IF ONLY OUR MEDIA WAS UNBIASED!

It is not often that I read the stories printed in the latest edition of Pravda. It is not required reading for this fiscal conservative as it might be for the memers of the CPOA.
But thanks to the Drudge report, I visited the Pravda web site today, and I read an article that illustrates to me that the former Communist propaganda vehicle for the "CCCP", the Communist Party of Russia, realizes what is going on in the United States more succinctly than most Americans.
This is due to the fact that our Main Stream media has put to the "spike" any story or news that would awaken readers and viewers of the rapid pace that Obama is making the Change he promised voters. A move from Democracy to Marxist Socialism!
In fact,The White House press corps is now completely supine, utterly shameless in its groveling cowardice. Stalin himself couldn't have wished for a more slobbering press corps!

To give the full effect of the message that the Russian people and the rest of the World who read Pravda will now think. I will quote the entire article, as any excerpt would not tell the whole story of what others see is going on in the USA.

"American capitalism gone with a whimper"
Front page / Opinion / Columnists
27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru

"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.

True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.

Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.

First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.

Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?"

This article is a wake -up call for those who voted for Obama and still believe his CHANGE will make life better for them. Of course those dedicated to Socialism and the elitist Socialists will not be phased by this article, because they realized from the "get go" that the smooth talking Obama was one of theirs.

HAS OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE ACT?

It wasn't long ago that this great Country of ours had a Legislative, Executive and Judicial branch that controlled the way we lived. The Legislative branch made the laws, declared war when needed, and appropriated the money needed to run the government.
The Executive branch was the Commander in Chief of the Military and had veto power over any Bills that the Legislative body sent to his desk, and the Judicial branch was lead by the Supreme Court. This body was the Court of last resort for redress of individuals and groups who felt they were either cheated by the other two branches of government or thought a law that was in force was wrong and harmful.
This oversimplifies the duties and powers of the three branches of government, but it illustrates that OUR Country was ruled in an orderly and lawful manner up until now!


The Obama administration is making choices that not only favor some and hurt others. President Obama is making decisions that, in my opinion and more learned scholars than I, think are exceeding the powers granted to the president by the Constitution!
It appears that the politically well connected tend to get the favors.( aka:Unions and Acornto mention a few).
Banks were forced to take government money due not slightly to having to loan money for housing to minority groups without their ability to pay the loan payments, as crafted by the likes of Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd. Now they are blocked from paying the money back.
In the meantime, the banks must direct funds where the government wants them to go.This is a direct assault on the Free Enterprise Private Banking industry!

Chrysler and General Motors bond holders had their property(their investment in $) redistributed to the United Auto Worker retiree health-care fund (how the retirees help the companies make cars profitably is left unclear). Stimulus funds go to state governments with lavish contracts with public employee unions. And out of every dollar that goes to a union, a certain number of cents make their way back to the Democratic Party.
And now it appears that Obama's Auto Bankruptcy CZARS are selecting Chrysler dealerships for closure based upon whether they were political supporters of the Democrats or Republicans. A review of the dealerships that have already been notified that they will not have their contracts renewed shows that over 95% of those selected supported Republicans!

And now, without the prior approval of Congress or any legislation authorizing the act, President Obama plans to announce on today(Monday) that the federal government will take a 60-percent ownership stake in General Motors as part of a bankruptcy and reorganization plan for the company.

The White House on Sunday night announced that the plan will require the federal government to provide another $30 billion of taxpayer money to General Motors, on top of the $20 billion in aid the federal government already has given the company.
Source: CNSNews.com

In December, Congress failed to pass legislation authorizing a federal bailout of the auto industry. Analysts James Gattuso and Andrew Grossman of the Heritage Foundation argued at the time that this was “legally wrong” because Bush took the money from the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) that was authorized specifically for purchasing assets from “financial institutions” such as banks, savings and loans, credit unions, brokerages and insurance companies. The Heritage analysts argued that auto manufacturers are not “financial institutions” as envisioned by Congress under the law.

Robert Reich, who served as labor secretary under President Clinton, argued that Bush’s move was unconstitutional because of the limits the Constitution places on the president’s power to spend public money. Specifically, the Constitution says, “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” Why is Mr. Reich so silent now that Obama is compounding Bush's misappropriation of Power?

When asked, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, where Obama derived the legal authority to do what he was doing. Hoyer candidly said he did not know.

“The administration clearly believes it does have the authority to use some of the remaining TARP funds for the automobile industry,” Hoyer told Fred Lucas of CNSNews.com.

“I don't know, technically, but my own view is that if it is perceived they don't have that authority and it is perceived by the Congress they need to have that authority, the Congress would probably be willing to give that authority. But I don't know technically the answer to that question.” I know the answer! The Senate could not muster the 60 votes necessary to stop a filibuster that would kill any authorization giving extra-Constitutional powers to Obama, and Hoyer knows that!
Undoubtedly the House of Representative with so many Liberal members who are in the pockets of the Union movement would pass the authorization, but as I said. It would fail in the Senate. So here we are with a president who apparently thinks he is above the Constitution taking the right away from those who should have them, the bondholders, and taking them for himself and his Union supporters. Can anything be more brazen than this? Only time will tell!

THERE ARE LIARS, DAMN LIARS AND THEN YOU HAVE POLLSTERS!!

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

Reagan was correct when he said "if it stops moving, subsidize it". GM and Chrysler were each subsidized and now they are owned by the Government. Obama and his mouthpiece Gibbs say they are owned by the "public'-us taxpayers. But has anyone asked you what you think the deal should be with the bloated UAW? Or have they asked, or even taken a poll to determine if the American public will by enough of the "pregnant roller skates" that GM is going to make?

Of course they have not and will not, because they do not want to know what you and I want. They(Obama and his merry band of thieves) think the average American is too uneducated, and generally ignorant of what is good for us, to make trhat decision. So they will make it and many more decisions for us!

Despite the fact that any one who has two brain cells to rub together realizes that Obama is rapidly taking control of one industry after another. First the Banks, then the Mortgage Houses and now Detroit auto makers Chrysler and General Motors. Waiting in the wing is the power grab of the best Medical system of the World.
Despite this march toward Socialism the polls still show the President has an over 60% approval rating.

I have live long enough to realize that pollsters cannot be trusted. Take the Truman, Dewy election. The polls showed Dewey winning by a landslide even up to the day before the election. Truman won!

