 1987.

Wyzkoski could not be reached for comment.

Committee formed

The community currently has about 715 residents and home prices range from $200,000 to $600,000, according to the residents' website, www.magnolia residents.com.

Since the turnover, Floribec formed a subsidiary, Magnolia Golf Management LLC, which now operates the club, said Van Royal, vice president of the subsidiary. Royal, a longtime Magnolia Point resident and Green Cove Springs Realtor, is an officer in Floribec and oversees current "day-to-day" operations.

One of Royal's first moves was to form a committee of about 25 Magnolia Point "community leaders" to facilitate communication between residents and those now in charge of the club.

"We want to be open and communicative and hear from the community, and we hope to communicate through the committee," he said.

Royal met with the committee Oct. 16 to update them on the club's status. Information from that meeting will be delivered to Magnolia Point residents in a "hard copy," rather than by e-mail, to ensure those who don't use e-mail know what's going on, said committee member Gary Dake.

Dake said the committee is anxious to talk to Schad, who will be at the Oct. 28 meeting.

"We need more complete information," he said.

Royal said the club is retaining its golf pro and chef, and may even try to extend the restaurant's hours. In addition, the club will be open through December to Magnolia Point residents who are not members, to encourage them to join.

"We're making every attempt to make things as seamless as possible," he said.

Membership in the semi-private golf and country club is elective for residents. Nonresidents also may join.

Evaluating options

The long-term ownership of Magnolia Point is an unanswered question. But Royal, in an Oct. 5 e-mail sent to members and residents, said, "We are still very early in evaluating what our options are but we are not going to own and operate this golf course as a long term investment. We have not officially placed the club on the market as we believe it would be prudent and the right thing to discuss this with the members and residents." Royal confirmed that stance this week.

Residents and Magnolia Point officials want to avoid a repeat of the Ravines saga, in which continued disputes between residents and the owner of the Middleburg-area club and lodge resulted in it being shuttered and unsuccessfully put on the auction block.

"No one, absolutely no one, wants that to happen," Royal said.

ARE WE HEADED TOWARD INSOLVENCY AS A COUNTRY?

2010-09-24T08:26:00.001-05:00

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

Here we go again: Hoover got us in, and WWII got us out. Bush got us in, and

to his credit, started trying to get us out. Though, mostly he gave money to Wall Street bankers.

In the Great Depression, Roosevelt tried deficit spending, but he and the country ran out of money.So then he stopped in 1937 and the economy nose-dived. It took the humongous spending on the war effort of WWII to pull us out of the Great Depression. The spending was for jobs that lasted four years building airplanes, tanks and guns. This change the economy from depression into overdrive.It was not the WPA or a myriad of other make work programs that Roosevelt fostered. It was the building of a sustainable industrial base that employed millions of people for decades.

Of course after the war, we had to pay off a huge national debt, but during that time, from 1946 to 1980, the economy was quite prosperous. We hit a bad recession when Reagan took office, and his early deficit spending made sense (though he didn’t know it). But then he began to cut taxes and let the companies and the people keep more of their hard-earned money and the economy boomed!

We are now headed into the worst slump since 1938, and you itf you have a false hope that Obama can fix it because he is spending money with the help of an elitist Congress that is only too anxious to “bring home the bacon for his constituents.You are sadly wrong!!

The main thing to remember is that, with consumer spending going down, business is going to lay people off—not hire them. You can’t blame business for this. It’s just a vicious cycle that the economy gets into. And you can’t blame consumers for not spending in bad times. The only way out of this, is for the government not to spend, continue to pay unemployment insurance, or give tax breaks to people that only last for one year.

It is to cut taxes and extend the tax brakes the president Bush signed into law that will expire if not extended before they expire in 2010.

Obama should stop saving the Wall Street bankers, and just let those who perform poorly fail. There is only one thing that is too big to fail, and it is the USA!!

One of the charts above is showing government debt as a percentage of GDP by Curious Cat Investing Economics Blog, Creative Commons Attribution, data from OECD, March 2009.

The USA federal government debt is far too large, in my opinion. We have been raising taxes on future taxpayers for several decades, to finance our current spending. Within reason deficit spending is fine. What that reasonable level is however, is not easy to know. One big problem with the past few decades is that during very prosperous economic times we spent money that we didn’t have,and despite the warnings from economists who are not in the hip pocket of Obama, Congress continues to spend!!

This will only transfer to our children and grand children trillions of dollars of debt that will have to be paid or this country will become a “banana republic” very soon!

By not even paying for what we are spending when times were prosperous we put ourselves in a bad situation when we have poor economic conditions – like today. Even if we did not pay down debt, just by not increasing the outstanding debt while the economy grew the ratio of debt to GDP would decline. Then when times were bad, we could afford to run deficits and perhaps bring the debt level up to some reasonable level (maybe 40% of GDP – though it is hard to know what the target should be, 27% seems within the realm of reason to all but Obama sycophants. But today we have the debt to GDP ratio at 98% when you count in the unfunded guarentees that are included in entitlements!

There is at least one more point to remember, the figures in the chart are based on reported debt. The USA has huge liabilities that are not accounted for. So you must remember that the actually debt is much higher than reported in the official debt calculation.I mentioned them in the previous paragraph.And a Boston College Economist estimated yesterday that our actual debt is 200 trillion when you included unfunded social security, mediare and medicaid!

Now on to the good news. As bad as the USA has been at spending tomorrows increases in taxes today, compared to the OECD countries we are actually better than average. The OECD is made up of countries in Europe, the USA, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The chart shows the percentage of GDP that government debt represents for various countries. The USA ended 2006 at 62% while the overall OECD total is 77%.Most probably because of the financial debacle in Greece. A subject I will discuss later in this post.

In 1990 the USA was at 63% and the OECD was at 57%. Japan is the line way at the top with a 2006 total of 180% (that is a big problem for them). Korea is in the best shape at just a 28% total in 2006 but that is an increase from just 8% in 1990.And rember just 50 years ago they were involved in a War with North Korea and China that many of our brave men and women died to keep them from become Communist!

Iin Europe, Greece has already accumulated a mountain of debt that will be difficult if not impossible to pay off. The government has borrowed more than 110 percent of the country’s economic output over the years, and if investors lose confidence in the bonds, a meltdown could happen as early as next year.

Although this is a country far away we should learn from their experience that spending money you do not have and “fudging” the debt numbers can result in a similar outcome here at home!

When the government borrowers in Athens will be required to refinance €25 billion worth of debt — that is, repay what they owe using funds borrowed from the financial markets. But if no buyers can be found for its securities, Greece will have no choice but to declare insolvency — just as Mexico, Ecuador, Russia and Argentina have done in past decades.Will the USA be far behind?

This puts Brussels the seat of the European government and monetary system, in a predicament. European Union rules preclude the 27-member block from lending money to member states to plug holes in their budgets or bridge deficits.If only we had a law against bailing out States like California and New York!

And even if there were a way for the EU to circumvent this prohibition, the consequences could be disastrous. The lack of concern over budget discipline in countries like Spain, Italy and Ireland would spread like wildfire across the entire continent. The message would be clear: Why save, if others will eventually foot the bill? It says a lot about the future we are preparing, or I should say Congress and the Obama administration is preparing for our future generations with the tax and SPENDING running unchecked!

Central bankers in the euro zone are already speculating, behind closed doors, what would happen if the Greeks started printing euros without ECB approval. There is no answer to the question, and that makes central bankers from Lisbon to Dublin even more nervous than they are already.

The Greeks managed to increase their official gross national product by a hefty 25 percent, partly because they included the black market and prostitution in economic output. This brought down the deficit rate — on paper, at any rate — to 2.9 percent.

The government in Athens received a rebuke from Brussels, but so far, however, the Greek government has shown little inclination to take any significant steps. It does intend to reduce the deficit, but only to 9.1 percent next year. This is far too little for many European foreign ministers. As the new Greek finance minister, Giorgos Papakonstantinou, recently announced, the country will need at least four years to get its deficit under control “without jeopardizing the economic recovery.” If only we here in the USA could predict that we could get the deficit under control in four years!

With the debt approaching 13 trillion over the next ten years there is a good possibility that we will become insolvent and our money will be worthless if the brave few that oppose BIG government can succeed in repealing the Health Care Bill and stopping Cap and Trade bills, but I am afraid it is a fait complete!
Soon we will have to decide whether it's "guns or butter"! And with the present administration it will decimate the military to further their march to socialism. Then who will protect us?

When the government deficit will have reached about €400 billion, or about 150 percent of GDP. Servicing that amount of debt, even at current interest rates of about 5 percent, will make up at least one-third of government spending.

A London investment banker is betting on the continued decline of prices for Greek bonds in the short-term, while simultaneously waiting for the right time to start buying the securities again. He jokes: “If someone has €1,000 in debt, he has a problem. If someone has €10 million in debt, his bank has a problem. And the bank, in this case, is Europe.”
Will we be next?

Source: Telegraph uk.com

THE CIRCUS COMES TO CONGRESS

2010-02-23T16:09:00.001-05:00

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

I stopped watching Congressional hearings because I came away from those I did watch with the feeling that the Congressional questions were posed to elicit a personal animus towards a particular issue or just asinine statements from Congressman who wanted to impress their constituents back home how smart they were.

But today I was compelled to watched briefly the Congressional hearing of the Toyota USA president regarding safety issues. I was particularly interested in as much as there have been only 19 deaths in 10 years due to malfunctioning Toyota’s. That is less than 1.9 per year.

When you consider that According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration there are about 43,000 people killed in fatal car accidents each year in the United States. Roughly, 40 percent of the fatal crashes are alcohol-related. In addition to fatal accidents, about 2.9 million people are injured each year. It seems like a waste of tax payers money to hold hearings about a malfunctioning accelerator pedal. But when I learned that the Chairman of the committee was from Michigan and the inquisitor when I turned on the television was Congressman Dingle also from Michigan. I realized what is really going on here.

Toyota has been selling safe efficient cars that are moderately priced for over 25 years. Now this hearing is called because of 19 deaths? I think 19 deaths are tragic, but if the 2 witnesses that testified today are any example of the problem. The hearing should be adjourned!

The lady and her husband told a horror story of her Lexus suddenly accelerating to 100 miles an hour despite her putting the car in reverse and other attempts to slow the car down, but after six minutes it slowed down! Had she just turned the key off or put the car in neutral it would slow the car down rapidly! I do not question the lady’s statement, but I do question her ability to handle an unfortunate occurence. And if the car allowed her to put the car in reverse at 100 miles an hour why did the transmission not self destruct?

It is apparent to me that this is just a Democrat “witch hunt” to demonize the Japanese car maker, and to benefit those who make GM and Chryslers autos back in Michigan. The Auto Workers Union might as well conduct the hearings!

The Congress would better serve the public if they looked into the deaths cause by the EPA forcing auto makers to substitute fiberglass and plastic for steel to obtain the miles per gallon dictated by the Federal government. The picture I have enclosed is a lot more of a problem. When a car made with plastic and fiberglass is hit head on by a made of steel semi-teailer truck!

NEW YEAR SHOULD BRING END OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

2009-12-31T08:39:00.097-05:00

Walks like a duck and quacks,it is duck !    Lets all accept the accept the fact that since Obama President all attacks upon Americans were committed by radical Muslims who were mostly either Arabs or Blacks in face color.   The most notable incidents were at Fort Hood, last week on an airplane bound for Detroit, Mohammed Jabarah, January 2008. Mohammad Jabarah was involved in plots to bomb U.S. embassies in Singapore and the Philippines and mass transit frequented by U.S. military personnel. He was convicted of filming U.S., Australian, and Israeli embassies and conducting surveillance of U.S. warships. He is suspected of training in al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan and spending time with Osama bin Laden. Jabarah was arrested in 2002 by Omani police and was later transferred to American custody. In January 2008, Jabarah was sentenced to life in prison after pleading guilty to terrorism charges.[55]

Hassan Abujihaad, March 2008. Hassan Abujihaad, a former U.S. Navy sailor from Phoenix, Arizona, was convicted of supporting terrorism and disclosing classified information, including the location of Navy ships and their vulnerabilities to Azzam Publications, a London organization that provided material support and resources to terrorists. Abujihaad was arrested in March 2007 and pleaded not guilty to charges of supporting terrorism in April 2007. In May 2008, he was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 10 years in prison.[56]

Christopher Paul, June 2008. Christopher Paul is a U.S. citizen from Columbus, Ohio. He joined al-Qaeda in the 1990s and was involved in conspiracies to target Americans in the United States and overseas. In 1999, he became connected to an Islamic terrorist cell in Germany, where he was involved in a plot to target Americans at foreign vacation resorts. He later returned to Ohio and was subsequently arrested for conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, specifically explosive devices, "against targets in Europe and the United States." Paul pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 20 years in prison.[57]

Synagogue Terror Plot, May 2009. On May 20, 2009, the New York Police Department announced the arrest of James Cromite, David Williams, Onta Williams, and Laguerre Payen for plotting to blow up area Jewish centers and shoot down planes at a nearby Air National Guard Base.[58] The four had attempted to gain access to Stinger missiles and were caught in the act of placing bombs in the buildings and in a car. (The bombs were duds, because undercover agents sold them fake explosives as part of an ongoing sting operation). All four men have pleaded not guilty.[59]
And yet the Obama administration refuses to use the words WAR on  Terrorism, or use the words Radical Extremeists!

They have no compunction to call TEA Party attendees, or Bible carrying Christans, Gulf War veterans
potential terrorists!
It is past time that we stop listening to CAIR that refuses to renounce the Muslim Radical Terrorists,but influencence the public dialouge ,and the Obama Administration  and the Congress.
The Administration also needs to continue to make combating terrorism an international effort. The U.S. cannot afford to leave our allies behind because America will not be safe without their cooperation.[62] These allies are key not only to U.S. security interests, but also as trade partners.

Congress plays a substantial role in developing and sustaining America's counterterrorism abilities. Reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act and FISA will require congressional support. FISA authorizes electronic surveillance within certain legal limits. The PATRIOT Act facilitates interagency cooperation among federal, state, and local agencies in information sharing and terrorism investigations, and it established mechanisms for conducting surveillance of modern technologies, such as cell phones.[66] Key sections of these vital terrorism-fighting tools will expire this year.

Unless we do these pro-active measures we will continue to have Terrorist terror attacks on U.S. soil and our foreign assets! We have been warned by Osama.
"All that we have to do is to send two mujahidin to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al-Qaida, in order to make the generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses without their achieving for it anything of note other than some benefits for their private companies….

So we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah.

bin Laden spoke those words in 2004.

WHO THE STIMULUS CASH HAS REALLY HELPED!

2009-12-12T13:56:00.000-05:00

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

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

The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data.

Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months � and that’s before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.

Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time in pay and hiring during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.

The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.

The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high-tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules.

“There’s no way to justify this to the American people. It’s ridiculous,” says Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a first-term lawmaker who is on the House’s federal workforce subcommittee.

Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs.

For Obama and his comrades, this isn’t about creating jobs, or they wouldn’t be hoarding so much of the “stimulus” money for purposes of “buying” the upcoming national elections. It isn’t about getting everyone health insurance. It’s about leveling the economic playing field by lowering the common denominator and spreading the misery. It’s about evening the score. It’s about power, i.e., who makes the decisions over how our money is to be spent.

Obama Democrats believe that they know better than we do how our money ought to be spent and that they have a superior moral right to our money. They might even recognize that supply side economics works — just as they know capital gains tax reductions generate more revenues. But to them, the free market isn’t fair because winners and losers are determined, not by the government, but by other factors, including people’s raw efforts. They believe that economic “fairness” — or “economic justice,” a good old Jane Fonda/Tom Hayden/Marxist phrase — should be dictated from the top down by government officials and bureaucrats.

As David Limbaugh so aptly said it: “For Obama and his comrades, this isn’t about creating jobs, or they wouldn’t be hoarding so much of the “stimulus” money for purposes of “buying” the upcoming national elections. It isn’t about getting everyone health insurance. It’s about leveling the economic playing field by lowering the common denominator and spreading the misery. It’s about evening the score. It’s about power, i.e., who makes the decisions over how our money is to be spent.

Obama Democrats believe that they know better than we do how our money ought to be spent and that they have a superior moral right to our money. They might even recognize that supply side economics works — just as they know capital gains tax reductions generate more revenues. But to them, the free market isn’t fair because winners and losers are determined, not by the government, but by other factors, including people’s raw efforts. They believe that economic “fairness” — or “economic justice,” a good old Jane Fonda/Tom Hayden/Marxist phrase — should be dictated from the top down by government officials and bureaucrats.

So the answer to the unemployment crisis is to put millions on the government payroll instead of stimulating the private free enterprise system.This promotes the socialization of America, and w must stop him by regaining power in 2010!

WHAT IS OBAMA’S ECONOMIC POLICY?

2009-12-11T10:57:00.000-05:00

First let me say that I have voted in Presidential elections for 59 years. So you could call me an old, senile fa*t, or someone who has witnessed a lot and drawn conclusions that are worth listening to.

If you are of a mind to believe the former description of my state of mind –stop reading now!

I have voted Republican in every Presidential election but one. I was proud to cast my vote for Senator John Kennedy, whom I thought had served our country well in the Navy and in the U.S. Senate. Maybe I was a little biased, because I too was a Navy veteran. But never the less, I believed he was a better choice because of his fiscal policy and I pulled the lever for him!

I voted for George W. Bush also, but during the last two years of his second term I looked at him as though he was possessed by the “evil one” who promotes the destruction of truth. It was as if he had been replaced by his “evil” identical twin, and he had secretly retreated to his ranch in Texas! His acceptance of Congressional spending was out of character for the man I voted for twice, and the result was putting our country in fiscal irresponsibility.

I know some will say the cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the impending banking and mortgage crisis were the cause of his signing into law Bills that spent more money than our GDP produced.
What ever the reason, he was responsible for as the Deamoncrats say,”taking the surplus inherited from Clinton to a deficit. I acknowledge that!!

But now to the thrust of my blog. I believe the 10 months of President Obama’s first term, and I hope only term, has illustrated to me that we have the most progressive, Marxist leaning occupant of the Oval Office in the history of this great country.

His economic policy if fully enacted will certainly destroy the dollar, and the free-market economy that we had until he took office. The health Care Bill, Cap and Trade, multiple stimulus bills, cash for clunkers, bail-outs and unending increase of taxation is a prescription written by someone who deliberately has set out to destroy our Free market economy and replace it with a massive Federal government that controls its citizens from cradle to grave.
Either Obama is an eloquent puppet whose strings are being pulled by the likes of George Soros, and Andy Stern, or he is a slick Harvard and Columbia educated lawyer who hates capitalism and is determined to destroy it and substitute his brand of Marxist Socialism.

Unprecedented deficit spending for unsustainable entitlements, and accumulation of national debt, now at more than $12 trillion, poses an enormous threat to our economic future. Obama’s proposals will add $13 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years.

There are only three ways to cut that debt: Raise taxes, inflate the dollar or cut government spending.
The first two will destroy any semblance of economic recovery. Only the latter will strengthen the U.S. economy and create jobs.

In order to avert the deep depression that we are headed for. Obama should instruct the Democrat controlled Congress to hold the line on discretionary spending and enact spending caps enforced by a balanced budget amendment. This was first proposed by President Reagan, but blocked by Democrats every time it comes up since his administration.

I believe Obama and his ilk are all devoted socialists, and they believe government is the solution, not the problem.
But when has government actually made money? Government runs on the backs of the workers that pay taxes,fees and when in doubt by printing worthless money 24 hours a day!

He and his leftist cronies believe,or at least say they believe, that we must “spend our way out of this recession.”!! When has spending ever reversed a deficit economy? Try this in your own business or your household and you will end up in bankruptcy court!

Investor’s Business Daily analyzed cabinet posts of administrations over the last century and determined that prior to Obama, Kennedy and Carter had the lowest number of appointees from the private sector, about 30 percent in each administration.
Only 8 percent of Obama’s key appointees are from the private sector, precious few of them have actually created or understand how to create real jobs.And his Czar cadre is filled with socialists who have little if any experience in running a business.
Unprecedented deficit spending for unsustainable entitlements, and accumulation of national debt, now at more than $12 trillion, poses an enormous threat to our economic future. Obama’s proposals will add $13 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years.

There are only three ways to cut that debt: Raise taxes, inflate the dollar or cut government spending.

The first two will destroy any semblance of economic recovery. Only the latter will strengthen the U.S. economy and create jobs.Government is an extremely inefficient consumer of wealth, with up to 70 percent of income-transfer program (a.k.a., welfare program) budgets going to bureaucratic overhead

Source: Patriot Post and Mark Alexander

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: Democrats, obama, Opinions, socialism, CONGRESS, ECONOMY, spending

THE TRAP THAT LIES IN WAIT IN COPENHAGEN AS DESCRIBED BY SOROS!

2009-12-10T11:14:00.002-05:00

The Guardian newspaper printed and published on the internet an article written by billionaire George Soros that details his idea of how to pay for the redistribution of the wealth of so-called Developed Countries to Developing countries in Africa and the various islands that are included in the organisation called the Group of 77.

The following post includes quotes directly taken from the published article written by Soros and my comments on the absurdity of this Marxist , elitist ideas.

“It is now generally agreed that the developed countries will have to make a substantial financial contribution to enable the developing world to deal with climate change.(No it is not. Perhaps among the jet setting elites who don’t give a damn what the voters think but among real people who have to pay real bills every month this is not generally agreed at all. And any politician that actually did,t can look forward to a being replaced when the facts come out!)

Funds are needed to invest in new low-carbon energy sources, reforestation and protection of rainforests, land-use changes, and adaptation and mitigation. But there is no similar agreement on where the money will come from.
The developed countries are reluctant to make additional financial commitments. They have just experienced a significant jump in their national debts, and they still need to stimulate their domestic economies. This colours their attitudes. It looks like they will be able to cobble together a “fast-start” fund of $10bn a year for the next few years, but more does not fit into their national budgets. This is unlikely to satisfy the developing countries.
I believe that this amount could be at least doubled and assured for a longer time span. Developed countries’ governments are labouring under the misapprehension that funding must come from their national budgets. But that is not the case. They have the money already. It is lying idle in their reserve accounts at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Spending it would not add to any country’s fiscal deficit. All they need to do is to tap into it.
In September 2009, the IMF distributed to its members $283bn worth of special drawing rights (SDRs), arcane financial instruments that essentially constitute additional foreign exchange. They can be used only by converting them into one of four currencies, at which point they begin to carry interest at those currencies’ combined treasury bill rate. At present, the interest rate is less than 0.5%.

Of the $283bn worth of recently distributed SDRs, more than $150bn went to the 15 largest developed economies. These SDRs will sit largely untouched in the reserve accounts of these countries, which don’t really need any additional reserves.
I propose that the developed countries – in addition to establishing a fast-start fund of $10bn a year – band together and lend $100bn worth of these SDRs for 25 years to a special green fund serving the developing world. The fund would jump-start forestry, land use, and agricultural projects – areas that offer the greatest scope for reducing or mitigating carbon emissions, and that could produce substantial returns from carbon markets.
The returns such projects could generate go beyond addressing carbon emissions. Returns from land-use projects, for example, could also include the potential to create more sustainable rural livelihoods, enable higher and more resilient agricultural yields, and generate rural employment.

