About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

WHAT IS OBAMA’S ECONOMIC POLICY?

Friday, December 11, 2009





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

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

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

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 It was as if he had been replaced by his “evil” identical twin, and he had secretly retreated to his ranch in Texas!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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source: Patriot Post and Mark Alexander

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

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

Thursday, December 10, 2009

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

WAKE UP AMERICANS THE HOUR OF DECISION IS UPON US!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

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

Tuesday, December 08, 2009

 



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WRONG WAY TO CHOOSE A DOCTOR!

Saturday, December 05, 2009

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA MAKES UP HIS MIND, FINALLY!!

Tuesday, December 01, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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




:
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

PUT YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE AND THIS MAY BE YOUR REWARD!!

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

Monday, November 30, 2009

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THERE ARE TWO BASIC PRINCIPLES THAT DISCONCERT ME TODAY!!

Friday, November 27, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Shall we sit by while Obamaphiles destroy our Republic?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

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

Friday, November 13, 2009


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DELEGITIMIZATION AND DEMONIZING ARE THE LATEST OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TACTICS

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE DUPLICITY OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Monday, October 19, 2009

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


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

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

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


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

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ATTACK FOX NETWORK?

 







SAUL ALINSKY'S "RULES FOR RADICALS", RULE 10: If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive. Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.
 RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.


First the Obama administration and his Democrat sycophants attacked Rush Limbaugh, in what many saw as a foreboding sign about what Congress and President Barack Obama will try to do with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine,"
Even though Obama has stated he will not  push the fairness doctrine--he has made falls promises before!!
Democrats are continuing their attacks on talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh over his opposition to what he has described as "Obama's Porkulus Bill." And recently they have also targeted the growing ever popular Glenn Beck'

Radio and television ads were launched by MoveOn.org and other organizations condemning Limbaugh's opinion that such government spending is wrong, and then linking Republican lawmakers to Limbaugh through their opposition to Obama's massive $1 trillion "stimulus" plan.

Now they have committed the biggest mistake since Obama promised that unemployment would never exceede 8%.
The Communications director has labeled Fox News as the enemy and an arm of the Republican party! This is an absurdity not worthy of a spokesperson for the President of the United States. Ms.Anita Dunn is claiming something that anyone who has watched Fox News for at least 4 years will attest that they were as critical of President Bush as they have of Obama.

The problem is that president Obama has done so much to destroy the free enterprise system, redistribute the wealth, and make our country less solvent and safe. That there are so many stories to report is a fact no one who is aware of what is going on in Washington can deny. Unfortunately, the other major news organisations like NBC,CBS, ABC and CNN are so enamoured with Obama that they are wont to print or speak anything negative about their "messiah"!

There is no pressure on Congress by any of the major media except Fox, as they continue to spend our country into insolvency. Congress has got away with so much , all the while they were keeping the pressure on anyone who prints or says they are destroying our financial stability.
As reports surfaced about Obama’s coming $9 trillion in new debt that will place the United States on course for anywhere between $17 trillion and $20 trillion in federal debt when Obama is done was hardly discussed this week by anyone by Fox.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both companies with federal ties, announced their bonuses shortly after Congress and the Obama White House staff(and he too) excoriated Bankers and Brokerage houses for bonuses.
Not much was said by the main stream media, because that would put Barney Frank in a compromised position. The House passed HR1388, which was Obama’s plan for required community service for all children. Remember a few days after the election, the unpopular idea showed up on Change.gov and was quickly removed once word spread, helped by Fox's Beck, creating anger towards Obama. All this and so much more was overlooked by the "Lame" Media.


Now Team Obama would dismantle the world’s greatest health care system and substitue a government health plan. That’s a losing proposition, which is why Mr. Obama is increasingly resorting to fear and misleading claims. It’s all the candidate of hope has left. And as a Lone Ranger , Fox News is reporting the facts that Obama does not want the public to know for fear that his major promise to the Left is in danger of being rejected in Congres as it has in the American populace. Thus the targeting of Fox News by Ms. Dunn as the enemy, aka an opponent!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

REASONS FOR OBAMA GETTING NOBEL PEACE PRIZE??

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Barack Obama today admitted he does not think he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize after being sensationally awarded the honour.

