The Buck Stops... over there

Welcome to the “Pass the Buck” presidency!

President Harry Truman had a sign on his desk that said “The BUCK STOPS here”, meaning that he is the person who is ultimately responsible. It was a statement and a testimony to his strength of character. We all know that there were some tough decisions made during his presidency and President Truman took the credit and the blame.

I’m not seeing that same sense of responsibility in the current administration.

Of course, we didn’t see it in his candidacy either.

We all remember the host of people that were “thrown under the bus” during his campaign. Some have actually resurfaced, including Samantha Powers who was originally put under the tires for her anti-Israeli comments.

There was the recent horrible memo put out by the Department of Homeland Security. When asked about it, President Obama pled ignorant and referred any questions to the Secretary of Homeland Security. Napalitano should have seen it coming.

This week there was the flyby of Air Force One escorted by fighter jets over New York City as people ran from buildings in a panic, reliving 9/11 all over again. Louis Caldera got the finger pointed at him for that one and a statement from the Whitehouse Press Secretary Robert Gibbs that the President was “furious”. Just as a side note, the President should probably point the “fiscal responsibility” finger at him as well, considering the New York “fly by” pictures cost the tax payers over $328 THOUSAND. Nice.

The entire first hundred days, the president has traveled the country touting his economic changes and embellishing the record by his claims of, “The deficit that I inherited.” True, the Bush administration handled the economic challenges last year very poorly in my opinion, but as a Senator, President Obama helped shape that deficit. The link above is from the AP, shockingly enough, and calls the President on his stretching of the truth finger pointing.

The ONE case that the President claimed full responsibility for is when half a dozen of his cabinet appointments turned up with tax issues and I did give him credit for that. But with all of the finger pointing at the people around him, you have to conclude that a) he doesn’t know what is going on in his own Whitehouse b) the people that he has picked to be responsible for key areas of importance and expertise aren’t up to the task, or c) no one has informed the President that he’s actually the one in charge.

Okay, that was a little snippy, sorry, I’ll take all of the blame for that one.

It is very humorous to see that the very same people who will accept the shift in blame from President Obama to pretty much ANYONE else, are the same people who blamed President Bush for ANY and EVERYTHING that happened during his two terms.

But the buck can only pass for so long. To paraphrase one of the many thrown under the bus during the campaign, eventually the chickens will come home to roost.


*****Update: I thought this video went along nicely.

A Contrast in Character

There has been a tremendous contrast that happened in the last couple of days. Two very different people, faced with difficult decision, came to two very different conclusions. One person chose what was popular in hopes of furthering his career and his ambitions. In exchange he was lauded by the President and “welcomed” into his political party. The other person is a person of character who chose to step out of the lime light and hold fast to her principles rather than compromise her beliefs and be the cover for actions that were contrary to her faith and her convictions.

The first person of course is Senator Arlen Specter, a man who faced a very tough primary battle in his last election and won after President Bush supported him and helped in his campaign. During that same term he has now switched his political affiliation from Republican to Democrat, despite the fact that just a month ago he claimed he would not. His stated reason for switching parties is that he has looked at the polls and determined that he will lose a Republican primary bid.

Better to change sides, than to lose an election.

Senator Specter claims that this will not change the issues that he takes a stand on, particularly the upcoming card check legislation that he currently opposes. Of course that might be the case and I certainly hope that it is, however at this point it doesn’t seem that Senator Specter can be trusted to keep his word, after all, a month ago he said “I am a Republican”. Senator Specter has an election coming up that he obviously desperately wants to win. He will be relying heavily on funding from his national and state party to get the funding he needs for this election. You would hope that he would return the MILLIONS of dollars that the state Republican Party has already given to his campaign, but that would mean he will need that much more support from the Democrats. If the Democrats are close on the card check legislation, you can bet that they would pressure Senator Specter to vote with his party, after all, they control the purse strings and Senator Specter has already demonstrated that he will do anything to win this election.

Senator Specter has never been a conservative and the Republican Party will be better without him.

The second person is Mary Ann Glendon, a lawyer of considerable note and a strong advocate for the rights of unborn children. She was picked by the University of Notre Dame to receive a very prestigious award, the Laetare Medal. As part of receiving this medal she would be giving an address at the university commencement ceremonies, also a great honor. The university also requested the President attend and speak at the commencement. He agreed and they have decided to present him with an honorary degree despite the fact that Notre Dame is a Catholic university and is naturally opposed to abortion and the pro-choice agenda. President Obama however is perhaps the most strongly pro-abortion president in history. They have received considerable criticism for their decision and just this week, Mary Ann Glendon wrote a letter that included the following:

First, as a longtime consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the president an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops' express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions "should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles" and that such persons "should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions." That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution's freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.

Then I learned that "talking points" issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:
• "President Obama won't be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal."
• "We think having the president come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the president and for the causes we care about."

Rather than serve as cover or as “balance” for the event and for actions that she obviously opposes, she has decided that she will not be attending the commencement and also will not accept the Laetare Medal from the university.

Mary Ann Glendon is a person of principles and Notre Dame University has a lot it could learn from her.

100 Days

President Obama will celebrate his first 100 days in office tomorrow. A modern milestone with little real significance but it is an opportunity for people to comment on his progress.

Personally I have a lot of issues with what has gone on in his first days as President. For that matter I have a lot of issues with what when on during the 120 days before he was President, from a fiscal perspective. I have been dismayed on almost every element of President Obama’s agenda accept for his troop build up in Afghanistan, which I think is necessary to restore order to that country and I believe Gen. Petreaus is exactly the man we need to oversee that conflict. On almost every other issue I can think of I would have to disagree with the direction the President is taking.

On foreign policy matters, the President has upset some of our most fervent and important allies, including, but certainly not limited to Israel. At the same time he has capitulated and apologized to nations who are bent on our destruction including Iran and Venezuela.

On fiscal matters he took the mistakes of the Bush administration and recommitted them on a whole new scale. During the campaign he talked about fiscal responsibility and stated that he would account for every cent of increase in spending with reductions in other areas. Unfortunately his first budget spends 90% more money than the government will see in revenue and quadruples the worst deficits of the Bush administration. He has already broken his promise not to increase taxes on those making under $250K a year by passing the SCHIP bill. He passed a stimulus bill laden with pork that has no hope of stimulating the economy, but rather paves the way for socialized medicine and completely strips away the welfare reform that was achieved under President Clinton.

On matters of life, that should concern every American, he has quickly removed restrictions on foreign aid for abortions, hinted at removing protections for doctors who have a moral objection to abortion, and opened up federal funding of embryonic stem cell research which requires the destruction of a living baby to ‘harvest’ the cells.

In all these first hundred days have been rough and will get worse. The main accomplishment of the administration is that they are moving at break neck speed, having the support of both houses of Congress.

In the near future there will be a big push for the following things:

- Health care reform. The goal long term is to put private insurance companies out of business and go to the single payer system. The first move will be a giant leap in that direction. If you don’t believe me, just listen to a Rep from the President’s home state.




- Cap and Trade. I know, I write about this one every day it seems, but it is an economic crusher. If this gets through it will put us into a depression that will take years and a complete reversal to bring us out of. Former Vice President Al Gore was on the hill this week testifying that this is the most important piece of legislation in our history and that it must pass. All for something that can’t hold up to scientific scrutiny. Shameful.

- Amnesty for illegal aliens. For years I have been hearing that there are 12 million illegal aliens in this country; people are pouring across the boarder and still there are only 12 million illegal aliens here. Hmm… sounds kind of fishy to me. Or the real number is really 2 or 3X the 12 million number that we are given. It won’t be called amnesty, it will be called “comprehensive immigration reform” or even something having to do with “refugees”. Immigration is great. Illegal immigration is, well, ILLEGAL! That’s the law! As the Chief Executive, our President should be enforcing it!