This is a simple and practical idea, and there is a precedent for it. The UK and France each recently lent $2bn worth of SDRs to a special fund at the IMF to support concessionary lending to the poorest countries. At that point, the IMF assumed responsibility for the principal and interest on the SDRs. The same could be done in this case.
I further propose that member countries agree to use the IMF’s gold reserves to guarantee the interest payments and repayment of the principal. The IMF owns a lot of gold – more than 100m ounces – and it is on the books at historical cost. Thus, at current market prices, it is worth more than $100bn over its book value. It has already been designated to be used for the benefit of the least developed countries. The proposed green fund would meet this requirement.
This means that the developed countries that lend the SDRs would incur no interest expense and no responsibility for repayment. There are some serious technical problems involved in offsetting the interest income against the interest expense, particularly in the United States, but the net effect would be a wash. These technical difficulties stood in the way of previous attempts to put the SDRs to practical use, but they do not apply to the proposed green fund.
There are three powerful arguments in favour of this proposal. First, the green fund could be self-financing or even profitable; very little of the IMF’s gold, if any, would actually be used.
Second, the projects will earn a return only if developed countries co-operate in setting up the right type of carbon markets. Establishing a green fund would be an implicit pledge to do so by putting the gold reserves of the IMF at risk.
Finally, this money would be available now, jump-starting carbon-saving projects.

For all these reasons, the developing countries ought to embrace my proposal. The key point is that it is possible to increase substantially the amount available to fight global warming in the developing world by using the existing allocations of SDRs, with interest payments on them guaranteed by the IMF’s gold reserves.
All that is lacking is the political will. The mere fact that tapping SDRs requires congressional approval in the US ensures that nothing will happen without public pressure – including pressure from the developing countries. Yet it could make the difference between success and failure in Copenhagen”.

It is good to know that one of the main supporters and financial backers of our President is in lock step with Obama’s international thinking, as if there was any doubt about why he is making a massive effort to destroy our free enterprise system by spending and taxation that will if not checked WILL lead to insolvency of this Country. Then we will have to turn to international ,aka UN, control of our government and it’s people!
THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!
The massive lending the Developed World made to the Third World in the 1970s and 1980s could have been self-financing too. Even profitable. It was in South Korea for instance. It was not in Congo or the rest of Africa, it was not in Peru or Argentina. I wonder why that is? Now having lent them hundreds of billions and watched their Governments waste it all, you want us to give them more so they can p**s it away against the same wall? Really. How fascinating.

Second, the projects will earn a return only if developed countries cooperate in setting up the right type of carbon markets. Establishing a green fund would be an implicit pledge to do so by putting the gold reserves of the IMF at risk.Why in God’s Green Earth should Americans do this if you and your “ecobozos” consider China and India developing Countries when they produce more good and services presently than we do here in the USA, and pollute the air while doing it with your” blessing”!

Earlier Soros wrote:
“I further propose that member countries agree to use the IMF’s gold reserves to guarantee the interest payments and repayment of the principal”.
So let me get this right – we have a large number of countries in the world who have been indifferently blessed with mostly kleptocracy Governments to whom we lent hundreds of billions in the 1970s and 1980s. That money all magically disappeared and virtually none it was paid back – and it had no particularly beneficial or even obvious effect on the borrowers. So now you want to lend them a few hundred billion more – but this time, and this is the bit I really hate!
We guarantee their interest repayments? So if their Governments steal all our money again, as they almost certainly will, we will get the joys of paying ourselves back with our own gold? Oh joy! What a Christmas present for the USA!

But there’s more, the repayment from the Third World would, in theory, rely on us further destroying our economy, imposing massive costs on everyone and spending billions more we don’t have to buy permits from people who don’t need them – all for a so far, unproven and non-existent problem? It just doesn’t get any better than that as a policy proposal. I suggest your buddy Obama go to the electorate with this. You think Tea Partys were loud and radical, try putting this over on the already mad electorate!

Finally, this money would be available now, jump-starting carbon-saving projects.You Mr. Soros and Al Gore stand to make billions on his Ponzi scheme!
So they wouldn’t have to wait? Just when I thought it couldn’t get any better. Why bother with due diligence?

For all these reasons, the developing countries ought to embrace Soros proposal.?
Offer me a few hundred billion now and more later for which I have to do nothing, pay back nothing and generally steal as much as I liked and I would embrace it too. Embrace it? Hell, I’d make cart wheels all down Pennsylvania Avenue!

WAKE UP AMERICANS THE HOUR OF DECISION IS UPON US!!

ARE WE HEADED TOWARD INSOLVENCY AS A COUNTRY?

2009-12-09T09:35:00.001-05:00

Here we go again: Hoover got us in, and WWII got us out. Bush got us in, and
to his credit, started trying to get us out. Though, mostly he gave money to Wall Street bankers.

In the Great Depression, Roosevelt tried deficit spending, but he and the country ran out of money.So then he stopped in 1937 and the economy nose-dived. It took the humongous spending on the war effort of WWII to pull us out of the Great Depression. The spending was for jobs that lasted four years building airplanes, tanks and guns. This change the economy from depression into overdrive.It was not the WPA or a myriad of other make work programs that Roosevelt fostered. It was the building of a sustainable industrial base that employed millions of people for decades.

Of course after the war, we had to pay off a huge national debt, but during that time, from 1946 to 1980, the economy was quite prosperous. We hit a bad recession when Reagan took office, and his early deficit spending made sense (though he didn’t know it). But then he began to cut taxes and let the companies and the people keep more of their hard-earned money and the economy boomed!

We are now headed into the worst slump since 1938, and you itf you have a false hope that Obama can fix it because he is spending money with the help of an elitist Congress that is only too anxious to “bring home the bacon for his constituents.You are sadly wrong!!

The main thing to remember is that, with consumer spending going down, business is going to lay people off—not hire them. You can’t blame business for this. It’s just a vicious cycle that the economy gets into. And you can’t blame consumers for not spending in bad times. The only way out of this, is for the government not to spend, continue to pay unemployment insurance, or give tax breaks to people that only last for one year.
It is to cut taxes and extend the tax brakes the president Bush signed into law that will expire if not extended before they expire in 2010.
Obama should stop saving the Wall Street bankers, and just let those who perform poorly fail. There is only one thing that is too big to fail, and it is the USA!!

One of the charts above is showing government debt as a percentage of GDP by Curious Cat Investing Economics Blog, Creative Commons Attribution, data from OECD, March 2009.

The USA federal government debt is far too large, in my opinion. We have been raising taxes on future taxpayers for several decades, to finance our current spending. Within reason deficit spending is fine. What that reasonable level is however, is not easy to know. One big problem with the past few decades is that during very prosperous economic times we spent money that we didn’t have,and despite the warnings from economists who are not in the hip pocket of Obama, Congress continues to spend!!

This will only transfer to our children and grand children trillions of dollars of debt that will have to be paid or this country will become a “banana republic” very soon!

By not even paying for what we are spending when times were prosperous we put ourselves in a bad situation when we have poor economic conditions – like today. Even if we did not pay down debt, just by not increasing the outstanding debt while the economy grew the ratio of debt to GDP would decline. Then when times were bad, we could afford to run deficits and perhaps bring the debt level up to some reasonable level (maybe 40% of GDP – though it is hard to know what the target should be, 27% seems within the realm of reason to all but Obama sycophants. But today we have the debt to GDP ratio at 98% when you count in the unfunded guarentees that are included in entitlements!

There is at least one more point to remember, the figures in the chart are based on reported debt. The USA has huge liabilities that are not accounted for. So you must remember that the actually debt is much higher than reported in the official debt calculation.I mentioned them in the previous paragraph.

Now on to the good news. As bad as the USA has been at spending tomorrows increases in taxes today, compared to the OECD countries we are actually better than average. The OECD is made up of countries in Europe, the USA, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The chart shows the percentage of GDP that government debt represents for various countries. The USA ended 2006 at 62% while the overall OECD total is 77%.Most probably because of the financial debacle in Greece. A subject I will discuss later in this post.

In 1990 the USA was at 63% and the OECD was at 57%. Japan is the line way at the top with a 2006 total of 180% (that is a big problem for them). Korea is in the best shape at just a 28% total in 2006 but that is an increase from just 8% in 1990.And rember just 50 years ago they were involved in a War with North Korea and China that many of our brave men and women died to keep them from become Communist!

Iin Europe, Greece has already accumulated a mountain of debt that will be difficult if not impossible to pay off. The government has borrowed more than 110 percent of the country’s economic output over the years, and if investors lose confidence in the bonds, a meltdown could happen as early as next year.

Although this is a country far away we should learn from their experience that spending money you do not have and “fudging” the debt numbers can result in a similar outcome here at home!

When the government borrowers in Athens will be required to refinance €25 billion worth of debt — that is, repay what they owe using funds borrowed from the financial markets. But if no buyers can be found for its securities, Greece will have no choice but to declare insolvency — just as Mexico, Ecuador, Russia and Argentina have done in past decades.Will the USA be far behind?

This puts Brussels the seat of the European government and monetary system, in a predicament. European Union rules preclude the 27-member block from lending money to member states to plug holes in their budgets or bridge deficits.If only we had a law against bailing out States like California and New York!

And even if there were a way for the EU to circumvent this prohibition, the consequences could be disastrous. The lack of concern over budget discipline in countries like Spain, Italy and Ireland would spread like wildfire across the entire continent. The message would be clear: Why save, if others will eventually foot the bill? It says a lot about the future we are preparing, or I should say Congress and the Obama administration is preparing for our future generations with the tax and SPENDING running unchecked!

Central bankers in the euro zone are already speculating, behind closed doors, what would happen if the Greeks started printing euros without ECB approval. There is no answer to the question, and that makes central bankers from Lisbon to Dublin even more nervous than they are already.

The Greeks managed to increase their official gross national product by a hefty 25 percent, partly because they included the black market and prostitution in economic output. This brought down the deficit rate — on paper, at any rate — to 2.9 percent.

Three weeks ago, the government in Athens received a rebuke from Brussels, followed by another one last week. So far, however, the Greek government has shown little inclination to take any significant steps. It does intend to reduce the deficit, but only to 9.1 percent next year. This is far too little for many European foreign ministers. As the new Greek finance minister, Giorgos Papakonstantinou, recently announced, the country will need at least four years to get its deficit under control “without jeopardizing the economic recovery.” If only we here in the USA could predict that we could get the deficit under control in four years!

With the debt approaching 13 trillion over the next ten years there is a good possibility that we will become insolvent and our money will be worthless if the brave few that oppose BIG government can succeed in stopping the Health Care Bill and Cap and Trade bills, but I am afraid it is a fait complete!

But by then the government deficit will have reached about €400 billion, or about 150 percent of GDP. Servicing that amount of debt, even at current interest rates of about 5 percent, will make up at least one-third of government spending.

A London investment banker is betting on the continued decline of prices for Greek bonds in the short-term, while simultaneously waiting for the right time to start buying the securities again. He jokes: “If someone has €1,000 in debt, he has a problem. If someone has €10 million in debt, his bank has a problem. And the bank, in this case, is Europe.”Source: Telegraph uk.com

WILL THIS BE OUR FUTURE?

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: CONGRESS, deficits, EU, GDP, Greece, history, money, obama

THE FOLLY OF THE NEW WAY TO FIGHT A WAR!!

2009-12-08T09:43:00.000-05:00

NAVAL STATION NORFOLK, Va. — Two Navy SEALs accused in the mistreatment of an Iraqi suspect in the 2004 slayings of four U.S. contractors were arraigned in military court Monday, and one SEAL said he was gratified by support from the public and some members of Congress.

The judge scheduled courts-martial next month for Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe of Perrysburg, Ohio, and Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas of Blue Island, Ill. A third SEAL will be arraigned later.

The SEALs have received an outpouring of public support on the Internet, and a California congressman has led a campaign urging Defense Secretary Robert Gates to intervene. About three dozen protesters, including the mother of one of the slain contractors, stood outside the Norfolk Naval Station gate Monday morning holding signs of support.

McCabe is accused of striking the detainee in the midsection, dereliction of duty for failing to safeguard the detainee, and lying to investigators. He deferred entering a plea until his Jan. 19 trial.
McCabe told reporters he was confident he would be exonerated.
“I feel very good about it,” he said as he made his way through the crowd of supporters, shaking hands and thanking them. “The support is phenomenal. It makes us feel better, all these people being behind us.”

While this travesty was being perpetrated in North Carolina at Camp LeJunne The nation’s highest-ranking military officer told soldiers and Marines Monday that the insurgency in Afghanistan has grown in the last three years and he expects casualties to rise next year as additional U.S. troops pour into the war.
“This is the most dangerous time I’ve seen growing up the last four decades in uniform,” Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told about 1,000 Marines at Camp Lejeune.(and I believe it is the most dangerous time that our brave men and women have gone into battle because they have been ordered, as they were told by MulleN yesterday, that if we kill a dozen terrorist Taliban but also kill one or two civilians during the fir fight . It is not a victory! We have to protect the civilians!)

My question is this:. Admiral, how do we determine that people who mostly wear robes that can HIDE underneath an AK-47, that those among the ones shooting at our men and women, are not potential killers?

Many attending Mullen’s talks at Camp Lejeune and Fort Campbell, Ky., will be sent to Afghanistan after this Christmas aspointed out in President Barack Obama’s plan announced last week.

After the first of the year, the Marines will begin sending an additional 6,200 from Lejeune and Camp Pendleton, Calif., the Pentagon announced Monday. The Army will also begin sending in the first of its forces in the spring — a training brigade with about 3,400 soldiers from Fort Drum, N.Y. Three brigades from Fort Campbell’s 101st Airborne Division are also heading to Afghanistan and about 4,100 support forces from various places will deploy early.

“We are not winning, which means we are losing and as we are losing, the message traffic out there to (insurgency) recruits keeps getting better and better and more keep coming,” Mullen said. “That’s why we need the 30,000 and in particular, and you are the lead on this, getting in there this year, over the next 12 months, almost in lightning bolt fashion.”

Mullen told 700 soldiers at Fort Campbell that military leaders believe they have 18 to 24 months to reverse the insurgency, in what he expects to be a tough and bloody fight.
“I am sure we will sustain an increase in the level of casualties, and I don’t want to be in any way unclear about that,” he told troops at Fort Campbell. “This is what happened in Iraq during the surge and as tragic as it is, to turn this thing around, it will be a part of this surge, as well.”

“I expect a tough fight in 2010,” Mullen said. ( what he did not say to the Marines, was that they only have 18 months to accomplish the mission. Then the President has promised he will withdraw!!)
Many questions from soldiers and Marines focused on the role of Pakistan and America’s NATO allies in containing al-Qaeda and the Taliban and on the July 2011 withdraw date.

Mullen said the 2011 date is not an end or withdrawal date.Not exactly what Obama said when he gave his speech to the cadets at West Point!
“In the long run, it is not going to be about killing Taliban,” Mullen told the Marines at Camp Lejeune. “In the long run, it’s going to be because the Afghan people want them out.”( never in my life have I heard a senior officer say war was not about killing the enemy! McArthur and Eisenhower have been be making back flips in their graves!

Just why this aristocratic admiral is the Chief of Staff of the Armed forces is evidentially because he believes as Obama does that we can win over our enemies by being nice to the civilians. Forget about the axiom “kill or be killed”. As Winston Churchill said in 1944: “No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism.”War is about killing the enemy before hey kill you!!

Mullen also said, “in the long run, we are anxious to get at al-Qaeda and the leadership that resides in the border area between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Strategically the way you do this in my view is to bring pressure from both sides.”So he expects the Pakistani military to help the Marines, but all the reports(and there are few) about the location of Osama bin Laden are that he is hiding in Pakistan with full knowledge of the Pakistan government who either cannot locate or will not capture him. I would not expect too much co-operation from them!

The thrust of this post is that it appears to me that we are sending brave men and women, all volunteers, into HARMS way with orders to give Miranda rights to any one they capture and to not shoot until they are shot at. NO WAY TO WIN A WAR!!!

-----------------------------------

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: afghanistan, marines, MULLEN, obama, Opinions, SPEECH, war

WINNING IS THE ONLY OPTION

2009-12-07T09:06:00.000-05:00

One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!...Winston Churchill

Before and after US President Barack Obama's speech on Tuesday, NATO allies -- and Germany, in particular -- were expecting to get the call to commit more troops to the fight in Afghanistan. But instead the US government says it will not pressure Germany to send more combat troops, and Richard Holbrooke, the US special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, told the German business daily Handelsblatt on Thursday that the US wanted "political commitments, rather than numbers" from its NATO allies. (Since when do politicians defeat the enemy)
Holbrooke added: "Britain has already announced an additional 500 troops; other countries are preparing their own contributions. What's crucial is that there is cooperation within NATO." Source:DerSpiegel

There are currently roughly 4,300 German soldiers in Afghanistan, and Berlin says it won't consider increasing that figure until after an international conference in January. Holbrooke, in turn, has insisted that the US is not disappointed with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

In contrast to that report in the German paper, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Wednesday that alliance members would send at least 5,000 troops to back the newly announced US increase of approximately 30,000 soldiers. Washington has asked Germany to provide 2,000 more troops, France and Italy 1,500 each, and Britain 1,000, according to French officials.It woul appear the right hand does not know what the left is doing! A bad thing in war!

On Thursday, Italian Defense Minister Ignazio La Russa confirmed that Rome would send around 1,000 extra troops to Afghanistan, raising its presence to roughly 3,700. La Russa told the Corriere della Sera newspaper that the previously reported figure of 1,500 extra soldiers was "a maximum quota which we would never reach."

NATO officials say several other nations have announced plans to send more troops, including Georgia (900), Poland (600) and Slovakia (250). Portugal is keeping the pledge it made earlier this year to send 150 troops from its "rapid deployment" force to join 100 military trainers already in Afghanistan, according to Defense Minister Augusto Santos Silva.

Similarly, following the Obama speech, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said Berlin was prepared to increase the number of police trainers it sends to Afghanistan, and France has also stressed its commitment to building up local police forces. Turkey also says it is looking at whether it should boost its training role in Afghanistan. However, Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul has made it clear that Turkish soldiers will not be part of any combat operations.
It appears to me that we will continue to fight the Taliban by ourselves! Since the European governments appear to be more interested in Nation building than in fighting the Taliban!

Obama's talk of a timeline for withdrawal was a mis-judgedment in my opinion. From USA's experience in Bosnia, I remember how the Dayton Agreement that supposedly ended the Bosnian war committed Nato to just a one-year mandate. The people were not impressed. As many of Bosnians asked in December 1995: "Why should we support you, if in 12 months' time you will have gone?" So we must not fall into the same trap this time in Afghanistan.
And, unfortunately, we still have troops in Bosnia to this day!

For our Armed Forces, the immediate task is to complete our mission in Afghanistan. o kill the Taliban and alQaeda! Just in the last few days, the International community has sort of renewed its determination to succeed . And succeed we must, because defeat is not an option for the USA! Any other outcome would give a huge boost to alQaeda and the radical Muslims who seek to change our values and our way of life, through terrorist tactics..

Talk now of a withdrawal or troop reductions in Afghanistan is premature. We must show first that we are succeeding. In particular, the World media must believe we are succeeding, and report comprehensive progress as it develops. Maybe our Mass Media will be different than they were in the Vietnam era, but I will not hold my breath until they do!
The current fixation on casualties runs the risk – if over-reported – of eroding our national will to continue. This would be a tragedy. Wars kill people on both sides. If we are not committed to killing the enemy we should bring the troops home now!

Patience is difficult for a liberal (left leaning) Democracy, but impatience, with an eye on the domestic ballot box, is what the enemy always counts on. We must not fall into that trapl. For the people of Afghanistan, and the people of this country, the stakes are too high.

Obama and the NATO people say we need to win the hearts and minds of the people. But perhaps more critically, we also need to win the hearts and minds of the people of this country, too. The biggest threat to our success in Afghanistan is not the Taliban, but a loss of will by the people at home to see this vital task through. We must maintain the will to win, and break the will of the Taliban to continue.
Talk of withdrawal only emboldens the enemy!!

WRONG WAY TO CHOOSE A DOCTOR!

2009-12-05T12:11:00.001-05:00

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

The surgeon general is a government health educator sometimes called “the nation’s doctor.” It at times has been a high-profile position, such as in the 1980s, when Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop became the government’s leading spokesman on the emerging AIDS epidemic.

The post has faded into relative obscurity in recent years. Last year, both the Institute of Medicine and Trust for America’s Health called for the surgeon general to play a more prominent and powerful role.

It would appear that our new Surgeon General is stricken with the fatal disease of affirmative action because of the following speech she gave in her speech this week in Atlanta, Georgia.

Being a retired professional I know the value of education and he knowledge that one must have to practice the healing arts. The skills and minds of our health care professionals are determined by two things and one of them is not the color of ones skin!

It takes a GOD given gift to have the hands of Brain Surgeon or a highly skilled Oral Surgeon, and a mind that can learn all the intricacies of the human body and the knowledge of diagnosis and treatment to begin the practice of a healing art.

I say “practice” because when one finishes his doctors training he is just a safe beginner.

A professional is the Antonym for the word beginner, but that is what doctors of all types and colors must realize they are. A continuous student of the art and practice of the healing art! Doctors who quit learning are bound to become a threat to the public!
If all one thinks about is to balance the numbers of the ratio of one particular race to the over all population of any field, much less the healing arts, they are following a path to destruction of that profession or business that they want to balance.

The ability to learn is an innate ability that is not given to those who we seek for our health care, but a GOD given talent. There is no way we can balance the disparity of people of color by setting quotas and goals to recruit more people of color.

The sole determinate should be who has the ability to learn and the skill to run the gauntlet of higher education required to be a health care provider! Color of ones skin should not even be put on the application for admittance to a health care professional school.

The new U.S. Surgeon General on Thursday called for stepped-up efforts in increasing the number of minority physicians.

She should have called for the destruction of the strangle hold the Teachers Union has on Public Education by restoring the government grants for those children in the inner cities who are outstanding students can attend magnet schools or private schools that provide a real education not just the political correctness and diversity that I believe are the main objectives of Public education today!

In what was one of her first speeches to a large crowd since she was sworn in Nov. 3, Dr. Regina Benjamin noted that the proportion of U.S. physicians who are minorities is only 6 percent — the same proportion as a century ago.

“There’s something wrong with that,” said Benjamin, speaking at a conference on health disparities at a hotel in downtown Atlanta.

The numbers come from a 2004 estimate of the percentage of U.S. physicians that are black or Hispanic. Blacks and Hispanics account for roughly 28 percent of the U.S. population, according to 2008 figures from the U.S. Census Bureau.
In a 27-minute speech, Benjamin told health leaders in the audience to encourage young minorities to pursue careers in medicine or other ambitions.

If people like Dr. Benjamin really want more people of color to succeed in any field of life she should join those of us who believe the Public School system is just dumbing down the youth of America so they can be spoon fed by the political class. Her thrust should be to improve education of the all people by returning to the three “Rs”and basic abilities to read, write and do calculations in math. Then the “cream will rise to the top” and those who have the ability to persue professional education will get that. Not by setting quotas. We have seen what a disaster that has produced in all forms of public life!

The tragedy that occurred last month on an Army base caused by an apparent terrorist doctor who was not only educated but promoted to major despite the fact that many people knew he was a potential for trouble. Was a perfect example of political correctness and affirmative action gone wrong!

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: Opinions, PC. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, SPEECH DOCTORS, SURGEON GENERAL

WILL SERFDOM BE IN AMERICANS FUTURE?

2009-12-04T10:05:00.001-05:00

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

The so-called Land of the Free, has decided to recreate the ancient and rejected art of serfdom. As in history, serfdom was enacted gradually with restrictive laws that slowly or in some cases quickly ate away at the right of the people to move freely, thus guaranteeing the government a stable tax base and its favorite enterprises, a stable work force to exploit, one that can not walk away.

