INFORMATION THAT OBAMA WILL NOT EXPLAIN TO THE VOTERS!

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
Obama and ACORN GPS Marking EVERY Front Door in America?

By JB Williams Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Republican Senator Judd Gregg was Obama’s first choice for the Secretary of Commerce post, and Gregg was actually considering joining the Obama team, until he found out that control of the US Census was being stripped from the Commerce Department and placed under the direct control of White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel.

Then, the same week that Americans learned that they were “domestic terrorists”—at least according to Obama’s new DHS (Department of Homeland Security),—if they own a bible, a pocket Constitution or guns, and still believe in Life, Liberty and Freedom, - they also learned that Obama’s Census Bureau had hired thousands of new temporary employees, equipped each with a handheld GPS computer and sent them out to mark GPS coordinates for every residential front door in America.

Oddly, it was this same period that news was breaking of an international flu pandemic, suspected of being a weaponized strain of the virus never before seen, - and that Obama’s team still sees no need to close the US-Mexican border, despite the cross continental spread of a deadly illness now claiming American lives.

Now, if any one of these events happened alone, one might not get too excited. But when a string of such events happen all at once, one begins to question the string of freedom and life threatening coincidences…

I can’t resist the urge to question the authority and purpose behind such a BIG BROTHER initiative, when the official Census itself is not due to be taken until 2010…

No imagination is required to think up a whole laundry list of evil that could be done with a nationwide GPS grid of coordinate’s markers painted on every private home across the country. But I was having trouble thinking up one good reason for it, even one legitimate use that would justify what must be a very expensive undertaking.

According to one of the Census workers, who spoke with me on condition of anonymity, they must GPS mark the coordinates “within 40 ft of every front door” in America and they are supposed to complete that mission nation wide, within 90 days, by the end of July 2009.

The workers were not told why they were GPS marking every front door. But a supervisor is sent out to follow them door-to-door, to make certain that no door is left unmarked. Every door will be marked by one employee, and then checked by a follow-up supervisor.

So, I had to ask, why?
Why does the Obama administration need or want the latitude and longitude coordinates for every home in America? Why the rush to GPS paint every home in the next 90 days? Why must the marker be within 40 ft of every front door? For what possible purpose does the Fed need GPS coordinates for every home, and under what authority do they have the right? Census workers, whom I asked, had the same holy-crap look on their faces that I had by then…

ACORN signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States — currently believed to be more than 306 million people. But the count doesn’t take place until 2010… This is April 2009.

Obama’s interest in an ACORN controlled 2010 Census, for the purpose of redistricting to the advantage of Democrats before the 2010 mid-term elections, comes as NO shock from a regime known for their heavy handed Rules for Radicals political strategies. But what does this have to do with GPS marking every home in the country?

The 2% of Americans, who have served military duty at some point in life, are very familiar with the most common use of GPS target painting. The other 98% of Americans might want to pick up a book on the subject, such as The Precision Revolution: GPS and the Future of Aerial Warfare ...

Their Authority?
RightSoup.com has just about the only online report available on the matter, and they report, “Why does the government (and ACORN) need to have the GPS coordinates of your FRONT DOOR? Your house is probably on Google Maps already. But the front door? Sounds like a jackboot convenience to me. This is a developing story, and several reports of those who have already been visited by the GPS squad can be found in this forum thread.”

If you challenge Census Bureau employees about the GPS marking of your private residence, you will be handed a preprinted explanation referring you to Sec. 223, Title 13, U.S. Code, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2, which explains the penalties for refusing to provide names and statistics of occupants when asked for by a census taker. This only applies when they are taking a census, (which will not be taken until next year), and the penalty for refusing to answer questions for a census is up to a $500 fine.

However, since the actual Census is not due to be taken until 2010, nobody is asking for any information today. They are only GPS marking your front door today, and Sec. 223, Title 13, U.S. Code, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2 provides the Fed NO authority to GPS paint your front door.

Best I can tell, the Fed has NO authority whatsoever, to paint the front door of every private residence in America. Still, that is exactly what they are doing. Now, the trillion dollar question is, why?

A State of Emergency
From Wikipedia - The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (such as states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.

In short, the statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard operating under federal authority, from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States.

As members of the military are sworn to protect and defend the Constitution and the American people against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, a federal order to do the exact opposite, and take aim at American citizens, would be a clear violation of the US Constitution and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, unless…

US Military personnel are trained to follow orders. But they are also obligated to refuse any order deemed “unlawful.” In order to make such an order appear “lawful,” the federal government would first have to declare a national “state of emergency,” such as in the case of an international pandemic, which can be demonstrated to threaten the health and well-being of American citizens.

Following a state of emergency declaration, a federal order for Martial Law would be expected, to allegedly provide law enforcement and security for citizens. This type of scenario can be followed by a presidential order to quarantine, disarm and contain American citizens in the name of national security, all of it, having the appearance of being “lawful.”

Is this what is happening?

Connecting the Dots
Alone, individual events look concerning, but not conspiratorial. What about when you place the pieces of the puzzle together and take a look at the entire picture developing?

Under this “theory,” how does the GPS marking of every private residence in the nation fit into the picture?

I wish I knew… but I don’t!

What I do know is this… Coincidences of this number and magnitude don’t happen. They certainly do not happen all at the same time, within hours or days of each other, out of the wild blue tin-foil hat heaven…

I also know that people had better start asking the right people the right questions and demanding answers fast. Begin with asking the mainstream press why there has been no public notification of the federal governments GPS marking your front door?

Then, I suggest contacting your local Census Bureau office immediately, and demanding an explanation as well as advice as to what law gives them the right to GPS paint every front door in America?

I’d also recommend sending a copy of this column to your state and federal representative, demanding that they put a stop to it or explain why it’s necessary, and what law gives them the right?

Unfortunately, we live in a moment of history when real events are much stranger than nutty conspiracy theories. The people have every right to know what is happening. But unless you demand to know, nobody’s talking!

Bill Clinton sold US nuclear technology to Red China for a mere $300,000 in campaign contributions. The event landed Chinese bagman Johnny Chung in prison, but put Hillary Clinton in the US Senate, and now at the helm of the US State Department.

Highly secured government servers are hacked daily. Soon, hackers will be able to grab a nation wide GPS grid map, marking the front door of every home in America.

How much is a GPS grid of every American household worth to the enemies of America, both foreign and domestic? I’d estimate, PRICELESS!

There is a foul odor resonating from the current regime in Washington DC and most Americans can smell it. Can most Americans gather the strength to do something about it?