- Freedom of Choice Act. This is the anti-life bill that the President has pledged to sign. It will allow abortion at ANY POINT prior to actual delivery. It will remove parental notification laws, partial birth abortion bans, and will supersede any state restrictions that are in place. Tax dollars will fund it. It will undo years of incremental gains against abortion. It is sick and it is morally reprehensible… and it’s coming.

The first hundred days have been an expected mess. The next three years and 265 days aren’t going to be any fun either.

Remember your voice can make a difference. Call your Representatives, Senators, and the Whitehouse switchboard and tell them this is NOT the change you want to see in Washington.

It's all about...

Hubris is a dangerous thing, as a multitude of Greek and Roman myths will explain in endless detail. It blinds the subject to their own weaknesses, which can then be exploited.

I’m going to do something a little different today and just throw out a few things. You look at them for what you will.

- As a gift to the Queen of England who has sat on the thrown of one of the oldest surviving monarchies (of sorts) for decades, our President gave an IPod preloaded with pictures from her trip to America and some of the President’s more memorable speeches.

- As a gift to Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s sons, the first lady gave toy models of Marine One, the President’s helicopter.

- Yesterday Air Force One flew low over New York City with a military escort in order to get new updated photos of the President’s plane, sending people scurrying from buildings and running through the streets, reliving the panic and fear of 9/11.

- The President and First Lady donated magazines, featuring them and signed by them, as items for the charity fundraiser at their daughters’ school.

- The Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently released a revised copy of his book that included a story about the President. After a speech that Senator Obama made he was complimented by Senator Reid and in reply Senator Obama said, “I have a gift, Harry.”

Hmmm….

The Economy Stinks... but it can still get worse

These are tough times. That’s a fact. There have been tougher, but most people haven’t seen something like this in a long time, if ever. Financial markets and the economy are kind of hard to predict in the first place, after all they are always changing, but this one seems to be the craziest of all.

Granted, there are some good things going on. The market has experienced a minor rally the last several weeks. This is not a result of the stimulus being IN the market, but rather the normal cycle of the market and the promise of the stimulus money coming into the system. From all of the different things that I have read it sounds like this will push forward a little rocky, but on a positive track, for the next year or so.

Nothing like being a little ‘iffy’ to keep you on your toes.

However there are so many unnatural and unpredictable variables that are exterior to the normal system. Quite frankly there are things happening on a scale and magnitude that no one has ever tried before. The fact that they are being done to the main economic engine of the world only leaves everyone that much more speculative and hesitant. Some of these things are counter acting. For instance the TARP and other bank bailout funds were intended to loosen up credit markets and allow the flow of credit, however increased measures and ex post facto rules implemented by the government on those loans has many banks focused on how to get out of them. This only serves to bring you back to where you were previously. It also means that banks end up holding money they could have lent because there is so much uncertainty still. At the same time there aren’t that many people seeking loans right now because there is so much concern and uncertainty about their own jobs and positions, or they are hesitant to start a new business because it is just not a good time to take a risk.

Because money isn’t flowing the Fed has flooded the market with cash on the scale of TRILLIONS of dollars. The idea is that if you put more cash into the system then the system can support any bank runs or cash demands and it helps to ease tensions. This can be useful to a point, but as I have pointed out repeated, it has consequences.

To top off the whole thing you have a new budget that is about to be pushed through that pushes spending 90% over and above what the government is going to take in, with deep red ink going on for a decade and never coming into line. Every family knows that to run a small deficit in an emergency is understandable, but it has to be dealt with as soon as possible and it can’t go on forever. To plan for a decade of spending where your best year will see expenditures exceeding revenue by 30% is… quite frankly irresponsible on such a scale that it is almost unbelievable. The numbers are appalling if not incomprehensible in real terms.

To put it simply, people don’t know what is going to happen because uncontrolled spending on this scale hasn’t been seen in peace times. Ever.

From what I have seen and read from a variety of sources I personally anticipate something along these lines.

A rocky year in a slight upward direction as the stimulus money comes into the system and the measures that have been taken over the last six month have their minimal positive affect. However, the gross amounts of money going into the system will have a significant negative effect in the form of rising inflation. The increased debt burden of the federal government will push interest rates higher by necessity. The scale of all of this only magnifies the problem. Double digit inflation coupled with double digit interest rates are not impossibilities. We will hit double digit unemployment, in fact some states are already there, but I would expect to see some states go as high as 15-20%. Stories will begin to come out of the massive corruption and fraud being committed against the American people through the TARP and stimulus packages. Corruption in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Already there are more than 20 criminal investigations of fraud in TARP related bailouts, but this is just the smallest tip of the ice berg. As more and more baby boomers go onto the Social Security and Medicare rolls, entitlement spending is going to become the new chief concern as underestimates in real numbers push us further into the red. Just like your personal budget, you plan to spend so much and save so much but things rarely go according to plan. The projected deficits aren’t going to be close to reality. Either a cap and trade system and/or nationalized healthcare will get pushed through. One of these by itself would be a budget crushing blow, but the combination of the two could push the economy into an all out depression. Instead of learning from their mistakes the administration and congress will double and triple down like gamblers on a losing streak, just waiting for the next move to be enough. Upper income tax rates will go up 15-20%, only further hampering recovery.

It’s hard to say where the bottom is going to be.

I hate to be this gloom and doom. I really do. It’s just hard to see an upside when you have this kind of aggressive and reckless stupidity going on. This long term budget is completely unsustainable. These actions that have had limited benefit will not be without repercussions. I wish I could speak with more optimism, but the data just isn’t there.

When President Obama came into office and tried to push his stimulus package through he touted this as the worst economy since the Great Depression. That might have been a self fulfilling prophecy.

Let’s just hope it doesn’t turn out to be an understatement.

I tried, but I just can’t end it like that.

The answer is the same as I have been saying for months. Stop pumping money into the system. Reign in the Fed. Pull back some of the cash. Let the markets adjust. Cut income tax rates by 30% across the board. Cut capital gains rates by at least 30%, if not suspend them entirely. Dissolve Fannie and Freddie. Stop the bailouts. Cut government spending 10% this year and 5% a year for the next 3-5 years to slowly get people out of the public sector and back into the private sector. Cut every department. Make Secretaries actually prove their administrative skills by maximizing the benefit for the public’s cost. Open up the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) to drilling. Open up restricted areas in Alaska, CO and Utah.

It’s worked before. It can work again. Free markets work… if you let them.

Hamas Tactics to Hurt Their OWN Civilians

The recent incursion by Israel into the Gaza strip, that I blogged about here drew a lot of criticism from international organization and was used by Hamas as a propaganda tool against the Israelis. Hamas has become quite impressively adept at manipulating the media into being their official PR wing. Funny that same media wasn’t broadcasting video footage of Hamas shooting other Palestinians from the Fatah party in the knee caps and pushing them off buildings.

In any case, during this recent battle, called Operation Cast Lead by the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), the Israelis for the first time did a much better job handling media attention to the conflict and by presenting the truth about Hamas and the tactics that they were employing to maximize their own civilian casualties for propaganda purposes.
This short video gives a pretty thorough breakdown of Hamas tactics. Watch this and ask yourself what else Israel could possibly do? How can they live peacefully with their neighbors when this kind of devious and outright evil strategy is being employed? Hamas is not a force to be negotiated with; they are a group of terrorists that need to be rooted out and destroyed.

What are "green jobs"?

This week people celebrated earth day. My kids yesterday on the way home told me all of the things that they had been learning this week. Some of these things were very sad. Everybody like see turtles and evidently they can mistake plastic grocery bags for jelly fish and mistakenly ingest the plastic. That’s horrible. Of course I never liked the plastic bags anyway. Wasn’t it the environmentalist when I was a kid telling us that the paper bags were killing trees and these new plastic ones don’t kill any trees or rainforests?

In any case they pointed out some things that should be improved. Of course with any ‘improvements’ that are made, we need to look at not only the environmental impact, but also the cost.