In America that is about to be done by the new Cap and Trade Law, that will more than likely go into effect next year. Only one of the chambers of the Congress has passed it but the other will soon if a miracle does not occur, and some Democrats develop a back bone and stand up for the people that elected them, not the president!

In the name of all things green, humans in the Free World including the USA will be turned into serfs.The Greens or rather Watermelons, Green on the outside, Marxist Red on the Inside have found the perfect tool with which to leverage the futures of all peoples in advanced nations.

No longer is the cry of power to the people, as the cover for the power grab of the more equal amongst the “equals” but instead it is the cry of Power to the Plants and the Fishes and the little buggy things that fly around and annoy you!

And it will cost the future of yourselves and your children, but Gaia will love you when you are decomposing in her belly, serf. Gaia is a primordial deity in the Ancient Greek pantheon and considered a Mother Goddess or Great Goddess.Source:Wikipedia

Her equivalent in the Roman Pantheon was Terra Mater or Tellus. Romans, unlike Greeks, did not consistently distinguish an Earth goddess (Tellus) from a grain goddess (Ceres).[2] Today it appears this is the Green Ecologists new replacement for GOD!
But how will this be done?

In the giant, unread “democratic” bills that the American Democrat controlled Congress is pushing through, some with literally up to ten thousand pages of unread and undebated laws.

Cap and Trade (American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009) will force all home owners to make extremely costly efficiency upgrades to their homes, for energy efficiency, before the government will give the serf, aka the citizen, a license to sell their home. Of course, before the process begins, the serf must get and pay for a government inspection and another after the upgrades.

With the taxes associated with the proposed health reform bill, Cap and Trade, and the massive multi-trillion dollar debt that is growing daily. Our dollar has lost 92% of its value in the past 30 years, and is certainly will be worthless if the spending does not stop. The American public will have to have a wheel barrel of dollars to buy a loaf of bread!

The middle class will disappear and what will remain is the government ruling class, the entertainment class and the academic elite! They will not call us serfs, or unwashed but we will be those left out of the CHANGE Obama promised America!

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: BILLS, CONGRESS, Opinions, SERFDOM, TAXES

IS SHARIA LAW A USA THREAT?

2009-12-03T11:54:00.000-05:00

COLUMBUS -- A runaway Christian convert and her Muslim family must listen to each other's views about religion if they are to reunite, a possibility that appears in jeopardy since the girl continues to refuse any contact with her parents or siblings, a caseworker says.

A case-management plan filed yesterday said Rifqa Bary and her parents should hear what each has to say about Islam and Christianity as a step toward a possible reunification. But the plan, written by a government caseworker, also said "severe differences" exist between the 17-year-old girl and her parents over what led Rifqa to run away to Florida over the summer.

The girl has said she feared her father would harm or kill her for leaving Islam. Her father has denied the claim.
"Parents concern is that Rifqa has a false perception of their religious beliefs and that her understanding creates a barrier to reunification," wrote Margaret Shirk, a Franklin County Children Services Board caseworker. "Rifqa's concern is that her parents do not understand her practice of Christianity."
Bary's parents, Mohamed and Aysha Bary, agree with their daughter being in foster care for the moment, but are concerned about her and would like a family relationship with her again, according to the plan.

Shirk's plan says Rifqa Bary has made it clear she wants no contact with her parents or her brothers. The girl talked to her brothers on the phone while she was in Florida but since then decided she wants no contact with them either, the plan said.

"Rifqa has been insistent about not having any contact with her parents and now with her siblings for what she has expressed for healing purposes," the plan said. "Rifqa continues to express fear about returning home."

The plan also calls for finding other relatives or nonrelatives that Rifqa could be placed with if reunification with her parents isn't a possibility. The goal is to bring them together by Aug. 10, when the girl turns 18, after which she would be on her own and could leave foster care.

The girl's family is originally from Sri Lanka and emigrated in 2000 to seek medical help for Rifqa, who had lost sight in her right eye when she fell and struck a toy airplane at home.

Rifqa disappeared July 19 and apparently stayed with friends of a minister she knew in Columbus for two days, according to court documents.
The minister, Brian Williams, drove Rifqa to the Columbus bus station, where she took a bus to Florida and was met by "Christian associates" she met on Facebook, according to an Oct. 15 complaint filed by her father seeking her return from Florida.

Police used phone and computer records to track the girl to the Rev. Blake Lorenz, pastor of Orlando, Fla.-based Global Revolution Church. Authorities said the teen had met him through an online Facebook prayer group.

Columbus is home to one of the largest Somali Muslim populations in the United States, 70,000 and growing. This is the group, Somali Muslims, that has been at the epicenter of myriad busts for jihad in recent weeks (and one coming soon). Is she safe in a devout Muslim community?

The office of Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland (recipient of boucoup Islamo-bucks) issued a statement back on September 14th, on why Rifqa Bary should be returned to Ohio. She was in Florida.

“Child welfare agencies and authorities in Ohio and Franklin County are fully capable of providing for the security and well-being of Ohio’s children,” the statement said. “The governor believes this is a family matter and therefore would most appropriately be handled here in Ohio with the assistance of the child welfare and foster care system.”

One can see the stark difference in how Florida and Ohio are handling Rifqa. This speaks to my fear of Rifqa’s being returned to Ohio. There is a level of corruption and Islamic influence all the way up to Governor Strickland’s office that is deeply troubling. Strickland is on their payroll. And so now Rifqa Bary’s civil rights are being violated by the state of Ohio. She is being for all intents and purposes held prisoner, deprived of access to a phone, to the Internet, and to public school. And why is all this being done? What crime has she committed? The Ohio authorities may not realize what they are doing, but they are holding Rifqa under house arrest in accord with Sharia law, which stipulates that female apostates are to be imprisoned until they recant. Ohio is effectively practicing Sharia law.

Where are all the feminists in America coming to the defense of this young Muslim girl?

Where indeed? Whenever feminist groups are asked to comment on an honor killing or gender apartheid, they always defer and suggest that the media speak to the Muslim groups. How courageous. It is despicable that feminist groups and child welfare groups are nowhere to be seen. Feminist groups are either afraid of the Islamic supremacists who are trying to deny Rifqa her religious freedom and human rights, hate Christianity for its position on abortion, or they hate America so much that they will be silent when women are being oppressed by a force that also hates America.

The barbaric oppression of women under Sharia has never mattered to American feminists. Hillary Clinton has never said a word about it. Gloria Steinem hasn’t touched the subject. Code Pink has never come out against the barbarians. But they will go to Israel and protest freely their against the Jewish people right to self defense. Morally ill.

source: FrontPage.com

COMPARING FDR’S SPEECH WITH OBAMA AT WEST POINT

2009-12-03T09:59:00.000-05:00

What if on December 8th, 1941, President Roosevelt said to Congress instead of the following words, the speech that Obama gave at West Point?

Roosevelt said: “ Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.
Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.
No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our people – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God!”.

Now compare these words that President Obama said to the Nation on television and to the West Point cadets who will be graduating in the spring and sent to fight the war in Afghanistan.

“As President, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, or our interests. And I must weigh all of the challenges that our nation faces. I don’t have the luxury of committing to just one. Indeed, I’m mindful of the words of President Eisenhower, who — in discussing our national security — said, “Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs.”
Over the past several years, we have lost that balance. We’ve failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills. Too many Americans are worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has grown more fierce. So we can’t simply afford to ignore the price of these wars”.

FDR spoke in the middle of the Great Depression, but he unlike Obama was not mixing the will to defeat an enemy that attacked the USA and killed thousands of Americans with his ability to Socialize the USA economy. His message(Roosevelt) was we need to defeat this enemy at all costs!

Only a man with no military experience and a mind-set that was formed while being a Community Organizer would equate paying for the fight to defeat an enemy who attacked us with the economy that he hopes to socialize!
Not only does this send a defeatist message to the enemy , but it a demoralizing effect on the troops in the field of battle.

What Obama said can only be interpreted as we have to spend only what we can afford to support the war, but we can run the printing presses in the basement of the Treasury Department 24 hours a day to pay for pork and social/welfare programs!

If FDR had put this type of language in his message to Congress the Day after Pearl Harbor. The whole of Europe and England would be speaking german and we would probably have been subject to the rule of the Japanese Emperor!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

JUST ANOTHER CAMAIGN SPEECH, WHEN WILL IT END?

WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ATTACK FOX NETWORK?

THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY

Holocaust, Sovereignty, and Socialism

Posted in THREATS TO US

Obama Sends Message to Taliban That We Will Withdraw in 2011

2009-12-02T09:14:00.003-05:00

For the first time,(and the first time in our countries history) the president set a timeline on America's military involvement in the country it invaded in October 2001. He told the World including the Taliban that he will support the war effort until 2011 and then withdraw. There was no reference to our winning and eliminating the Taliban.That is after all the reason we went into Afghanistan to defeat and elimate those who attacked NewYork and Washington in 2001, not to build schools and roads!

The White House hopes that the addition of 30,000 US troops, which will begin almost immediately, ( If you consider sometime in the summer of this year immediately! I calculate a 7-8 months delay until the Marines go to Afghanistan sometime next summer, when our heroic volunteer force is fighting and dying and need help now!)combined with the pressure of the new deadline, will spur the government of Hamid Karzai into action.
(What action he expects from the Karzai government, he did not elaborate on. It leaves a lot of wiggle room for him to reverse his decision on witdrawl, and bring troops home sooner if he gets too much pressure from his anti-war supporters)

He did not even tell the leaders of Countries that he spoke to before his speech at West Point what the details of his plan were.
News agencies report that Obama was spending much of Monday and Tuesday on the phone, outlining his plan — minus many specifics — for the leaders of France, Britain, Germany, Russia, China, India, Denmark, Poland and others. He also met in person at the White House with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

During the speech, which to me sounded like a political speech more than a war declaration of support for our troops. He never once mentioned the words Islamist extremist,or Jihadist. In fact he even said that he wanted to be friends with the Taliban after we withdraw in 18months! This President in my opinion is the first Commander in Chief giving aid and comfort to the enemy!

Obama said that "these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011".
He continued: "Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan's security forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul".

"But it will be clear to the Afghan government – and, more importantly, to the Afghan people that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country."
(If this is not a clear message to the Taliban to hide low until 2011 when they can take over the country as they did when the Russians withdrew!)

"It is no use saying, 'We are doing our best.' You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary"...Winston Churchill

A HALF HEARTED RESPONSE TO McCHRSTAL'S REQUEST FOR 40,000 TROOPS

2009-12-01T11:05:00.000-05:00

What would have happened had General Eisenhower delayed the invasion of Europe for THREE months after the World Press announced that the Invasion was being delayed while Roosevelt decided how many troops to send into the beaches in Normandy France?
The German’s would have slaughtered more than they did, because they would have moved all their defensive forces and firepower to the Normandy beach cliffs. It would a massacre of disastrous proportions.

The first troops to be deployed to Afghanistan are going to be Marines,( when in doubt ,send in the Marines!)” General James Conway, the Marines’ top officer, told troops in Afghanistan at the weekend. “We have been leaning forward in anticipation of a decision. And we have got some pretty stiff fighting coming.”

The Marines are expected to be followed quickly by about 1,000 US Army trainers. They will land in Afghanistan early next year to hasten the growth of the Afghan Army and police force, another critical component of Mr Obama’s new strategy. ( you remember the commander in the field, General McChrystal had asked for 40,000 troops now!)

And the additional 30,000 US troops will deploy to Afghanistan over the next 12 to 18 months.( talk about a calculated delay to satisfy his political base that is violently against sending any more troops!)

The first priority will be to dislodge the Taleban from the Helmand town of Marjeh. Despite months of often intense fighting, the 9,000 Marines already there have failed to retake the city, which is a hub of the country’s opium trade. It is also a Taleban stronghold where many of the roadside bombs, the biggest killer of foreign troops, are made. ( Why don’t the soldiers burn or defoliant the poppy fields and dry up the supply of opium. This si the source of much of the financial support given to the Taliban)

Another focus will be to build a security cordon around the southern city of Kandahar, another Taleban hotbed. The aim will be to protect the civilian population from Taleban attacks, part of the classic counter-insurgency strategy that General Stanley McChrystal, the ground commander, has already begun pursuing.

( It seems we are more concerned with what we used to call collateral damage to the population during a battle to DEFEAT an enemy than they are to support and protect our brave men and women in uniform!)

Mr Obama is also expected to lay out in a prime-time speech tonight an aggressive goal for greatly increasing the size of the Afghan Army and police force. It will call for increasing the size of the Army to 134,000 troops by next October, four years earlier than the initial goal of 2014. ( This appears to be another tip of the hat to the anti-war zealots that Obama needs to get re-elected in three years)

The accelerated training of Afghan forces is central to Mr Obama’s hopes of handing over responsibility for the country’s security to the Afghans themselves as quickly as possible. (a numbers game, never mind if they can defend themselves against the Taliban, Obama just wants to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq!)

Analysts also believe that another crucial element of the new strategy will be to use the additional troops to secure the main highway between Kandahar in the south and the capital Kabul. This central road is currently not controlled by Nato forces.(As usual we have to the heavy lifting for the NATO skimpy force!)

Mr Obama told America’s senior military leadership about his long-awaited decision on troop numbers and strategy at a 5pm Oval Office meeting on Sunday, said the White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
Mr Obama conveyed his decision, which has been more than three months in the making, to Robert Gates, his Defence Secretary, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman, and General David Petraeus, chief of US Central Command.

The meeting was immediately followed by a secure video conference with General McChrystal and Karl Eikenberry, the US Ambassador in Kabul, when they were also formally instructed about the new strategy.
(I would assume McChrystal was very disappointed that he would not get the 40K troops immediately as he requested)

Mr Obama held a series of calls yesterday with foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown, to brief them about his decision. He also called President Sarkozy of France, President Medvedev of Russia, and personally briefed Kevin Rudd, the Australian Prime Minister, who is in Washington on an official visit. (I am sure he apologized for sending the troops. Since that is all he has done since assuming the Presidency, apologize and bow to foreign leaders for America’s actions)

In tonight’s speech Mr Obama will attempt to convince a sceptical American public that the surge of troops, which will bring the number of American forces in Afghanistan to 100,000, is the right option. ( he has to convince the anti-war base that he had to send troops or risk another Viet Nam massacre )

I was already convinced that he would not grant the Commander in the fields request for 40,000 troops immediately to mount a surge. You will remember Obama said he doesn’t like the word VICTORY!!
This obvious from the leaked reports of the speech he will give at West Point tonight.
In his address,to be delivered from the US Military Academy at West Point, Mr Obama will focus heavily on the importance of an exit strategy, and will make clear that there is no open-ended commitment in Afghanistan.

He is planning to set lay out a “time frame” for scaling back the US involvement there, US officials said.

Withdrawal not VICTORY is on the Commander in Chiefs mind! What a disgrace this man is to the office he holds!!

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: afghanistan, decision, DELAY, obama, troops

PUT YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE AND THIS MAY AWAIT YOU!!

2009-11-30T11:22:00.001-05:00

With things like this going on the now Political Correct Armed Forces it a wonder anyone vlunteers to serve and defend our Country!

Posted by Jax Hawk on Monday, November 30, 2009 10:58:56 AM

The following story is almost unbelievedable in a time of war. It is though some Nazi high Command general had been captured after he killed thousands of American soldiers in an ambush and burned their bodies in a large bonfire that was still smoldering when he was captured. The small group of Rangers that captured him was so enraged that they rough him up before he was turned over to the prisoner of war camp.

When they returned to their unit no citation or medals were forthcoming, but charges of brutality were brought against the unit and they were tried and court martialed!
If this had happened the morale of the fighting men who learned about this heinous and wrong headed charge would have a grave affect on the fighting capability of the men and women trying hard to defeat the Nazi's. We might have lost the war!

Now comes this story from Fox News about a group of Navy Seals. The most highly trained and dedicated unit in the Service that I am proud to have served a very long time ago.

These brave men put their own lives on the line every time they go on a mission. They do things that no other unit can do and it takes dedication and a heroic effort to just become a Navy Seal!

"Navy SEALs had secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges!.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.
Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Pettty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.
The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7!

The official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses [was] given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad. . . .

The detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued. (you will notice that he complained about abuse while he was in the custody of Iraqi's, could they have done the "fat lip" is my question?)

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that “Objective Amber” planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and “they had been tracking this guy for some time.”

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.
They are sensitive because I believe political pressure and negative press about the Iraq war has made them have "rabbit ears"!
If we were’t so “sensitive,” perhaps less American troops would die. The world is laughing at this ridiculous treatment of our own men. Why would anyone want to serve if this is what they get in return? Catch a terrorist murderer and get court martialed?

If you’re looking for a true story that showcases both American heroism and Afghani humanity, Marcus Luttrell’s Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and the Lost Heroes of SEAL Team 10 (Little, Brown, $24.99), written with Patrick Robinson, may be the book for you.

Tags: facts Navy SEAL COURT MARTIAL terrorist OPINIONS

DO AMERICANS WANT THIS TO HAPPEN IN THE USA?

2009-11-29T09:41:00.000-05:00

An article in todays internet version of the Guardian Newspaper of London reveals just what can happen if Americans allow our politicians to turn over our health Care to a bunch of bureaucrats.( and do not expect to see this information in any newspaper or on TV in the USA!)

This article is a frightening portent of what is to come if we allow the Democrats to ram their socialized medicine Bill through Congress to satisfy one of Obama's campaign promises!
The true scandal of NHS hospitals failing to comply with basic safety standards is revealed in today's Observer. Research that ranks every general hospital in England against a range of safety measures has named 12 NHS hospital trusts judged to be "significantly underperforming".

This is despite the fact that last month the Care Quality Commission, the health service regulator, judged overall care at eight of the trusts to be good or excellent. Today's study by Dr Foster, an NHS partner organisation that collates and analyses healthcare data, also highlights 27 trusts with unusually high death rates. Almost 5,000 more patients in their care died in the past year than was expected.

Revelations of such widespread safety failings will send shockwaves through the NHS, already reeling from scandals at two trusts last week. Poor nursing care, filthy wards and hundreds of unnecessary deaths were exposed at Basildon and Thurrock University NHS Hospitals Foundation Trust, and the chair of the NHS trust in Colchester was fired.

Now the new data proves that key safety failings are occurring in 11 more hospital trusts across England. They include Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust, South London Healthcare Trust, Weston Area Health Trust, Hereford Hospitals Trust, Lewisham Hospital Trust and University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Trust. Eighteen were found to have death rates the same or higher than at Colchester. Ministers want to know why seven in particular have had persistently high death rates over five years.

The Department of Health yesterday ordered the CQC to investigate if any other trusts needed urgent attention. The CQC said it was "monitoring closely a number of other trusts", but had no evidence there was another case in England where it would take action of the kind taken at Basildon.

John Black, president of the Royal College of Surgeons, last night told the Observer that patient safety had been neglected by hospitals too busy meeting NHS-imposed financial targets: "Too many hospitals are too concerned with meeting financial targets at the expense of clinical standards, and we are seeing patients suffering as a consequence."

Today's research exposes systemic failures in large parts of the NHS during the last financial year and finds:
■ 39% of trusts failing to investigate unexpected deaths or cases of serious harm on their wards.
■ At least 209 incidents in which "foreign objects", such as swabs and drill-bits, were left inside patients after surgery.
* At least 82 cases in which medical staff operated on the wrong part of the patient's body.

It finds that 5,024 people died after being admitted for "low-risk" conditions such as asthma or appendicitis, of whom 848 were under 65. A proportion of those deaths will be linked to safety errors.

The Conservatives reacted by promising a complete overhaul of the regulation system, which rated Basildon "good" only weeks ago. Andrew Lansley, the shadow health secretary, said: "Labour's failed health inspection regime is more interested in targets than patients." He also questioned the timing of the Basildon announcement. Officials knew of the hospital's failings weeks ago but decided to publicise them last Thursday, just days before the Dr Foster research was due to be published in the Observer".

The NHS in London defines Health Trusts thusly: "Hospitals are managed by acute trusts, which make sure that hospitals provide high-quality healthcare, and that they spend their money efficiently. They also decide on a strategy for how the hospital will develop, so that services improve.

Acute trusts employ a large part of the NHS workforce, including nurses, doctors, pharmacists, midwives and health visitors, as well as people doing jobs related to medicine – physiotherapists, radiographers, podiatrists, speech and language therapists, counsellors, occupational therapists, psychologists and healthcare scientists. There are many other non-medical staff employed by acute trusts, including receptionists, porters, cleaners, specialists in information technology, managers, engineers, caterers and domestic and security staff.

Some acute trusts are regional or national centres for more specialised care. Others are attached to universities and help to train health professionals. Acute trusts can also provide services in the community, for example through health centres, clinics or in people's homes. All the above are run by bureaucrats!

Americans wake up before we trash the best health care in the World and turn the doctor patient relationship into a patient/ bureaucrat relationship!

IT IS TOO BAD THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE DID NOT THINK CHRYSLER BOND HOLDERS DESERVED THE SAME PRO

2009-11-28T14:14:00.000-05:00

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009

If the American public had any doubt where the loyalties of the Obama administration were before yesterday. There is no doubt about it today.

As you will recall when we had the controversy over the government take over of General Motors less than a year ago. During the GM process the issue of bankruptcy for Chrysler was not allowed, by Obama’s Car Czar, to go through the normal bankruptcy process, but a “special” government bankruptcy was pushed through by the Car Czar that was in direct violation of the Constitution!

This travesty ignored the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution that guarantees that the bond holders are prime recipients for any payment that results from reorganization. But in the Chrysler manipulation, the CAR CZAR appointed by, and beholden to only Obama, decided that the bond holders came last and the workers of the auto union came first. A direct violation of the Constitution! In fact Obama called the Bond holders unpatriotic because they were not willing to accept 20 cents on a dollar for their bonds and had threatened to sue to get what they thought they were due !

Now the issue of contracts between the government and ACORN has been addressed by the Attorney Generals office.The issue is, should the government pay monies owed ACORN for services that were contracted(arranged) before the President signed a Bill forbidding the payment of taxpayers money to this corrupt organization.

Remember that when they were contracted to register voters they not only registered dead people, they registered Mickey Mouse!!

In a direct contrast to the Chrysler bond holders deal, the Attorney General’s office ruled that ACORN must be paid because the contracts were in force before Obama signed the Bill forbidding payments to ACORN

The following is an excerpt from an article on the internet written by Charlie Savage.

“Acorn, which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has received about $53 million in federal aid, much of it grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development for providing various services related to affordable housing.

But the group has become a prime target for conservative critics, and on Oct. 1, President Obama signed into law a spending bill that included a provision that said no taxpayer money — including money authorized by previous legislation — could be “provided to” the group or its affiliates.

A Housing and Urban Development Department lawyer asked the Justice Department whether the new law meant that pre-existing contracts with Acorn should be broken. And in a memorandum signed Oct. 23 and posted online this week, Mr. Barron said the government should continue to make payments to Acorn as required by such contracts.

The new law “should not be read as directing or authorizing HUD to breach a pre-existing binding contractual obligation to make payments to Acorn or its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations where doing so would give rise to contractual liability,” Mr. Barron wrote”.

The deputy director of national operations for Acorn, Brian Kettenring, praised Mr. Barron’s decision.

Of course he would and so should all the recipients for the government (tax payer funded) bail outs including the Wall Street bankers, Brokerage houses(AIG,etc.) and other Obama supporters who helped elect Obama, and now are being paid back!