The  president said he was both "surprised and deeply humble"' to win the award.
The Nobel Committee has shocked the world by choosing Mr Obama

It used to be the rule that the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to politicians if they could point to tangible political successes. American presidents and politicians have consistently been recipients of the award: Theodor Roosevelt received the award in 1906 for his role in securing a peace deal between Russia and Japan. Woodrow Wilson was honored with the prize in 1919 for his work on the creation of the League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations. Martin Luther King was presented with the award in 1964 for his commitment to civil rights for African Americans. The former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was even controversially given the nod in 1973 for his role in negotiating an end to the Vietnam War.

Now it is the turn of the 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama, who was awarded the prize on Friday for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples," in the words of the Nobel committee.
It is possible to reward diplomatic efforts and thus make them more effective. The former German Chancellor Willy Brandt greatly benefited from that in 1971, when he was awarded the Nobel Prize for his famous Ostpolitik policy of rapprochement with the Warsaw Pact states. At the time, Brandt was no less controversial within Germany than Barack Obama is within the US today; the opposition was up in arms and ridiculed him in the most objectionable fashion. But Brandt, who like Obama was a fan of international diplomacy, had already signed the Eastern Treaties when the committee handed down its decision.

In contrast, who has accepted Obama's outstretched hand today? Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? The Taliban? North Korea's Kim Jong-Il? Russia's Vladimir Putin or Dmitry Medvedev? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas? None of them. Nowhere is there any success in sight.
Former Polish president and 1983 Peace laureate Lech Walesa slammed the decision as 'too early'.


'So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far. He is still at an early stage. He is only beginning to act,' he said today to a London Daily Mail reporter.He added: 'This is probably an encouragement for him to act. Let's see if he perseveres. Let's give him time to act.'

But his "soul mate", former president Jimmy Carter congratulated Obama saying:
"it was a bold statement from the Nobel committee. It shows the hope his administration represents not only to our nation but to people around the world".


My question is since the nomination was made nine days after Obama was sworn in as president. Who nominated him? And was this an award for the man who lost the Olympics for Chicago, but was rewarded for his radical shift of America towards European socialism?

This morning the field for the Nobel Peace Prize still appeared wide open.

'It's quite likely this committee will reward somebody who is engaged in current processes,' said Kristian Berg Harpviken, head of the International Peace Institute in Oslo (PRIO). Could it be he got the Nobel because he was not Bush?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1219201/Barack-Obama-awarded-Nobel-Peace-Prize
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA STIFFS DALI LAMA!!

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

IS THE MUSLIM RELIGION THE ONLY RELIGION OBAMA MEETS WITH?

IN THE RECENT PAST THE CHINESE COMMUNIST FLAG WAS FLOWN ON THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN.AND TtHERE WAS A MUSLIM CELEBRATION HELD IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE WHITE HOUSE LAST MONTH. PRESIDENT OBAMA SPOKE ADMIRINGLY OF THE RELIGOUS VALUES OF THE MUSLIM RELIGION.

And when he visited Cairo, Egypt last year he said this:"I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

However, for the past eight years, the White House recognized the National Day of Prayer with a service in the East Room, but this year, President Obama decided against holding a public ceremony.

Under the Bush administration, the White House hosted an interfaith service each year, inviting protestant, Catholic and Jewish leaders for an event at the East Room.

President Ronald Reagan and President George H.W. Bush also marked the day with a White House observance.
Despite numerous attempts to get a representative from the executive office to attend, "it doesn't appear they are going to fulfill our request," said Becky Armstrong, marketing and media manager of the National Day of Prayer Task Force.source:CNN.com


The National Day of Prayer goes all the way back to 1775,it  was temporarily ended at the end of the Revolution, and then was re-established in 1795, while George Washington was president. But, now that President Obama doesn’t need to fake any belief to get elected (anyone want to bet that he starts attending a church in 2011?) and he can’t attend a bigoted, separatist, hard left church, well, he is taking that position to say “sc**w you” to tradition and religious believers.( note to readers, to date Obama has not chosen a church to attend!)
Of course it is for God to determine, but I have not seen the ‘fruits’ on Christianity in this man.

His answer to the question ‘what is sin’? He answered, “Being out of alignment with my values.” (Based on this answer, I’d say he either has a god complex, or doesn’t have a clue what God says about sin).I belive it is the former.