DO AMERICANS REALLY WANT TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF MEDICAL CARE?

The latest health scare has awakened the American electorate to the way our Medical System treats patients who are or suspected to be infected with the latest strain of swine flu.Any one who feels they have the flu can go to the emergency room and receive examination, and if need be treatment.

An article in the today's "Daily Telegraph" shows the fatal faults of going down the road to government controlled medical care. Great Britain has had socialized Medicine for thirty years. Run by bureaucrats, not doctors. As a result many physicians have fled Great Britain to practice in America, and many hospitals have closed as the budget for health care is gradually reduced to switch money to the social welfare system.

The following is a a copy of an article warning the British people of the dire circumstances that await them if the Swine Flu hits hard in their country!
" The world is now on the brink of the first flu pandemic in 40 years, with the World Health Organisation's (WHO) alert status at five out of six.

The Department of Health is printing leaflets to put through every door urging people to find "flu friends" who can bring them groceries and supplies if they fall ill.

However, the Department of Health (DoH) document seen by The Daily Telegraph warns that, during the peak of a flu pandemic, complications such as pneumonia could mean there are 10 times as many people requiring ventilators as the NHS can supply.

If demand cannot be met, it recommends doctors deny treatment to the weakest patients so that resources can be shared among the greatest number.

The draft document, which was written in September before the outbreak of swine flu, acknowledges that its recommendations open "controversial ethical issues" and could cause anger and violence from relatives of those refused care.

Doctors taking decisions to deny care are urged to fully document their decisions to protect themselves from litigation, while hospitals are warned that "additional security decisions may be necessary because of the risks of violence directed at staff making triage decisions".

The document, Pandemic Influenza: surge capacity and prioritisation in health services, sets out the criteria which doctors should use to determine which patients receive intensive care.

If there is competition for places in intensive care units, patients suffering from advanced cancer could be refused beds along with pensioners suffering from severe burns, those with multiple organ failure and children suffering from advanced cancer, severe burns or trauma.

If patients competing for life support are likely to have an equal benefit from treatment, decisions should be taken by lottery, the guidance concludes.

The document describes the pressures that the NHS suffered during the last two pandemics, in 1957 and 1969, which caused a total of 3 million deaths worldwide.

It states that the impact of the 1969 outbreak was lessened by a high number of spare hospital beds at the time. The document says cuts to spare bed capacity, so that the health service is now working "at or near capacity", a 31 per cent increase in the number of over-65s, a more complicated out-of-hours system for GPs and more widespread use of critical care would all make it more likely that intensive care units could be "rapidly overwhelmed".

Meanwhile, NHS Direct took a more than 10,000 calls in total on Wednesday and almost 3,000 of them related to swine flu – more than double the calls received on Monday about the virus, reflecting how public concern is growing.

A spokesman for the DoH said: "We have published this draft guidance to help clinicians to work within an ethical framework during a pandemic."
Note: bold letters are used by me to emphasize the critical issues of this article that should alert all senior citizens and especially AARP. But since they are not really concerned about seniors other than when it comes to Liberal causes. I do not expect to see any warnings from them!

NOW IT IS THE "LITTLE" GUYS WHO ARE TO BLAME!?

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 THE AUTO WORKERS UNION MADE LITTLE OR NO CONCESSIONS TO HELP AVOID THE IMPENDING CHRYSLER BANKRUPTCY. THE "LITTLE GUY", THE SMALL SHARE HOLDER IS GOING TO BE THE ONE WHO CAUSED CHRYSLER TO FALL INTO BANKRUPTCY!

Government mandates that were put in place to placate environmentalists, that put a strain on the design and manufacture a competitive car to bring to the world market will not be mentioned. And thee outrageous demands on Chrysler by it's union will not be mentioned by the President when he speaks at noon today. After all the UAW spent millions to get him elected!
The bad guy is the stock holder who did not want to accept pennies on the dollar(33 cents) for the stocks and bonds. While the Union and Obama get to run their company.
Big banks and foreign lenders would be protected, but the share holders would be left out in the cold. Sooo! The stockholders choose to take their chances before a bankruptcy judge, like any other company not involved with political fat cats or big unions would normally do if a company failed.

From Times Online April 30, 2009 we learn this about the impending bankruptcy

"White House confirms Chrysler will go bankrupt
Christine Seib in New York and Robin Pagnamenta (Source)
"Chrysler will declare itself bankrupt today, White House officials confirmed, after last minute talks with the carmaker’s smaller lenders broke down late last night.

President Barack Obama, accompanied by members of his car taskforce, will make a statement on the issue at noon today.

White House officials said that the carmaker had the full support of its stakeholders, including its largest lenders and union.

An Administration official accused Chrysler's smaller lenders of "failing to act in either their own economic interest or the national interest" but added that Chrysler now had an opportunity to restructure and "emerge stronger going forward".

He said: "After a month of tireless negotiations, the Administration went into yesterday afternoon with the full support of Chrysler's key stakeholders, including the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the largest creditors. That support remains."

The bankruptcy filing comes after the breakdown of talks with Chrysler's smaller lenders. They had refused to write off their share of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt. Chrysler had offered $2 billion in cash in return for the debt being written off, which was accepted by the four largest lenders — JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.

The US Treasury last night sweetened the offer to $2.25 million, but some of Chrysler's 42 smaller lenders, including a number of hedge funds, refused the deal.

A group of 20 renegade lenders, which control about $1 billion of Chrysler's debt, said today that they were forced to conduct negotiations with Chrysler and the Treasury though the four big banks, which the smaller lenders described as "obviously conflicted" because the banks had taken billions of dollars in Government bailouts. My comment is why are these people called "renegade". All they want is a fair return on their investment!

The lenders, who said that they had not taken a dime in bailout cash, said that they had been willing to write off 40 per cent of their debt, accepting considerably less than was being offered by the company to more junior creditors.

"Our offer has been flatly rejected or ignored," the lender group said. "The Government has risked overturning the rule of law and practices that have governed our world-leading bankruptcy code for decades."

But senior Administration officials described the lenders' claims as completely untrue. All lenders received direct communications and were able to participate in the same repayment offer, officials said. My comment on this; Is why should we believe Obama's spinmasters on this subject when we have been lied to so many times in the last one hundred days?

The Treasury has prepared for Chrysler to enter a brief “surgical” bankruptcy that avoids liquidating the company. They never wantr to give up their strangle hold on the auto makers in Michigan, so they can dictate that they make "green type" cars!

Details of Chrysler's tie-up with Fiat, the Italian carmaker, are expected to be outlined today .