The decision by the acting assistant Attorney General reminds me of the testimoney of Bill Clinton when he was questioned whether he had sex with “ML”. He said it all depends on the meaning of the word is, is? Of course I am paraphrasing his words, but the result is the same. The parsing of words using Semantics to confuse the issue.

Here is what the AAG said: “Mr. Barron said he had based his conclusion on the statute’s phrase “provided to.” This phrase, he said, has no clearly defined meaning in the realm of government spending — unlike words like “obligate” and “expend.”

Citing dictionary and thesaurus entries, he said “provided to” could be interpreted as meaning only instances in which an official was making “discretionary choices” about whether to give the group money, rather than instances in which the transfer of money to Acorn was required to satisfy contractual obligations.

Since there are two possible ways to construe the term “provided to,” Mr. Barron wrote, it makes sense to pick the interpretation that allows the government to avoid breaching contracts”.

I believe the reason why Obama and Democrats are pushing so hard for Health Care reform to be rushed through Congress is to reward large Unions and AARP and other ilk who will gain from Socializing 1/6th of our GNP. Not to cut the cost of health care or provide health insurance to those who cannot afford it!

Wake up Americans !! How long will this corrupt adminstration go without Americans marching in the millions on the Capitol screaming enough already!!

THERE ARE TWO BASIC PRINCIPLES THAT THIS BLOG ADDRESSES

2009-11-27T10:09:00.000-05:00

There are two items of interest that I will address in the blog today. The Economy and Patriotism!

First I am compelled to comment on the asinine statement of Senator Conrad of North Dakota. I hate to cast aspersions on people whom I know little about, but I am compelled to ask the question: What were you people thinking when you sent the elitist stupid man to Washington.

Apparently he does not understand that the Bill of rights gives us freedom of speech, and the uniform code of military justice reigns over all persons regardless of rank that wear the uniform of the United States!

His statement yesterday that impugned all who believe if you commit a crime of the massive effect that was the plotting of flying our airplanes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and is captured on foreign soil by military personnel he is a prisoner of war.

AS such he is entitled to trial by a military tribunal as were the Nazis in Nuremberg, not in the civilian court.

But this paragon of Liberal progressive thinking had this to say about those of us who protest the decision by the attorney general to bring KSM to New York for a civil trial.

"CNSNews.com) – Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) told CNSNews.com that civilian courts are well-suited to prosecute al Qaeda terrorists and that "if people don't believe in our system, maybe they ought to go somewhere else.”
Conrad also dismissed a question about the rights of terrorists captured on foreign battlefields and the rules of evidence in terms of a civilian court trial as not serious.

If Senator Conrad was a patriotic American he would want the confessed plotter of the worst destruction committed on U.S. soil in the history of our Nation, to receive his just punishment. If for no other reason than to avenge the lives of the almost three thousand people who lost their lives in this heinous act, but if this mockery of a trial proceeds it is an almost certainty that the five terrorists will be acquitted if not released by dismissal before the trial begins by the judge because of this Supreme Court Ruling.

According to the Supreme Court in Weeks v. United States (1914), the government cannot use evidence obtained without a search warrant.

“The tendency of those who execute the criminal laws of the country to obtain conviction by means of unlawful seizures and enforced confessions, the latter often obtained after subjecting accused persons to unwarranted practices destructive of rights secured by the Federal Constitution, should find no sanction in the judgments of the courts, which are charged at all times with the support of the Constitution, and to which people of all conditions have a right to appeal for the maintenance of such fundamental rights,” the Court found.

I believe, as most Americans believe, that when an appointed or elected official of the Government, either locla, state or federal does something that is either un-constitutional or just not in the interests of the people whom the official is supposed to represent. They should speak out ! Not quietly, but in a loud voice that gets the attention of the elected and appointed official. It is still a free Country and you can still say anything that is not presently treasonous or inciting to riot!
Senator Conrad should apologize to the American people for his statement!

The second and not necessarally less important is the U.S. Economy. It is heading south rapidly and the number one cause is the massive spending by the Congress to satisfy President Obama's quest to socialize the USA! They say they are doing it to reverse the downward spiral of the economy, but despite and because of the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars, the economy has nose dived that has resulted in an unemployment rate of 17% ,if you count the people who no longer are looking for work!

The fall of the US dollar is turning into an avalanche that I and others could be the downfall of the USA fre-enterprise system!.

The following is an interesting article printed in the English version of Pravda that illustrates my point.
"On Tuesday, the American currency lost nine kopeks in Russia and reached a new minimum mark this year - 29.5 rubles per dollar. Within six months (April through September) the dollar lost over 10 percent at the world foreign exchange trading, which marked the sharpest decline since 1991. Some experts believe that the American currency is close to collapse, which may lead to a new financial crisis.

The tendency of the US dollar devaluation has been observed for a few years, but the current rate of decline is unprecedented. Some jokesters even rushed to re-read the letters of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels written during the US financial panic of 1857 discussing the collapse of America. It would have been funny if it wasn’t so serious.

The chief economist of HSBC Bank Stephen King believes that if the US officials fail to stop the fall of American currency, it may provoke another financial crisis. “A dollar collapse would be a disaster all round… It would leave the international monetary system short of stability and long of fear. It would unleash economic upheavals on a similar scale to those seen in the 1970,” King wrote for The Independent.

American officials don’t seem to be overly concerned since nothing is being done about it. The US hasn’t done anything to support the currency since 1955. But is a collapse inevitable? From the viewpoint of macroeconomic indicators, the US state of affairs is, indeed, scary: record budget deficit of $1.4 trillion, record state debt that now exceeds $11.9 trillion, high unemployment and weak currency. Huge inflows of capital into the economy that Obama is proud of haven’t yet shown results.
But on the other hand, weak currency may be good for the US.

“The economy is supported by industrial orders based on the current weak dollar and higher prices in the future. Key players in the market are ready to support their manufacturers by weakening the currency,” says Alexander Kuptsikevich, FxPro financial analyst.

If the state debt is growing, it means that the US continues to obtain loans.
“Market participants prefer to borrow money in dollars, and dollar loans are relatively affordable. They invest into more active instruments denominated in currencies of developing countries,’ explains Yevgeny Nadorshin, chief economist of Trust Investment Bank.

This causes growth of stock index. For example, Russian Trading System increased by 34 percent within two and a half months.

Shall we sit by while Obamphiles destroy our Republic?

ANOTHER REASON TO WORRY IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS

2009-11-25T09:54:00.000-05:00

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

EM crews that respond to emergency 911 calls will only take you to he nearest hospital. Even if you travel to the city to see an internist or cardiologist who is affiliated with a major metropolitan hospital for a chronic medical condition that suddenly becomes acute. The EMT crews who man the ambulances are required to take you to the nearest hospital.

This is a good idea if you are suffering a heart attack, but if you end up in the emergency room of a rural or small city hospital, you better have them transfer you to the Big city hospital as soon as you are stabilized. If you do not the “TAB” for your treatment will cost you very much more because of provisions in the Pelosi House Health Care Bill.

A rural town’s only hospital very likely has the only outpatient surgery unit, the only radiology unit and the only clinical laboratory. Its outpatient clinic may be the only primary care practice in town, and it may have the only ambulance service and the only home health agency.

If the House health care bill becomes law, the Democrats’ plan stipulates below-market payment rates and a new government-run insurance company that would compete with cash-strapped rural hospitals.

Rural hospitals, which are normally small and operate on a tight budget, could be put in further financial jeopardy because the House-passed version of health care reform does not fix the disparity in Medicare reimbursements between rural and urban hospitals. Rural hospitals usually are paid far less than their urban counterparts, despite facing comparable rates of chronic illnesses such as heart disease or diabetes.

Currently, Medicare reimburses hospitals based on how their average labor costs – adjusted to account for the hospital’s geographic location – relate to the national average. This geographic location adjustment is supposed to represent an area that has relatively uniform costs.

However, if a hospital’s geographic area does not have uniform costs, hospitals can be short-changed and may end up having to pass the excess cost on to patients who carry private insurance.

The disparities are caused by Medicare’s “metropolitan/non-metropolitan” classification system. Under this system, hospitals located in metropolitan areas are paid at one rate and hospitals in non-metropolitan areas – usually the entire area of a state that is not within a particular city’s limits – are paid at a lower rate.

Rural hospitals are often placed in financial straits because costs in the non-metropolitan areas, and financial difficulty translates into shoddy care and the transfer of the lost reimbursement from the Federal government to the patient. This is a double “whammy” courtesy of the Democrats and Rhinos who eventually will pass this travesty if Americans do not wake up and stop it!!

Maggie Elehwany the VP for NRHA told CNSNews.com; “Because these are small facilities, they often operate at a very narrow margin. Many of them are the only access to care for patients within miles and miles and miles,” she said. “They generally have a low [patient] volume but they still have to have a basic level of equipment and update their HIT [Health Information Technology] and things like that.”

“Medicare’s way of saving money is sort of bit like a Costco purchase – the more you do, you’ll make out okay because you’re doing such a high volume of business – that just doesn’t work in rural areas,” she said.

These disparities mean that rural hospitals are forced to pass the costs of Medicare patients not covered by government on to patients with private insurance, a system put at risk by a government-run public option, one that could siphon off those privately insured customers.

If this does not convince you people, who like I do, live in a small city not close to a BIG crime ridden city that the politicians consider US as only “fly over” communities. This provision in the Pelosi Bill should awaken you to the fact that they do not care about us except at election time when they beg for our votes!

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: commentary, cuts, PELOSI BILL, RURAL HOSPITALS

WILL MORAL LEGITIMACY BE QUESTIONED IN NEW YORK TRIAL?

2009-11-24T11:15:00.001-05:00

WILL HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TERRORISTS BE THE ISSUE IN NEWYORK?

Ali Dayan Hassan, senior South Asia researcher for the US-based rights watchdog Human Rights Watch is at work in the United Kingdom. He is also the British HRW South East Asia consultant to the the Lord Chilcot inquiry that will try to decide what was the overriding factor that took Britain into the Iraq war. This is a “crucial secret” the Chilcot inquiry could unlock. Key could be what assurances Tony Blair gave George Bush in a series of bilateral meetings, notably at the president’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.

The five man investigation committee that is holding a hearing that the leader says will last most of a year to investigate what actually was the reason for the Iraq war, and was Britain complicit in the torture of captured terrorist suspects.

The session will be televised on the BBC so it appears London will have a “circus” to watch on the “Tellee”about the same time that we have the travesty called a trial in New York for KSM and his four co-conspirators!

It appears the British have the same Human Rights “shill” as we have here in the USA.
What troubles me is the fact he may be called as a witness for the defense of the Terrorist Five” scheduled by Obama and his Attorney General in New York.

The following is an article that Hasan wrote for Dawn, Pakistan’s only English newspaper.

“ISLAMABAD will be sealed off so that President Musharraf can welcome US President George Bush to his capital. Bush is making the journey to compliment and compensate Musharraf on services rendered in the ‘war on terror’.

Musharraf is hosting Bush to bask in the glory of a renewed alliance with the United States and to strengthen his faltering grip on power. Nowhere is human rights on the agenda.

In the run up to the trip, Bush has praised general Musharraf’s “vision for a democratic Pakistan” and his commitment to “free and open elections” Unless Bush knows something that Pakistanis do not, it appears that the continued disregard and undermining of the Pakistani Constitution, the marginalization of mainstream political parties, and the failure to hold a credible election is an odd formula for a democratic Pakistan and the Bush administration’s broader commitment to “fostering democracy in the Muslim world.”

The skewed view of President Musharraf held by Bush is certainly based on shared values. But rather than the shared value of democracy that Bush likes to speak about, what Musharraf and Bush have in common is a shared commitment to the priority, above all else, of the ‘war on terror.’ Bush has been gushing about Musharraf’s role therein, appreciating his “commitment to joining the world in dealing with Islamic radicals who will murder innocent people to achieve an objective.”

Bloggers note: this is the same Musharraf that identified the man scheduled to be tried with four other terrorists in New York as ” the man who had been recruited by the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Muhammad, who had trained a 12-man suicide squad intended to hit US interests around the world, and conducted reconnaissance of Heathrow airport in preparation for a possible attack” Source: BBC News.

“Given the conduct of the Bush administration in this context, the US president’s appreciation of the Musharraf government is hardly surprising. International human rights law contains no more basic prohibition than the absolute, unconditional ban on torture and “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” To date, the Bush Administration’s understanding of the term “torture” remains uncleared. My comment is that torture and beheading by the terrorists is no problem for this Leftist humanist!

And to make your blood boil even more I offer an excerpt from an article written by Ali Dayan Hasan for the Dawn Internet. The only Pakistan Newspaper that is printed in English”.

DOES THIS SOUND LIKE IT MAY BE USED AS A DEFENSE ARGUMENT IN THE TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR NEW YORK?
”British officials knew that Pakistani intelligence agencies routinely used torture, were aware of specific cases and did not intervene,” HRW’s senior South Asia researcher, Ali Dayan Hasan, said.

Such complicity had been confirmed by unnamed UK and Pakistani officials, the report said.
bloggers note: unnamed sources is a way to say this cannot be verified!

”A key lesson from the past eight years of global efforts to combat terrorism is that the use of torture and ill-treatment is deeply counter-productive,” Mr Hasan went on.
”It undermines the moral legitimacy of governments that rely on it and serves as a recruiting tool for terrorist organisations. ”The evil of terrorism does not justify participating in or using the results of torture. Until an independent inquiry is held and those responsible held accountable, Britain’s reputation as a rights-respecting nation will stand tarnished.”

Some one ought to inform Mr Hasan that all WAR is immoral, but unfortunately there is only one option–to surrender to our attackers! Remeber 9/11/01!!

I would remind the reader that those who blow themselves up to kill innocent people, chop heads off Journalists, and plant IEDs to kill anyone who drives the road are religious zealots dedicated to kill anyone they feel is not Islamic! And need I remind you of the Zaccarias Moussaoui trial as an example of the bad result that can happen in the New York trial?.

But a better case for an accurate preview of what can go wrong is that of USA v. Karim Koubriti and his other co-defendants in the Detroit terror trial. As I’ve noted in excruciating detail, after Koubriti was found guilty by a federal jury in Detroit, his lawyers and PC prosecutors conspired to get the verdict overturned. The Justice Department (yes, it was President BUSH’s Justice Department) indicted the prosecutor (who beat the absurd charges). Terrorist Koubriti is now living in my hometown making his way to becoming a U.S. Citizen (with the DOJ’s help). And he’s suing the prosecutor, Richard Convertino. That’s what can happen here with KSM and his buddies.

Winston Churchill said something that is worth quoting at this point. He said; “A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and then asks you not to kill him!

WHILE POTUS BOWS AND SCRAPES IN THE FAR EAST THE SENATE PREPARES TO RIP UP THE CONSTITUTION

2009-11-23T10:17:00.000-05:00

While in Tokyo, Japan Obama was photographed kowtowing to Emperor Akihito of Japan last weekend, by the middle of the week he was accused of being almost supine when dealing with the new capitalist emperors of China, whom he allowed to stifle his star qualities at every turn.

From the “town hall” meeting in Shanghai stuffed with carefully schooled patsies of the Communist Youth League to the joint press conference with President Hu Jintao at which no questions were allowed, Mr Obama cut an uncharacteristically wooden, stilted figure. As one American columnist acidly observed, at times it was “hard to tell who was Hu.”

Reading from pre-prepared 1,200-word statements, the two men spoke as if from their parallel policy universes, unable even to feign agreement on most key issues. On trade, currency, Iran, climate change and human rights Mr Obama failed to win so much as an inch of ground from his hosts.

And yet two hours later the two governments released a “Joint Statement” which is now being hailed as the most significant step forward in US-China relations since Richard Nixon reopened relations 30 years ago.

The statement – mentioned by neither leader at the press conference – left even the most seasoned China watchers perplexed.

”It was paradoxical,” said Richard Baum, professor of Chinese politics at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The press conference confirmed every low expectation we had for the meeting, but when I saw the statement, I said, ‘Wait a minute, are we talking about the same event?’ It is the most extensive document in 20 years, maybe ever.”

Running to more than 4,000 words, it promised a breadth and depth of co-operation that was unthinkable even two or three years ago. On more than 40 key areas, including military and security ties, global financial governance, climate change and the economy China and America agreed to put their much publicised differences to one side and work together.

From the general (including China’s significant first ever “welcome” to the US as an Asia-Pacific nation contributing stability to the region) to the particular (a pledge to put “millions” of electric cars on the roads of both countries) the document was described as “incredible”.

The substance of the Joint Statement has already caused some to reassess the merits of Mr Obama’s strategy in Beijing. Perhaps, by giving China so much “face”, Mr Obama may in time be judged to have saved his own.

”It was surprising that the White House should roll over to Chinese demands to control the agenda as they did,” said Professor David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy Programme at George Washington University and visiting scholar at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

”He(Obama) met no Chinese people, no CEOs, not even the US Chamber of Commerce. He didn’t give a speech at a university or even visit a wind farm.

“However the Joint Statement is a most extraordinary document, a blueprint for global partnership that opens a new chapter in the China-US relationship.” It was, he said, “a major accomplishment”.

On this view, Mr Obama’s softly softly approach paid a significant dividend, as he traded media opprobrium at home for the chance to take what a White House official called “an important first step” in a new relationship with China. It is a step that the White House hopes will be viewed positively in “the scope of history”, if not in the New York Times – which memorably said Mr Obama had been “squelched” by his Chinese hosts.

Doubters of Mr Obama’s low-key strategy point to China’s failure to give ground on a single major issue this week – not even faintly tougher language on Iran, for example – and wonder if China will ever make the compromises required to turn the grand aspirations of the Joint Statement into reality. Where Mr Obama sees statesmanship, his opponents see weakness which the Chinese are ready and waiting to exploit.

But both governments have asked for patience, saying they are determined to focus on positives not negatives.

“I did not expect, and I can speak authoritatively for the President on this, that we thought the waters would part and everything would change over the course of our almost two and a half day trip to China,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary.

In essence, said veteran Chinese commentator, Shi Yinhong, professor of International Relations at Renmin University in Beijing, both sides have “agreed to disagree” over their core positions, which is itself an important step forward in the context of US-China relations.

“The joint statement clearly places co-operation as the primary aspect of the US-China relationship, relegating their rivalry and competition to a secondary position. This is a position that would have been impossible perhaps even two years ago,” he said. Source: London Telegraph
I say the co-operation will be done by the Obama administration and his MINIONS in Congress, and the ChiCOMS will do the dictating to the USA because they hold all the T-bonds!

While this charade was occurring in China the Senate was violating the Bill of Rights once again, by passing the vote to consider and debate their Health Care travesty called reform 60-39!

The Constitution that was ratified on 12/15.1791 contains section nine(9) that defines the LIMITS of Congress.

This section contains the language that I believe makes the so-called fines on individuals and families that choose not to buy health insurance subject to a fine and possible Jail term.

I am no Constitutional lawyer, but I think the word fine could easily be interpreted as a tax as it applies to the proposed bill.

The language in the Constitution in Section nine (9) is this: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Attainder: The loss of all civil rights by a person sentenced for a serious crime. [< OFr. attaindre, to convict] Source: AHD
In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder!

I also believe the Senate Bill violates the 5th amendment of the Bill of Rights that says:

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If your hard-earned money is not your property,what is?

2009-11-21T11:07:00.000-05:00

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

2009-11-20T10:35:00.000-05:00

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

2009-11-19T11:07:00.001-05:00

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?“

2009-11-18T11:58:00.000-05:00

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

2009-11-17T11:00:00.001-05:00

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!!

2009-11-16T10:05:00.000-05:00

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

WHAT ZEALOTS CAN DO TO AN ECONOMY!

2009-11-14T17:13:00.000-05:00

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

ZEALOTS FOR ECOLOGY MAY DESTROY WORLD ECONOMY!
The Dutch government said Friday it wants to introduce a “green” road tax by the kilometre from 2012 aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 10 percent and halving congestion.

“Each vehicle will be equipped with a GPS device that tracks how many kilometres are driven and when and where. This data will be then be sent to a collection agency that will send out the bill,” the transport ministry said in a statement.

Ownership and sales taxes, about a quarter of the cost of a new car, will be scrapped and replaced by the “price per kilometre” system aimed at cutting the Netherlands’ carbon dioxide emissions by 10 percent.

“Traffic jams will be halved and it helps the environment,” the ministry said.

Dutch motorists driving a standard family saloon will be charged 3 euro cents per kilometre (seven US cents per mile) in 2012. That would increase to 6.7 cents (16 US cents per mile) in 2018, according to the proposed law.

Every vehicle type will have a base rate, which depends on its size, weight and carbon dioxide emissions.

AND THE TELEGRAPH.UK IS REPORTING TODAY THAT A MEMBER OF THE lABOR PARTY IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS IS PROPOSING THAT ALL BRITISH CITIZENS HAVE A CARBON CREDIT CARD!

.It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel

LORD Smith of Finsbury believes that implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity.

Climate change commitments of different countries Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of what they are using.

If their “carbon account” hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits.

Those who are frugal with their carbon usage will be able to sell their unused credits and make a profit.

Lord Smith will call for the scheme to be part of a “Green New Deal” to be introduced within 20 years when he addresses the agency’s annual conference on Monday.

An Environment Agency spokesman said only those with “extravagant lifestyles” would be affected by the carbon allowances. Everyone in Britain should have an annual carbon ration and be penalised if they use too much fuel, the head of the Environment Agency will say.

Many In Britain realize that this is just another way of taking money from the earners to support the welfare programs that drag down the economy in England, and soon will destroy our economy here in the USA if Obama and his sycophants prevail in the Cap and Tax Bill.

We still do not know if Obama will visit Copenhagen for the meeting of the Worlds wealth distribution conference, masquerading as Kyoto II. I believe he will attend if his slippery tongue can convince China to go along with the conference agreement, even though they wil never in a million years abide by any agreement they sign.

At any rate, some USA representative will attend and agree to all the redistribitionists want. You can be sure it will cost millions if not billions of dollars from Americans tax payers to pay” tribute”( aka: ransom) to Third World nations for our “polluting the air” that they breath!

As Obama prepares to visit Communist China he made no reference to the lack of co-operation that China has demonstrated for air quality and only vaguely mentioning human rights in the speech he gave in Tokyo.

He said: “On China, Obama called for harnessing China’s clout to make progress on shared interests like weapons proliferation, a more solid global economy and climate agreements.Fat chance the Chinese will curtail their pollution at the cost of slowing down their quest for economic domination!

Obama will receive accolades and be treated in a royal way because the Chinese Communists recognize that he is a Marxist at heart, but the promises and prosaicisms he receives will be the same as he presently gives to his Commander in the field of war in Afghanistan–JUST empty words!

And while the hot air is coming out of the Obama administration, the UN is crafting a plan that makes blood spurt to my brain!

- A new United Nation’s global warming treaty is expected to give some of the world’s worst polluters–such as the communist People’s Republic of China–and some of the world’s wealthiest nations–such as the oil-rich United Arab Emirates–a license to continue freely pumping carbon into the atmosphere while restricting the emissions of the United States.

The United States will be joining other countries next month in attending “climate talks” in Bonn, Germany, in preparation for the United Nations’ Conference of the Parties 15 (COP15) climate-change summit that will take place in Copenhagen in December.

At the meeting, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will oversee the drafting of an international treaty that will allow some of the world’s wealthiest nations and worst polluters to avoid the legally binding regulations on carbon emissions and greenhouse gases expected in the document.