We’ve been hearing almost non-stop about green jobs, and how the administration wants to create millions of green jobs in a green economy, with green technologies and green improvements to homes and infrastructure, where everyone will drive around in green cars and eat food that was produced in a green way.

I’m just about greened out.

What is a “green job”?

If green technologies are such a great idea, why haven’t private investors moved in to corner the market on these breakthroughs?

If green energy were such an obvious thing, then why aren’t energy producers already investing some of their profits to develop these green life lines? I mean, come on, it would not only improve their bottom line, but their image within the country and the world. Why WOULDN’T they want to “go green”? If it were possible. If it were really feasible.

The fact is that we have been pumping literally BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS of dollars into researching green technologies and specifically renewable, non or low polluting energies for decades.

What do we have to show for it?

Really?

Is there an alternative out there?

I’m almost certain.

Will a government sponsored project find it?

Almost certainly NOT.

The greatest discoveries and advancements in history haven’t been made by government. They’ve been made by individuals that saw a need, had an idea, and were able to find and produce a solution.

Environmental protection, alternative energies, and green jobs are nothing new. Others have gone down this road before. The president sites Spain as a great example. Unfortunately Spain has found that it cost them 2.2 regular jobs for every “green job” they were able to create. On top of that, only 10% of those “green jobs” were actually permanent. That’s right, you are destroying 2.2 regular, full-time jobs, for 1 green, temporary position.

Is that what we need right now?

I do believe that we should be good stewards of our resources. Of course much like being a good steward of you money doesn’t mean that you don’t spend any of it, it just means that you use it wisely. We shouldn't be shutting off our resources, we should be using them in a safe and responsible manner.

Gradual improvements are good.

The company I work for continually looks for ways to make its process and it’s products more environmentally friendly. They make one change like removing lead, then they check the process and the product to be sure that we are still building something of quality that our customers will buy.

Keep cleaning up coal, build nuclear power plants, build more hydro plants, improve the efficiency and output of wind turbines, and most importantly encourage private enterprise by keeping tax rates low. Green energy sources and by default “green jobs” will happen when an intelligent entrepreneur or company, sees an opportunity, calculates the benefit, (both personal and financial), and starts to market it.

A green job that is permanent and pays is the only green job that we should be concerned about.

Beautiful SMACK DOWNS!!

Two ‘smack downs’ happened this week that I thought were notable. The first one was on Larry King. Dennis Prager was asked onto the show to debate Perez Hilton (or whatever his name is) concerning gay marriage and the Miss USA fiasco caused by PH. For those who don’t know who Dennis Prager is, he has a nationally syndicated radio talk show. He’s a conservative Jew who discusses politics, culture, happiness, and life’s ‘ultimate issues’. Despite the fact that he draws a conservative audience, his show is actually on the air at the same time as Rush Limbaugh’s, and has been very successful for decades. If you aren’t a talk radio fan you might check out Dennis’ show. He’s very entertaining and very easy to listen to. He does not get audibly upset at almost anything but presents some very effective and interesting arguments. He is also not strictly political and discusses a variety of topics. I highly recommend it.

Contrast that intellect with Perez Hilton a celebrity gossip blogger who is openly gay and acts more like a spoiled child who will get his way through bullying and name calling. The contrast is spectacular and only solidifies Dennis Prager’s argument.



The second involves The Secretary of State.

I realize that every administration is going to have disagreements and a difference of opinion in administration handled things. That’s a given. I have been very disappointed however, with the lack of respect that the current administration has shown the Bush administration.

Case in point. Secretary of State Clinton was testifying before a congressional committee and was asked a very legitimate question regarding the CIA memos that were just released which covered interrogation techniques. The politicization of these memos has been quite ridiculous and has caused a huge firestorm for both the previous and current administrations. This week, former Vice President Dick Cheney went on Sean Hannity’s T.V. show for an interview and requested that the CIA prepare other documentation for declassification which covered the ‘enhanced interrogations’. This paperwork would include the number of people that these methods were used on and the information that was gathered from these interrogations. His point was that in order to not make this political we need to look at all of the information so that the public can see the truth of what happened. Secretary Clinton responded to the question by disparaging the former V.P. A ridiculous and undignified response at best.

The beautiful thing is the reaction of the CA Republican Congressman, who without missing a beat very articulately reprimands Sec. Clinton and emphasizes the point of the question. If you are going to give someone a smack down in a congressional hearing, this is the best way to do it. (to see the question and the smack down fast forward to about 4:30 or just wait for it)

Ranting... there is just too much material out there!

It’s feeling more like a rant than a rational discussion this morning, but sometimes things just make you mad, because they should make you mad.

- First on the list is my former governor and current Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. Last week she upset me with the report warning of right wing extremists, which also disparaged returning veterans. As if they didn’t have enough to deal with returning home from a war zone! Now she is saying that being an illegal alien, meaning the act of crossing the United State border… is not a crime! Hello? How frightening is it when the head of the DHS doesn’t know that it is a CRIMINAL OFFENSE to cross the border illegally. That’s why they need to be called “illegal aliens”, just to remind everyone that they committed a crime when they came here. Again, I have no problem with immigration, just have enough respect to follow the law.

You know I thought it was bad that cabinet appointees weren’t following the tax code, but it seems even worse to have a Secretary of Homeland Security that doesn’t even understand immigration law!

President Obama has coined this as “the most ethical administration in history”, but I think we should amend that to “the most CLUELESS administration in history”. And that is being VERY kind.

- The second on the list is the whole Miss USA scandal. Regardless of the question and answer, which I of course agreed with her response; why on earth is this lib, gay, blogger, gossip… FREAK judging a beauty pagent? I can name a million guys more qualified who would have been THRILLED to fill that spot. The moron doesn’t even go by a real name, he goes by a parody of the name of a famous person. What is THAT all about?

- According to Senate rules, members are suppose to avoid even the hint or perception of unethical behavior. So when Senator Diane Feinstein goes out of her normal realm of influence to make sure that a firm receives a substantial chunk of bailout money… and it just so happens that her husband just received a contract from that company… doesn’t that smack of at LEAST a hint of unethical behavior? Why isn’t this front page news? Why isn’t she being censured? Let’s GO people!

- Taxes. If it takes over ten thousand pages to describe your tax code then something is seriously, SERIOUSLY wrong. Recently a friend of mine explained that his company changed their bonus calculations to include multiple variables, none of which were really measureable by the employee, most of which were subjective, and the standards of which were non-existent. I explained that if somebody makes something that complicated they are just preparing you for the fact that they are going to hose you out of whatever money they can. The same goes with the tax code. It doesn’t need to be complicated, but when you have every possible special interest asking for their own particular inserts in the code and special provisions written in for certain constituencies and voting blocks, you can bet the average citizen is getting HOSED. If President Obama really wants to score some points and add transparency to government, he will throw the tax code out and start from scratch. If something is overly complicated there is a REASON for it.

- I started a diet competition yesterday, but I almost pulled out after I saw the story blaming FAT PEOPLE for global warming. I almost wanted to get FATTER! But I’ll refrain. I’m not losing weight for the earth worshippers, I’m doing it for my health and my family.

Unfortunately that’s not all, but I’ve got to stop. It’s not good to type angry, my computer is having enough problems as it is.

The Clown at the UN

I have no idea why, by the Iranian President was the main speaker at the Durbin II, UN Conference on racism in Switzerland. Further proving and demonstrating that the UN is not only nearly useless in accomplishing anything meaningful, they have become a stage for anti-western stooges to rise up and grab a global audience.

The speech was suppose to be on racism. Obviously a farce considering the anti-Semitic stance of the speaker, who on numerous occasions has called for the complete destruction of the Jewish state of Israel and has denied repeatedly that the Holocaust ever occurred.