Kerry vs Bush had Kerry as a sure winner. Bush won! I could go on, but statistics would only cause you to stop reading this blog.

Suffice it to say that their is a disconnect in the polls that show Obama with a favorable rating as high as 65% when the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of American voters say the nation is moving down the wrong track. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say America is heading in the right direction.

Both numbers are largely unchanged from a week ago. But the number of voters who say the country is heading in the right direction is up 10 points from the week Barack Obama was inaugurated as president in January and up 16 points from the first week in November when he was elected.

The percentage of women who see the country as moving in the right direction slipped from 41% last week to 38% this week. Fifty-four percent (54%) of women say the country is heading down the wrong track. Men remained more steady this week, with 36%who responded right direction and 59% who said wrong track. Among African-American voters, who have been the most optimistic demographic since the election, 61% say America is heading in the right direction while 33% say the opposite. Last week, black voters answered right direction by a 70% to 18% margin. White voters showed no change this week, with a third (33%) saying the country is headed in the right direction and 61% who believe the opposite. Twenty-nine percent (29%) of all other voters answered right direction this week, down from 34% in the last poll, while 62% said wrong track. Source: Heritage Foundation

We all realize that Obama has the Main Stream Media in his pocket, they might as well be called his propaganda arm!
The way his "people" strong armed the bond holders in the Chrysler "deal" is illustrated of the power of persuasion that the President has in his control.
But to be more direct to the point of poll results. It all depends on the sample group. A poll taken in a minority area will get results far different than one taken in a suburb of Salt Lake City. Numbers can be obtained that are predetermined before the poll is taken, and there is just false reporting.

It is all conjecture on my part, but I have the feeling that many people who voted for Obama have buyers remorse when they see that his promise of taxing only the so called RICH has turned out to be an untruth! And the taxes will keep on coming to pay for his grand march toward CHANGE!

THE HYPOCRISY OF CO2 EMISSIONS TREATY

The taxpayers have been paying for Congressional "junkets" for decades. The Hypocrisy of these foreign trips is that they are said to be fact finding missions, when in reality most are disguised vacations for both Republicans and Democrats depending which party holds power at the time.
While the president was spending more than a million dollars of the taxpayers money flying Air force one and two other jumbo jets to Las Vegas and Los Angeles to raise money for Harry Reid and the Democrat party. "QUEEN" Pelosi was in Communist China talking up the emissions control line.
What she thinks she will accomplish talking to groups of school children as she did is purely speculative. I think she just wanted to visit China and see the sites, and is using the excuse that she is promoting the idea of reducing carbon emissions.

The Associated Press is reporting that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged Beijing on Thursday to cooperate on climate change, calling a safe environment a basic human right.

Only she was not talking to the Country's leaders. She was speaking at Beijing elite Tsinghua University, Pelosi continued the theme of her five-day China trip,that combating global warming represented a new challenge that both governments must tackle jointly.
Students have very little to say about government decisions as Tienanmen Square proved!

"We are all in this together," Pelosi told an audience of about 200 students and faculty who applauded enthusiastically throughout the 45-minute session. "The impact of climate change is a tremendous risk to the security and well-being of our countries." She might as well been talking to Kindergarten children, because she must know that China has been exempt from any Carbon emission regulations that are mandated by the International body that will draw up a new Carbon Emission treaty in Germany this summer!

CNS NEWS is reporting that the 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.

So while Communist China is developing the capacity to drill for crude oil in Africa, and any other country that will allow them. We are trying to substitute a proven method of producing the energy that makes the wheels of the Free Enterprise system work, oil. Billions are being spent to develop wind turbines, solar panels and the poor substitute for gasoline, ethanol,to heat and air condition our homes and run the transportation industry. This tact will slowly but surely make the USA a third rate country. If Americans do not wake up to the canard that is being perpetrated upon us by those who stand to get rich on Carbon Credits, and those who want to see this country fail so Godless Communism can take the reigns of power.This Country will run out of oil and the wind turbines and solar power cannot run our airplanes much less run what industry we still have. We have not built a refinery for over 30 years, and the "tree huggers" have convinced Congress to deny drilling off shore, so get ready for an expensive winter just to heat your home!

Perhaps the prediction of John Adams is coming to fruition!
"Remember Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a Democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” – John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

IT MAY BE TIME TO ACT NOT TALK!!

THE REPORT FROM SOUTH Korea, THAT NORTH Korea HAS THREATENED TO CONSIDER ANY INTRUSION INTO IT'S "SEA SPACE", AS AN ACT OF WAR!
Should be a wake-up call for president Obama!
This came after they violated the UN negotiated agreement not to produce nuclear weapons. They did it by setting of a nuclear device yesterday and followed with a barrage of five missiles that were intended to intimidate South Korea.North Korea wants to move the "Treaty" Line between North and South Korea further South.

An article by Hyung-Jin Kim includes this quote from North Korean leaders. "North Korea threatened military action Wednesday against U.S. and South Korean warships plying the waters near the Korea's' disputed maritime border, raising the specter of a naval clash just days after the regime's underground nuclear test.
Pyongyang, reacting angrily to Seoul's decision to join an international program to intercept ships suspected of aiding nuclear proliferation, called the move tantamount to a declaration of war.
Now that the South Korean puppets were so ridiculous as to join in the said racket and dare declare a war against compatriots," North Korea is "compelled to take a decisive measure," the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea said in a statement carried by state media.

Seoul's decision comes at a time when "the state of military confrontation is growing acute and there is constant danger of military conflict," the statement warned.And a memo to president Obama from me. Please understand that tyrants like they have in North Korea and Iran do not pay any attention to UN sanctions or care to discuss accommodation with the USA as this quote illustrates.
The current leader Kim Jong-il, the late president Kim Il-sung's son had this to say about UN sanctions.

"It is a laughable delusion for the United States to think that it can get us to kneel with sanctions," it said. "We've been living under U.S. sanctions for decades, but have firmly safeguarded our ideology and system while moving our achievements forward. The U.S. sanctions policy toward North Korea is like striking a rock with a rotten egg."
His "achievements" as he calls them, are nuclear weapons and long range missiles. He has also beefed up his Naval capability with new warships and submarines that threaten our Fleet in the Sea of Japan, or as the Koreans call it,"the Sea of Korea".
There are some 650 vessels in the North Korea Navy including 3 frigates and 23 submarines (total displacement of approx. 107,000 tons).Source:Wikapedia

This type of provocative rhetoric resonates with the "little mad man" of Iran. Who will be emboldened if the Obama administration lets Kim Jong-Il continue to rattle his sabres without some reactive radical measures. Such as freezing the Jong-Il bank accounts and blockading North Korean waters to in coming and out going commercial shipping unless they stop nuclear weapons production.