Countries categorized by the United Nations as Annex 1 Parties, including the United States and much of the industrialized world, are considered developed nations that will not be harmed by controlling carbon emissions. Non-annex I Parties, on the other hand, are countries considered to be “developing” or have “economies in transition.”

These Non-annex 1 countries such as China – which emits the most carbon emissions of any country in the world, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Top 20 Countries for CO2 Emissions–will be able “sign on” to the treaty but will not be legally bound by it. And some of the world’s wealthiest nations, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are on the Non-annex 1 Parties list.

“It’s very political,” Ben Lieberman, senior policy analyst on energy and the environment at the conservative Heritage Foundation, told CNSNews.com. “It has as much to do with what nations are willing to accept than per capita wealth or per capita usage of fossil fuels.”

“In an interconnected world, power does not need to be a zero-sum game, and nations need not fear the success of another,” he said.

He also said the United States “will never waver in speaking up for the fundamental values that we hold dear.” And yet, clearly hoping to avoid overly irritating Beijing, Obama named none of the many and serious specific human rights concerns with respect to China, including Tibet, where authorities have suppressed religious freedom and national aspirations. Except for the brutal regime in Myanmar, he spoke only generally about human rights and democratic values.

ANOTHER PHOTO "OP".,AKA SUMMIT, FOR THE "MESSIA"

2009-11-13T12:46:00.000-05:00

Every time I hear Obama pontificate on what he is going to do to improve the very economy he is so busily destroying, I remember the bombastic five-year economic plans under the Soviet Union communist party's centralized planning who were full of rhetoric, but delivered disaster to Russian socialist economies time and time again.

Obama announced yesterday, that he had planned "a forum(aka: summit) at the White House on jobs and economic growth ... to talk about how we can work together to create jobs and get this economy moving again." Isn't this the precise combination of words Obama used to sell his stimulus package in the first place: "creating jobs to get the economy moving again"? The answer is yes.

A few months ago, Obama wasn't looking for experts to tell him how to stimulate the economy. He claimed to be the expert with the magic bullet solution. Having demonstrably failed, Obama is now convening a photo-op summit, designed to deflect blame and personal accountability for his policy failures and to provide an excuse to give us more of the same, because you can bet that he won't be inviting Friedman free marketers, but academic adherents to failed Keynesian thinking and businesspeople whose judgment and policy endorsement he has purchased or will purchase with your money.

Such disasters involved goods and services that nobody wanted or needed but employed millions of workers at subsistence levels, chronic shortages of basic foods, medicines, energy, water, and fuel that required rationing coupons. Such rationing devolved into perennial long lines (people joined lines all the times, often not really knowing what was for sale, but certain that whatever it was, they needed it) and a thriving black market for everything that was unwisely planned during such grandiose spectacles of the five-year planing committee.

It is nauseating to watch this man lie to the American people while destroying their jobs, their lives, their health care, their futures, and their children's futures for generations to come. The actual rate of unemployment, which includes discouraged workers is around 17%, much more than the promised 8%. Which Americans actually believe that he "saved" or "created" jobs? Just how does one measure such "created" or "saved" jobs? It sounds like voodoo economics to me. Source:Patriot Post

The perception of most economists that are not devoted to Obama, is that the Obama administration is anti-business, and I agree! Newt Gingrich said it well in this quote found in The Washington Examiner. "Last Friday, the unemployment rate jumped to 10.2 percent. The underemployment rate -- including part-time workers who want full-time jobs and those who have simply quit looking for work -- reached 17.5 percent. How did Washington react?

The next day the Democratic-controlled House passed a trillion-dollar increase in government disguised as a health care bill. In the face of the worst jobless rate in 26 years, the Obama administration and congressional Democrats don't seem to realize that adopting bad policies kills jobs. What's most remarkable about this is that the president should know better. We now have proof that the Obama administration's job-killing policies are hurting America.

In an interview with CNBC last January, when he was still trying to sell his massive $787 stimulus bill, President Obama predicted, "If we do nothing, things will get much, much worse. With the plan that we have, we will do better than we would otherwise have done." At the time, the Obama White House predicted that unemployment wouldn't get worse than 8 percent if the stimulus was enacted. By the middle of 2009, they promised, the massive spending bill would be having a positive effect on employment. So much for promises. By the White House's own standards of success, its economic recovery policies have been an abject failure.

That doesn't mean they don't keep touting the stimulus as a success, of course, aided by that most meaningless of economic metrics, "jobs created or saved." In fact, the most accurate measure of jobs under the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress isn't jobs "saved or created," its jobs "lost and dislocated."

American Solutions calculates that the 1 million jobs number cited by the administration as gains for employment actually represents future, additional unemployment. The one million jobs supposedly funded by the stimulus bill -- overwhelmingly in government -- will necessarily end when their government funding ends. Add these one million dislocated workers to the 3.2 million Americans who have lost their jobs since the stimulus was passed and you have an astonishing more than 4 million jobs lost and dislocated since the beginning of the Obama administration's policies.

The one million jobs supposedly funded by the stimulus bill -- overwhelmingly in government -- will necessarily end when their government funding ends. Add these one million dislocated workers to the 3.2 million Americans who have lost their jobs since the stimulus was passed and you have an astonishing more than 4 million jobs lost and dislocated since the beginning of the Obama administration's policies. Democratic economic policies aren't simply ineffective, they are affirmatively job killing. And they're about to get worse. "

I believe the Obama economic policies are not designed, to create jobs, but to grow government and solidify power by first destroying the Free Enterprise system. And with it destroy our freedoms granted to US in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Americans awake before it is too late!!

TEARING THE CONSTITUTION APART PIECE BY PIECE

2009-11-12T09:39:00.000-05:00

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 all of those of US that do not think Obama is the "second coming", we realize he believes the Constitution on which our freedoms and federal government are based, is flawed. Now it appears to me that the Democrats and RHINOS in Congress also believe that the Constitution can be either ignored or manipulated to serve their purposes.

The recent question of whether the Health Care Bill 3200 is even Constitutionally sound was brought up because the Federal government has never mandated that a citizen buy anything, and now the bill passed requires that all citizens buy health insurance approved by the Health Czar or face a fine and possible jail sentence!

When the Senator from Rhode Island ( Reed) was asked by CNSNews where in the Constitution does it give the authority of Congress to demand that a citizen buy health Insurance? He answered with a lame reference to the drafting of people for military service during the time of war.

First reflection on his statement shows the ridiculous concept of comparing the draft to buying health insurance. They only drafted MEN! And they did not have to pay to be drafted! Some paid not to be drafted but that is another story!

The following is a copy of the interview verbatim of Senator Reed by CNSNews

CNSNews asked Senator Reed, where in the Constitution can he find authority or Congress to force all citizens to buy health insurance?

Sen. Jack Reed (D.-R.I.): “Let me see. I would have to check the specific sections, so I’ll have to get back to you on the specific section. But it is not unusual that the Congress has required individuals to do things, like sign up for the draft and do many other things too, which I don’t think are explicitly contained [in the Constitution]. It gives Congress a right to raise an army, but it doesn’t say you can take people and draft them. But since that was something necessary for the functioning of the government over the past several years, the practice on the books, it’s been recognized, the authority to do that.”
And to add insult to injury lets look at how Senator Nelson answered the same question.

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) told CNSNews.com that because he is not a constitutional scholar he was “not going to be able to answer that question” of where specifically the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance.

“Specifically, where in the Constitution does Congress get its authority to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance?” CNSNews.com asked Nelson.

“Well, you know, I don’t know that I’m a constitutional scholar,” said Nelson. So, I, I’m not going to be able to answer that question.” And yet this princely millionaire from Nebraska is going to vote for a Bill that may( many believe it does) violate the Constitution! He might as well have said; what Constitution, who cares?

When asked by CNSNews.com what specific part of the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individuals must purchase health insurance, Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) pointed to the part of the Constitution that he says authorizes the federal government "to provide for the health, welfare and the defense of the country." In fact, the word "health" appears nowhere in the Constitution.

In an analysis published this July, the CBO said that an attempt to justify a mandate that people buy health insurance by using the Commerce Clause—which gives Congress the power to regulate commerce “among the several states”—raises a “novel issue.”

“Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or a service,” said the CBO.

In a recent interview with CNSNews.com, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah), a longtime member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that it was “not constitutionally sound” for Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance.

“But here would be the first time where our [federal] government would demand that people buy something that they may or may not want,” said Hatch. “And, you know, if that’s the case, then we didn’t need a 'Cash for Clunkers,' all we had to do is have the federal government say you all got to buy new cars, no matter how tough it is on you. You know, they could require you to buy anything. And that isn’t America. That’s not freedom. That’s not constitutionally sound.”

THE DISINGENUOUSNESS OF THE LEFT

2009-11-11T09:57:00.000-05:00

Danger - if you meet it promptly and without flinching - you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!...Winston Churchill

Until the Left voted in their "messia", they hated all the provisions of the Patriot Act. Instead of admitting that it provided the tools needed to prevent another 9/11. The Left attacked the Act based on the specious argument that it took away our freedom.

Well, now that they control Congress, the White House and all branches of the Federal government it appears that they like the power that the Patriot Act gives them to gag anyone who prints or speaks against the power grab Obama and his "capos"from Chicago are steam rolling on the USA.

In order to understand the position change the Left has taken it is important to review a little recent history.
On April 8, 2008,working with the Bush administration, Congressional Republicans were maneuvering to make permanent the sweeping anti-terrorism powers granted to federal law enforcement agents after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The Patriot Act

The move touched off strong objections from many Democrats and even some Republicans(RINOS) in Congress who believed that the Patriot Act, as the legislation that grew out of the attacks is known, has already given the government too much power to spy on Americans.

The landmark legislation expanded the government's power to use eavesdropping, surveillance, access to financial and computer records and other tools to track terrorist suspects.

Justice Department officials credited the Patriot Act with allowing the F.B.I. to move with greater speed and flexibility to disrupt terrorist operations before they occur, and they say they wanted to see the time limit on the legislation lifted.

"The Patriot Act has been an extremely useful tool, a demonstrated success, and we don't want that to expire on us," a senior department official said on condition of anonymity.
Despite this endorsement from an agency that protects Americans from another 9/11. Democrats opposed the extension when Bush was president.

The Kyl-Schumer measure eliminated the need for federal agents seeking secret surveillance warrants to show that a suspect is affiliated with a foreign power or agent, like a terrorist group.
The proposal was approved unanimously by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senator Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, added amendments that would require the Justice Department to give detailed information about how the secret warrants are being used and that could give defense lawyers access to some information generated by the warrants in criminal cases.

Fast forward to this week, and this story will demonstrate how opinions change when power changes hands!
In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day.

The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based Indymedia.us Web site "not to disclose the existence of this request" unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization.

Kristina Clair, a 34-year old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department's subpoena. (The Independent Media Center is a left-of-center amalgamation of journalists and advocates that – according to their principles of unity and mission statement – work toward "promoting social and economic justice" and "social change.")

The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded "all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us" on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to "include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information," including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.

"I didn't think anything we were doing was worthy of any (federal) attention," Clair said in a telephone interview with CBSNews.com on Monday. After talking to other Indymedia volunteers, Clair ended up calling the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco, which represented her at no cost.

Under long-standing Justice Department guidelines, subpoenas to members of the news media are supposed to receive special treatment. One portion of the guidelines, for instance, says that "no subpoena may be issued to any member of the news media" without "the express authorization of the attorney general" – that would be current attorney general Eric Holder – and subpoenas should be "directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter."

Still unclear is what criminal investigation U.S. Attorney Morrison was pursuing. Last Friday, a spokeswoman initially promised a response, but Morrison sent e-mail on Monday evening saying: "We have no comment." The Justice Department in Washington, D.C. also declined to respond.

Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, replied to the Justice Department on behalf of his client in a February 2009 letter (PDF) outlining what he described as a series of problems with the subpoena, including that it was not personally served, that a judge-issued court order would be required for the full logs, and that Indymedia did not store logs in the first place.

Morrison replied in a one-sentence letter saying the subpoena had been withdrawn. Around the same time, according to the EFF, the group had a series of discussions with assistant U.S. attorneys in Morrison's office who threatened Clair with possible prosecution for obstruction of justice if she disclosed the existence of the already-withdrawn subpoena -- claiming it "may endanger someone's health" and would have a "human cost."

Lucy Dalglish, the executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of The Press, said a gag order to a news organization wouldn't stand up in court: "If you get a subpoena and you're a journalist, they can't gag you."

My fear is that this kind of bogus gag order is much more common than one would hope, considering they're legally baseless," Bankston says. "We're telling this story in hopes that more providers will press back and go public when the government demands their silence." After all we still have the freedom to speak even it is opposition to what Obama and Pelosi want!

Update 1:59pm E.T.: A Justice Department official familiar with this subpoena just said that the attorney general's office never saw it and that it had not been submitted to the department's headquarters in Washington, D.C. for review. If that's correct, it suggests that U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison and Assistant U.S. Attorney Doris Pryor did not follow department regulations requiring the "express authorization of the attorney general" for media subpoenas -- and it means that neither Attorney General Eric Holder nor Acting Attorney General Mark Filip were involved. I wouldn't be surprised to see an internal investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility. As usual, the deniability game is being played by the Obama administration. Things just happen and no one appears to know about it at the top of the chain of Command!

How long will Americans stand by while the Marxist Liberals destroy our money and freedoms as they incrementally take away pieces of our Constitutional rights?
SOURCE: CBSNEWS.COM

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IS COMPLICIT IN FORT HOOD MURDERS

2009-11-10T10:04:00.000-05:00

November 10, 2009

The U.S. Army doctor(Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan) who shot and killed 13 people and wounded 31 others at Fort Hood ,made two contacts via email during the past six months with the American hating Iman Anwar al-Awlaki, who is in Yemen.

Even though U.S. intelligence agencies monitored the emails that were sent.They decided that they did not require following up. This disclosure has caused US members of Congress to criticise that the intelligence agency’s failed to recognise warning signs about Hasan, and failed to notify the U.S. ARMY or the FBI and Homeland Security.

This revelation shows that Major Hasan was in contact with other extremists abroad prior to the shootings!

In a posting on his website on Monday, headed ”Nidal Hasan Did The Right Thing”, Al-Awlaki said Hasan had carried out a “heroic and virtuous” act and the only way a Muslim could justify serving in the US Army was to “follow in the footsteps of Nidal Hasan”.

He said: ”Nidal Hasan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people.” The US Department of Homeland Security has described Al-Awlaki as an “al-Qaeda supporter, and former spiritual leader” to the two hijackers. He is also mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report as knowing them. He is not accused of knowing they were terrorists. Source: Nick Allen @ Fort Hood

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the US army psychiatrist who went on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, had come to the attention of authorities six months ago because of internet postings that discussed suicide bombings and other threats.
ne of the web postings that authorities reviewed is a blog that equates suicide bombers with a soldier throwing himself on a grenade to save the lives of his comrades.

“To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause,” said the internet posting. “Scholars have parallel this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers.”

The file of apparent missed clues in this case is already thick: besides the apparent connection to Mr al-Awlaki, there is a presentation he gave to fellow combat-stress specialists in Maryland in 2007 in which he reportedly said that his faith trumped the US Constitution.

And despite repeated counseling sessions with his superior officers while he was at Walter Reed Hospital. He was promoted! Had he been a white American, he would have been “passed over” and told he had no future in the Army! But political correctness raised it’s ugly head as it is wont to do in this Country lately, and he was ignored as a potential time bomb that exploded at Fort Hood!

In Europe, the Muslims are already DEMANDING that Sharia Law be instilled/represented in their government!! They have “attempted” to do this in Canada and Australia as well.

At some point, they will attempt the same thing in the US as well. If the loony left are still in power/control in the US—they could possibly be successful.
The Oklahoma bombing was a terrorist act.This shooting was a terrorist act and a treasonous act because it happened on a military base against the U.S.. The Islamic contacts and extremism confuses and complicates the acts .The acts should be taken at face value.He is an American citizen and joined the American forces.He is a traitor to those responsibilities by his actions, and he should be tried, convicted and sentenced. There are over one hundred witnesses to his act of terrorism, and PC is no defense!

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: FORT HOOD. PC, MAJ. HASAN, MURDRES

THE HIT MEN AND WOMEN COMMIT THE MURDER OF HEALTH CARE

2009-11-09T09:51:00.001-05:00

'Prima facie' is a latin phrase meaning 'at first sight.' In law, it is used to refer to a body of evidence sufficient to establish guilt unless the suspected guilty party is able to refute it. In essence, it means that there is a case to answer, and the ability of a prosecuting authority to establish a 'prima facie' case against a defendant would normally be a prerequisite for a trial to take place.

Well, 219 Democrats and one RHINO committed the murder of health care as OUR country has known it for the last sixty years. The health care system that has attracted millions of sick and dying people from foriegn countries was murdered to satisfy the Socialist in the Oval office who made National Health Care his primary objective shortly after he was sworn in as President.
The 219 Democrats and RHINO Rep. Joseph Cao, a first-term Republican who holds an overwhelmingly Democratic seat in New Orleans, committed the murder!. Opposed were 176 Republicans and 39 Democrats. The vote came late Saturday night, and cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.
I can only hope that the Senate will realize this for what it is, a power grab, and defeat it!

A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi compared the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.
That is an apt description, because both programs have cost more than the Congress predicted and both are financial disasters! A fine example of what the Obama power grab disguised as a health care bill will be!
To pay for the expansion of coverage, the bill cuts Medicare's projected spending by more than $400 billion over a decade. It also imposes a tax surcharge of 5.4 percent on income over $500,000 in the case of individuals and $1 million for families.

And Drudge reported yesterday that the Bill passed includes the provision that if individuals or familys fail to buy health insurance they will be subject to a fine of thousands of dollars and a jail term!

Dick Morris & Eileen McGann have posted an article on the net at NEWSMAX.com that explains why AARP. the AMA, and the Drug Industry signed on to Obama's power grab.
As the Democratic congressmen/women proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama health care reform despite the drubbing their party took in the recent '09 elections in Virginia and New Jersey, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these and the other endorsements in his" package" are all bought and paid for.
Each one of the three were warned that if they did not support Obama's powergrab they would pay the price!
In the AMA's case The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians' reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5 percent to 6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill...or else!

The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP -- which supposedly represents them -- will make more money.

The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn't go along with Obama's blackmail. So the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare. Even the Catholic Bishops group endorsed the Bill despite the fact that if you read the fine print abortion will be payed for by tax payers. Many of whom are Catholics, and consider abortion murder!

So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.

IS THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR JUST AN ACT OF COERCION?

2009-11-07T14:09:00.000-05:00

Posted by Jax Hawk on Saturday, November 07, 2009 11:39:21 AM

PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail

JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats’ Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail

Friday, November 06, 2009

Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.

In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”

Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:

“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]

“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]

Criminal penalties

Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:

• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.

“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.

If this doesn't make you angry at "queen" Pelosi, nothing will! She reminds me of the historical woman, Marie Antoinette, who allegedly said; "let them eat cake" whenasked what do do about the bread shortage prior to the French revolution.

PLANNED "PARENTHOOD"GETS PRESENT FROM PELOSI

2009-11-06T09:29:00.000-05:00

Speaker Pelosi’s Government-Run Health Plan Will Require a Monthly Abortion Premium

Health care reform should not be used as an opportunity to use federal funds to pay for elective abortions. Health reform should be an opportunity to protect human life - not end it.

Unfortunately, Speaker Pelosi’s 2,032-page government takeover of health care does just that. On line 17, p. 110, section 222 under “Abortions for which Public Funding is Allowed” the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority to determine when abortion is allowed under the government-run plan. The Speaker’s plan also requires that at least one insurance plan offered in the Exchange covers abortions.

What is even more alarming is that a monthly abortion premium will be charged of all enrollees in the government-run plan. It’s right there on line 16, page 96, section 213, under “Insurance Rating Rules.” The premium will be paid into a U.S. Treasury account - and these federal funds will be used to pay for the abortion services.

Even more blatantly, Speaker Pelosi took out a key provision that would ensure that when patients are given information on end-of-life options it would not include physician-assisted suicide. Instead, she offered the new bill that includes end-of-life 'counseling' without ensuring that such 'counseling' will not encourage physician-assisted suicide as already occurs in Oregon and Washington.

"From womb to tomb, this legislation would use funds garnered from taxpayers to fund abortions and encourage seniors to end their lives early in states such as Oregon and Washington. Consequently, it is paramount that Members of both parties support amendments to prevent a massive new wave of federal funding for abortion, to permanently prevent abortion funding in Indian Health and to re-insert the language preventing physician assisted suicide 'counseling'."

Section 213 describes the process in which the Health Benefits Commissioner is to assess the monthly premiums that will be used to pay for elective abortions under the government-run plan. The Commissioner must charge at a minimum $1 per enrollee per month.

This is in direct opposition to the Hyde Bill! Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic Leadership introduced a new version of the "Affordable Health Care for America Act" which provides federal funds for elective abortion, reauthorizes Indian Health Care without adding the Hyde Amendment, and mandates providing information about physician-assisted suicide in certain states.

"Speaker Pelosi might as well rename her bill the 'Government Funded Abortions for America Act.' This almost 2,000 page bill, which will cost more than one trillion dollars, guts the Hyde Amendment abortion funding ban by explicitly authorizing federal funding for elective abortion funding in the government option. The bill also subsidizes health plans that cover all elective abortions.

"Speaker Pelosi's commitment to federally funded abortion is, apparently, absolute. She is ignoring the roughly 70 percent of the American people who, polls show, consistently oppose federal funding of elective abortion, which indisputably is what this new health bill does! Source: Family Resource Council

Despite the zeal Pelosi has for killing babies in their mother's womb there are people who are turning away from Americas genocide as this story tells.
"Watching an ultrasound of an abortion changed Abby Johnson forever. She is now prolife and has quit her job as director of the Planned Parenthood clinic in Bryan, Texas. Johnson describes her conversion this way:

“I just thought I can’t do this anymore, and it was just like a flash that hit me and I thought that’s it.”
She also says that there was pressure on her to increase revenues for Planned Parenthood by increasing the number of abortions. She explains in The Houston Chronicle:

JUST ANOTHER CAMAIGN SPEECH, WHEN WILL IT END?

2009-11-06T08:50:00.000-05:00

President Obama opened a summit with American Indians here in Washington today, making good on a campaign promise to hold annual meetings with tribal leaders.

386 tribes were represented at the Tribal Nations Conference where Mr Obama signed a presidential memorandum requiring every cabinet agency to report back to the president on ways to improve the relationship between the federal government and tribal communities.

According to the White House today's meeting at the Department of the Interior was the largest and most widely attended gathering of tribal leaders in US history. Government officials planned to discuss problems facing the American Indians including the economy, education, health care, public safety, and the environment

"You will not be forgotten as long as I'm in this White House," Obama said during opening remarks at the all-day conference of tribal leaders and government officials.

Obama said the meeting is the largest and most widely attended gathering of tribal leaders in U.S. history. Officials planned to discuss problems facing American Indians, including economic development, education, health care, public safety and housing.

Given the government's history of reneging on agreements with Native Americans, Obama said it took an "extraordinary leap of faith" for leaders to attend the meeting. Obama said he is determined to be a good partner with tribal nation.

There are two problems with Obama's speech to the indians.