In this particular speech he throws out a laundry list of moronic and out right laughable statements:

- He claims that Israel is just a country of racists. Kind of funny that way, I have never heard anyone in Israel, let alone the prime minister, call for the all out destruction of the nation of Iran… or any other Muslim nation for that matter.
- He re-iterates the old leftists’ malarkey that the US went into Iraq for oil. What a joke, get off it.
- He sadly and laughably blames the US for the all of the Iraqis that have been killed in this war. True, we’ve killed quite a few, of course the terrorist brigades that Iran has funded, trained, and equipped have been responsible for a lot of those lives themselves.

He dribbled on making ridiculous statement after ridiculous statement. The man is a clown and the protesters were quite appropriately wearing clown wigs to point out what a sham and a circus this whole meeting was.

All of this was said after the Obama administration has been reaching out to the Iranian regime with both hands, even begging the Iranians to come to the table by talking about removing the stipulation that they give up their nuclear program as soon as talks begin. This same regime that just captured and imprisoned a former Miss North Dakota who holds dual citizenship and was in Iran working as a reporter. This same regime who is boldly working on a nuclear weapon and calling for the destruction of one of our biggest, if not best, ally. This is the regime that President Obama wants to add legitimacy to by holding high level talks.

What on earth can you ever REALLY accomplish by talking and negotiating with someone like this?

Will he stop his nuclear program? Maybe temporarily, if you give him enough other things that he wants. But at some point in time he will turn around and resume whatever outrageous activity he wants.

He is a thug, a bully, a madman, and giving him any kind of respect or a pulpit to preach his diatribe from is dangerous and disrespectful to the legitimate leaders out there who could have added something useful to this conference.

Why would we concede ANYTHING to this man?

Why would we even talk to him?

What we need to be doing is pressuring the Mullah’s to remove him and fueling the strong dissent that already exists in the country.

If you haven’t heard his garbage before, then listen in. The sane people in the room are the ones that got up and left. The crazy people are the ones applauding.

Why is our government NOT letting banks repay TARP funds?

First of all the TARP funds were a bad idea, but the federal government’s involvement in the whole Fannie/Freddie mortgage meltdown complicated the matter. Unfortunately during this time of bailouts some of the banks that didn’t need them were REQUESTED to take them. They were told that if they didn’t accept the funds it would look like they weren’t able to qualify for them and it would affectZ their public perception.

Once the loans were administered the rules started to change. The government decided that they should have a say in how these banks ran their businesses, much like they were taking over at GM. More regulations began to be added to the funds, by congress, after the fact.
For banks in a reasonably healthy financial situation, who could raise their own capital, this started to look like a bad deal and an immediate return of the funds seemed like the best answer. Little did they know that the rules are continuing to change. Some have already been able to return the TARP funds with any applicable interest; others have tried and have been delayed. Now they are being told that for “the good of the system” they will not be able to return that money.

WHAT?!

As a tax payer and partial owner of those funds, I say let them come back! And when they come back let the original principle and any interest go straight into paying off the DEBT that we acquired to hand the money out in the first place.

I think it’s time to end these shenanigans (that’s a technical term).

There are a couple of routes to take in order to balance the power that the legislative and executive branches are wielding like Conan in a drunken stupor.

The first and most tradition branch is the courts. Find some legal ground to stand on. There HAS to have been some type of contract that was agreed upon prior to these funds being handed out. You can’t rent a pair of rollerblades without signing a contract so don’t tell me that our elected representatives were handing out BILLIONS of dollars without having SOMETHING on paper.

The second method is the court of public opinion. Banks should buy ads in newspapers and show the paperwork that they have filed to repay the TARP funds. Hold press conferences. Start asking WHY their funds can’t be repaid. Hold up a check for the full amount and demand an explanation of why these funds can’t be repaid immediately. Banks should be the front line in the cheering section to get the government to get OUT of the private sector. They should be the ones arguing and championing the fact that government involvement in the mortgage industry is what got us into this mess in the first place.

Unfortunately we are hearing about ‘bank stress tests’. I’m afraid what these really are, are subjective government ‘evaluations’ of banks. What should be an indicator to banks of improvements that they need to make, may suddenly become a blackmail card. I would hate to think that a good grade depended on TARP funds being on hand.

I’m not a conspiracy follower or creator by nature, but when the government is throwing cash everywhere, coercing and in some cases even demanding that banks or businesses take money, then denying repayment, all the while passing new laws to regulate the very business that they are giving money too, I have to question what the real motive is? What is the government trying to accomplish by repeatedly changing the stipulations of these loans and then prohibiting repayment.

Have you asked yourself that question yet?

When our government says that it is acting for the “good of the system”, what does that really mean?

We’ve ventured down a very dangerous and bumpy road of government involvement and most likely (in my OPINION) a nationalization of some businesses. This is not what is best for this country. It has never been a path of prosperity and stability and never will be.

WARNING: Global Warming is INCREASING the Polar Ice?

The EPA this week completed their findings that green house gas emissions are a threat to the health of humans and should be regulated. Kind of funny that CO2 is bad for us, but God made it so that every human and animal on the planet exhales this toxic gas from our lungs EVERY SINGLE TIME WE BREATH! These green house gases are so dangerous and global warming so critical that the Antarctic polar cap is actually growing… that’s right… it’s growing.

Hmmm… must be some viscous global warming going on. I know Denver is feeling it. Those mid-APRIL winter storm warnings are typical of this warming trend. (Can you FEEL the sarcasm?)

Once again, all the evidence shows a cooling trend. It is just part of a very stable, normal cycle that the earth goes through. This is not man-made (hubris), but rather God-made and relating to the cycles of the largest heat source in our solar system, the sun.

But you are going to hear the debate heat up. They are going to push to regulate CO2 for tax and control purposes. Don’t be snowed by this LIE they are peddling. The cost to YOU will be huge. Unless you are completely self sufficient and never purchase ANYTHING from ANYBODY this will effect you. Send a letter to the president and remind him that indirect climate taxes are still taxes and you don’t want to pay them! Remind him of his promise not to increase taxes for 95% of Americans (of course he’s already broken that with the increased taxes on cigarettes… but be nice and don’t mention that one).

Abandoning Our Roots... and Our Strength

Recently at a speech given in Turkey, President Obama said something that made me cringe. Not because I necessarily disagree with the exact words, but I shudder to think about the true meaning and sentiment intended by the remarks. The president said, “…we have a very large Christian population -- we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values." To say that America is not a Christian nation is accurate, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans are Christian. Our government does not recognize any official state religion. That was very intentional and good. Our government should not be forcing the religious conversion of any of its citizens.

However, look at the statement again, “…a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.” Where do those values come from? The founding documents and extensive writings of the founding fathers state over and over a deep and abiding faith and belief in God and in a Judeo-Christian ethic that is the basis and the anchor for those ideals and values. The statement and more to the point, the impression of the statement, is to disavow America’s deep and historical roots as a nation of Christians.

Please do not mistake, I am not calling the president’s faith into question. That is not my position, nor would I ever try to judge a man’s heart. I should however, look at his actions and listen to his words.

What does our president hope to accomplish by making such a statement? Who is he looking to appeal to? The speech was made in Turkey, a Muslim nation. The intent of the words is clearly to pacify Islamic sentiment against the United States. What type of animosity is he attempting to subdue? Clearly one not based on political, military, humanitarian or any other basis, but one based on religion. Why does that animosity exist in the first place? Because of our beliefs? Or because of the beliefs of the people that he is speaking to? How can this statement be seen as anything but a total abdication of American principles. If your audience holds its religion as the most foundational and defining piece of its existence and assumes that the people you represent feel the same way, then how can they see this statement as anything other than a concession that America has been wrong to be a Christian nation and so now has given up that foundation. To this audience (truly the entire Muslim world, not just Turkey) how can this be seen or understood as anything but a statement of weakness and submission?