A quick bankruptcy would allow Fiat to pick and choose the assets it wanted from Chrysler without taking on some of the company's liabilities and underperforming businesses. These will once again be assumed by the Obama administration for the "RUBE" taxpayers whom already have a 13 trillion dollar debt oppressing them!


Where will it end, and when??????

WHY THE USA SHOULD NOT SIGN THE UNCLOS TREATY

Many people think that the treaty UNCLOS, being pushed by Obama and his Democratic supporters,for the Senate to Ratify, is all about rules of the Oceans.

In fact the framework of the treaty being promoted by the "One World" supporters has great impact on much more than the seas. The treaty has definite regulations regarding the extraction of minerals and fossil fuels from the floor of the oceans. In particular it has definite limitations on the Arctic shelf as this post in the current issue of Der Spiegel.com illustrates.

"The most significant international agreement for the current debate on jurisdiction and sovereign rights in the Arctic is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Often described as a "constitution for the oceans," the convention, which came into force in 1994, has now been ratified by 155 nations, including Germany. The United States is the only major industrial nation not to have signed the treaty.


The UNCLOS permits coastal states to establish an "exclusive economic zone" extending up to 200 nautical miles -- the so-called 200-mile-zone -- within which they exercise sovereign rights over both the waters and the seabed. However, this sovereign territory may be extended depending on how far the continental land mass extends out under the ocean. In such cases the outer boundaries of this so-called continental shelf must be precisely defined and documented.

Cut-off lines are determined by a number of factors, including the structure of the ocean floor, sediment thickness and ocean depth. Such definitions can be a matter of dispute, as in the case of the Lomonosov Ridge, a mountain range extending over 1500 kilometers under the Arctic Ocean. Determining whether this geological formation is part of the continental shelf of Russia, Canada, or Denmark/Greenland is crucial to deciding which country has sovereign rights over the seabed around the North Pole".

A coastal state must submit its claims to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf within a ten-year period following its ratification of the convention. The deadline for submissions relating to the Arctic is now approaching and it is for this reason that the "race" is on.


The discussion of national rights in this context is also often dogged by a lack of terminological clarity both on the part of policymakers and the media, particularly when it comes to the concept of sovereignty. There is no question here of states denying access to shipping or preventing fishing on the high seas. Outside the 200-mile zone the only relevant issue is the right to utilization of the seabed and the exploitation of its natural resources.
A story that was not reported by our Left wing Media is the meeting held in Greenland during the spring of 2008 one month after Obama was elected.By this time he was touting his office of the President-elect. A position that does not exist in the Constitution.

In response to the debate on the utilization of the Arctic Ocean, Denmark's foreign minister and the premier of Greenland invited representatives of four other coastal states (Canada, United States, Norway, and Russia) to attend a conference in the Greenland town of Ilulissat. The conference ended on May 29 with the adoption of the Ilulissat Declaration, which declared that climate change and the melting of the polar ice have a "potential impact" on vulnerable ecosystems, the livelihoods of local inhabitants and indigenous communities, and the potential exploitation of natural resources.
Apparently our government representatives at this meeting agreed to the presently unproven theory of Global Warming at this conference before our Congress has even voted on the issue!

Due to their sovereign rights and jurisdiction in large areas of the Arctic Ocean, the five coastal states see themselves in a "unique position" to address these possibilities and challenges. The decisive formulations in the declaration relate to the UNCLOS. The signatories agree that the law of the sea provides for important rights and obligations regarding the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf, the protection of the marine environment, freedom of navigation, and marine research. The declaration states: "We remain committed to this legal framework and to the orderly settlement of any possible overlapping claims." In other words, Ilulissat affirms the status of the Convention on the Law of the Sea as the definitive document in relation to the Arctic.
This just one more example of the way government officials operate behind the cloak of secrecy to sign away our rights and freedoms without the Constitutional authority. No wonder the public opinion of the Congress is so low! Why would a man who promised that he would have an open and transparent government, allow this to happen without letting the public know about it? Surely his transition team that was in Washington at this time had to know about this meeting. Why did they not make any comment about the ramifications of this meeting?
The answer is that Obama is doing what he wants irregardless of the wishes of the electorate, as long as he satisfies the 61% who elected him. The rest of us be damned!

THERE OUGHT TO BE A LAW!

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
unfortunately WE HAVE TO ADD ONE MORE EVIL TO THAT WHICH OUR GOVERNMENT CAN DO TO US. IT CAN AND IS SOCIALIZING OUR MAIN INDUSTRIES.

The blatant lie hat Mr. Gibbs told to the press corp recently is an example of the duplicity and double talking that is coming out of the "Chicago Style" White House daily.He said this:"We strongly back an auto industry that we believe can and should be self-reliant. It is not our desire to either own or run one of the auto companies.”

Well, the President just joined forces with the UAW union to take over the Chrysler Corporation. And in doing so committed a crime of drastic proportions in that they reduce the Bond holders share of the company that they owned last month, to a ten percent share!

Under the agreement, the four banks will forgo claims to their portion of Chrysler's $6.9 billion debt in exchange for $2 billion in cash when the deal closes.

The Treasury needs to persuade all 46 banks and hedge funds that hold Chrysler debt to go along. If not, a bankruptcy filing could still be possible for the nation's third largest automaker.

If the remaining debt holders agree to the deal, that leaves a partnership with Italian automaker Fiat Group SpA as the lone remaining hurdle to Chrysler meeting a government-imposed deadline Thursday to complete a number of major restructuring steps and become eligible for further government aid.

The UAW reached a deal over the weekend that would give it a 55 percent stake in the company and assurances over issues like health care. At no cost to the union I should remind all who bother to read this post! While the Bond holders get the shaft!

Chrysler has been living off $4 billion in government funds since the start of the year and would likely need more to avoid bankruptcy.

The people familiar with the matter said a "surgical" bankruptcy is still possible if all of Chrysler creditors don't go along with the deal, but that it was not the preferred option for resolving Chrysler's problems. Has any one bothered to ask individual bond holders who they want running the company? I am sure they would not say the union or the President, who has not even run a candy store!

The debt holders and the Treasury Department have been trading proposals in the past several weeks but had remained far apart on how much the creditors would recoup in a Chrysler restructuring. Debt holders last week offered to reduce their debt to $3.75 billion in exchange for a 40 percent stake in the company. Treasury has offered much less generous terms. What the government is offering is a Chance to take part in the first, but certainly not the last step, in Obama's change of the free Enterprise system to that of a socialized economy run by a non-responsive government.
The people close to this deal, said the government told the debt holders that they could lose everything if no deal was reached.