I do not worry that North Korea will launch a nuclear weapon against the USA or it's ally South Korea, but I do envision the North Koreans selling "nuke" weapons to terrorist states that will use them against US or our allies in the form of "suitcase" bombs that will be much worse than the disaster we sustained on 9/11/01!

CONSERVATIVES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE SHOULD VOTE AGAINST SOTOMAYOR

MSNBC story line this morning was about president Obamas' pick for the Supreme Court . Yesterday Obama announced that he had selected Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Justice Stevens.
The piece began with this direct quote: "President Obama nominated federal judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court yesterday, putting her in line to become the nation's first Hispanic justice and creating a difficult political equation for Republicans as they weigh how aggressively to fight her appointment.

An all-out assault on Sotomayor by Republicans could alienate both Latino and women voters, deepening the GOP's problems after consecutive electoral setbacks".

"Critics targeted her support for affirmative action, with Rush Limbaugh calling her a "reverse racist" in his syndicated radio program, citing a case in which she ruled against a group of white firefighters who claimed discrimination in hiring practices.

White House officials argued that the comments in the speeches were taken out of context, and they said that the firefighters case was an example of Sotomayor accepting established precedent, something they said conservatives should applaud. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, who are on the verge of controlling a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate, warned Republicans of the dangers of pushing too hard against Obama's first court pick.

Judicial precedent: A judgment of a court of law cited as an authority for deciding a similar set of facts; a case which serves as authority for the legal principle embodied in its decision. The common law has developed by broadening down from precedent to precedent".

A judicial precedent is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision making. This is known as stare decisis (to stand upon decisions) and by which precedents are authoritative and binding and must be followed.

In giving judgment in a case, the judge will set out the facts of the case, state the law applicable to the facts and then provide his or her decision. It is only the ratio decidendi (the legal reasoning or ground for the judicial decision) which is binding on later courts under the system of judicial precedent

Judicial precedent is an important source of English law as an original precedent is one which creates and applies a new rule. However, the later decisions, especially of the higher courts, can have a number of effects upon precedents.. In particular, they may be:

* Reversed: where on appeal in the same case the decision is reversed, the initial decision will cease to have any effect
* Overruled: where in a later case a higher court decides that the first case was wrongly decided
* A refusal to follow: this arises where a court, not bound by the decision, cannot overrule it but does not wish to follow it so it simply refuses to follow the earlier decision
* Distinguished: where an earlier case is rejected as authority, either because the material facts differ or because the statement of law in the previous case is too narrow to be properly applied to the new set of facts
* Explained: a judge may seek to interpret an earlier decision before applying it or distinguishing it, thus the effect of the earlier case is varied in the circumstances of the present case. Source: Law Dictionary.com

The Pew Research reported that in the 2008 presidential election 9% of those who voted were identified as Latino. Of this group, Hispanics voted for Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden over Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin by a margin of more than two-to-one in the 2008 presidential election, 67% versus 31%,

Nationwide, the Latino vote was significantly more Democratic this year than in 2004, when President Bush captured an estimated 40% of the Hispanic vote, a modern high for a Republican presidential candidate. So you see the Latino vote is already decided just as is the Union vote--Democrat!!
Obama's 67% share of the Latino vote in the 2008 general election represented a major reversal of fortunes for him since the Democratic primaries, when he lost the Latino vote to Sen. Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly two-to-one4 . No other major demographic voting group in the country swung so heavily to Obama as Latinos did between the primaries and the general election this year. According to the 2008 National Survey of Latinos, conducted in June and July of this year, 75% of Latino registered voters who said they supported Clinton in the primaries switched their support to Obama. Source: Pew Hispanic Center Report

However, Politico reports that 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate, a 2-percentage-point rise in their national turnout. As in past years, black women turned out at a higher rate than black men.Blacks do not necessarily like Hispanics as I experienced when the Cuban exodus brought thousands of Hispanics into South Florida in the 60's and took away all the jobs in hotels and dining establishments that had been held by Blacks!

A stunning 54 percent of young white voters supported Obama, compared with 44 percent who went for McCain, the senator from Arizona. In the past three decades, no Democratic presidential nominee has won more than 45 percent of young whites.
So you can see the effect on the voters who are Hispanic if the Republicans grow a spine and object to Sotomayors confirmation will be negligible in the 2010 election. Latinos with the exception of Miami Cubans have seldom voted Republican, and the new generation of Cubans appears to have already switched to the Democrat side.

What should be the deciding issue in the vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor is will she follow the Constitution. It appears from her own statements that she will not! Obama picked her because he is convinced that she will vote as a minority who believes the Supreme Court can change the Constitution to accommodate those whom she believes the need the law be changed to accommodate their needs, as she did in the case of the reverse discrimination brought by the firemen who were more qualified( by test scores) but passed over for minority fireman that were promoted to satisfy the "PC" and affirmative action leftists. This was a Direct assault on the rule of law as we see Obama doing with his version of bankruptcy with Chrysler and soon GM. The ignoring of the primacy of bond holders to satisfy the UAW whom contributed over $50 million to the election of Democrats in the last election!

AND IF STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE Constitution IS NOT ENOUGH TO ASK OF A NOMINEE TOO THE SUPREME COURT. PERHAPS THIS WILL MOTIVATE Conservatives FROM ALL BUT THE LEFT COAST AND THE EAST to vote against this Liberal.
President Obama during his campaign described “identity politics” as “an enormous distraction,” Sotomayor has at times been blunt in her belief in the profound importance of racial identity.
Judge Sotomayor told a California audience in 2001 that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion” than a “white male” judge. I thought Justice was color blind!

Let’s Not Place Budget-Cutting Solely At The Feet Of Our Military.

President Obama’s 2010 budget amounts to an eye-popping $3.7 trillion, and opens the floodgates to a projected $42 trillion in the next decade. This is the largest domestic-spending increase in history. The interest on the national debt will be $800 billion in 2014 — more than we currently spend on national defense.