Fast forward a couple of weeks. The president gave a speech at Georgetown University on the economy. Georgetown is Catholic university. The place where the speech was to be given was Gaston Hall where stained glass, carvings, drawings, and different imagery reflect the Catholic roots of the school. The location of the stage was set and the White House staff requested that the school cover up the letters “IHS” above the place where the Obama was to speak. “IHS” in the ancient Latin tradition is the monogram for the “name of Jesus Christ”.

Why would the White House request that this symbol of Jesus be covered during the president’s speech? To avoid offending people? Who would he be offending? He’s at a Catholic university! The students there see the symbol everywhere! Without a doubt the pictures and video from the speech would feature this symbol over the podium where the president was speaking, much as they were during a speech that First Lady Laura Bush gave. The only conclusion that I can rationally think of, and please let me know if you can think of another, is that the president truly wants to distance himself as much as possible from the impression of United State being a Christian nation, as he told the Muslim world from a stage in Turkey.

All in an effort not to offend people who have stated time and again that they are our enemy. Not based on things that we have done, but because we are “infidels”, non-Muslims, and the “great satan” in their eyes. A vain effort that only serves to further their belief that America is weak, a “paper tiger”, and that we have abandoned our roots that they believed were wrong in the first place. It is not a statement of goodwill that will be received warmly, but rather a statement of indifference and weakness that I fear will be greeted with increased hostility and escalating aggression.

In the meantime his efforts to not offend have been extremely offensive. Not to our enemies, but to our citizens. Not to those who would crush our republic, but those who would die to defend it.

Clearly our president no more understands our enemies than he does our people.

No wonder CNN is losing viewers

Well, the coverage of the TEA parties didn't go as I expected. For one thing the "anti-protest" didn't seem to spring up at all, despite threats from ACORN. However, in the absense of an "anti-protest" fringe group... the media filled in nicely.

This is the most diespicable excuse for journalism that I think I have ever seen.


In all the attendance at the HUNDREDS of TEA parties was excellent. The one in PHX brought in over 5000, and on a very windy evening. Across the country, first reports are saying close to 250K people.

BTW: If you were so inclined you can lodge a complaint to CNN here.

******UPDATE: PJTV.com now puts the official count at over 500K!!!! SWEET!!!

T.E.A. Parties

It’s tax day. Hopefully you aren’t going to be up at midnight dropping your taxes off at the post office or trying to work through the electronic traffic jam submitting them on-line. Personally, I am very proud of myself, I am expecting my refund any day now. This is a personal best for me having done all of my information gathering in March!

And there was much rejoicing… yeah.

In any case, if you have all of your papers in order and have already completed your filing, you may be free for a party, a T.E.A. party that is (Taxed Enough Already). During the height of the stimulus nonsense, Rich Santelli stood on the floor of the Chicago exchange and worked the traders in the vicinity into a frenzy over the government using tax money to bail out banks and bad mortgages. As part of the rant he called for another Boston Tea Party. Some people thought that was a good idea. Today, all around the country there will be hundreds (estimates go as high as 2000) of TEA Parties in different locations, usually staged near state capitols, city halls, or other prominent government buildings.

If you would like to participate at a rally near you, there are several places that you can go. Freedom Works has a good map of them, although no site is going to have a exhaustive list, since there really isn’t any central organizing behind this. It’s just more of a grassroots movement that caught on. If you are already planning on going and want to take your digital camera with you, maybe your Blackberry or I Phone and do some Twittering from the rally, PJTV.com is signing up “citizen journalists” to help cover the different events. PJTV.com (Pajamas Media) is also a good place to get the real and latest story on all of the protests since they will be covering it extensively today.

Some have been skeptical that the main stream press is going to cover these events. I would disagree entirely. I think they will be well covered. Not to get the message out that people are upset about the government spending 90% over budget, but as a follow up to a story that ran yesterday. The Dept. of Homeland Security released a report discussing how the recession and the fact that we have our first black president, were fueling “right wing radicals”. Kind of odd to me that this report would come out right before protests that have been planned for weeks.

The sad thing is that the ‘report’ is not based on any facts. Where are the attacks by “right wing radicals”? What groups specifically are growing during this turbulent time? There are no specifics about any groups. No numbers. Nothing to back up the claims. They also single out returning military veterans as possible targets for these right wing militia types, after all, everyone in the military is a stupid hick anyway, right? Bunch of violent, uneducated, racists. That’s why they got “stuck in Iraq”(to quote former presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry) in the first place.

This report is ridiculous and shameful; evidenced by the fact that the White House dodged questions about it and reasserted their claims of supporting veterans.

The report also claimed that single, hot button issues would be used for recruitment, things like border security and gun rights. Good. As if these two things weren’t legitimate issues? As if someone who thinks our border should be secured and protected is some type of racist zealot, or that someone who believes that the founding fathers knew what they were talking about when they wrote the Second Amendment is some type of crazed gun freak.

The protests will continue anyway. They will get slanted coverage that will minimize their numbers. The smaller protests will get coverage, while the larger protests will be ignored or downplayed, all while small numbers of “anti-protestors” or President Obama supporters will get all of the coverage. Guaranteed. Sad to see what our media has come to.

Check out PJTV.com, the Drudgereport.com, Townhall.com, Freedomworks.org, or any other crazed, right wing, radical news site. They will be giving more realistic reporting of what happened. It’s one of those far right, conservative, fundamentalist issues that we believe in… it’s called honesty.

Catching Up: pirates, taxes, and cyber security

I am just catching up to the news of the last couple of days. Pealing myself away from the twelfth load of laundry to find out what is happening in the world. I must say that there are a few things going on that are encouraging, discouraging, and perplexing.

- The captain of a ship flying under US colors was freed by Navy SEAL snipers. Bravo! President Obama had been silent on the issue, denying repeated opportunities and requests to comment. Evidently permission had been granted to act if the captain’s life was in imminent danger. Fortunately that occurred about the same time that the three pirates in the boat with the captain happen to stick their heads up all at the same time. Three pirates later… the captain is free!

Unfortunately this is a problem that is not going to go away. The pirates have been too busy collecting money from different governments and businesses all over the world that would rather give in and pay up than deal with the problem. The right answer is the one that the US has been giving for more than half a century, and that is “we do not negotiate with terrorists”. Equally unfortunately President Obama missed a golden opportunity to restate this policy. The secondary response in this situation is to go in and clean out the pirates wherever they hide. These are terrorists at sea and need to be dealt with in such a manner. The whole reason they even exist is that President Clinton ran out of Mogadishu instead of moving in forcefully and eliminating the problem. Now we are stuck with a failed Somalian state that is basically run through anarchy and AK-47s.

- Reports are coming in that people are going to be delinquent in their taxes. What is more shocking is that some of them AREN’T cabinet members! While it is sad that some small business owners were hit hard by this down turn and so dipped into their tax savings accounts to pay their bills, I have to wonder how recent events have affected the situation. Considering the number of cabinet appointees that have issues with back taxes, I have to think that this has a trickle down effect to the ordinary citizen who looks at his tax bill and thinks, “they aren’t paying theirs, why should I pay mine!” No proof. I didn’t even bother finding anecdotal evidence for this one. Just a thought.

- The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 has been brought forward. I’m scratching my head on this one. On the one hand there are some clauses in here that just look concerning. One says that the president has the ability to shut down certain networks if he deems them “critical infrastructure” and there is a cyber emergency. Hmmm… Also another clause that says, the Secretary of Commerce has access to "all relevant data concerning such networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." (section 14,b,1) Wow, I don’t like the sound of that and I’m not sure what implications it has if any, but I guess it all depends on what the president deems as “critical infrastructure”. Aside from all of that, I don’t know how I feel about the government poking its nose into cyber security. It sounds good to establish standards for that kind of thing, but how long are those standards really good for? I mean, if the company that produces my virus protection software says that they are “current with all government standards”, I’m probably going to find another software suite. I don’t want one that “meets’ some government standard, I want one made by hackers-turned-good that know all the ins and outs and can think like the bad guys. The Act also establishes government contests, scholarship programs, academic schooling in cyber security standards, and all other kinds of private enterprise that the government appears to want to take over. I’m not sure consolidation in this business is a good idea and I’m pretty certain that government ownership of that consolidation is a BAD idea.