This is a blatant falsehood! A bankruptcy court would certainly not give the union controlling interest in Chrysler. It would certainly nullify the union contracts and make the union slash their benefits package for themselves and the retirees.That is reality as the world of economics knows it. Not the fairy tale system that Obama has used very effectively to slip the USA into the beginnings of a socialist system, and pay back a debt to one of the group's that helped him get elected, The UAW.

First Obama went around the world apologizing for America being a "bad" country under the Bush administration. Then he went to South America, and not only did he listen for 50 minutes silently while Hugo Chavez lambasted the USA, he then accepted a book damning America from Chavez that any patriot would have thrown in the trash. Now he is in the process of trashing the free enterprise syestem in the name of "CHANGE AND HOPE" that violates every principle of the Constitution and Bill of Rights that he is sworn to defend and protect!

THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH BEING UNINFORMED

The problem that I have whenever I think of the disturbing things that are occurring in the USA today. Economic meltdown, spending by Congress out of control, weakening of our defense capability and the rapid erosion of personal liberty. I think that the fact that anyone under the age of fifty(50) has never experienced a war allows a mind set that denies the horrors and sacrifices of war.
Being a senior citizen who witnessed from afar the great struggle of WWII,including rationing of food and gasoline,and personally being involved in the Korean war has given me a perspective that my children and grand children have not had.

Because those of us who lived through "declared" war experienced the possibility that we might actually loose the war, and the real possibility that you or one of your loved ones would be killed brings a perspective of dread and angst to mind about those who were the enemies we fought. Japanese and Germans were demonized in the media and we all believed anything was allowed as long as we win the war!

Today only those who lost loved ones on 9/11/01, and those who lost men or women in Iraq and Afghanistan can related to what was an ever day event from 1941 to 1945. Even the death of civilians and hero's in uniform from 2001 to today has apparently not had the impact on the populace, as those of us who lived through WWII. A time when casualties on the Island of Tarawa in a 76 hour period were 3,000! One thousand Marines were killed by the Japanese, and two thousand wounded. This produced 1000 telegrams to anxious loved ones that brought war home with a sudden clarity and grief!And the flag in the front window was changed from a blue star to a gold star!

Today the total killed in action in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by terrorist action
on 9/11/01 is less than the KIA's in the battle for IWO JIMA! 6,821 Marines were killed in 35 days! This statistic is not mentioned to deprecate the loss of life in Iraq and Afghanistan, but to highlight the terrible horrors that Americans experienced daily for four years. And there was no sympathy for the enemy as is seen by the left in today's media frenzy over water boarding of terrorist who were captured, and imprisoned in Iraq.


You can call it selective transparency as do the Obamaphiles. But I believe it is that time has made the Americans forget that war is a fight to the death for us or the enemy. It is not a video game or TV series. War is horrific and destroys bodies and minds.You win if you inflict more violence on the enemy than he does on you!

Despite the fact that the Bush administration succeeded with the interrogation policy in question, when it comes to Left-partisan politics, no good deed goes unpunished.The water boarding did produce valuable information that prevented loss of life, and compared with the terrorist cutting off heads of their captives is not even in the same category.

A perfect example of the naivety that comes with the lack of experience is the speech that president Obama gave to the CIA recently regarding water boarding.
"I have put an end to the interrogation techniques described in those OLC memos, and I want to be very clear and very blunt. I've done so for a simple reason: because I believe that our nation is stronger and more secure when we deploy the full measure of both our power and the power of our values -- including the rule of law."
Tell me how we are safer when you announce to the world that you will treat terrorist prisoners better than the average American prisoner is treated in our prison system. Do we supply special meals for Kosher Jews? We supply prayer blankets, Korans and Islamic dietary foods to the prisoners in that terrible place called Gitmo!

War is Hell, and the rules of engagement do not specify that we must treat the enemy in a humane way when we kill him before he kills you. People should realize that talk is cheaper than cheap, but the nasty truth is that the only way to defeat an enemy is to be tougher on him then he is on you. All this talk of what the world thinks of us disappears when you face the enemy on the field of war!

"Values"? Like the values which form Obama's "vision for America." are "pie in the sky" values that should not even be considered in a time at war!

"Rule of law"? Everything the Obama administration has done and plans to do is an affront to constitutional Rule of Law. He has announced to the world and Al Qaeda, that we are a country of debaters not fighters! We might as well surrender now!

In fact, the the releasing the memos publicly accomplished two things immediately. First, it gave our enemies an exact knowledge of exactly how far our interrogations are allowed to go, which means that even where we have probable evidence that a captured jihadi has first hand knowledge of an imminent strike, there's absolutely no weapons left that the interrogator has to use when questioning a terrorist captive. And the president believes this makes us safer?

WILL THE USA GO THE WAY OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE?

The decline of the Roman Empire was a gradual transformation that cannot be dated precisely. Some stepping stones in the path toward the loss of the Western part of the Empire, the weakening of its Eastern part, and the progressive estrangement between the two halves, are nevertheless worth remarking:

The first war with the Visigoths (376 - 382), culminating in the Battle of Adrianople (August 9, 378), in which a large Roman army was defeated by the Visigoths, and emperor Valens was killed. The Visigoths, fleeing a migration of the Huns, had been allowed to settle within the borders of the Empire by Valens, but were mistreated by the local Roman administrators, and rebelled

The second war with the Visigoths, led by king Alaric, in which they raided Greece, and then invaded Italy, culminating in the sack of Rome (410). The Visigoths eventually left Italy, and founded the Visigothic Kingdom in southern Gaul and Hispania.
The rise of the Hunnic Empire under Attila and Bleda (434-453), who raided the Balkans, Gaul, and Italy, threatening both Constantinople and Rome.
The second sack of Rome, by the Vandals (455). effectively ended the Empire that had built the system of aqueducts, the Apian Way, the Forum and the Coliseum.

But there was an internal decay within the Roman populace that contributed to it's fall
The decadence, amorality and the general degradation of the populace resulted in a weak army( Roman Legions) that once conquered the whole of the known world.
A.H Jones wrote: ".the decay of trade and industry was not a cause of Rome’s fall. There was a decline in agriculture and land was withdrawn from cultivation, in some cases on a very large scale, sometimes as a direct result of barbarian invasions. However, the chief cause of the agricultural decline was high taxation on the marginal land, driving it out of cultivation. Jones is surely right in saying that taxation was spurred by the huge military budget and was thus ‘indirectly’ the result of the barbarian invasion."
The argument is made that Rome's loss of her provinces in the fifth century was not an "inevitable effect of any of those features which have been rightly or wrongly described as causes or consequences of her general 'decline.'" The central fact that Rome could not dispense with the help of barbarians for her wars (gentium barbararum auxilio indigemus) may be held to be the cause of her calamities, but it was a weakness which continued to be far short of fatal but for the sequence of contingencies pointed out above. WEAKNESS!!