Obama is using his sending more troops to Afghanistan to delude the American public that are not members of the "OBAMESSIA" congregation. But the real trouble to come our way is the growing nuclear threat from North Korea(China's puppet) and the rapidly approaching nuclear weapon capability of Iran.

This point is supported by the fact that U.S. Defense Secretary Gates said the momentum in Afghanistan is with the Taliban, who are inflicting heavy US casualties( not reported by the New York Times or Washington Post like when Bush was in the Oval Office) and hold de facto control of swaths of the country. The defense chief has been moving aggressively to salvage the war in Afghanistan, signing off on the deployments of 21,000 American military personnel and recently taking the unprecedented step of firing the four-star general who commanded all US forces there. Mr. Gates, speaking in his cabin on an Air Force plane, said the administration is rapidly running out of time to turn around the war. Source: Wall Street Journal

To defend both our allies in the Middle East and parts of Europe against nuclear missiles launched from Iran, and to keep South Korea safe from North Korean hegemony. We need sophisticated missile defensive weapons. The "star wars" program is a good start toward the goal of protecting ourselves and our allies, but it needs more research and development.

Unless we continue expenditures on anti-missile defense systems we will be a "sitting duck" to those who would rather see our capitols in flames then the way they are today.

But the spendthrift Obama has begun a drive toward pacifism and diplomacy that does not include any money to advance some of the weapons systems that we will need if Iran or especially Korea make aggressive advances.
Obamas' budget does not include any money to continue the F-22 Raptor fighter bomber, designed to be the most advanced and capable fighter jet in the sky.

The Obama budget calls for terminating the F-22 Raptor program after only a dozen or so more are built, and “replacing” them with the more standardized but less capable F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-22 is far and away the most advanced plane ever built. Its combination of stealth technology, maneuverability, and survivability makes it essential to maintaining air superiority, which enables the use of less-capable assets in our inventory. Attacking the enemy and protecting our own troops demands air superiority, and compromising that goal is a mistake.

Also critical to maintaining unquestioned air supremacy in a theater of conflict is the Air Force’s fleet of aerial refueling tankers, which are nearly 50 years old and need to be replaced. The cost of doing so is in the neighborhood of $40 billion, that is less than 0.1 percent of projected federal spending over the next decade.
Critics complain that the F-22 is expensive and superfluous. But the F-35 is the most expensive program in Pentagon history, with a projected cost of nearly $1 trillion. Additionally, the F-35 was not designed to do what the F-22 can do in establishing air superiority in situations that require high levels of stealth, speed, and range. And as any one who understands the history of modern warfare realizes, air superiority is what wins wars. Despite what naysayers say about "boots on the ground". The ability to resupply the ground troops with ammunition and supplies requires air superiority! They are complementary, not interchangeable.


American military superiority in Europe, Asia and the Middle East depends on the ability of the U.S. military to threaten and, if necessary, to use military force to defeat any regional challenge.
It connet let Russia in the ETO and North Korea or Communist China to become super powers or we will be once again living in daily peril from nuclear attack at either coast!
Is the Change Americans want, the return of the "Cold War"?

THE "BRITTS" WISE-UP, WHEN WILL WE?

Obamas' popularity is still high in the USA despite the fact that he has spent more tax payers money than any president in history.
His approval rating is above 60% because people either do not realize what he is doing to the value of our money, or because they still look at him with adoring eyes as one would to a savior.

The 13 trillion dollar debt that he is running up and the resulting tax increases and devaluation of our dollar have not effected the average person as much as it will in year or two, when bread and cereal may cost $4.00 each!
But the British are realizing that Obamas' attempt to collect taxes from Americans who live and work in England will be an expensive for them, and they get nothing for being Obamas' tax collector.

"Andy Thompson of Association of Private Client Investment Managers and Stockbrokers (APCIMS) said: "The cost and administration of the US tax regime is causing UK investment firms to consider disinvesting in US shares on behalf of their clients. This is not right and emphasises that the administration of a tax regime on a global scale without any flexibility damages the very economy it is trying to protect."

One executive at a top UK bank who didn't want to be named for fear of angering the IRS said: "It's just about manageable under the current system - and that's because we're big. The danger to us is suddenly being hauled over the coals by the IRS for a client that hasn't paid proper taxes. The audit costs will soar. We'll have to pay it but I know plenty of smaller players won't."

The British Bankers Association (BBA) and APCIMS had a meeting with European counterparts 10 days ago to discuss the crisis. A delegation is set to meet the US Treasury's Internal Revenue Service on 16th June to demand they drop the reforms." source:Drudge Report

President Obama's proposals are built on the so-called Qualified Intermediary system which was intended to ensure Americans paid the correct tax wherever they were domiciled. Foreign financial institutions that handle American money have to fill in a US tax form on behalf of the client that has to be audited too. In return, the banks receive a QI seal of approval as a qualified intermediary.
But the seal is not legal tender. It sounds strangely similar to president Roosevelt's NRA sign that merchants could put in their window during WWII if they agreed to price controls.

At the same time, Reuters reported that The dollar fell to a 2009 low on Friday as fears intensified that the United States could lose its triple-A rating, while renewed caution about the world economy and banks prompted Asian and European stocks to slip.


Yesterday, the President was interviewed by Steve Scully of C-SPAN, about the status of our economy, and despite the fact hat he has spent more money than the combined cost of all the wars since WWI, he still takes no blame for the deficit spending that he calls "stimulus".

In the interview he was asked about the possibility that the USA could run out of money. The following is a quote from that interview.
"SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?

OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades.

So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off.

So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit".

So unlike this simple minded citizen, our Harvard Law school president refuses to recognize that he cannot spend the Country out of a recession. He implies that he will spend the estimated trillion dollars to bring about socialized medicine, on top of his massive "spendulus" program.
This will assuredly sink our generation and future generations further into debt, that will result in dollar devaluation and massive inflation to satisfy his quest to Socialize our Country. This is a sign that education doesn't necessarily make one smarter! Or was his intention to wreck the U.S. economy and the free enterprise system all the while?

WHEN WILL SOMONE IN THE MEDIA GROW A SPINE?

A wise signer of the Constitution once said: "A strong an stable rule of law and governance, and a history of paying our debts. Fosters growth and expansion which keeps foreign and domestic investors investing their money in the public coffers".