The Lakota Nation has withdrawn from all treaties with the United States, national leaders said Wednesday. “We are no longer citizens of the United States of America and all those who live in the five-state area that encompasses our country are free to join us,” Indian leader Russell Means told reporters and a delegation from the Bolivian embassy at a Washington news conference.
There are approximately 2,500 tribes and one broke away from the USA .
A delegation of Lakota leaders delivered a message to the US State Department on Monday 12/20.07, announcing they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties they signed with the federal government of the United States.
They also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and Venezuelan embassies, and will continue on their diplomatic mission and take it overseas in the coming weeks and months, they told the news conference.

The Lakota Nation includes parts of the states of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming

The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 provided for the formation of "tribal governments" under federal authority as vehicles for Indian "self-government." The Act provided a model of government based on democratic and corporate structures often at odds with the original forms of organization among indigenous nations. The New Deal abandoned some of the exercises of federal authority typical of the allotment era that preceded it. Thus establishing a separate Indian Nation!

Tribal councils established under the Indian Reorganization Act are regarded as vehicles of "tribal sovereignty"; they act as governments and not just as corporations.Indian nations are regarded as immune from suit without their consent, under the doctrine of "sovereign immunity.

The idea of indigenous sovereignty surfaced internationally and with intensity in the Draft United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, E/CN.4/Sub. 2/1994/56, issued in 1994 as a report to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. This document, which may eventually become the basis for an international protocol or convention, stirred up the ancient debates. The United States took an official position that the word "peoples" was inappropriate in a statement of "rights," because it implied group rights, which would threaten the sovereignty of states. The United States and others argued that "rights" adhere only to individuals, and that no group may be recognized as having any legal existence independent of a state. Indigenous nations, on the other hand, asserted that the Draft Declaration was meant to embody just such group rights, that these were essential for the survival of indigenous peoples worldwide.

Secondly, In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (in the case California vs. Cabazon band of Mission Indians) that states had no authority to prosecute gaming conducted on Indian land. It was a huge victory for the tribes.

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (Pub.L. 100-497, 25 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.) is a 1988 United States federal law that establishes the jurisdictional framework that governs Indian gaming. There was no federal gaming structure before this act. [1]The stated purposes of the act include providing a legislative basis for the operation/regulation of Indian gaming, protecting gaming as a means of generating revenue for the tribes, encouraging economic development of these tribes, and protecting the enterprises from negative influences (such as organized crime)[2]. The law established the National Indian Gaming Commission and gave it a regulatory mandate. The law also delegated new authority to the U.S. Department of the Interior and created new federal offenses, giving the U.S. Department of Justice authority to prosecute them.
The law has been the source of extensive controversy and litigation. One of the key questions is whether the National Indian Gaming Commission and Department of Interior can be effective in regulating tribal economic decisions related to Indian gaming. Senator John McCain is in favor of greater regulation, while a prominent professor in the field is skeptical that such regulation is effective.[3] Many of the controversies have produced litigation, some of it reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.

The National Indian Gaming Association (NIGA) is a non-profit organization founded in 1985 of 184 Indian Nations, with additional nonvoting associate members. The purpose of the NIGA is "to protect and preserve the general welfare of tribes striving for self-sufficiency through gaming enterprises in Indian country," and to "maintain and protect Indian sovereign governmental authority in Indian Country." The NIGA seeks to advance the lives of Indian people economically, socially, and politically. The NIGA's office building is located in Washington, D.C. The NIGA headquarters building was purchased by a tribal collective. It is the first structure to be owned by Native Americans in Washington, D.C The building was purchased with money from casino operations on Native American lands.

Native Americans today have a unique relationship with the United States of America because they can be found as members of nations, tribes, or bands of Native Americans who have sovereignty or independence from the government of the United States. Their societies and cultures still flourish amidst a larger immigrated American populace of African, Asian, Middle Eastern, and European peoples.Despite this fact, Native Americans who were not already U.S. citizens were granted citizenship in 1924 by the Congress of the United States.

American Indian and Alaska Native in combination 1.6 million are registered voters. This is 1.37% of the US population.

Through the years, Native Americans became US citizens by:
1. Treaty provision (as with the Mississippi Choctaw)
2. Registration and land allotment under the Dawes Act of February 8, 1887
3. Issuance of Patent in Fee Simple
4. Adopting Habits of Civilized Life(?)
5. Minor Children
6. Citizenship by Birth
7. Becoming Soldiers and Sailors in the U.S. Armed Forces
8. Marriage to a US citizen
9. Special Act of Congress

So it is easy to see this was just another "promise" speech to a minority voter group.

WILL THIS BE OUR FUTURE? RIP THE USA!!

2009-11-05T10:06:00.001-05:00

Born 1776, Died 2008

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning last November’s Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29

Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.
Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low-income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare…”

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation’s population already having reached the “governmental dependency”

Obama’s election brought the United States astronomical public debt, a slumping currency, increasing government control of the economy, continued job losses, radical judges, a disastrous foreign policy, a proposed government takeover of health care and a job-killing energy bill. Americans — some unwittingly — put in place the most radical government in generations, and they now are realizing what they have wrought.”

And if American freedom dies it will be the enablers in academia, left -wing religion and journalism that are partly responsible for its demise.The underlying myth in much of their “reporting,”and teaching has been that free market capitalism was a greater threat to human happiness than communism or socialism!

In many ways the USA is rapidly approaching the economic situation that precipitated the rise in power of Adolph Hitler in Germany. With the massive spending of money that the Treasury is printing on a 24 hour cycle to fund the outlandish social programs the Congress is passing to satisfy the Marxist in the White House. We are setting ourselves up for this scenario as described in Wikipedia.

In 1922 and 1923 Germany was hit by Hyperinflation. This means massive rise in prices, everyone was affected by this. Te confusion caused by the hyperinflation led Adolf Hitler to believe that he could take power in Munich in November 1923. The attempt failed. Hitler believed that the government was so unpopular that Germans would be on his side. Hitler was arrested for high treason. While Hitler was in prison he wrote a book called my struggle(Mein Kamp), he became very popular with the Germans.

When Hitler left prison he set up a proper political with a national organization. He set up different sections for the party teachers, women and children. He appointed Josef Goebbels as head of propaganda.

There was bad employment IN Germany as we have here in the USA, and the prdictions are that it will get worse!. From 1929 support for the Nazis grew steadily. Most of what Hitler did in his quest for power was legal. Such as his move to centralize all aspects of German government, social life and its economy. Sound familiar!

The nazi party was well organised and had the support of Alfred Hugenberg who was a millionaire and owned 53 newspapers.And Hitler was an eloquent speaker who could motivate people not unlike the man we have in the White House!

The career of Adolf Hitler was marked by a spectacular rise to power. He went from being a nobody in the streets of Vienna to the supreme leader of one of the most powerful nations on earth. Hitler came to power through a combination of legal means and backroom politics. The events leading up to the rise of the Nazis and Hitler are prime examples of the myriad of factors intertwining in the area of social action. Economists view the economic conditions as the major reason for the downfall of the Weimar republic and the rise of the Nazis. Are we heading toward the fate of the Weimar Republic?

Posted in THREATS TO US
COMMENTS, ECONOMY, GERMANY, obama, REVOLUTION

THE SCHIZOPHRENIC OBAMA ON USA DEFENSE

2009-11-04T10:38:00.000-05:00

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” –James Madison

THE MEDICAL DEFFINITION OF SCHIZOPHRENIA

Positive symptoms include hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking, speaking, and behavior. Negative symptoms include lack of emotion, lack of energy, and lack of motivation.

Obama said that the new Defense bill would save tens of billions of dollars by cutting wasteful projects.I take exception to this statement, because no weapon that helps defeat the enemy and makes it more safe for our armed forces is wasteful. The fraud in making and providing these weapons is a problem, but no one in Washington is attacking corruption. This is obvious in the most recent revelation that thousands of checks were sent to dead people!
Obama continued with; “I have always rejected the notion that we have to waste billions of dollars of taxpayer money to keep this nation secure,” Obama said, before signing the defense authorization act at the White House.

“In fact, I think that wasting these dollars makes us less secure – and that’s why we have passed a defense bill that eliminates some of the waste and inefficiency in our defense process.” What the liberal translation of this statement is. I cut the defense budegt so I can fund socialized medicine!
Nevertheless, the new bill is $30 billion larger in spite of the fact that Obama supports non-military solutions of all disputes and conflicts. He decided to shelve missile defense plans in Eastern Europe, cut strategic arms and supported the peaceful solution of the Iranian nuclear program.

Those of you who like scuba diving, as I did in my youth, are familiar with the ramora. Remoras are commonly found attached to sharks, manta rays, and whales.

The relationship between remoras and their hosts is most often taken to be one of parasitism and mutualismy. The host they attach to for transport gains nothing from the relationship, but also loses little. The remora benefits by using the host as transport and protection and also feeds on materials dropped by the host. There is controversy whether a remora’s diet is primarily leftover fragments.

IN MY MIND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THOSE WHO HAVE BENEFITED FROM THE ELECTION OF OBAMA AND THE TAX PAYER’S MONEY HE HAS SPENT AND PROPOSES TO SPEND WITH STIMULUS MONEY , HEALTH CARE AND CAP AND TRADE IS SIMILAR TO THE SHARK AND THE RAMORA.

Campaign contributors, especially those who bundled large contributions from others, have been embraced by this administration. Because they aren’t formally registered or regulated in the way lobbyists are, they enjoy the benefits and privileges of serving in the heart of the administration.

These contributors serve in critical foreign and domestic policy positions, as well as department and agency boards and commissions. Dozens of Obama for America National Finance Committee members have joined the administration. Most of them raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the campaign, according to the watchdog group the Center for Responsive Politics.

Add to this the illegals, the 111 federal beaurecrats that the proposed health care bill being pushed by Pelosi will create, unions, ACORN and fanatical ecologists and you have just a few of the special interest groups that I compare to ramoras living off the big shark, Obama

But watch out those of us in the balance of the population, because WE are just prey to the shark!

This inconsistent treatment does a disservice to most Americans.. Obama ignores the majority of Americans who want this country to retain our essential values and preserve the free enterprise system that has made the USA the envy of the world!

But yesterdays election in New Jersey and Virginia should be an indication that Obama and his merry band of “capos” are taking America down a road that WE do not want to travel!!

WHILE OUR OWN NERO FIDDLES OUR DOLLAR SLIDES

2009-11-03T08:46:00.000-05:00

BLOOMBERG.COM REPORTS: The dollar slid against high-yielding currencies, led by the Australian dollar, as China reported a surge in manufacturing and investors bet factory production in the U.S. accelerated. Oil, copper and gold climbed.

The so-called Aussie advanced versus 15 of the 16 most- traded currencies as of 10:12 a.m. in London, and the Swedish krona gained against all 16. Oil added 1 percent in New York while copper rose 0.7 percent in London and gold rallied 0.8 percent. Futures on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index increased 0.7 percent, indicating the benchmark gauge for U.S. equities may rebound from its steepest weekly drop since May.

Manufacturing in China expanded at the fastest pace in 18 months, according to a purchasing managers’ index from HSBC Holdings Plc. The U.S. Institute for Supply Management’s manufacturing index probably climbed to the highest level in three years, a Bloomberg News survey showed. Australian Treasurer Wayne Swan today increased the government’s forecast for growth, fueling speculation the central bank will raise interest rates tomorrow for the second consecutive month.

“The markets have taken a step back and said: hold on, the global economy is recovering and we’re not in an environment where risk aversion is going to shoot up on a sustained basis,” said Daragh Maher, the London-based deputy head of global currency strategy at Calyon, the investment-banking arm of Credit Agricole SA.

The dollar fell most against the Australian currency, dropping 0.7 percent, sending the Dollar Index, which IntercontinentalExchange Inc. uses to track the greenback versus some of the U.S.’s biggest trading partners, down 0.1 percent.
The pound fell for a second day against the dollar on speculation the Bank of England will extend its bond-buying program this week to revive Britain’s shrinking economy. Sterling also snapped a five-day gain versus the euro as Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc said it may be forced to sell assets “not initially contemplated” to shore up its finances.

The dollar’s decline buoyed commodities, while China’s manufacturing report revived optimism that the world’s biggest consume of metals will buy more raw materials. Copper for three- month delivery on the London Metal Exchange rose $45 a metric ton to $6,525. Crude oil for December delivery added 61 cents to $77.61 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Gold for immediate delivery climbed as much as $8.35 an ounce to $1,053.76, the highest price since Oct. 26.

While this govt. devaluation of our money continues, the Congress plans to destroy the best health care system in the world.
If lawmakers were to create a public plan as envisioned by many congressional leaders, particularly liberal Democrats in the House, millions of Americans could lose their current employer-sponsored insurance, end up crowded out of private coverage, and find themselves enrolled in the new public "option."

The 40 percent levy on health care costs above $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families passed the U.S. Senate Finance Committee on Oct. 13. If the tax were to become law, experts said, government employees in New York would be hit hard because their powerful unions have negotiated benefits that go beyond medical and prescription drug coverage to include, among others, dental and vision.

The tax would be paid by insurers who then are expected to pass it along in the form of higher premiums, deductibles and co-pays.

The fight in Washington has revived questions about why government employees have such robust health care and whether it can be sustained when public treasuries have been depleted by the recession.

A review of benefits shows large disparities between the public and private sectors, with the exception of top executives and unionized manufacturing workers, who often have generous coverage.

Employee contributions to premiums also are lower in government. State workers and teachers pay between 5 percent and 20 percent depending on coverage type. Suffolk workers and Nassau workers hired before January 2002 pay nothing

"A lot of state workers would qualify because of the dental and vision, and the fact that health care is the fastest growing expense," said Kenneth Brynien, head of the 59,000-member state Public Employees Federation.

Senate legislation acknowledges this and provides a limited remedy. Tax thresholds for New York and 16 other high-cost states would be set higher in the first year and gradually decline to the national level over the next two years.

Over time, the tax would affect more government workers and people in the private sector. "We're going to get hit and so is just about everyone on Long Island who has health insurance," said Carl Korn, spokesman for the 600,000-member New York State United Teachers union.
As Republican minority leader says: "
We now have a choice: we can come together to implement smart, fiscally responsible reforms to improve Americans’ health care or we can recklessly pursue this government takeover that creates far more problems than it solves.

It’s clear where the American people stand on this issue. They‘re frustrated and fed up. The ‘stimulus’ bill isn’t working. Unemployment is rising. The debt to be paid by our kids and grandkids is exploding. And now, Speaker Pelosi’s 1,990-page government takeover of health care.No doubt the White House and Democrats in Congress will continue to insist that Republicans "have no plan." But Boehner's four proposals are contained in fleshed-out legislative form in several GOP reform bills. They really exist

Enough is enough. Breaking the bank and taking away the freedoms Americans cherish is not the answer to the challenges we face".

PROCRASTINATION IS THE WAY TO DEFEAT

2009-10-31T19:59:00.054-05:00

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen pointed out the dangers of failure on the part of the Western military alliance in Afghanistan. The war effort is already underfunded to the tune of several hundred million euros. Nevertheless, the costs of defeat will be much higher than the costs of the mission, Rasmussen said at the NATO summit in Bratislava, Slovakia last week.

UNFORTUNATEY, his warnings have fallen on deaf ears, with only Great Britain agreeing to a slight increase in troop strength. All other NATO defense ministers, including, of course, the German defense minister, remained politely aloof when it came time to make commitments.

For once, this hesitation cannot be attributed to widespread war fatigue in Europe. The mission in Afghanistan is seen as a toxic issue in all Western nations,( it is difficult to fund a war and run an alredy failing socialist government) and every government that has provided troops has come under sharp criticism at home. What the US's NATO allies now find far more irritating is US President Barack Obama's silence on the issue!

The world has been waiting for clear words from the White House for months. Obama has had government and military analysts studying the military and political situation in the embattled Hindu Kush region since early January. He appointed Richard Holbrooke, probably the US's most effective diplomat in crisis situations, to be his special envoy to the "AfPak" region, he has replaced generals and he has deployed more troops. The answers Obama asked his experts to provide after taking office have been sitting on his desk for a long time. But the conclusions vary. Obama will have to make his own decision, one that will shape his political fate.

According to Carl von Clausewitz, a country has only won a war when it has imposed its will on the enemy. But even without studying the writings of the Prussian military historian, which are required curriculum at military academies like the US Military Academy at West Point, the American generals know full well just how far they are from that goal in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

White House officials have previously told the Associated Press Obama is considering sending a large number of additional U.S. forces to Afghanistan next year but fewer than Gen. Stanley McChrystal prefers. The president appears willing to send at least 10,000 to 15,000 troops of the 40,000 forces requested by McChrystal.

The Washington Post reported that Obama is seeking a strategy that would satisfy both his military and civilian advisers.(what they do not say is he is trying to appease his anti-war supporters and still act like a CIC of the armed forces)
Obama's long awaited review of how to right a deteriorating war effort is hopefully nearing its end but appears weeks away from being wrapped up. Once made, he is expected to explain his decision to the American public( a telepromptered aided speech written by his speech writers) and the international community in a prominent way, such as a major address. The details are not yet set.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff includes a high ranking admiral and generals from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. The group's main mission is to ensure that the armed forces are trained, ready, healthy and large enough to carry out the missions of the military. In that sense, the body would play a vital role in a normal presidents decision, but I do not think in Obama's war planning they have as much input as his Czars and people like George Sorros. Or the decision would have been made long before this. No commander leaves his field general who has requested more troops and support, hanging in doubt this long!

Morale and unfortunately deaths and injury resut from indecision. Not VICTORY!

WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TO FACTS IS ACCUSATION AND INDIGNATION

2009-10-31T10:28:00.002-05:00

Posting its results late yesterday afternoon at Recovery.gov, the White House claimed 640,329 jobs have been created or saved because of the $159 billion in stimulus funds allocated as of Sept. 30.

Even though officials in the White House acknowledged the numbers were not exact, saying that states and localities that reported the numbers have made mistakes.
Assuming their number is right -- 160 billion divided by 1 million. Does that mean the stimulus costs taxpayers $160,000 per job?

Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic advisor to the vice president, called that "calculator abuse."
He graduated from the Manhattan School of Music with Bachelors Degree in Fine Arts where he studied double bass with Orin O'Brien. He earned a Masters Degree in Social Work from the Hunter School of Social Work, and from Columbia University he received a Masters Degree in Philosophy and Ph.D. in Social Welfare. With that kind education he becomes an economist? Why not a brain surgeon while he's at it!

Bernstein's areas of interest include "federal, state and international economic policies, specifically the middle-class squeeze, income inequality and mobility, trends in employment and earnings, low-wage labor markets, poverty, and international comparisons."[2] He is known as a critic of free trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).[3] He has taught at Howard University, Columbia University and New York University. In 1992, he was hired at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a think tank with ties to organized labor and a focus on issues affecting low- and middle-income workers.[3] From 1995-1996, he served in the Department of Labor as Deputy Chief Economist. He then returned to the EPI, where he was senior economist and director of the Living Standards Program when selected by Biden. Source:Wikipedia

This appears to be the modus operandi for the Obama "capos"anytime anyone disagrees with their "messia".Instead of refuting the facts presented in opposition to their "rosy" claims. The acolytes of Obama attacked those who questioned the claims of jobs creation and saved.

And by the way, proving "jobs saved" is like proving "how high is up"!

Thomas Sowel an noted University Professor of economics had this to say in a recent article'
White house seems to react violently to any suggestion that what they are doing or saying by "indignation, accusations of bad faith and even charges of racism." The White House thinks we should all be nice little sheep and follow any way that OUR SHEPHERD leads us with so much as a bleep! The only problem is that is to the destruction of our economy and a change fre the free enterprise system to a marxist socialism or worse!

Bernstein was not able to say how many of the 640,329 jobs were saved and how many were created. How do they know that government officials asking for stimulus funds to help prevent layoffs were legitimate?

What we have to do is expect that our public officials are honest," Bernstein said. "I know that's a high bar."

After all the lies and mis-information that have come from the White House that bar is a super world class pole vault for all of us that are not members of Obama's worshipers!

THE TRUTH IS A STRANGER TO DEMOCRATS IN WASHINGTON

2009-10-30T09:52:00.001-05:00

At first the pitch to Americans was that we needed a Health Care Bill to cover the 40 plus people who did not have health insurance, but the Bill that Queen Pelosi introduced on the steps of the House of Representatives leaves out 29 million Americans despite the fact that the taxes begin as soon as the Bill is signed by the president and the health care plan is scheduled to begin in 2013!

The second reason Obama and his minions said was why they needed to pass a Health Care Bill was to save patients and the country from rising health care costs. But the nearly 2000 page bill presented yesterday
added $20 billion in taxes on sales of medical devices like artificial hips and heart stents to the legislation..

In fact the Bill would impose an array of new taxes, fees and government mandates on major players in the health industry, including insurers, doctors and drugs and would cost the tax payers at least $1.05 trillion dollars according to the CBO preliminary estimate.

And Obama said repeatedly that thousands of people die each year because they do not have health insurance. But when Gov. Sara Palin said that the proposed bill would have "death panels" included in it. Every Democrat and the president lied and said there was no such provision in any proposal. The Senate promptly removed the provision from its proposed Bill , but the Medicare end-of-life planning provision that Sarah Palin said was tantamount to "death panels" for seniors is staying in the latest Democratic health care bill unveiled Thursday.by Pelosi!

The provision allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling to help beneficiaries deal with the complex and painful decisions families face when a loved one is approaching death.
President Barack Obama has promised Americans that if they like their current insurance, they can keep it. But Republicans say that’s a promise the president cannot make. I believe he never believed what he said!

“When you set the government up as a competitor, as a funder, as a regulator, all that can happen is, it’s going to drive the private sector out,” Sen. Chuck Grassley told Fox News on Tuesday.

A bill that drives up insurance premiums and taxes and also cuts Medicare is not health care reform. And the Bill the House plans to vote on next week cuts medicare disbursements by 450 billion dollars over a ten-year period! This can only lead to reduction of doctor payments and the resulting decrease in the number of medical providers due to retirement of older doctors, rather than work under a plan that cuts the already low reimbursements to doctors by Medicaid and Medicare..Grandma's access is being slashed to add illegal immigrants and twenty-somethings into the insurance system.

Here's the latest shock: Average current health insurance premiums with likely triple under Obamacare.

The new data comes from a well regarded, state-by-state study conducted for WellPoint, Inc. The most dramatic premium boosts will hit young people. These are the actual individuals that often opt out of insurance plans now.

The reason for the dramatic insurance premium increases is the result of Obamacare regulations. First cause is the mandate that insurance companies take any customer. Insurance traditionally is an actuarial business that rates different customers based on risk factors. This is the reason a driver aged 19 with two speeding tickets pays more for auto insurance than a customer aged 35 with no speeding tickets. Nineteen-year-olds have more accidents. Therefore they pose more risk.

Traditionally, health insurance companies charged customers with risk factors and chronic illness more than young, healthy 19-year-olds. Obamacare stands the concept of insurance on its head. Since an insurance company will be forced to sell to any sick patient, the incentive to buy insurance when you are healthy decreases. Why not wait until you are sick; get cancer, diabetes or some other severe illness before you buy? To circumvent this problem, Obama is riddling the program with police-state mandates on healthy, younger citizens. Perverted, negative incentives such as threats of large fines and even prison time will hang over young people's heads to force them to join and stay enrolled in Obama's healthcare scheme. Does this sound like America to you? Source: Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

Will the American voters allow the government that has bankrupted Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. Postal Service. WE cannot allow Obama and his ilk in Congress to let the politicians destroy the greatest healthcare delivery system in the world in the disguise of reducing cost and increasing access to Americans who have no health Insurance. Let the Republican plan to repeals laws that prohibit selling health insurance across state lines, introduce tort reform and include the legal Americans who do not have health insurance because they cannot afford it. To be included in the medicaid plan.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell also warned that the Democrats' "trillion-dollar" legislation will raise insurance premiums, raise taxes and slash Medicare to create new government spending programs.He did not include the words, but the increase will be directed toward abortion on demand!