Roman decadence was the gradual decline in the ancient Roman republican values of family, virtus, and dignitas that ultimately led to the decay of Rome. According to Edward Gibbon, the root of the decadence may have lain within the political system. Sound familiar with what is going on in the halls of Congress and the Supreme court today?

There is no doubt in my mind that Stalin was correct when he said we will not have to conquer you. We will do it from within. I paraphrase his words, but the meaning is still there.
A look at the major Ivy league university faculties will show you that most so called tenured scholars are at the very least leftist socialists and at the extreme, Communists. These are the people who are teaching the next generation of leaders in a Godless, Statist mind set!

The TV is filled with advertisements that just a few years would be considered pornographic. Most of them are adds to increase sexual pleasure for couples, and there is an add that touts a vibrator for women! While the morality of this country is being degraded the value of human life is no longer important thanks to the Supreme Court. There is even a push to force Catholic and other doctors who have a conscience, to make them perform abortions even if their conscience says an abortion is a sin. Not only the doctor is being attacked, but Catholic hospitals may be forced to allow abortions in their Obstetrics departments!

Will the advent of Obama's National Health Plan open the doors to rationing of services and eventually the withholding of treatment to save the lives of older patients? If you increase the number of people who are eligible and able to access the limited number of medical doctors and hospitals were presently have. It is axiomatic that there will have to be rationing of services and preferences for treatment based upon the secular attitude of a persons "worth to society".This has ominous consequences that the Left who are pushing the "government Option" do not want you to think about, nor will the answer questions that are asked as the Town Hall meetings have shown!

And if that does not destroy or individual and States rights they have the Cap and Trade bill that will deliver the knock out blow to our way of life if they can hood wink enough Congressmen and Senators to pass this heinous bill!

These are questions that need to be answered, but getting a straight answer from Obama and his minions is "like pulling teeth"!

WHEN WILL THE PRESIDENT DEFEND THE USA?

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

When Barack Obama was a candidate for president, the main plank of his foreign policy, other than withdrawing from Iraq, was agreeing to "talk to our enemies," notably Iran and Syria. The intellectual rationale for this policy, as far as one can make out, is that because George W. Bush wouldn't commit the office of the presidency itself to direct negotiations with the leaders of these regimes, and because everything George W. Bush did was wrong, reversing that policy would bear fruit.

Obama went to Europe not as the voice of his nation, but as a "missionary" with a message of atonement for its errors. Which were, as he perceived them -- arrogance, dismissiveness, Guantanamo, deficiencies in its attitudes toward the Muslim world, and the presidency of Harry Truman and his decision to drop the atomic bomb, which ended World War II.

No sitting American president had ever delivered indictments of this kind while abroad, or for that matter at home, or been so ostentatiously modest about the character and accomplishment of the nation he led. He was mediator, an agent of change, a judge, apportioning blame -- and he was above the battle."Don't blame me, as I was only a child when it happened"!

None of this display during Mr. Obama's recent travels could have come as a surprise to legions of his supporters, nor would many of them be daunted by their new president's preoccupation with our moral failures. Five decades of teaching in colleges and universities across the land, portraying the U.S. as a power mainly responsible for injustice and evil, whose military might was ever a danger to the world.a nation built on the fruits of greed, and racism, have had their effect. The products of this education find nothing strange in a president quick to focus on the theme of American moral failure. He may not share many of their views, but there is, nonetheless, much that they find familiar about him. And after sitting in a pew of Reverend Wrights hate filled church for 20 years may explain this horrendous betrayal of America.

The hopeful way to view the Obama administration's openings to Chávez, the Castros, Iran and the others would be: This had better work. Because if it doesn't, a lot of people who've spent years working in opposition to these regimes -- in hiding or in prison in Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, China, Russia, Burma, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan -- are going to get hammered. North Korea's opposition is invisible.

President Obama has painted in indelible ink images of America that cannot be taken back. These images will remain in both the minds of those who received the apologies, and in the minds of the American public of those who vote. The enduring power of the negative images Obama painted to satisfy one more campaign promise will endure, and come back to haunt Obama in 2010 and if he keeps it up will sweep him out of the OVAL OFFICE in 2012! Source:Wall Street Journal

OBAMA TAKES "TURN THE OTHER CHEEK" TO THE EXTREME!

First he traveled to Great Britain and then the major powers of the EU, Germany, France and the Muslim Country of Turkey with the message of apology and buckets full of taxpayers dollars for appeasement.
Then he went to the meeting with Ortega, Chavez and Castro last week, and said "don't blame me because it all happened when I was child".Not a word in defense of the Country he swore to defend and protect in his swearing in as President.
He shook hands with Chavez as though he was an old friend and listened for 90 minutes to a tirade from the Tyrant Ortega who blamed all the worlds ills on the USA, without uttering a single word of protest.

The picture of the president of the United States smiling broadly as he met President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela schockd me. Our president is considered a nice guy. Chavez is anything but.


US President Barack Obama,shook hands warmly with Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, Friday.

The State Department maintains that Chávez has attacked democratic traditions and has put Venezuelan democracy on life support with unchecked concentration of power, political persecution, and intimidation. Foreign Affairs magazine says that Chávez is a power-hungry dictator with autocratic and megalomaniacal tendencies whose authoritarian vision and policies are a serious threat to his people. In testimony before the US Senate, the South American project director for the Center for Strategic International Studies said that Chavez's government engages in "arresting opposition leaders, torturing some members of the opposition (according to human rights organizations) and encouraging, if not directing, its squads of Bolivarian Circles to beat up members of Congress and intimidate voters-all with impunity."

In spite of a presidential term limit of six years, Chávez has suggested that he would like to remain in power for 25 years. Hmmm. An autocratic dictator who abuses human rights and undermines democracy being warmly embraced by the American president. There's something wrong with that picture.

Then there was the incident of President Barack Obama seeming to bow before King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 summit in London. The president's people denied it was a bow, but it certainly was a sign of great deference from the American president to the dictator of a country who just six weeks ago sentenced a 75-year-old woman to 40 lashes for having been secluded with her nephew after he delivered bread to her home. This is the same Abdullah whom, when asked why Saudi Arabia prohibits the public practice of religions other than Islam, said, "It is absurd to impose on an individual or a society rights that are alien to its beliefs or principles." Source: The Values Network

Obama is also pursuing a renewed relationship with Cuba, a country which engages in systemic human rights abuses, including torture, arbitrary imprisonment, unfair trials and extrajudicial executions. Censorship is so extensive that Cubans face five-year prison sentences for connecting to the Internet illegally. And not only is emigration illegal, but even discussing it carries a six-month prison sentence.