Unfortunately, the monetary base of this once great country has increased by 13 times under the last year of the Bush administration, but exponentially since Obama took office. This is the highest in our history, and I predict that prime interest rates will become double digit in three to four years. Reminiscent of the Carter years, only worse.Yet there is no clarion cry, not even a peep from the Obama adoring media!

No where can you read or see any warning news that the Obama administration is spending to much money that is the result not of tax income, but by keeping the Treasury printing presses on full bore.

Not only is Obama spending billions that are supposed to be for shovel ready projects, but are in reality to pay back groups that put him in the Oval Office.
His handling of the Chrysler debacle is an example of Obama's pragmatic approach to the rule of law and our Constitution.

Congress gave President Bush the Sarbanes/Oxley law in 2002. This law has A provision called Section 363(b) that relates to the bankruptcy laws, that has allowed Obama to make an end run around Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws. He used this to rig the Chrysler "fast track" bankruptcy IN favor of the auto workers union despite the fact that normal chapter 11 dictates that secured lenders are entitled to first consideration.
Instead Obama gave the unsecured creditors, the union,!0 billion dollars and almost half of the new Chrysler stock.
This violation of a fundamental principle of our Constitutional government gives less than a quarter of a dollar on a dollar invested by teachers' pension funds and other retirement funds. The UAW, while it has made some sacrifices in wages and benefits, will be given more than half ownership of the firm(New Chrysler) - a far larger share than it deserves under Chapter 11.

This lawness began with "The Emergency Economic stabilization Act". This law gave the constitutional powers reserved to the legislative branch to the executive branch. This resultED in TARP, and the avalanche that followed that effectively became a "slush fund" to pay off Obama's friends and allies!

This type of bankruptcy tramples on the constitutional provisions that have governed bankruptcy for decades, and will have a devastating effect on our economy if allowed by Congress, that can stop it, because this "new" bankruptcy deprecates the investor who would buy stocks and bonds normally. But if it is possible to give superior rights to unions or other unsecured participants. What will be the incentive to invest in companies? The lending and capital investment all across our economy will be adversely affected if the Congress allows Obama to strike down contractual rights!

And it is not over by any means. The Gm deadline is June 1st. They cannot possibly make the drastic changes to their administrative and union problems in a few days. I believe they will be handled by the Obama administration the same way Chrysler was . If Congress doesn't stop the trampling of Constitutional rights of Contracts. The Federal government will first take over GM, and then a rapid bankruptcy with secured investors getting 28 cents on a dollar invested, and the UAW will receive $10 billion of the tax payers money besides getting up to 39% OF THE "New GM" for their unsecured 20 billion. Source for information: The Heritage Foundation

Readers remember that "unbridled discretion, brings unbridled power" and we are well on our way to tyranny!

IT APPEARS THE CHRYSLER/FIAT DEAL WILL FAIL

The intrigue surrounding the "rapid" bankruptcy of Chrysler and the pending financial disaster of General Motors on June 1st appears to be never ending.
A story you will not read in the New York Times or see on the main scream media is the progress in Germany and Italy between Opel, Fiat and the German government regarding both Chrysler and GM.

Though the decision on who gets Opel will be up to GM, or the U.S. goverment, the German government will also play a big role because it would likely have to supply billions of euros in financing guarantees to the eventual buyer.

This has made the Opel tender a political hot potato as the German chancellor is just four months away from a general election and must decide how to save jobs and tax-payers money without losing votes.

Fiat chief executive Sergio Marchionne is looking to create the world's second biggest carmaker, after Japan's Toyota, by adding the assets of Opel and Vauxhall to Fiat's own brands and those of US carmaker Chrysler.This information will not sit well with our government and the Chrysler union.

German media reports, however, said the Fiat plan would involve total job cuts of about 18,000, compared to about 10,000 each for Magna and RHJ. Fiat is also seeking some 7 billion euros ($9.7 billion) in government support, about 2 billion more than Magna and RHJ require.
My question is will Obama offer the same amount of money or more if Fiat goes through with the deal?

Addressing growing media speculation, German government spokesman Thomas Steg called for calm, saying that any premature speculation on a political comment on Opel could affect a government negotiating position. He said the government would be looking at three key factors: a deal for carmaker Opel that secures the most jobs and sites in Germany and does not burden taxpayers.

Steg went on to say that until the government had met with industry experts and the federal state representatives no preference could be drawn.

Steg also reiterated that the primary decision lay with the GM/US, which still has to announce whether it is selling GM Europe, thus offering up Opel( a company that is part pf GM) for tender.

The US government has given GM until June 1 to restructure its operations and prove it can be viable without state aid, or face probable bankruptcy.That deadline is fast approaching!

Marchionne said we want to build a real European car company that will achieve worldwide success. We want to combine Fiat, Opel and Chrysler. If we achieve this we will be the second biggest car company behind Toyota and it will provide jobs not just in Germany, but around the world.
I wonder how this will sit with the Union at the new Chrysler if the deal does go through? And where is the U.S.news on the potential deal between Gm and Fiat for Opel?

CAP AND TRADE WILL BE ECONOMIC SUICIDE FOR USA

The push to pass the "Cap and Trade" Bill in Congress is being promoted by those wealthy politicians and the out of touch with the real world academics. Some like Al Gore stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars through his association with World organisations that profit from the marketing/trading of emission credits.
And I suspect there are many more politicians in Washington on both sides of the aisle who will profit from this Bill if it is passed.

On the opposite side of the issue, the average American will have to pay more for driving a car that doesn't meet the new gas mileage standards, and it is estimated that heating and air conditioning bills for the average household will increase by more than a thousand dollars a year.

These type of free enterprise, private industry destroying measures are based upon a premise that is disputed by over three thousand scientists who study climate change. Yet those academics in Ivy League Schools who think they are so smart that they CAN THINK for the average citizen, In so doing, the law the back will arguably destroy our free enterprise system. to satisfy an EU and UN aspiration to form World government through international laws like "cap and trade" and a World Court that is supreme over all Countries Laws and Courts.