I didn’t even mention the ever worsening situation with Iran, that is a whole different post on its own.

There is a lot going on in the world… including laundry load number 13! Excuse me…

Unions

The Jungle by Upton Sinclair is a classic book. Right up until the very end, it is a compelling story. If you stop reading right before the whole socialist/communist indoctrination at the end, it’s a great book.

More importantly it was a call for change and reform. Health standards at meat packing plants were absolutely abysmal. The only thing worse than the ‘food’ that they were producing was the horrid conditions that the workers were enduring. Child labor was rampant Something had to change. And it did. Conditions improved for the workers and the consumers both.

It was during this crucial time in American history that unions really sprang up with force and gained in popularity. Saul Alinsky and others taught workers how to organize and how to fight for basic improvements in working conditions. Union memberships increased and filled union coffers. Things changed and conditions improved.

As they did, there was a problem. Workers were content. If you are banking on discontent and abuse, peace and stability become a real issue. Instead of cutting back union dues and gradually fading the unions out of existence, they kept fighting for more and more concessions from management. If people aren’t upset, then make them upset, that’s how Alinsky taught labor leaders to hold organizations and therefore power, together.

The system began with extremely wealthy business owners stepping on the health and safety of their customers and employees in order to increase their profits. The government began implementing regulations, the unions negotiated for improved conditions, and gradually things got better. But as they did the union had to keep up pressure on management to make more and more concessions; as if management was drawing from a limitless financial well. The union movement had spread across a good portion of major industries and in some cases even joined ranks to increase the pull across industries. They became powerful. Their demands for basic improvements became demands for extravagant perks. Instead of paid sick leave and a forty hour work week it became full pensions for life, life time guaranteed health insurance, drastic pay increases, and the elimination of merit based pay.

The people that once fed and nurtured the bottom line of the company began to rise up and choke the very company that employed them. The concessions they had won, that were marginally feasible during good years, became a lead weight during tough times. Instead of working for the mutual benefit of the companies that employ them, unions began committing suicide by destroying the very companies they worked for. Instead of shifting focus and looking at the real financial conditions of their employers they became even greedier for power and influence. Instead of lobbying management, they began lobbying the government against their own companies.

I believe now we have come to a new era. A new time of worker organization and cooperation. I believe, for the most part, unions have outlived their usefulness. They benefit workers who fail to perform and they hobble the companies that pay the bills. Across almost every industry union membership is declining and rightfully so. Good workers are against unions because they take dues and offer no real benefit. If anything they are ripe territory for corruption, hurt your chances for advancement, and take away some of the possible perks that could be given to better workers. They tend to be a benefit to the lazy workers, rather than the efficient and more competent employees.

The UAW (United Auto Workers) is a prime example. The employee perks that they gained from GM in their golden days are now forcing the company into bankruptcy. Even in this condition the company has gained little ground against the union. At this point bankruptcy is actually the company’s best option because it will force the UAW to renegotiate.

The American worker is protected. Unions should not be.

You have probably heard of the Employee Free Choice Act or the Card Check Bill as it is also called. It is a last desperate gasp by the unions to expand their memberships. Instead of voting for a union by secret ballot it will allow the union organizers to use a card check method, which is public. This means that union “representatives”, hint : Vito and Tony, approach employees with cards and request that they vote for the union… you know… “like all your coworkers are doing”… “you want to be a team player don’t ya?” It turns a legitimate ballot into a high pressure sale. The real goal is to force Honda and Toyota plants in America into the UAW and finally give Walmart employees enough pressured votes to break the back of the world’s largest retailer.

Unions use to be the protector of the common man. Now they are the crusher of American business.

Oppose card check legislation. Shut down the unions. Let the organizers go to countries where the unions could really help people; like China, Malaysia, the Philippines, and India.

Is a Single Payer Universal Health Care System the Answer?

The Obama administration is pushing forward strongly with the idea of creating a public alternative to private insurance. In fact President Obama has stated that if he could start the system over from scratch that it would be a single payer system. That means the government is the only source of medical care.

So what’s wrong with that?

Plenty - and it doesn’t take too much thought or research to see what the issues are.

A single payer system would provide basic care to everyone. True. So, what if you need more than “basic care”?

That’s when things become complicated.

Right now, you get to choose who your doctor is and together, as you sort through your particular medical condition, you get to work out a plan for how your care will be handled. It is between you and your doctor and is limited only by what your insurance company will pay for and what you are willing to absorb out of your own pocket. Single payer systems don’t generally work like that. Under a single payer system you would have to go to your prescribed doctor, emergency room, or urgent care. Based on your diagnosis the doctor would be forced to pursue what the government panel considers to be the most effective solution. Of course when I say effective, I mean that in every sense of the word. Not just from a medically beneficial perspective, but from a cost perspective.

The cost in single payer program can become astronomical very quickly. The government has to make adjustments and decisions to control those escalating costs. That means doctors will have their fees determined by the government and in some single payer systems cash payments between the patient and doctor are not permitted. Suddenly the financial benefit of becoming a doctor is limited and the number of people willing to go through fifteen years or more of schooling at tremendous personal and financial cost decreases. You have fewer doctors. Of course the increased expense and time of specializing in any particular area would also have less long term financial benefits. So the result is fewer specialists; fewer pediatric oncologists, fewer neurosurgeons, fewer electro physiologists, and every other specialist.

Specialties themselves would be limited; considering all doctors would be paid by the government. The more specialists you have the more costs go up. The more specialists you have the more experimental treatments you have and the more cost intensive procedures you have. Things like medical implants, spinal fusions, pacemakers, defibrillators, hip replacements, and cochlear implants are all very expensive. Their use would have to be limited. There would have to be certain criteria and even a triaging of sorts for every patient to see if they would benefit the most in the long term by receiving such a procedure. This may not mean much to you if you are young and healthy, but what if you older and develop bradycardia. You’re tired all of the time and you just don’t have enough energy to do the things you want to. But you’re not bed ridden. You won’t die without the implant. Plus you are older now and the quality of life benefit would have to be weighed against your age. You are eventually passed over because your condition wasn’t severe enough, or there were more patients who were younger and would benefit for a longer period of time. They get a pacemaker, you get a walker so you don’t pass out trying to walk around.

Sound ridiculous? Why do you think Canadians have been coming to the US to get medical procedures for years? The number of medical procedures and devices is rationed. Medicine is no different. Chemotherapy? I’m sorry but you are in your sixties and the people would not see the long term cost benefit. It would help you and you would live another ten or fifteen years but you’d probably be on public assistance the whole time. We need to save that treatment for someone in their thirties who might be able to work and pay into the system for another thirty years.

Arthritis? You’ll need to just manage that with over the counter medications.
Macular degeneration? You’ll have to go blind in one eye before we can give you medicine to save the second one.
Breast cancer? We’ve deemed a double mastectomy is really the best long term solution for most of our cases, so that is what you are going to get.

Of course just like the benefits to doctors are limited, the benefit to other medical businesses are limited as well. What if… Medtronic thinks that they can cure spinal cord paralysis with a new surgery and an electronic implant… but the research is too expensive and the government would never pay for more than a couple dozen a year, even if they could find a specialist who could perform the surgery. Or, what if… Merck thinks that they have a promising lead on a drug that will reverse the effects of autism if given to children under four… but the research and testing is expensive and the medicine would cost thousands of dollars over the course of the treatment, the government just wouldn’t buy enough to make it cost effective for their business.