WATCHING ALL THIS, I was wondering what the new American standards are. How oppressive must a leader be before we determine that he has not merited a hug by the democratic standard-bearer of the free world, the president of the United States? Yes, I get it. We have to speak to our enemies, and America has to push "reset" on its relationship with many of these countries. We should try and change them through charm. But who said the president himself, rather than a lower-level diplomat, must do so? That is what the State Department is for!

And if Obama feels that he has to be the one to greet a man like Chavez, must it be with the kind of ear-to-ear grin that one might show girl scouts selling cookies? It must surely be disheartening for those who suffer oppression in countries like Venezuela, Cuba and Saudi Arabia to see the American president backslapping their oppressors when these victims have always looked up to the United States as their champions.

In Turkey, Obama boldly declared that "the United States is not, and never will be, at war with Islam." But the person who was at war with Islam, Saddam Hussein, the man who killed nearly one million Muslims, was removed by a country which has already paid with the lives of 4,500 of its servicemen and women. The same is true of the Taliban, another group whom the Obama administration is considering talking to, who beat Muslim women in the streets of Afghanistan. Yet the president seems reluctant to publicly identify these real enemies of Islam.

I am increasingly troubled by his seeming inability to call out rogue dictators. He seems to want everyone to like him except the Conservatives in America, of whom he says we would be better off if we didn't listen to them!

While he was campaigning for the presidency, Obama promised, "As president I will recognize the Armenian genocide." But in a press conference in Ankara with President Abdullah Gul, he refused to use the word "genocide" when challenged by a reporter on the issue. Yet, it was Obama's early foreign policy adviser Samantha Power of Harvard who wrote "A Problem from Hell", the definitive book on the American non-intervention in repeated 20th-century genocides, beginning with the Armenian genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman Turks which killed 1.5 million between the years of 1915 and 1923. Source: Jerurslem Post

WHILE THE FBI INVESTIGATES VETERANS OF WAR OBAMA SIGNS UP MORE GOVT. EMPLOYEES

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

As documented by Michele Marie Moore in the book Oklahoma City: Day One, the legislation provided a general charter for the FBI and other agencies, including the military, to investigate political groups and causes at will. In addition, the legislation authorized secret trials, the use of illegally obtained evidence, allowed the military to engage in law enforcement activities (in violation of Posse Comitatus), relaxed rules for wiretaps, and allowed the president to determine who is a terrorist. “The bill was specifically designed to give the President of the United States the ability to name whomever he wished as a political enemy for the purpose of that person’s removal, and the appropriate media label would be ‘terrorist’. One could also foresee, as a result of this bill, great strides in the effort to completely disarm the American people,” Source:Congressional Record

While setting the Defense Department and the FBI's sights on returning veterans for possible Terrorist activity, Obama is quietly filling his own "army" of civil reervants by legislative fiat.
Seventy-five years to the day after President Roosevelt signed the Civilian Conservation Corps into law, the House of Representatives sent President Obama a sweeping expansion of national service that will engage millions of Americans in meeting national needs and solving local problems through volunteer service.Of Course he signed the Bill into law, as it would put more people on the Government payroll and thus result in more voters for the Democrats and him!

The House voted 275-149 to accept the Senate amendments to H.R. 1388, the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act. The Senate passed the bill in a 79-19 vote and renamed the legislation after Senator Kennedy, a longtime champion of national service. The House action then sent the bill to President Obama, who has signed the measure.

The legislation would reauthorize and expand national service programs administered by the Corporation for National and Community Service, a federal agency created in 1993. The Corporation engages four million Americans in result-driven service each year,(note the words "each year") including 75,000 AmeriCorps members, 492,000 Senior Corps volunteers, 1.1 million Learn and Serve America students, and 2.2 million additional community volunteers mobilized and managed through the agency’s programs. All people who are dependent upon the Federal government for their livelihood.

Under the legislation, the Corporation would increase and enhance opportunities for Americans of all ages to serve by setting AmeriCorps on a path to increase from 75,000 to 250,000 positions each year, establishing a Summer of Service program, expanding eligibility for Senior Corps programs, and creating Silver Scholarships and Encore Fellowships for older Americans. It will strengthen America’s civic infrastructure through the creation of grant programs to invest in social innovation, support volunteer mobilization, and build nonprofit capacity. The new law is also designed to strengthen the management, cost-effectiveness and accountability of programs by increasing flexibility, consolidating funding streams, and introducing more competition. It also includes ACORN as one of the organizations that "volunteers"(who are paid) help financially to further their education.


The legislation would reauthorize and expand national service programs administered by the Corporation for National and Community Service, a federal agency created in 1993. The Corporation engages four million Americans in result-driven service each year, including 75,000 AmeriCorps members, 492,000 Senior Corps volunteers, 1.1 million Learn and Serve America students, and 2.2 million additional community volunteers mobilized and managed through the agency’s programs. Thus growing the Federal government even more as Obama crows about his cut in the Federal Budget of 100 million dollars! Less than one-quarter of the budget increase that Congress awarded to itself; 4 percent of the military aid the United States sends to Israel; Less than half the cost of one F-22 fighter plane; 7 percent of the federal subsidy for the money-losing Amtrak passenger rail system; 1/10,000th of the government's operating budgets for Cabinet agencies, excluding the Iraq and Afghan wars and the stimulus bill.Source: New media Journal

An administration that chooses not to call those who cut off heads of captured Americans like Richard Pearl, TERRORISTS! They have the alert alarm for returning veterans who join or might join Militia groups.
While the FBI stood by and let the Acorns led radicals destroy private property of those who received bonus money from AIG, and did nothing to stop the pirates holding the captain of an American flagged vessel. It took three navy snipers of a SEAL team to resolve the issue! These people are thanks to Secretary Napolitano's leaking a redone memo alerting all law enforcement agencies to consider returning veterans as potential terrorists. Obama was quietly growing the number of people he could legally put on the government payroll. All of whom will be beholden to the "Messiah" for the rest of their lives. Unless they wake up and realize that this President is a Statist who loves adulation and power.