While we are marching toward National Bankruptcy with the massive "spendulus" program that will result is devaluation of our money, and a plethora of Socialism programs. Countries like Brazil, China and India are driving toward economic dominance by giving nothing but lip service to the air emission issue as this quote illustrates.
"While visiting Prague this week, Premier Wen Jiabao(Cina) shrugged off pressure from the European Union for China to commit to cutting greenhouse gas emissions, though he backed EU efforts to reach a new global climate change accord to replace the U.N. Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.
He even went so far as to say this about the so called "developed" nations: " Wealthy nations, as history's biggest polluters, should cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020 China says in a policy document on climate change. The government also rolled out fresh help for solar power and other "green energy."
This despite China, which relies on heavily polluting coal for about three-quarters of its electricity, has sought to "spotlight" its efforts to improve energy efficiency and cut emissions, but has not committed to specific targets in climate talks.

The reductions China is calling for are based on the principles of "historical responsibility and fairness," the position paper says, and sets a hard line ahead of international negotiations on addressing global warming. Talk is cheep, especially when the Communist nation wants to see our Country and any free-enterprise Country to reduce their capability to compete with the growing economic "giant" of China! A country that will be making more and more cars for General Motors and Chrysler that will be shipped to the USA for sale, because their totalitarian State only allows the workers who make the cars only three dollars an hour!
And by the way, China has welcomed President Barack Obama's commitment to tackle climate change and re-engage in the international negotiations to come to an agreement in December. Of course they will cheer for everything that Obamna does to destroy the free enterprise system and productivity of the USA.Which is what I think is his hidden agenda!

The cap-and-trade tax is potentially the largest tax increase ever imposed. According to the Administration’s own budget document, the cost will be at least $646 billion over an eight-year period.
And the Bill is so long that the Democrats are talking about having speed reader read the Bill to Congress to satisfy the Promise, broken already many times, that Obama made that his administration will be open. The latest estimate of how long will it take to have a speed reader, read the Bill, is nine Hours!
I can remember when I was in College studying Political Science, that the average Congressional Bill was 30 pages long. Today the Bills are many hundreds,some Bills are more than a thousand pages. These massive Bills are filled with things that are inserted to hide from the public, and are never read by the Congressional staff much less the Congress person!

This quote from The "Right Side News" illustrates the impact this dastardly Bill will have on US taxpayers and business in general.
"Memorial Day was the target date set by Democrats Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Ed Markey (D-MA) for passage of a cap-and-trade bill that promises economic hardship for all. The Waxman-Markey "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009" (HR 2454) would raise taxes on American families by nearly $3,100 a year, lead to huge job losses, and dramatically raise the energy expenditures of American households.

Under a cap-and-trade policy, companies would be forced to raise energy prices. This would unleash a series of adverse economic consequences and hardships for Americans, as numerous studies dictate.

"The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis determined that Waxman-Markey would reduce aggregate GDP by $7.4 trillion, kill 844,00 jobs and raise the energy bill paid by a typical family by about $1,500 annually.

A study by the National Association of Manufacturers projected that emissions caps, similar to those previously rejected by the U.S. Senate calling for a 63% cut in emissions by 2050, would reduce GDP by up to $269 billion and cost 850,000 jobs.

A study conducted by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology determined the restrictions could raise gasoline prices by 29%, electricity prices by 55% and natural gas prices by 15% by 2015.
And a 2007 report by the Congressional Budget Office examining the costs of cutting carbon emissions just 15% noted that customers "would face persistently higher prices for products such as electricity and gasoline. Those price increases would be regressive in that poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than wealthier households would."

Given these dire consequences, some may be surprised that some of the nation's largest corporations are lobbying for this bill. Companies participating in the United States Climate Action Partnership, a lobbying group of over thirty corporations(notably GE) and environmental activist organizations, are trying to profit from a government-mandated "cap and trade" anti-global warming policy by selling so-called carbon credits from reductions in greenhouse gases". So to make special interest groups and many politicians more wealthy. A Bill will be passed that not only hurts the private free enterprise system, but taxes all of us in this country who do not have the elected officials working for us anymore!

OBAMA TALKS THE TALK BUT DOES HE WALK THE WALK?

Like the weather if it doesn't suit you stick around and it will eventually change. Obama's positions and campaign promises have been unstable to say the least.
First there was his promise to release the photographs of the alleged torture of terrorist Muslim prisoners. He decided that their release would give aid and comfort to the enemy, so he blocked their release. Then there is his flip flop on the military tribunals.
Now his promise to close Guantanamo prison is apparently not going to be fulfilled, because Congress refuses to appropriate the funds needed to close the prison, and no U.S.Senator wants to have any terrorist imprisoned in his state, nor do foreign countries want them!
As a result, feeling political pressure, Senate Democrats said Tuesday that they planned to withhold funding( Obama asked for 80 million) to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, until President Barack Obama presents a plan for handling its 241 detainees. Source: Wall Street Journal

Then there was Obama's statement that he did not want to own and run the Detroit based car companies, but he fired the president of General Motors and brokered a deal where the Union holds 55% percent of the Chrysler Corporation, and has guaranteed the warranties on Chrysler cars with the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. treasury!

Obama has broken at least ten campaign promises, including seven promises in signing the economy-shrinking $800 billion stimulus package, and one promise in signing the Lilly Ledbetter law and the SCHIP tax increase.

After it covertly inserted language into the stimulus package to protect millions of dollars in bonuses at AIG, a major liberal donor, the Administration later switched course and sought to curry favor with an outraged public by praising the House for passing a 90 percent bonus tax, a tax broadened to cover not just AIG but also employees at other, healthy TARP banks. On March 22, the New York Times reported that the Administration wants to impose vague compensation limits on all banks and financial institutions, whether or not they receive any taxpayer money at all, and perhaps all public companies as well. To avoid stringent application of those limits, companies’ executives would have an incentive to curry favor with their federal masters, by making campaign contributions to Obama and his liberal Congressional allies (the way AIG did). Meanwhile, the Administration is now backtracking on its earlier praise for the legislation that would tax the AIG bonuses.
And Obama promised that the public would have 5 DAYS to look online and find out what’s in his proposed bills before he signs them. Well, another promise broken. Barack Obama signed the largest spending bill in US history andi t had only been posted online for 12 hours before it was voted on in the US House and Senate.