Karen Ignagni, President and CEO of America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), said the proposed government-run insurance plan "would underpay doctors and hospitals rather than driving real reforms that bring down costs and improve quality. The American people want health care reform that will reduce costs and this plan doesn't do that." Source:CNSNews.com

And if this does not convince you that the TRUTH is a stranger to Obama and the Democrats in Congress. Maybe this will tweak your mind!
bama repeatedly has used transparency in government as a campaign slogan and a continuing phrase he used to deprecate the industries like the private Insurance companies. He claimed what they lacked was transparency of their profit that he said were excessive. The fact is the bottom line of health insurance companies shows that they make only 2% profit!
Yet both the House of Representatives and the Senate, both controlled by Democrats, crafted their Bills behind closed doors!

THREE REASONS AND MORE ABOUT THE USA ECONOMIC COLLAPSE

2009-10-29T09:03:00.001-05:00

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

First and foremost, the US state debt has skyrocketed from $2 trillion to $11 trillion within a decade. The USA will never be able to pay off the debt.
Secondly, the political structure of the nation is vulnerable. There is neither universal legislation in the country, nor common traffic rules. The US Army does not execute its major function – defense – anymore since many foreign nationals prefer to serve in the army to obtain the US citizenship.
Third, the split of elites, which was especially visible under the conditions of the crisis.
The problems, which Panarin named, are absolutely real. However, there is only one thing that is real: America will not be able to cope with these problems. The USA is sick, but the illness began a long time ago and had a number of exacerbation. However, none of those illnesses has ever resulted in the collapse of the nation.

The USA survived several immigration and economic crises. There was the split of elites before – it once resulted in the civil war between the North and the South. Winston Churchill once said that Americans will find a way out of a difficult situation only after they try all other ways. It goes without saying that the map of the United States will remain unchanged in 2010.
Professor Igor Panarin made his mapof the divided USA in 1998, although it did not produce any attention on either the Russians or the Americans.

For those who have not seen the map It divides the USA into sections that will be taken over by foreign countries, such as Alaska by the Russians, the South West and the West Coast by the mexicans and so on! Any American knows that the USA economy is based on a large market. The larger the market is, the faster the nation can overcome economic difficulties.

America has never suffered from any crisislike like we are facing todayEven.after WWII, that is why the current crisis so painfully. However, the interest, which so many Americans have shown to the research of the Russian professor, proves they treat the imminent threat seriously. The government and the majority of the USA will not take a risk of triggering a global war.
If we do, our nation will suffer from much greater damage than it did during WWII, when we lost thousands of military personel but no damge to our infra-structure. There were no intercontinental ballistic missiles 70 years ago. However, Our nation's presnt leadership can provoke smaller, local wars, for example a conflict between China and India. If it happens, the USA will not try to have Russia involved in any regional conflict because Russia, for the time being, is the only state that is technically capable of destroying America,

Within six months (April through September) the dollar lost over 10 percent at the world foreign exchange trading, which marked the sharpest decline since 1991. Some experts believe that the American currency is close to collapse, which may lead to a new financial crisis.
Our present GDP to the amount of money in circulation, due to the government printing money as fast as they can spend it, is 120 times the GDP. The slide of the US dollar devaluation has been observed for a few years, but the current rate of decline is unprecedented.
Some jokester even rushed to re-read the letters of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels written during the US financial panic of 1857 discussing the collapse of America. It would have been funny if it wasn’t so serious.

The chief economist of HSBC Bank Stephen King believes that if the US officials fail to stop the fall of American currency, it may provoke another financial crisis. “A dollar collapse would be a disaster all round! It would leave the international monetary system short of stability and long on fear. It would unleash economic upheavals on a similar scale to those seen in the 1970,” King wrote for The Independent.

American government officials, including the Treasury and the Congress, don’t seem to be overly concerned since nothing is being done about it.And the spending marches on at a rapid pace despite the Tea Parties and protests by concerned citizens.
The US hasn’t done anything to support the currency since 1955. But is a collapse inevitable? From the viewpoint of macroeconomic indicators, the US state of affairs is, indeed, scary: A record budget deficit of $1.4 trillion, record state debt that now exceeds $11.9 trillion, high unemployment and weak currency. Huge inflows of capital into the economy that Obama is proud of haven’t yet shown results!

AND WHILE OBAMA CUTS ONLY THE "UNNECESSARY" DEFENSE SPENDING, THE RUSSIANS HAVE DEVELOPED A NUCLEAR CARRYING ROCKET THAT THEY SECRETLY FIRED AT THE POLAR REGION.
On 11 October 2008 Russia’s northern fleet held military exercises in the Murmansk region. Russia’s President Dimitry Medvedev praised the maneuvers paying special attention to the launch of the intercontinental missile ‘Sineva’, which he watched from Russia’s only aircraft carrier. The ministry of defence says the rocket, which was fired from the fleet’s nuclear submarine ‘Tula’, reached its longest distance yet – 11,547 kilometers. An aide to the Russian navy commander said it was the first time a submarine had launched the Sineva ballistic missile to its maximum range. “For the first time in Navy history, the launch was not to the Kura test range in Kamchatka [Russian Far East], but to the area of an equatorial part of the Pacific,” Captain 1st rank Igor Dygalo said, adding that the launch was made to check the preparedness of naval strategic nuclear forces. The Sineva launch was made as part of the Dvina tactical exercises of the Russian Northern Fleet, which are also part of larger-scale Stability-2008 exercises conducted with Belarus that started in September and ran until October 21..
These RSM-54 missiles will be able to stand on alert status until 2030. The K-84 Ekaterinburg strategic submarine of the Project 667BDRM/Dela IV class of the Northern Fleet conducted a successful launch of a R-29RM Sineva/SS-N-23 missile at 15:20 MSK (11:20 UTC) on September 9, 2006. The missile was launched from a surfaced submarine from an ice-covered polar region toward the Chizha test site at the Kanin Peninsula. The three warheads that the missile was reported to carry successfully reached their targets.
Unlike its predecessor, the Skif, the Sineva carries 10 independently targetable re-entry vehicles instead of four. The new missile has a longer range and a modern control system developed for Makeyev’s Bark SLBM (SS-NX-28). It can carry four or 10 nuclear warheads, depending on the modification. The RSM-54 carries four, and the Sineva (with a service life of several decades) 10 individually targetable reentry vehicles, with a yield of 100Kt each. source: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces.com

So now after Obama and his followers in the Congress manage to spend US into insolvency, that will make paying the present military force impossible. All the Russians and Chinese have to do to take over the USA is threatened to annihilate us with their nukes, and Kruschefs prediction that we will not have to beat you on the battle field will become a truism!
Kruschev remarked to Agriculture Secretary, Ezra T. Benson, that communism would eventually consume democracy. Benson replied that Americans would never accept such a drastic change in their form of government as communism. Kruschev then told Benson that it was already beginning to happen.

He said that Americans were being fed one small bite of communism at a time, and that over the course of several years, Americans will have accepted so many communistic ideals, including a massive and uncontrollable federal government, that one day we would wake up to discover that we are a democracy only in name - that our policies and methods of government will be communist in nature. Kruschev concluded that it will be the slow injection of socialist/communist principles into America - not nuclear missiles - that would destroy our nation.Source: Wikapedia

Posted in THREATS TO US

« THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY

THE RUSSIAN ARE ENJOYING THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY

2009-10-28T09:09:00.000-05:00

Many historians attribute the arms race between president Reagan and the Soviet Union and the destruction of the OSSR economy as the reason for the demise of the Communist state.

Now it would appear to this blogger that the U.S. Congress and Obama are committing economic suicide with the mad dash toward government control of our lives. And the Russians are enjoying the sight!

This quote from a well-known(in Russia) columnist about the Immolation of the U.S. economy illustrates how much they are enjoying the debacle that is occurring in Washington.

“ It can be safely said, that the last time a great nation destroyed itself through its own hubris and economic folly was the early Soviet Union (though in the end the late Soviet Union still died by the economic hand). Now we get the opportunity to watch the Americans do the exact same thing to themselves. The most amazing thing of course, is that they are just repeating the failed mistakes of the past. One would expect their fellow travelers in suicide, the British, to have spoken up by now, but unfortunately for the British, their education system is now even more of a joke than that of the Americans.

While taking a small breather from mouthing the never-ending propaganda of recovery, never mind that every real indicator is pointing to death and destruction, the American Marxists have noticed that the French and Germans are out of recession and that Russia and Italy are heading out at a good clip themselves. Of course these facts have been wrapped up into their mind-boggling non stop chant of “recovery” and hope-change-zombification. What is ignored, of course, is that we and the other three great nations all cut our taxes, cut our spending, made life easy for small business…in other words: the exact opposite of the Anglo-Sphere.

That brings us to Cap and Trade. Never in the history of humanity has a more idiotic plan been put forward and sold with bigger lies. Energy is the key stone to any and every economy, be it man power, animal power, wood or coal or nuclear. How else does one power industry that makes human life better (unless of course its making the bombs that end that human life, but that’s a different topic). Never in history, with the exception of the Japanese self-imposed isolation in the 1600s, did a government actively force its people away from economic activity and industry.

Even the Soviets never created such idiocy. The great famine of the late 1920s was caused by quite the opposite, as the Soviets collectivized farms to force peasants off of their land and into the big new factories. Of course this had disastrous results. So one must ask, are the powers that be in Washington and London degenerates or satanically evil? Where is the opposition? Where are the Republicans in America and Tories in England?

This is a story you will not read in our newspapers or see on the major television networks, but I hope will be picked up by other bloggers and circulated on the net.

Hans Hoppe’s first book in English – and the one that put him on the map as a social thinker and economist to watch. In it he argued that there are only two possible archetypes in economic affairs: socialism and capitalism. All systems are combinations of those two types. The capitalist model he defines as pure protection of private property, free association, and exchange – no exceptions. All deviations from that ideal are species of socialism, with public ownership and interference with trade.

Within the structure of socialism, he distinguishes the left and right version. “Conservative” socialism favors high regulation, behavioral controls, protectionism, and nationalism. The “liberal” version tends more toward outright public ownership and redistribution. I believe Obama is a liberal socialist and his goal is to transform(aka. change) the USA from a free enterprise system to one that is controled by the government from cradle to grave!
The consequences of socialism vary based on their degree and kind, but they have similarities: high costs, resource waste, low growth.

While Obama destroys our economy that currently borrows $ two(2) billion a day to keep are economy going, and Obama makes nice with China and Russia They are busy making deals with each other to become the power that once was the USA!
This excerpt from an article written in the English version of Pravda, illustrates the problem we are to face if Americans don’ t stop the “train reck” that is going on behind closed doors by the DEAMONCRATS and Obama consigliere.
“Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, together with a Russian business delegation, has sealed over five billion dollars in deals with China on energy, infrastructure and space exploration. The lucrative agreements are the outcome of talks with China’s leaders in Beijing Russia Today reports.

In terms of security cooperation, the two countries agreed to notify one another on any launches of ballistic missiles. Both Russia and China are permanent members of the UN Security Council and are big players when it comes to negotiations with Iran and North Korea, so talks on those issues took place on the sidelines of the major deals.
The foundation has been set for a future pipeline which, when built, will bring up to 70 billion cubic meters of gas a year from Russia to China, according to Aleksey Miller, Russia’s gas giant Gazprom CEO. Preliminary agreements have been already signed.
“We have agreed on the initial framework for supplying China with natural gas,” Miller said.
According to the agreements, the price of the gas will be determined by a special formula included into the future contract. It will be based on existing international practice.”
Prime Minister Putin expressed confidence that the talks on gas deliveries will end fruitfully.

Another thing is important – there are requirements, and there are opportunities to work with each other. In this sense, the Russian and Chinese economies supplement each other. This work is planned for many decades.”Meanwhile in Washington DC, our odious president and his willing Democrat congress is preparing to destroy our economy by passing CAP AND TAX!

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

IS THE RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE FUNCTIONING AS THE NEW BERLIN WALL?

THE ARCTIC AND RUSSIA WHILE CONGRESS ARGUES OVER SPENDING BILL!

WHAT WILL USA DO WHEN THE SECOND SHOE DROPS???

Could Russia “go gold”?

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: CONGRESS, ECONOMY, obama, Russia, socialism, USA

AND I THOUGHT THE PURPOSE OF THE WAR WAS TO DEFEAT THE ENEMY!!

2009-10-27T10:01:00.000-05:00

If the United States waited until Germany and Italy had stable governments before we invaded Europe in 1944. The British and most of Europe would be speaking German, possibly Russian by now.

We went to war to defeat the Nazis and the Japanese who attacked Pearl Harbor.Not to establish a stable government!
MacArthur set up the government in Japan and Eisenhower set up the government in Germany AFTER we defeated the enemy!

Today we dither around at the peril of the brave men and women who are trying to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, despite the fact that the General sent by Obama has asked for 40,000 more troops to complete the job that Obama sent him to Afghanistan to do.

The absurdity of the dialogue about sending more troops is centered around the establishment of a stable government. We do not even have a stable government in the USA in my opinion. How can you equate what Obama and the Democrats are trying to do with health care and cap-and-trade with the Constitution and Bill of Rights! You cannot!!

But todays news highlites the statement by the spokes person in NATO that they would not consider sending troops to fight in Afghanistan until a stable government has been established.
“Bratislava, Slovakia (AP) – Two NATO members said Friday they will not send more troops to Afghanistan unless its Nov. 7 presidential runoff creates a legitimate government and until President Barack Obama decides on a new strategy there.
Dutch Defense Minister Eimert Van Middelkoop said his country, with 2,160 troops in Afghanistan, is awaiting the final election results “because the legitimacy of the Afghan government is key,” as well as a decision by the Obama administration.

“I think most countries are waiting for the American decisions,” van Middelkoop said at a meeting in Bratislava of the defense ministers of the 28 NATO countries.
I believe they will have to wait until Obama gets his Health Care Bill and the CAP and Trade(aka Tax) are passed, and then he will say that the economy will not support the sending of 40,000 troops as an excuse to do what he intended to do two months ago. Deny McChrystal’s request for 40,000 troops!

The top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, was briefing NATO ministers — including U.S. Defense Minister Robert Gates — on his view of the war in Afghanistan at the meeting.
Danish Defense Minister Soeren Gade said allies won’t increase troop levels until they’re assured the new government in Kabul is committed to the NATO goals.
“I think whoever is going to send more troops to Afghanistan will put up some conditions,” said Gade, whose country has 690 soldiers in Afghanistan. (who cares what a country steeped in socialism that only has 690 troops committed cares?)

“They need to see the new Afghan president and say: ‘If we send more troops to your country, you have to deal with this, this and this.’ We have to make sure the new government in Afghanistan are committed to their job before we send any more troops to Afghanistan.”
Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung of Germany said he also doesn’t expect his country to increase its troop numbers in Afghanistan when the soldiers’ mandate from the German parliament comes up for renewal in December. The existing mandate allows the deployment of a maximum 4,500 soldiers, and Germany currently has just over 4,200 troops in Afghanistan.

The” Hill” is reporting today that: In a speech to nearly 3,000 servicemen at the Naval Air Station in Jacksonville, Fla., Obama said those who died gave “the last full measure of devotion.”9But will he send the troops to watch their backs as McChrystal has requested?)
In the same speech, he pushed back against critics who say he hasn’t acted swiftly enough.( he has not!!)
“While I will never hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests, I also promise you this — and this is very important as we consider our next steps in Afghanistan — I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm’s way,” Obama said. “I won’t risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary. And if it is necessary, we will back you up to the hilt.”( I guess he forgot his votes against anything that Congress was doing to support the troops in the Iraq war!)
Monday’s loss of U.S. troops in Afghanistan followed Sunday’s car bombs in Iraq that killed more than 150 people, many of them children.

The president met with some of his national security advisers Monday in the White House Situation Room, the sixth meeting of its kind, to discuss the situation in Afghanistan. But fewer advisers were included, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in the region who reportedly has asked for nearly 40,000 additional troops, did not participate! (It sounds like the failure of McNamara and president Lyndon Johnson to listen to the generals in Viet Nam while they were listening to the anti-war chants in the streets and reading the negative articles in the Washington Post and New York Times)

Will Americans allow this smooth talking president to be Commander in Chief over the modern day Viet Nam!

CAMPAIGNER-IN CHIEF NOT COMMANDER -IN-CHIEF

2009-10-26T09:21:00.000-05:00

Governing involves tough, unpopular choices and cutting deals with opponents. It requires doing things rather than talking about them!.

Obama is showing little appetite for this. Instead of being the commander-in-chief, he is the campaigner-in-chief.
After a disastrous summer that saw his approval rating drop more than any other president at the same stage since Harry Truman in 1953, Mr Obama has temporarily abandoned the campaign-style events promoting his stalled health-care reform initiative.

Now, he is stumping for Democratic candidates in states he won last year but which are now in danger. Last Wednesday in Hackensack, Mr Obama took to the stage to proclaim: "Your voice can change the world. Your voice can elect Jon Corzine, governor once again of New Jersey." Change the world? Mr Corzine is a former Goldman Sachs executive whose political career was launched when he spent $57 million of his own money on a Senate seat in 2000.

And as he always does, Mr Obama blamed every economic woe on the Bush years, conveniently forgetting that Republicans are no longer in office and it's been his mess for nine months now.

Campaigning and raising cash is what Mr Obama does best. Next week's fundraising events in Florida and Virginia will bring to 24 the number of such functions he had headlined since entering office in January. During his first year in office, Mr Bush attended just six fundraisers.

Late-night comics, although unabashedly liberal and at a loss last year as to how to poke fun at the rather humourless Mr Obama, are having a field day portraying him as a do-nothing prevaricator obsessed with his own image.

"Obama agreed to commit an additional 40,000 troops to help fight Fox News," quipped NBC's Jay Leno. "Senior White House adviser David Axelrod told reporters that Fox News is just pushing a point of view. Well, yes, but at least they've got a point of view." Mr Obama was elected on a promise of being post-partisan to Washington and transforming the country. Thus far, he has won the support of only a single Republican for his health-care plan and has shown himself to be as aggressive a Democratic partisan in office as anyone in the fabled Clinton war room.

All this says much about Mr Obama's priorities at a time when he is sitting on an urgent request for 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan, seemingly unsure about whether the counter-insurgency strategy he announced in March is the right one.
And while our version of Nero dithers, a total of 46 US troops have died in Afghanistan in October in what is already by far the bloodiest year in the country since the 2001 US-led invasion.
With enough effort, resources and time, the marines are confident the Afghan population can be won over. But, with the platoon’s influence limited to a small area around their base, many soldiers wonder if the Taliban and Al-Qaeda may simply outlast them, or if the US and Afghan governments have the resolve to send enough troops to win. Top Republican senators have escalated their call for Obama to grant McChrystal's request for more troops in Afghanistan, and one prominent Democrat warned that a failure to do so could jeopardize U.S. forces.Source:

Despite the urgency in Afghanistan and the decreasing morale problem, Obama procrastinates in his decision to grant or deny McChrystal's request for 40,000 more troops.
Obama has said he would make up his mind in the coming weeks, and no announcement is expected before November. A senior administration official said the president is still working through and considering various options as has not settled on one. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the debate is ongoing.

Source: Telegraph.uk.com

Beyond the grand announcements, fine speeches and his eager acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr Obama has yet to achieve anything of substance. It is time for the campaign to end!

ALL TALK AND NO RESULTS WITH IRAN!

2009-10-24T09:57:00.000-05:00

October 24, 2009

The Times of London is reporting that Obama’s offer of friendship to Iran is about to be rejected, as anyone could have predicted who is not a worshiper of the Democrat “messiah”.

From Times Online October 24, 2009
“Barack Obama’s policy on brink of collapse as Tehran does last-minute nuclear stall Obama’s policy of diplomatic engagement with Iran is close to collapse as Tehran backtracks on a crucial deal aimed at cutting its stockpiles of nuclear fuel.
Iran agreed a deal “in principle” at talks in Geneva to ship the majority of its low-enriched uranium overseas for reprocessing into nuclear fuel that could be used for a medical research reactor.

The framework deal, along with an offer to allow international inspectors into its newly revealed enrichment plant at Qom, was hailed as evidence that Iran was responding positively to the diplomatic track.
Today, however, with just hours until the deadline, Iran has turned the table on its foreign emissaries with a rival proposal, demanding that it be allowed to buy higher enriched uranium directly from abroad.

Tehran’s proposals fall far short of the deal drawn up in Vienna by the United Nations atomic watchdog and endorsed by the UN, the US, Russia and France. It would not only fail to reduce Iran’s stockpile of low enriched uranium — now large enough to fuel one nuclear warhead — but it would also require the waiver of pre-existing UN sanction”s.

Russia and China’s reluctance to consider new sanctions is forcing Washington to seek a coalition of willing allies to impose their own economic blockade on Iran if efforts to get UN sanctions fail. But without the co-operation of the Communists in China and the quasi-communists in Russia, unless a blockade of Iran is established. The Iranians will get anything they want from Russia and China, and the rest is just talk!

It has been six months since Obama made the commitment to talk to Iran with no pre-existing conditions, to convince them to stop their quest for nuclear weapons.
He made the commitment on March 20th 2009, and yesterday(10/23/09) Iran threw his proposal back in his face! It appears that Obama has yet to learn that power and force are the only thing tyrants respect.
Obama has the ability of using the full force and power of his office as president to intimidate and vilify his opponents of his health care and cap-and-trade proposals, but he speaks softly without the “big stick’ when he speaks to dictators and tyrants!

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
OBAMA SPEAKS SOFTLY WITHOUT THE “BIG STICK”!

OBAMA IS NO KENNEDY OR REAGAN

COMMERCE WITH THE AXIS OF EVIL?

Iran Nuke Talks? Well, Maybe Not

Posted in THREATS TO US
Tags: FAILURE, Iran, nukes, obama, TALKS

YES MADAM SPEAKER WE ARE SERIOUS!!

2009-10-23T09:31:00.000-05:00

Friday, October 23, 2009

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

CNSNews posed a question to the power happy “capo” of Obama in the House of Representatives that illustrates the extent the left has shredded the Constitution to accomplish the power grab of Obama and the Democrats.
The following is a direct quote from a CNS reporter that asked what Constitutional authority the Congress had to demand that Americans buy health insurance or be fined.

CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a “serious question.”

Currently, each of the five health care overhaul proposals being considered in Congress would command every American adult to buy health insurance. Any person defying this mandate would be required to pay a penalty to the Internal Revenue Service.

In 1994, when the health care reform plan then being advanced by President Clinton called for mandating that all Americans buy health insurance, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office studied the issue and concluded:

“The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

Later on Thursday, CNSNews.com followed up on the question it asked Speaker Pelosi by sending written questions for the speaker via e-mail to her Spokesman Elshami.

“Where specifically does the Constitution authorize Congress to force Americans to purchase a particular good or service such as health insurance?” CNSNews.com asked the speaker’s office.

“If it is the Speaker’s belief that there is a provision in the Constitution that does give Congress this power, does she believe the Constitution in any way limits the goods and services Congress can force an individual to purchase?” CNSNews.com asked. “If so, what is that limit?”