OBAMA even has on the agenda, for action very soon, the creation of a Federal Police Force comparable to the size of our present military! Where have we heard of such a force before. Perhaps those of you old enough, as I am, will remember the special forces troops that Hitler formed called the "SS". A force that struck fear in the hearts of any one who dared to dissent from Hitlers plans, or failed to pledge allegiance to him!!

YOU CANNOT GIVE WHAT YOU DO NOT HAVE!

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.

You cannot say President Obama has the best interests of the United States in his heart. He is all about appeasement and "cow towing" to the most dastardly dictators like Chavez and the Castro brothers.
And We thought Jimmy Carter was bad! Obama has been a world traveler. Traveling all over the World apologizing and offering taxpayers money to every country he has visited while his sycophants in the White House and the Congress are putting the finishing touches to his "statist" change for America. His apparent lack of respect for the values of human life, liberty, personal property rights and free speech will all be part of the change he is planning for us.

How can a man who sat in the church pews of Reverend Wright, and associated with radical weathermen like Ayers and Dorn possibly hold dear to his heart what the average American takes for granted. Our Liberty and freedom from tyrannical rule? This president is at the very least a socialist statist who believes that the government can do a better job of running our lives and business than we presently are doing under the free enterprise system.

It should be apparent that Obama is an advocate of World government, as he curries the favor of world leaders at the disparagement of the USA. He apparently is not proud of anything previous Presidents have done, especially George Bush, as he blames every failure and slight on the past president. Never once considering that the Congress of the United States was complicit in all actions done by Bush including the invasion of Iraq!

Obama bowed to the Muslim King, and found time to visit a Mosque in Turkey, but when he returned to the USA and gave a speech at Georgetown University, his "caporegimes" had the University cover up the name of Jesus on the wall behind where he was speaking.

This man who swore to uphold and defend the Constitution, should have reminded the Germans and the French that if it were not for the tens of thousands of young men who gave their lives during WWII. The Germans would be speaking Russian and the French would be speaking German! Yet he apologized to both for America's arrogance, and did not find time to visit the Hallowed Ground in Normandy, France where thousands of serviceman are buried who died to make them free!

A patriotic president would not have sat idle while the tyrant Ortega trash mouthed America. A more patriotic man would have walked out in the middle of the 50 minute tirade, or at least spoke up to object. But then Obama seems comfortable in the company of people who hate America!He even married a woman who said she was never proud of the USA until the Democrats nominated her husband!

But then I guess I should not be surprised. A man cannot give homage to a country that he believes is corrupt, unfair, and racist.
He seems to be filled with class hatred and disgust for the free enterprise system, so I must conclude that he cannot show pride where there is none!

WHERE IS PAUL REVERE WHEN YOU NEED HIM?

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

Surprise, surprise! Barney Frank wants to take over another portion of the private sector economy at the taxpayers peril!
The Chairman of the House Financial Services Chairman, Barney Frank, who with the help of Senator Dodd forced mortgage lenders to make loans to people who had neither the means nor the inclination to pay the loan payments, is at it again.
Mr. Frank said for years that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack posed no threat to the tax payers despite his forced regulations that doomed the home mortgage private sector. Now he wants to take over the insuring of Municipal Bonds. This business is used to insure the bonds that State and local governments use to build infrastructure such as new City Halls or Court Houses. The municipalities "float" bonds that people buy with the intention of making money on the interest payed to the bond holders.

But in bad economic times like this, many municipalities do not have the money to pay the bond holders. This presents a situation that most prudent self serving politicians do not want to find them selves in. They have to choose to raise taxes or default on the the bonds. Unfortunately many choose to default rather than raise taxes and face an angry electorate at the polls in the next election.

Here is where large insurance companies like Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway come in. His company insures the municipal bonds against default.
Presently there are approximately $1.7 trillion outstanding municipal bonds held by the American public.

Now the man who caused the housing crisis, and told Americans that there was no chance the taxpayers would be at risk for his regulations on Fannie and Freddie, wants to meddle in the municipal bond insurance business!
He says there will be no risk to the taxpayers when the Congress passes the Bill he is proposing that will establish a fund to insure municipal bonds.

Although, once again Frank says there is no (zero) risk of a cost to the taxpayers. A man who despite the fact that his company charges high rates for insuring municipal bonds. Says "it is a dangerous business"!

Mr. Frank would like to create what he calls an FDIC-like federal insurance program for municipal bonds. Jurisdictions issuing debt would pay premiums into the insurance fund, and in return the federal government would guarantee the debt against default. "Private companies already insure municipal bonds -- companies such as MBIA, Ambac and Berkshire Hathaway. And you may recall that last year the big bond insurers caused considerable angst when their exposure to mortgage-related debt called into question their ability to meet their muni-bond obligations. MBIA, in response, recently fenced off its muni-bond business from its other obligations".Source:Wall street Journal

Wake up Americans!!! This is another taxpayer disaster that "statists" like Frank and the majority of the Congress want to force down our collective throats! Write, call, email your Congress and Senate representatives to defeat this absurd idea! They probably will ignore you as they have in the past, but it is ammunition for the next time they run for their princely office!

NAPOLITANO SHOULD BE FIRED!

In all my years on earth the two worst insults to the military personnel have occurred in the past few years.
First there was now Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton , calling general Petraeus a LIAR. And now the most outrageous insult has been uttered and re-enforced by the Mean Stream Media. Janet Napolitano has issued a report that says returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan are prone to acts of terrorism! Of course she defended the report by saying that it was done during the Bush administration. When in doubt blame Bush seems to be the mantra of the Obama cadre. But why was it not made public until the Tea Parties were launched?

She went into detail about their training in deadly weapons, and the fact that they may not fit in with the difficult economy we are having, and are prone to join Right Wing Terrorist groups.
She and her boss, Obama, don't think that calling the real terrorists who are waging a Jihad against the USA, is appropriate.
But she has decided to call Americans veterans potential terrorists!
Yes I remember Tim McVey, but I also remember two terrorists who are now professors named Ayers and Dorn who ignited a bomb on a military base.These are real home grown terrorists, and proud of it!

It is strange that this warning was circulated at the same time that the Tea Parties were held in every State to protest the massive spending of the Congress and the President.

The report the Homeland Security Secretary sent to all law enforcement agencies in the United States included these words: "Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right wing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that right wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities".

Has anyone - besides me - noticed that despite the fact that most violent crimes, most violent protests, and most radical acts of terror in America, are NOT committed by your average white Americans, or even the average Republican, there is NO reference to “Left wing” or “Black Panther” styled radicalism here???