Obama also claimed the $800 billion stimulus package was needed to avert “disaster” and “irreversible decline.” But the Congressional Budget Office, controlled by his own Congressional allies, admitted that the stimulus package will shrink the economy over the long run, in reports and studies released before and after the bill’s passage.Source:OpenMarket.org

And yesterday he continued with his deception when he met with the Prime Minister of Israel.This quote from Press Secretary Gibbs illustrates my point.
"With each of them,( he is speaking about Israel, Syria and the Palestinians) the president will discuss ways the United States can strengthen and deepen our partnerships, as well as the steps all parties should take to help achieve peace between Israelis and Palestinians and between Israel and the Arab states,"

Given that with the exception of Syria, peace already exists between Israel and the Arab states, and Syria and Israel have been having bi-lateral secret talks without help from the U.S, Obama is setting up as a goal for himself something that already exists.

With regards to Israel and the Palestinians,Obama's statement of support of a two state solution, notwithstanding Netanyahu's political posturing against it is not exactly earth shattering since that has been the goal for years.

With the United States the most important broker of peace in the region, Obama so far has shown little imagination, little strategic thought, and nothing in the way of new initiatives to bring to the process. The only thing Obama has been able to do to date, is unite the Israelis and Palestinians in their mutual anger against him when he made a major diplomatic blunder during the Democratic primary in a speech regarding Jerusalem.

In a speech given before 7000 Jews in Florida, Obama stated that he supported a unified Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel. That of course brought a standing ovation since it meant a rejection of any idea of partitioning East Jerusalem to establish a capitol for a Palestinian state, an idea that is unacceptable to most Israelis and Jews.

But Obama's statement brought condemnation from the Palestinians within 24 hours and in what has lately become an almost daily occurrence with Obama, he reversed himself saying "that he was misunderstood and that what he meant by a unified Jerusalem was a Jerusalem with no barbed wire".

In February of 2008,less than a month after his inauguration, Obama released the statement, "Small businesses are the backbone of our nation's economy and we must protect this great resource. It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."

Since making that statement almost a year ago, President Obama has consistently refused to make good on his campaign promise, and support legislation to stop Fortune 500 firms from hijacking federal contracts designated for America's nearly 27 million small businesses.

Not only has President Obama refused to propose even a single policy to address the problem, but he actually changed his Web site to remove the appearance that he had ever made the statement, "It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."
Is someone counting the broken promises? It's interesting to see how many it will add up until his re-election?

Modern politics seems to consist largely of the well-intentioned being fooled by scoundrels of one kind or another!

THE MUSLIM WAR IN THE WORKPLACE

While Secretary Napalitano tripped over her tongue trying to sort of apologize for her statement that returning Veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, bible readers and gun owners were a national threat.She apparently ignores the potential threat that the government has created by allowing many thousands of Muslims into this country on work permits.
The agencies of the government were busy trying to close the loop hole opened by president Clinton, that allowed hundreds of thousands of Muslims from Somalia and Bosnia to enter the USA on work permit visas. This massive influx has raised a legal fight in the workplace between those companies that offered jobs to the Muslim refugees and the Muslims they hired over their demands that the employers allow them to practice the Muslim religion in the work place.

In an exclusive interview with Examiner.com, Ann Corco of Refugee Resettlement Watch shared her insights about this phenomenon. Her group has been chronicling the spread of “workplace accommodation” for some time. Her comments reflect this expertise and are worth quoting at length.

“At some point,” says Corco, “big businesses like meatpackers discovered they could keep wages low by using immigrant labor. During the Clinton Presidency, the State Department's Refugee Resettlement Program brought in over 100,000 Bosnian Muslims” who ended up working in Midwestern meatpacking plants.

“Somalis are the most obvious group demanding workplace accommodation,” Corco points out. “We have brought to the US over 80,000 Somali refugees in the last 25 years. The State Department has cut off all family reunification because they found through DNA testing that a very high percentage of Somalis lied to get into the US.”

Corco points to well publicized disputes between Somali Muslim workers and meat packing plants in Shelbyville, Tennessee, and Greeley, Colorado.

In Shelbyville, tensions led to interracial conflict. In 2008, “about 500 Swift workers, all Muslim and most Somali, walked off the job and marched a mile to Grand Island City Hall to protest for religious freedom,” according to a news report.

“They wanted prayer time during the holy month of Ramadan.

“The plant’s attempt to accommodate the requests led to counter protests staged by Caucasians, Hispanics, Vietnamese and African-Americans.”

In St. Cloud, Minnesota, Somali Muslim employees were awarded $1.35-million for “discrimination” when a meat packing plant refused to let them pray during work hours.

Is this sort of civil unrest, resentment and disharmony among neighbors really worth the dubious monetary benefits of “cheap labor”?

Ann Corco wonders who is behind it all.

“Some one or some group is organizing the Somalis,” she says. “There is no way on earth, they became that savvy in organizing without being taught the fine art of ‘community organizing’ using the Saul Alinsky playbook. Is it a coincidence that in Greeley and Grand Island, well-educated, English-speaking Somalis, just happened to arrive in those towns and get hired by Swift & Co. in the weeks prior to the demonstrations and walkouts?”

Echoing observations by others that the late Saul Alinsky’s radical theories have shaped the thinking of President Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton and others currently wielding power in the political realm, Corco explains that Alinsky, “taught that you must create chaos to bring about change. A good agitator eventually wears people down. They don't have to win this year or next, it's the wearing down process that will ultimately succeed if we don't counter it.

“And, the Somalis are really good at it because they have an ‘in your face’ personality and they are very very smart.”

Corco warns that the Muslim holiday of Ramadan in August may see another upsurge in workplace demands and unrest, given the daunting requirements placed upon Muslims during that celebration, such as dawn to dusk fasting. In the U.K, some organizations have tried to impose Ramadan fasting rules on non-Muslim employees.

Lately, Muslim demands for workplace accommodation have met with increasing resistance, such as that seen in the Dunkin’ Donuts case. Last autumn, Somali Muslim cab drivers serving the Minneapolis airport lost an appeal in their ongoing campaign for the right to accept passengers who were carrying alcohol. (The city’s cab drivers have also caused controversy over refusals to accept blind passengers traveling with guide dogs.)

Ann Corco believes such developments demonstrate what can happen if non-Muslims vocalize their opposition to “stealth jihad” in the workplace.

“As for what people can do,” she says, “when Tyson's dumped the Labor Day holiday at the chicken plant in Shelbyville in favor of giving the entire plant off for Eid last year, the publicity came out very negative and very quickly. As a result hundreds of calls of complaint went into Tysons and the plan was modified---negative publicity is very important. These big companies can be swayed by negative publicity.”