Fewer incentives = fewer technological breakthroughs/ fewer medicines

That’s not all. Medical devices are tricky. These things have microprocessors, multiple stacked die, assembled through a several hundred step procedure, and they are implanted into the worst possible conditions for electronics. Sometimes they fail. Lawsuits come up. Will people be prevented from suing the doctor? Or the government? Right now Medicare tries to spread the devices that they use over the different providers so that any recalls by any particular company will effect the smallest percentage of patients. So if there are only two companies producing a device, they each get about half the business. Of course that could be a billion dollar business, so soon you have five companies. The original developers of the technology now see less of the business, even if they produce the best product. Government decisions.

The end result is that in a single payer system you see a significantly lower level of care. There are fewer specialists so wait times can become extreme. In Canada they joke (meaning they really ‘observe’ because it’s true) that for high risk pregnancies there is a ten month waiting period. Services, medicines, procedures, and devices are rationed and limited. Some have even said that the only reason the Canadian system even functions is because people can always come to the US if they know of a service that cannot be provided in Canada.

Our medical system has some problems and things can and should be done to improve it. Steps should be taken to open up competition in health insurance. Medical savings accounts should be readily available and encouraged along with retirement savings. Also, tort reform needs to be enacted to protect good doctors and companies from frivolous law suits. There are many avenues to take towards improving our health care system and bringing down the escalating costs. A single payer universal health care system, however, is not the answer.

Iran and the Nuke

The prime minister (again) of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu recently told The Atlantic that the two biggest obstacles that the Obama administration faced were the economy and Iran. Obviously he has the concerns of his own country foremost in his mind, but the comment deserves significant merit especially in light of the recent disclosure that a Chinese national has been funneling banned nuclear material to Iran through a sophisticated network of banks and shell companies.

The approach to Iran has been the same for quite some time. The idea is that the government of Iran is extremely unpopular, oddly enough with the same demographic that originally helped thrust the regime into power, the educated youth. While the government pours vast resources into nuclear development, the people are suffering and there is a general feeling of unrest. The recent drop in gas prices has only added fuel to the fire of belief that the current regime cannot last as they are seeing the main source of their income drop with the falling price of oil.

Still they seem to be clinging to power at the same time pushing down political dissent and working with other dictatorial regimes throughout the world. They have allied themselves with Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, Russia, and evidently are being aided, at least indirectly, by China. The problem is how long do you wait?

For fifty years we have imposed sanctions on Cuba. The gradual effect of the sanctions making life unbearable for some, but others have never known anything different. Those who couldn’t take it anymore have fled to other countries, including the US. If oppression and a dictatorial regime are all you have ever known then it is hard to believe that you could be free of such a system.

So how long is too long?

In this case I think it will be when Iran completes their first nuclear weapon.

Once the first nuke is finished now you have an unstable and irrational government armed with a nuclear weapon. We have learned the difficulties in controlling and containing WMD while invading a country and we’ve also learned that people and weapons are easy to hide even with advanced satellites, drones, and high altitude aerial surveillance. How do you destroy an existing nuclear weapon in a controlled fashion, minimize casualties, and guarantee that you have neutralized your target? If you miss now all bets are off. Now you have a unstable and irrational government… fighting for its existence. The first situation is bad, but now you’ve shaken the hornets nest. It will also shore up the regimes support in their own country because people will be thinking the same thing; better the crazed unstable dictator that you know, rather than the psychotic, trigger happy, madman waiting around the corner. This means that once they get the weapon, it is going to be very difficult if not impossible to remove the regime and replace it.

So then it seems obvious that you need to attack before the nuke is finished.

Unfortunately now you risk destroying the resistance itself. Attack from an outside invader that the leadership has already painted as a religious and moral enemy will only shore up support for the current regime.

Tough call.

Can we really afford to wait much longer? Can Israel afford to wait ANY longer?

My hope is that we have very good intel going on and the reality on the ground is a lot different than the press that Iran is putting out. Rather than months from a nuke they are actually years. That would be my optimistic hope.

Pessimistically I can see the current administration having considered it a forgone conclusion that Iran will acquire a nuclear weapon, but don’t believe them capable of actually using it. They would hope that they are planning on utilizing the nuke as a tool rather than a weapon. A bargaining chip rather than a global panic button.

I don’t know if that is really a gamble that Israel can afford to make, and one we should not ask them to.

Strike now. Wipe out any thought of a nuclear weapons program and hit the regime hard enough to weaken their grip; all while fueling and equipping a resistance dedicated to democratic reforms. Unfortunately you have to understand that you could be creating an even larger mess, with long term cleanup implications, but that seems to me to be the only risk worth taking.

Kyle

It's Kyle's birthday today! Check out the family blog for his birthday post.

Good guys and bad guys

In the late seventies, during the Carter administration, the US was involved in the infamous SALT treaties with the Soviet Union. The Soviets were smart, they would build up their arsenals, then go to the table and demand that neither side build any more of the weapon that they had just finished stockpiling. After they had finished building up their supply of long range bombers, they proposed that neither side would pursue any more long range bombers. Smart for them, stupid for us. The Carter administration swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Their goal was not to actually have meaningful negotiations, but to say that they had a treaty. They wanted to show that they were working with the Soviets. All the while the Soviets were laughing at the Americans who were hamstringing themselves into a second rate national defense.

Fast forward a bit to the 90s. The North Koreans, under a despotic regime tout their ambitions to become a nuclear power. In an effort to get some type of agreement the Clinton administration offers peaceful nuclear technology to the North Koreans, if they agree to not pursue nuclear weapons. Of course they agree. A nuclear reactor is established with the help of the US, then they Americans leave. The North Koreans turn around and announce the fact that they have been able to build a nuclear weapon with their new technology.

Brilliant diplomacy.

You can only negotiate with an enemy if you are in a position of strength. You have to know what it is that they have been and are capable of doing. You must be able to verify their compliance.

The problem is that both Carter and Clinton wanted to appear to be ‘the good guy’; the one who was willing to let down the guard of the great Unites States in order to achieve a peace agreement. The liberals of today seem to think that there really aren’t any ‘bad guys’ out there. We just haven’t taken the time to really understand their position and that if we were more willing to make concessions, they would see our side.

The fact is that WE are the good guys, and yes there are ‘bad guys’ in the world. No, they are not misunderstood, at least not by those who would open their eyes and see. They are people who are bent on holding and keeping their power, subjugating their people, and if they can fool you and gain the upper hand in any negotiations, they will. They are tyrants. They are murderers. They hate freedom. They love power. They cannot be trusted.

There is good and there is evil in the world. This is nothing new and it will not change.

If we are not fighting for the good, then we are abdicating to the evil.

As I watch the defense budget being slashed to make way for global warming initiatives and ineffective stimulus spending I’m concerned that the hard learned lessons of the past will have to be revisited. As I watch our president apologize for our role of strength and leadership in the world I’m concerned that our enemies are getting a green light to move forward in haste.

I want to grab our leaders and scream, “WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS!!”

If they can’t grasp the basics of who is on the side of good and who is on the side of evil, then they will never be able to fight for the good, or resist the evil.

An Irresponsible Budget

The House and the Senate have now passed slightly different versions of President Obama’s budget. Not one Republican voted for either of them. That’s a strong statement and really the only encouraging thing about this whole mess.

In all of the stories and reporting on the budget, there are a lot of terms thrown out that people may not understand. Sometimes I question whether the policy makers themselves really understand them. So lets just discuss a couple of the most important terms and how they impact the budget.

Deficit. The “deficit” is the difference between the money that the government is spending and the money they are bringing in. Think about it this way. You sit down to work on your own personal finances and you total up all of the money that you are going to make in a month. Then you start totally up your bills and include all of the things that you know you need or want to spend money on. When you compare your income to your expenses they almost never match up directly. Hopefully you have a little more income than expenses. If not, you pull back your expense to at least match your income. In the current budget the government expects to bring in about $1.9 TRILLION. They plan to spend… $3.6 TRILLION. Now think about that for a minute. Say you made $50,000 a year. You sit down with you family and you decide that you really WANT to spend $95,000. You can either cut back like any rational person would do, or you find someone willing to lend you $45,000. This is called “living beyond your means”. The deficit for each year is then added to the national DEBT.