Those seeking to rob fellow Americans of their hard earned property in the name of a greater communal good, are no threat to America at all.? Only those who oppose the Marxist efforts qualify as dangerous “domestic terrorists” under Obama’s DHS. Those who commit voter fraud on a massive scale like Obama’s ACORN are no problem. But those who oppose it are “racists,” and a “dangerous threat.”

In short, if you still foolishly believe in the Founding documents as they were written and ratified, oppose an oppressive federal government run by unbridled Marxists, cling to your bibles and guns, affirm the unalienable individual Rights to Life, Liberty, or the Pursuit of Happiness, or national sovereignty as established in the Founders Declaration of Independence, you are now a “domestic terrorist!”

This apparently hateful woman should be fired for her attack on the tens of thousands of brave and honorable men and woman who have and are still fighting the real war against terrorism!

IT IS ALL ABOUT"SPIN"!

As could be expected from the sycophants of the Obama administration, the mantra was "triumph" when they were asked about the results of president Obama's first trip to the EU since being elected president.
His press secretary was effusive about the love that Europeans heaped on Obama, and all in all it was a successful trip. But was it really a success for the president? From my vantage point he bowed and scraped, apologized and generally deprecated Americans to satisfy the mobs of American hating people who thronged to see the new president.

But did he accomplish anything substantive for the war effort in Afghanistan, or the economy of the World? The following article posted on the London Telegraph web site by Gerald Warner explains one man's opinion of the failure that Obama wrought on the USA.

"President Barack Obama has recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon's retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you'd notice.


Barack Obama in Prague on his astonishingly successful tour

Barack is not the first New World ingenue to discover that European leaders will load him with praise, struggle sycophantically to be photographed with him and outdo him in Utopian rhetoric. But when it comes to the critical moment of opening their wallets - suddenly it is flag-day in Aberdeen. Okay, put the G20 down to inexperience, beginner's nerves, what you will.

On to NATO and the next big objective: to persuade the same European evasion experts that America, Britain and Canada should no longer bear the brunt of the Afghan struggle virtually unassisted. The Old World sucked through its teeth, said that was asking a lot - but, seeing it was Barack, to whom they could refuse nothing, they would graciously accede to his wishes.

So The One retired triumphant, having secured a massive contribution of 5,000 extra troops - all of them non-combatant, of course - which must really have put the wind up the Taliban, at the prospect of 5,000 more infidel cooks and bottle-washers swarming into the less hazardous regions of Afghanistan.

Then came the dramatic bit, the authentic West Wing script, with the President wakened in the middle of the night in Prague to be told that Kim Jong-il had just launched a Taepodong-2 missile. America had Aegis destroyers tracking the missile and could have shot it down. But Uncle Sam had a sterner reprisal in store for l'il ole Kim (as Dame Edna might call him): a multi-megaton strike of Obama hot air.

"Rules must be binding," declared Obama, referring to the fact that Kim had just breached UN Resolutions 1695 and 1718. "Violations must be punished." (Sounds ominous.) "Words must mean something." (Why, Barack? They never did before, for you - as a cursory glance at your many speeches will show.)

President Pantywaist is hopping mad and he has a strategy to cut Kim down to size: he is going to slice $1.4bn off America's missile defence programme, presumably on the calculation that Kim would feel it unsporting to hit a sitting duck, so that will spoil his fun.

Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride".

I think this man can see from afar what apparently a majority of Americans cannot see up close!

ACCOMIDATION NOT ACTION IS THE MESSAGE WE SEND TO THE WORLD

While we are getting indications that Defense Secretary Gates is cutting back on so called "old weapons systems", like the f-22 fighter jet that was slated to replace the aging F-18, and cutting back on the production of a new nuclear aircraft carrier.

The State Department has reported that Iran's has charged that a US journalist is a spy and will be tried as such! This is disturbing news. There is no action even being considered to force Iran to release this lady who has been held in jail since January,2009!

Ms.Saberi, an Iranian/American, has lived in Iran for six years, reporting for BBC and other networks.
Hillary Clinton, Secretary of state, said on Wednesday that the US was "deeply concerned" about the news and called for Roxana Saberi's immediate release.

"We are deeply concerned by the news that we're hearing," Clinton said. "We wish for her speedy release and return to her family. Note, she did not say "we demand her immediate release", she said "we wish"!

Clinton said that the US, which is embroiled in a long-running dispute with Iran over that country's nuclear program, had asked Swiss diplomats in Tehran for the "most accurate, up-to-date information" on Saberi.But she failed to report that she and the Obama administration have agreed to meet along with five other nations who have disputes with the USA, to discuss with Iran their nuclear program! The operative word is "discuss"!

alJazeer.com has this report on their web pages today:
"The US government has said it is to regularly(?) join in talks between Iran and other states over the Islamic republic's nuclear programme.

Washington will participate in the talks, held between Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and Iran, the US state department said on Wednesday, marking a shift from the policies of George Bush, the previous US president.

"We believe that pursuing very careful engagement on a range of issues that affect our interests and the interests of the world with Iran makes sense," said Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state.

The other members of the "P5+1" group said they welcomed the US decision to join the talks.

The group had announced earlier that it would invite Iran to attend a new session aimed at breaking a deadlock in the talks"

It appears to me that the tack and modus operandi of the Obama administration is accommodation not action, as was the mast head of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush
Apparently Obama thinks he can talk those who hate us into doing what is best for us.
Or does he really care? Barack Obama, the US president,and commander in chief of the armed forces, has signalled a willingness for US officials to hold talks with Iran and other powers(China,Russia and France) with poor relations with the US.

In March, Obama recorded a video addressed to the Iranian people in which he appealed for better relations between the two nations, which have not had diplomatic ties since 1979.Better relations with no mention of the nuclear program cannot exist!

It would seem that the message the World is getting from the White House is one of accomidation not action. This brings to mind a quote from Winston Churchill. "Danger - if you meet it promptly and without flinching - you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!...Winston Churchill

In another intersting develeopment, Nato's incoming chief has said that he would carefully consider religious sensibilities in his new post, as he seeks to allay Muslim concerns over his appointment.

Speaking in the Turkish city of Istanbul on Monday, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Denmark's former prime minister, called for a balance between free speech and a respect for religion. What this sounds like is that freedom of speech will be curtailed if a person says or writes anything disparaging about Muslims!

Turkey had threatened to veto his appointment due to his support for a Danish newspaper after its decision to print cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in 2006 prompted protests across the Muslim world.

The dispute was resolved after Barack Obama, the US president, guaranteed that Turkish commanders would be present at the Nato's command and that a Turk would be appointed as one of Rasmussen's deputies. You did not read this or hear it on TV did you?