Elshami responded by sending CNSNews.com a Sept. 16 press release from the Speaker’s office entitled, “Health Insurance Reform, Daily Mythbuster: ‘Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform.’” The press release states that Congress has “broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production.”

This is the most preposterous part of the contention/argument. Insurance company’s are presently forbidden to be domiciled in one state and sell in other states. That is what keeps the price of health insurance artificially high. If the Congress passed a law eliminating the provision that forbids a person in New York from buying a health insurance policy in any other state. This would create more competition and reduce the premium prices. There is no interstate commerce in health insurance now because of government prohibitions!

Further more, Doctors are licensed by the State not the Federal government. Where is the interstate commerce here?

The capitation clause of Article I of the United States Constitution, reads “[n]o capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Capitation here means a tax of a uniform, fixed amount per taxpayer. Direct tax means a tax levied directly by the United States federal government on taxpayers, as opposed to a tax on events or transactions. The United States government levied direct taxes from time to time during the 18th and early 19th centuries. It levied direct taxes on the owners of houses, land, slaves, and estates in the late 1790s, but cancelled the taxes in 1802.

The 24th Amendment, ratified in 1964, outlawed the use of the poll tax (or any other tax) as a pre-condition in voting in Federal elections. The 1966 Supreme Court case Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections extended this explicit enactment as a matter of judicial interpretation of a more general provision, ruling that the imposition of a poll tax in state elections violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Today we are facing a tax more heinous than a poll tax. WE all know that since the poll tax was abolished and made illegal, some (at times many) people still do not vote. Also, everybody does not get sick. Particularly the young adults who have not entered the years of debilitating and sometimes fatal diseases like hypertension, diabetes and cancer. Why should we force these people, who a large portion of the uninsured, to get insurance or be fined?

Americans who fail to sign up for a medical plan after health care overhaul takes effect could be hit with fines of up to $3,800, according to a new proposal circulated Tuesday by a senior Democrat.This would be included in the Baucus’s bill that is currently slated for a vote sometime before Christmas.

“A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action,” said a 1994 report by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. “The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States.”

“An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique,” reads the report. “First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

And the most odious thing about this whole fine,aka TAX, is that it would be the IRS that collects the fine! Not the state or federal law enforcement people or the courts. And there is another provision floating around Congress that the fine would be automatically taken out of a person’s bank account. What about those people who do no have $3,800 in their bank account. Will we once again establish Konzentrationslager /gulags or debtors prisons?

CZAR ANOTHER NAME FOR POLITICAL COVER

2009-10-22T16:21:00.000-05:00

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
It will go down in history as one of Barack Obama’s signature decisions on the economy, a dramatic move to slash corporate pay at bailed out banks and automakers.
But on Wednesday night, administration officials said that the president of the United States didn’t have all that much to do with a decision that will, in many ways, come to define his relationship with Wall Street.
In fact, sources within the administration say the decision to cap corporate pay was Kenneth Feinberg’s, and his alone. A senior administration official tells POLITICO that Obama did not sign off on the pay master's decision. Feinberg didn’t even brief the White House on it, the official said, but he briefed Treasury officials instead.
“Decisions were his,” says the official. Treasury, in turn, briefed White House staff on the “shape and general direction” of the Feinberg decision last week, but didn't offer extensive detail. The president did not have to approve Feinberg’s plan.

Feinberg, a Washington attorney who was appointed to the unsalaried position as Treasury’s special master for corporate pay in June, has wide latitude to act independently of the administration. But it appears to me that the denial of the Obama syncophants is nothing more than giving Obama plausable deniability.

In fact I believe that the whole Czar set-up is an elaborate shield for the actions of Obama that could be damaging to the presidents "messianic" image.

The saying "the buck stops here" derives from the slang expression "pass the buck" which means passing the responsibility on to someone else.

History will show that on more than one occasion President Truman referred to his desk sign in public statements. For example, in an address at the National War College on December 19, 1952 Mr. Truman said, "You know, it's easy for the Monday morning quarterback to say what the coach should have done, after the game is over. But when the decision is up before you -- and on my desk I have a motto which says The Buck Stops Here' -- the decision has to be made." In his farewell address to the American people given in January 1953, President Truman referred to this concept very specifically in asserting that, "The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job.

Some one should remind Obama and the adoring press of this fact!!

DELEGITIMIZATION AND DEMONIZING ARE THE LATEST OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TACTICS

2009-10-21T08:12:00.002-05:00

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

What Ronald Regan left out, is apparently the watchword of the Obama administration,demonize your opponents.
Used against anyone or any group that opposes what the Obama administration is trying to do to our Country.Make it a "banana republic" like his friend Hugo and Raul have done.
First it was the bond holders of GM who held 27 billion dollars of bonds. They were told they could lose all if they continued to oppose the Obama bankrutcy plan and went to unregulated bankruptcy.
At approximately the same time they turned the dogs of Acorn and SEIU upon the homes of those on Wall Street, who dared to defy Obama and his czars on salary and bonus restrictions(aka .caps)

Then there is the attempt to intimidate the groups who protested peacefully at the Town Hall meetings and TEA parties. Obama and his "workers" said they were mobs, nazis, and tools of the Republican party in an atttempt to intimidate them! And they had help from the Media! Except for the FOX network.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid reportedly met with about a dozen doctors groups last week in which he promised to do the doctor "fix".The next day the Senate bill included billions more for doctor payments for Medicare patients. But there still is 400-500 billion dollars that will be slashed from the medicare budget to fund the pool for the millions added to the plan who presently have no health insurance.
But several people familiar with the meetings with the doctors, say he also made it clear he would expect the support of medical groups for whatever health care bill emerges in exchange for sparing them from the deep reimbursement cuts.I guess he thinks they don't know about the 400 billion taken from medicare!

Then an AARP executive warned Congressional opponents of the Democrat health plan, of possible political consequences of voting against the plan as they were watching how the Congressmen and Senators voted.

And when Obama spoke to a joint session of Congress about "his" health care plan, he said this to any potential opponents of the plan. "But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.

And Obama's "capos" attack on the FOX network and specifically the Beck and Hannity TV opinion shows are classic examples of what Obama promised he would do to anyone who stood in his way to get socialized medicine.He calls it the government option, but any thinking man knows that is a bold faced lie!

First they attacked Fox news by putting a Mao loving women named Dunn on the tube to say that FOX was not a real news network. Then the Sunday talk shows on the "lame Stream media" carried Axelrod and Emanuel further villifying and excoriating FOX! All because FOX appears to be the only news TV network that is not a propaganda arm of OBAMA!

David Libaugh had it right when he wrote in todays Patriot Post that; "Obama's perceived enemies are all those who have the temerity not to roll over for his extreme agenda. They all must be demonized, marginalized and silenced by a president who has turned the Oval Office into a glorified street organizing headquarters to attack his opponents. Indeed, this self-described uniter is the most divisive president in memory, and his uncontrollable ego can't countenance legitimate dissent.

A DEAL WITH THE EVIL ONE WILL LEAD TO CATASTROPHE

2009-10-20T08:08:00.000-05:00

Danger - if you meet it promptly and without flinching - you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!...Winston Churchill

Nile Gardiner is Director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC, AND HE POSTED THIS ON YHE INTERNT. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL AMERICANS TO READ THIS POST.

In the face of rising domestic opposition to the war, mounting casualties and a clear unwillingness on the part of European allies to send additional troops for the NATO-led mission, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has set his government down an extremely risky and dangerous path of negotiations with a barbaric enemy.

It is a dangerous strategy that is also backed in principle by some senior figures in the Obama administration such as Richard Holbrooke, the President's Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, who may be keen to use the British-led experiment as a trial balloon for a possible U.S. exit strategy as well. This is a disastrous approach that signals defeat, and one that must be firmly rejected by the next British administration, almost certainly Conservative, likely to take office in the spring of 2010.

Great Britain is the second largest contributor to the NATO-operation in Afghanistan, with over 9,000 combat troops on the ground. The British contribution in Afghanistan is roughly equal to that of continental Europe's big four combined -- France, Germany, Italy and Spain. So far 191 British troops have been killed serving in Afghanistan (more than were killed in Iraq), and hundreds wounded. In the month of July alone, Britain lost 22 soldiers in combat.

However great the bravery of British servicemen, it is being undercut by massive underfunding of Britain's armed forces, crippling defence cuts, and by shortages of helicopters, armored vehicles, medical teams as well as basic equipment. Britain now spends less on defence than at any time since the 1930s, and is waging a major war on a peacetime budget. It is though the lack of political will in London that is the biggest threat to the British mission.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband's recent speech on Afghanistan at NATO headquarters sent completely the wrong message to our enemies. In his address on July 27, the foreign secretary called for a political deal with so-called moderate elements of the Taliban in an effort to split the insurgency:

First, a political strategy for dealing with the insurgency through reintegration and reconciliation. That means in the long term an inclusive political settlement in Afghanistan, which draws away conservative Pashtun nationalists -- separating those who want Islamic rule locally from those committed to violent jihad globally -- and gives them a sufficient role in local politics that they leave the path of confrontation with their government.

In effect Miliband is saying that Britain and the United States must be willing to place cooperative, supposedly more reasonable wings of the Taliban back in local power in Afghanistan. This would be like putting the Nazis back in office after the fall of Berlin or the Khmer Rouge in charge of Cambodia again. No matter how much spin is placed on this negotiating strategy, it smacks of defeatism and appeasement, and a failure to place the conflict in Afghanistan within the broader context of a global war against a brutal Islamist ideology that seeks the destruction of the West and the free world.

British, American, Canadian and other NATO troops are not dying on the battlefields of south Asia to facilitate the return of a medieval-style government steeped in barbarism and savagery where women are treated as fourth-class citizens and individual liberty is non-existent. It would be only a matter of time before an Afghanistan dominated by "moderate" Taliban returned to its old position as a safe haven for al-Qaeda to launch attacks against New York, Washington or London.

Great Britain and the United States should have no truck with any strategy that allows a return to political power for the Taliban of whatever stripe. If this foolhardy policy is executed, it may ultimately lead to negotiations with al-Qaeda-linked groups in the region as well.

It is vital that a future British Conservative administration reverses what is a disastrously naïve approach, and commits to the complete political isolation, as well as the ultimate military defeat, of the Taliban in Afghanistan. This will require a significant increase in British defence spending to adequately fund a major military mission on this scale, as well as leadership in Downing Street that takes Britain's great power responsibilities seriously.

As UK Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox wrote in a recent article for The Times of London,

If we abandoned our task in Afghanistan today, we would put the security of our own country in greater peril. Al-Qaeda used Afghanistan for training, and to plan attacks on the West. We must not let that happen again. To throw in the towel at this stage would encourage every jihadist to believe that we lack the moral courage to see through a difficult mission. And it would gravely undermine the credibility of NATO, the alliance that has protected this country for six decades.

Negotiations with a fundamentally barbaric organization such as the Taliban will never result in anything good for the people of Afghanistan and will undercut both Britain and America's long-term security. If NATO talks to the various wings of the Taliban, the Allied coalition will negotiate only with different shades of evil. This is a recipe for failure and defeat as well as a monumental surrender to a totalitarian Islamist ideology based on a doctrine of hatred, fear and destruction.

With the announcement that Obama is using the mess in the Afghanistan election as reason to once more delay the sending of more troops as requested by the Commander in the field. It is feeling to this veteran that the President is putting the lives of the brave men/women in jeopardy, because he would rather spend the tax payers money rewarding those who voted him into the Oval Office than he is to give the General he sent to Afghanistan, the tools he needs to win a victory over the evil Taliban. After all Obama said he has trouble with the word VICTORY!

THE DUPLICITY OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

2009-10-19T08:35:00.001-05:00

TEL AVIV – President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference.

"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn.
"One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters," said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama's chief campaign manager.
"We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it," Dunn said.
Continued Dunn: "Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying."
SOURCE: WORLD DAILY NET

And if a Network like the Fox Network does not allow the Obama "captains" to force feed them as they do the other compliant Networks. They attack, and smear the Networks as this quote found on the intrnet illustrates!
White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN that President Obama does not want "the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox."

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is "not a news organization."
Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way," Axelrod counseled ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "We're not going to treat them that way."
By urging other news outlets to side with the administration, Obama aides officials dramatically upped the ante in the war of words that began earlier this month, when White House communications director Anita Dunn branded Fox "opinion journalism masquerading as news." This attempt by the Obama Administration to silence FOX NEWS violates all that is American. What they are trying to accomplish is strangely reminiscent of what the Nazis in Germany and the Communists in Russia did to their Press!
And in our time is similar to what Hugo Chavez did when he shut down all the television and radio stations who were critical of him Freedom of the Press and speech is in danger if this is continued unapposed by the voting public!

What's scary is how this administration has so readily turned their backs on debate and free speech and resorted to bullying and thuggery in their attempts to silence their critics.Americans meet Chicago politics now take residence in the White House!

.

THE NETWORKS ARE USING SAUL ALINSKY'S RULES TO ATTACK RUSH!!

2009-10-16T09:22:00.000-05:00

Not since Marge Schott, the managing partner, president and CEO pf the Cincinnati Reds baseball team from 1984-1999 has the " Mean Stream" media stooped so low to destroy a Conservative. ABC, CBS, NBC and MSNBC have all printed and spoke lies that were SPOKEN as actual quotes that Rush limbaugh is a racist and as such should not be part owner of the Saint Louis Rams.
This is a case of character destruction by hearsay as was Schotts case.
On November 13, 1992, Charles "Cal" Levy, a former marketing director for the Reds, stated in a deposition for Tim Sabo, a former employee who was suing the team that he'd heard Schott refer to then-Reds outfielders Eric Davis and Dave Parker as "million-dollar niggers."[2] Sabo, whose position was "team controller," alleged that his 1991 firing was due to testifying against her in another lawsuit brought against Schott by several limited partners and because he opposed the unwritten policy of not hiring blacks. Schott's countersuit alleged that Sabo wrote unauthorized checks to himself and paid health insurance premiums to retired front-office employees. She asked for $25,000 in damages for defamation. Sabo ultimately lost his suit. source:Wikapedia

The media lies about Limbaugh, alleging that he said "slavery was a good thing" and the lies were repeated on MSNBC, CNN, NBC and ABC. Not satisfied with on lie the once reliable media carried this story to jump on Limbaugh with full force!:

"I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark".

It’s also been spoken on the TV that he said this, about the death of the man who assassinated Martin Luther King: "You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honour? James Earl Ray. We miss you, James. Godspeed". Both statements are blatant lies, but once spoken it becomes the task of the accused to prove that he did not say the lies. You could hold your breath until you pass out before the Media attack dogs would admit they told bold faced lies to smear a Conservative.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC actually said esentially that Rush should blow-up! CHRIS MATTHEWS: You guys see Live and Let Die, the great Bond film with Yaphet Kotto as the bad guy, Mr. Big? In the end they jam a big CO2 pellet in his face and he blew up. I have to tell you, Rush Limbaugh is looking more and more like Mr. Big, and at some point somebody’s going to jam a CO2 pellet into his head and he’s going to explode like a giant blimp. That day may come. Not yet. But we’ll be there to watch. I think he’s Mr. Big, I think Yaphet Kotto. Are you watching, Rush? And this man is an ancor man NBC is broud of after he wishes the death of another human being?

This is the main preoccupation of the once major television networks. To malign all conservatives including past president Bush, and protect and promote any thing that Obama does that couldl destroy our Free Enterprise Republic. Not since Goebbels was the propaganda minister for the Nazis has the media network been such a cheerleader for a "ruler"!
And lest we forget the two hustlers Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson who have both encouraged the Black players on NFL teams to vocally oppose Limbaughs involvement! Some have even appeared on TV to mouth their objections to Rush.It is the owners of NFL teams to decide not the players. I believe they would play for the devil as long as they get their muti-million dollar salaries!
Michael Vick, a convicted felon, was given a second chance as were many players who have been involved in felonious assualts, but because of inuendo the consortioum that is trying to buy the Rams has dropped Rush from their list of potential owners. He is being unfairly treated because he is a popular radio talk show host who has 50 million listeners!

TEN TOTALLY REAL AND NOT FAKE QUOTES THAT THE MEDIA SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON!
10. Democrat Fritz Hollings of South Carolina thinks being from Africa makes you a cannibal: “You’d find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they’d just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva.”

9. Howard Dean(former DNC Chair) reaches out: “I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.”

8. California Democrat Diane Watson thinks interracial marriage is icky: “He’s married to a white woman. He wants to be white. He wants a colorless society. He has no ethnic pride. He doesn’t want to be black.”

7. Howard Dean thinks service positions are for minorities, not big fancy white people: “You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? … Only if they had the hotel staff in here.”

6. Joe Biden explains why southern Democrats should vote for him: “My state was a slave state.”

5. “Conscience of the Senate” and former Klansman Robert Byrd on equal opportunity: “I’ve seen a lot of white n*ggers in my time.

4. Hillary Clinton does an impression (complete with accent) of an African-American man who didn’t know what Emily’s List was: “She’s supportin’ all these people. She’s supportin’ Sen. Dianne Feinstein . She’s supported Sen. Barbara Boxer . . . She supported everybody. Why won’t she support me?”

3. Democratic Mayor of New Orleans Ray Nagin denies that white people might live in New Orleans: “I don’t care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day.””

2. Democrat Steny Hoyer reviews Michael Steele’s career: “[He has] a career of slavishly supporting the Republican Party.”

1. Then Senator Joe Biden fills us in on who works at convenience stores: “You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent .
Every single one of those quotes is a real, legitimate, well-sourced quote. Totally real; not fake.

t:

FEDERALISM UNDER ATTACK BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

2009-10-15T08:53:00.000-05:00

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

Despite the fact that Obama advocates, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi are pushing hard to force unread and undwritten Health Care legislation through their respective bodies of Congress. There is still a slim chnce that some Democrats, and all but the RINOS, will realize that what they are supporting is not only anti-free enterprise, but dangerously close to being un-constitutional.
In the middle of the 19th century Americans fought a bloody war that pitted in many cases brother against brother to determine if we would remain one country or two divided by the Mason Dixie line.

Survey after suevey has shown that once again this is a country divided! Half of the country wants the government to take care of them from cradle to grave, and a good portion of this group has bought into the class hatred principal of hating the sucessfull wealthy, and desire redistribution of the wealth. Unfortunately so does our president! As he has said numerous times before he was elected president.

The other half still believes in states rights and the freedom to prosper if they become educated, work hard and follow the rules. But now it appears the Democrats in control are about to put a knife in the back of the free enterprise system in the name of "reforming" our healh care system. The envy of the world!
And unfortunately, this is only the begining of the demolishing of our Republic as this following quote illustrates.

"The founding fathers of the American Republic are the authors of a brilliant design of the distribution of political power between the national government and the states. The national government, under the Constitution, is responsible for the general concerns of the republic; the state governments are the custodians of the people's trusts and are authorized to address their particular concerns. This is the essence of federalism.
America's federalist system should not be destroyed in a narrow ideological hot pursuit of an illusory perfection: a nationalized health care system that will provide perfect security and will "bend the cost curve" downward. The massive bills on Capitol Hill will do neither.

From the inception of the Republic, Americans have been instinctively skeptical of the notion that Washington politicians, and the national bureaucrats who supposedly answer to them, are successfully able to micromanage the affairs of tens of millions of individuals and their families.

Americans desperately need sound common sense and consequential health care reform. This means a reform that will result in a measurable expansion of private insurance coverage and control of cost. There is a great deal of work to do. While guaranteeing accessibility and controlling the costs of health care, Americans should reject national micromanagement and let the market work. They, and their elected representatives in Congress, should support major federal reforms that change tax policies that undercut consumer choice in the health insurance markets and federal regulatory burdens that stifle state reforms and subvert patient choice.

The states have a key role to play. State policymakers should support the growing movement in the states themselves that support the protection and expansion of patient choice in health care. State officials should also insist on keeping state control of health insurance regulation. At the same time, they should take bold steps to enhance patient choice, and create an environment that rewards high-quality care from physicians and other medical professionals. If they are true to their public trust, if they are to defend the legitimate interests of their citizens, state officials must stand with their citizens and reject policies that would put the United States on a glide path to single-payer, government control of the health care of every American".

The Honorable Thomas C. Feeney is Senior Visiting Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Florida and former Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives

Amen to all of what he has to say!!

Source:

[1]David F. Forte and Matthew Spalding, eds., The Heritage Guide to the Constitution (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing Inc., 2005), and Eugene W. Hickok, Why States? The Challenge of Federalism (Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation, 2007).

WHERE WILL WE GO THEN TO FIND FREEDOM?

2009-10-14T09:52:00.001-05:00

The statue of Liberty in New York harbor has been the light that people sought who were fleeing from tyrants, famine and religious persecution for over one hundred years. America has beeen the beacon of freedom and opportunity for those born here and especially those imigrants who passed through Ellis Island to try to get their little piece of a free society. Free fom government persecution, free from tyranny,freedom of religion and the freedom of speech!

But today we are faced with the diming of the light of freedom that the torch held high by Miss Liberty represents.
Not only has free speech been replaced by political correct speech, but freedom has been replaced by license, As we see in the "right to choose" that our un-august Supreme Court declared in Roe vs Wade.
Anything goes has replaced the rules of public speech as long is it isn't speech that offends some minority group or the present ruling class in Washington. Lewd an lascivious words, swear words are o.k, but do not say something that offends the minority groups

Now we are faced with a radical change of enormous affect on not only our health and welfare, but how we make decisions about our health and the health and welfare of our loved ones.
Thomas Sowell said it well in todays piece in the Patriot Post.
"Almost never are the dangers of having uninsured people weighed against the dangers of having government bureaucrats over-ruling doctors and deciding whether money would be better spent saving the life of an elderly person or paying for an abortion for some teenager.

The crowning irony is that the problems caused by insurance companies refusing to pay for certain medications or treatment are to be solved by giving government bureaucrats that same power, along with the power to prevent patients from using their own money to pay for those same medications or treatments".
More than two centuries ago, Edmund Burke said, "Nothing is good but in proportion"--

It appears to me that the present administration in Washington is he## bent on power over every sector of our way of life. It apso appears, that unfortunately the Democrats have the votes to ram through Congress a bill that will never see the light of day(only a synopsis of the over 1000 page bill) that will turn over 1/6th of our GNP to the federal government, and destroy millions of jobs presently held by people employed by the private insurance companies that offer health insurance that over 85% of our people have and are satisfied with! This at a time when unemployment is in excess of 10%!

When President Obama was inaugurated and gave his inaugural speech.He talked about the importance of transparency in government. He said ‘transparency breeds accountability and builds public confidence.' Where has this gone, or was it just another lie from a man who will say anything to gain power?

The bill passed in the Senate Finance Committe yesterday. Mmost of it will not be implemented until 2013,but the taxes begin in 2010!
Iit is not an inconvenience for the Senate to let those who voted them into their princely position to post at least what they ae voting on to allow those who are interested to read!
Thist is not something we ought to overlook, the opportunity to get the American people to be able to read it.There has been a lot of discussion at town hall meetings and elsewhere. People are mad about Congress voting on things we haven't even read. But unfortunately I think this is the way Obama and his sycophants will operate until they totally socialize our once great country!

Waiting in the wings is the Cap and Trade bill that will certainly be passed by the same lock step majority that will further the ambition of their messia, OBAMA!
This will destroy the energy system as we know it today by high taxation and fees, and replace it with a "Goreite" system that will certainly cost US more taxes and make life less free and more unpleasant due to regulations on how much energy the government believes we should be allowed to use each day.

Where will people who seek freedom rom tyrannts and opression go then?