Why is it that in a country that has all but banished the Christian religious symbols and holidays from all public places, the Muslims can successfully intimidate not only their employers but the judicial system to the extent that the above quote illustrates?
If you or I demanded that you have time during normal work hours to pray the rosary or another Christian prayer like the OUR FATHER. You know what the answer would be!!

However as Fritz said in response to this post:"So by trying to save a buck these companies ended up having to spend thousands in legal bills and suffer lower productivity. No sympathy from me. These are all the same companies that condone illegal immigrants so they can exploit them.

Hopefully its beginning to sink into these companies' thick skulls that not all cultures are created equal when it comes to getting work done. That's why the immigrants are fleeing their h##l hole countries in the first place".

IS OBAMA LIVING UP TO HIS OATH OF OFFICE?

In my opinion, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE OATH THAT THE PRESIDENT ELECT TAKES when he is sworn in on inauguration day is "to preserve,protect and defend the Constitution". Is his apparent determination to assume that the Iranians developing nuclear weapons is no threat to the USA a huge mistake? I think so, and those who are confronted with the immediate threat, the Israeli's, are of the same opinion, as this excerpt from the Jerusalem Post will illustrate.

" US President Barack Obama underestimates the threat Iran poses to global security. Were this not the case, he would not have sent CIA Director Leon Panetta to Israel ahead of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's visit to the White House.

Director Panetta was reportedly dispatched to Israel to read the government the "riot act". Israel, he reportedly told his interlocutors, must not attack Iran without first receiving permission from Washington. Moreover, Israel should keep its mouth shut about attacking Iran. As far as Washington is concerned, Iran's latest threats to destroy Israel were nothing more than payback for statements by Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials regarding Israel's refusal to countenance a nuclear armed Iran."This of course is rediculous since Iran threatened to "wipe Israel of the face of the world map" long before the Israeli Prime Minister took office!

This would have some credence if it were not for the close relationship between Iran's madman and Venezuela and Nicaragua's dictators.
Over the past several weeks, we have learned that the administration has made its peace with Iran's nuclear aspirations. Senior administration officials acknowledge as much in off-record briefings. It is true, they say, that Iran may exploit its future talks with the US to run down the clock before they test a nuclear weapon. But, they add, if that happens, the US will simply have to live with a nuclear-armed mullocracy. Does this make us safer if a mad man has nulear weapons and has close association with other uuUSA haters in our hemisphere?

The administration's nonchalance about the threat of a nuclear armed Iran explains why the White House is so up in arms about the prospect of Israel acting independently to prevent Iran from building a nuclear arsenal. As far as the administration is concerned, the only reason Iran would threaten US interests is if Israel provokes it. As far as the administration is concerned, if Israel could just leave Iran's nuclear installations alone, Iran would behave itself. But if Israel preemptively takes out Iran's nuclear capabilities, and Iran in turn attacks Israeli and US targets in the region, the Obama administration will hold Israel - not Iran - responsible for whatever losses the US incurs. That was apparently the message Panetta wanted to transmit to Jerusalem during his recent visit.This not only crazy! But seriously naive.

Venezuela's military alliance with Iran places Iranian military personnel and Hizbullah operatives at every level of Venezuela's military, intelligence and law enforcement establishment. For example, as the Washington-based Center for Security Policy's Western Hemispheric Security Project documented in a recent report, Hizbullah agents control Venezuela's passport agency.

In 2003, Chavez appointed Tarek el-Aissami, a known Hizbullah member to head the country's passport agency. Last year Aissami was promoted to serve as Minister of Interior and Justice. Then too, last June, the US Department of Treasury designated Ghazi Nasr al Din, a Venezuelan diplomat who served as the deputy ambassador in Damascus and Beirut as a Hizbullah agent.

Hizbullah has a large and active presence in Venezuela. It operates openly throughout the country through both Lebanese cells and through native Venezuelan operatives who have converted to Islam. In 2006, a Hizbullah cell comprised of local converts staged an attempted bombing against the US embassy in Caracas.

This Hizbullah has developed a formidable economic presence in Latin America. Although it has run a web of businesses in the region for decades, since 2005 the economic importance of these businesses has been eclipsed by the terror group's involvement in worldwide cocaine distribution facilitated through its close ties with Chavez and FARC. According to the US military's Southern Command, Hizbullah in Latin America earns between $300-500 million per year. This dwarfs the $200 million a year it receives from Iran.

In 2007 Iran and Venezuela announced that they were investing $350 million to build a deep water port at Nicaragua's Monkey Point along the Caribbean Sea. Iran also announced its plans to upgrade Nicaragua's Pacific Port of Corinto. Finally, Teheran announced it would build a dry canal connecting the two ports. Such a building scheme would enable Iran to evade the Panama Canal; to build its own military infrastructure within the ports themselves; and to freely camouflage missile ships as civilian maritime traffic and use them to launch short and medium-range missiles against the US. Moreover, with its massive army of Hizbullah operatives on standby, Iran could launch attacks through its proxies - as it did in its 1992 and 1994 attacks against Israeli and Jewish targets in Buenos Aires - and so deny it had anything to do with the attacks.

None of this should suggest that anyone expects the US to attack Iran's nuclear installations. The administration's policies clearly rule out any such contingency. As for Israel, regardless of what the US does, it should be clear that Jerusalem will not stand by idly and allow existential threats to emerge and grow.

What people - and particularly Americans - could have expected is that the administration would take seriously the threat that Iran poses to the US in the Western Hemisphere. Depressingly however, the administration's apparent decision to abdicate America's position and responsibilities as the sole global superpower has led it to also abdicate its position and responsibilities as the most powerful nation in the Western Hemisphere. Indeed, what the administration's refusal to acknowledge the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran - rich with proxies and allies at America's doorstep - poses to America demonstrates is that in its haste to blame its predecessor for the fact that the US has real enemies, the administration is abdicating its responsibility to defend America

itself". Hat tip to Caroline Glick of Jerusalem Post

So is Obama living up to his swearing to support and defend the Constitution upheld when is apparently endangering the people covered by that document by "making nice" with avowed enemies of the USA? As he extends his hand to Iran, are they extending their threat by supplying missile capability and know how to outspoken enemies of the USA like Chavez and Ortega. These idea logs hate the USA not because of Bush, but because of whom we are and what we stand for. Obama's hope of seeking a diplomatic solution is like trying to make a deal with the Devil!