Debt. This is something that most home owners are acutely aware of. This is how much you owe other people. This is the weight hanging over your head in the form of mortgages, car loans, credit cards, HELOCs, and the infamous student loans. Currently the national debt stands at about $11 TRILLION dollars. Ouch. Now think about all of your personal debt (if you have any). What does all debt have in common? If you don’t get rid of it, it grows. Like a beer belly on a redneck! Interest charges accumulate. The more debt you get, the worse risk you become. Your credit rating dips and any more debt you accumulate will cost you more money in the way of increased interest rates. It works exactly the same way for the government.

During the campaign, Senator Obama blasted Senator McCain for voting for President Bush’s budgets because of the deficits involved in them. I couldn’t agree more. President Bush’s budgets spent when they should have saved. They took the extra money and expanded government, when they should have cut back. Bravo Senator Obama. Unfortunately President Obama doesn’t remember the outrage that Senator Obama had about those reckless deficits.

Now I’m sure that you have heard President Obama state over and over that we are not going to follow the old failed policies of the past. He has said that by the end of his first term he wants to “cut the deficit in half”. Unfortunately before he cuts the deficit in half, he will more than QUADRUPLE it. In fact according to his planned budget, which is rosy by most accounts, we will not have one single year of surplus. He doesn’t ever plan to spend less than the government brings in. He plans to spend as much as 90% MORE than the government brings in. Just imagine if YOU budgeted that way!

This is what the Congressional Budget Office had to say about the budget.

- CBO now estimates that the deficit would total almost $1.7 trillion (11.9 percent of gross domestic product, or GDP) this year and $1.1 trillion (7.9 percent of GDP) next year—the largest deficits as a share of GDP since 1945.
- Debt held by the public would rise, from 41 percent of GDP in 2008 to 57 percent in 2009 and then to 82 percent of GDP by 2019 (compared with 56 percent of GDP in that year under baseline assumptions).

Don’t let terms and responsible SOUNDING language confuse you. This budget is irresponsible, reckless, and economically speaking, extremely dangerous.

Who is John Galt?

As you can tell from the left hand margin, I don’t read much fiction. I see reading as a way to learn things and expand my understanding. I enjoy it. I take notes. I underline. I dog-ear.

Yes, I am a geek, thanks for noticing.

However, right now I am reading a novel; a 50 year old novel at that. You might have read or heard of it because it is selling like crazy right now. I had been hearing repeated references to it, so I finally picked it up. It’s Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Almost 1100 pages long. Ouch. Not exactly easy reading. There are several sections where I just wanted to smack someone and say, “okay, I get it, move on” and other sections where the dialog was just completely unrealistic and so over romanticized that I became nauseous and not occasionally… very sleepy. Then in some cases it reads like a supermarket romance novel with passionate love scenes that are humorous at best.

On top of that, unfortunately I am a very slow reader and just CAN’T skim a book. I feel like if I don’t read every single word then I didn’t really read the book. So it is taking me forever to read this thing. I finally made it to the 900th page last night (and there was much rejoicing… yah), so I am hoping to get a glimpse of how it ends soon.

However, despite that glowing criticism… the PLOT of the book is genius. So genius, it’s frightening. In the early sections it reads like a pseudo prophecy of America’s present with horrifying glimpses of the potential future. While it actually bends toward worshipping self and an almost atheistic slant… it makes an excellent point, so here it is, just in case you don’t want to trudge through the 1100 pages.

Socialism will never work because it encourages laziness and discourages good honest work. On top of that it points out the subversive and devious nature of those who hide their actions behind “the common good”. It points out that when people turn class warfare against the most productive minds in society, then society as a whole will lose. The poor will suffer even more than the rich and the only ones who benefit are the politicians who make the rules. It cries against the unchecked power of the national government. The frightening thing is that the words, phrases, and even some of the actions of the antagonist politicians mirror those that we are seeing today.

From that perspective, Ayn Rand had tremendous foresight and the plot of the book is powerful. Frightening at times, but entertaining. There has been a movie in the works for a long time, but it sounds like they might finally produce it. I don’t know. We’ll see. They would have to cut volumes out of what is there now to fit into 3-4 hours, and they would have to omit several scenes to get a decent family rating, but we’ll see what happens.

In any case, I think I will work on my own writing for a while. Or maybe I’ll pick up the autobiography of the Red Baron that I recently acquired… oooh, now THAT sounds like a page turner!

Wow? Is anyone else watching this?

A government that can do anything FOR you, can do anything TO you. (I don’t want to claim credit for this one, but I can’t find the quote…)

Remember that.

Ask yourself, if the government can tax someone else 100% of their bonus (AIG), or fire them from their job (CEO of GM), then what will keep them from taking your job? In fact a measure just passed the banking committee that says that Congress will be able to control the salary of EVERY employee of a TARP bailout company. Remember that none of this was a part of the original bailout agreement. The government is rewriting the contract with these companies as they go.

Do you realize what your government has done this week?

They not only removed the head of a publicly traded company, but they revoked that company’s business plan and forced them into negotiating with government officials who have no experience running a car company? Are they planning to put in new board members? Are we suddenly going to see the GM board of directors populated with UAW stooges? What is the limit of the government’s authority in this situation? Is the head of GM going to be appointed by the president, after all, the last one appears to have been fired by the president?

Does this make anyone else nervous?

This is what happens when government strays from its purpose. This is what happens when we operate outside of principles.

The government should not have entertained bailing out any company. The government should have no vested stake in any business. The government should not be running car companies or backing up car warrantees (!) any more than they should be involved with dictating mortgage qualifications. The only involvement of government in business should be to insure that ethical business practices are followed and a free market preserved.

What’s happening now is ridiculous. It’s frightening. The executive and legislative branches are in a contest to see which one can claim more power in the quickest and most outrageous manner.

This could be a very painful lesson for us all.

Real Environmental Science

I've been out for a bit on an unpaid "vacation" and enjoyed some time away from the computer, but I'm back, for my 600th post! Wow, I need to get a life.



Anyway....



If you’ve read anything on my blog you would know that I am a ‘global warming skeptic”. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe in abusing our planet, just the contrary, huge efforts should be made to help and to pressure China and India to clean up some of the worst pollution in human history flowing down what were once pristine and sacred rivers. When the claims are backed up with solid science, I am all for practicing sane and healthy environmental protections.

This is not the case for global warming. A conference recently put on by Heartland.org on climate change is a great example of what I am talking about. Instead of saying that there is a “consensus” on global warming or that to debate the science behind the issue is “silly” as Al Gore has recently claimed, Heartland.org looked at the actual science. By science of course I mean things like facts, evidence, and data, something severely lacking in the global warming hysterics. The science is very revealing. CO2 emissions have ZERO effect on global warming or cooling or global temperatures whatsoever. This is my favorite visual from the presentations.

















As I’ve said before and numerous scientists and climatologists have pointed out, global temperatures correlate very closely to sun activity.

Unfortunately this is not what we are hearing from the current administration. They are using the same old phrases such as “man made global warming”.

When someone is using slogans and scare tactics to try and convince you of an impending doom that is not supported by evidence or logic, you really need to question his motives.

The answer is control and money. Cap and trade is going to be put forward soon either through direct legislation or by the EPA under the Clean Air Act. Either way, it’s a bad deal, based on bad science, for the purpose of controlling businesses and exacting tax dollars from places where they could not be taken before.

This is going to be a big fight. And it should be. Don’t concede the issue. The science doesn’t support it. Check the motives. Check the facts. Call you representatives and tell them if they vote for capping carbon you are going to vote for capping their political career.