Now Onbama has stiffed the Dali lama, the Tibetan titular leader of the Buddist religion, by refusing to even meet with him! The reason his sycophants give is that he does not want to offend the Cinese whom he will vist shortly!
The decision came after China stepped up a campaign urging nations to shun the Tibetan spiritual leader.

It means Mr Obama will become the first president not to welcome the Nobel peace prize winner to the White House since the Dalai Lama began visiting Washington in 1991.

Obama's decision dismayed human rights and Tibetan support groups, who said he had made an unnecessary concession to the Chinese, who regard the Dalai Lama as a "splittist", despite his calls for autonomy rather than independence for Tibet. The Chinese invaded in 1950, forcing the young leader to flee.

Sophie Richardson, Asia advocate for Human Rights Watch, said: "Presidents always meets the Dalai Lama and what happens? Absolutely nothing.

Mr Obama has changed his position on Tibet since his election campaign.


In April 2008, he was joined by Hillary Clinton, then his rival for the Democratic nomination and now his Secretary of State, in calling on George W Bush to boycott the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony in protest at the bloody repression of a popular uprising in Tibet.
"If the Chinese do not take steps to help stop the genocide in Darfur and to respect the dignity, security, and human rights of the Tibetan people, then the President should boycott the opening ceremonies," they said.

Frank Wolf, a Republican congressman and outspoken critic of China's human rights record, said: "What would a Buddhist monk or Buddhist nun in Drapchi prison think when he heard that President Obama, the president of the United States, is not going to meet with the Dalai Lama?


"It's against the law to even have a picture of the Dalai Lama. I can almost hear the words of the Chinese guards saying to them that nobody cares about you in the United States."
Ms Richardson said treating human rights as separate from other issues guaranteed failure "across the board". source:Telegraph UK.com

The idea that if you are nice to the Chinese Communist Party up front you can cash in later is just wrong. If you lower the bar on human rights they will just move it lower and lower." This also aplies to our diplomatic relations to the Russians. Obama's giving way to Putin's demand that the USA abandon the bases in Poland and the Czech Republic for missile defense is an example of a "QUID" with no "PRO QUO"!


My opinion is only worth the words that I put in my blog but I believe I say the truth when I say: We removed prayer from schools, we have the highest abortion rate in the world, we want to remove every reference of God from all the public places, and we called Good things bad and bad things Good. But God in His sovereign ways will not force in to us His will but rather will let us make our own choices. It is evident that as a nation we decided to remove God from our lives. As a result of these choices, He is no longer present in this nation and in our lives to protect us from the one who wants to destroy us and his minions. A nation without God is a nation in serious trouble and ultimately in a path for judgment.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE NAIVETE OF PRESIDENT OBAMA, OR IS HE?

Friday, October 02, 2009

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


On March 27, following a "careful policy review," Mr. Obama proclaimed Afghanistan and Pakistan as "the central front in the war on terror," announced a "comprehensive new strategy" for the region and ordered 21,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan -- increasing the number of Americans there to 68,000 by the end of this year. A month and a half later, he made Gen. Stanley McChrystal -- an advocate of pursuing a counterinsurgency campaign -- the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan. On Aug. 17, the president declared: "This is not a war of choice; it is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al-Qaida could plot to kill more Americans."Source:PatriotPost.com

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT OBAMA HAS A VERY SHORT MEMORY, OR PERHAPS SOMETHING THAT IS TOO HORRIBLE TO CONTEMPLATE, THE ANTI-WAR 50 CONGRESSMEN LED BY "RED" PELOSI HAS CHANGED OBAMA'S MIND!

It was just six months ago in Prague that Obama said:  “Let me be clear: Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran’s neighbors and our allies. The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles. As long as the threat from Iran persists, we intend to go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven..”
But last month he canceled the plans to build a missile base in Poland and a radar station to track incoming
enemy missiles in the Czech Republic. This after both countries, that were over run by the Communist USSR during World war II, had defied Russian objections to the bases! This now puts hundreds of thousands of people in both countries at the wrath of Putin and his KGB buddies!

Historian  Bernard Lewis has warned, the U.S. can’t afford to tell the world that “America is harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend.” Yet we’re doing exactly that by abandoning promises to our allies and failing to share the benefits of our missile defenses. Canceling the planned sites is a self-inflicted wound we cannot afford. Source: E. Feulner


If this were not enough to enbolden our enemies and strike terror in the hearts of those who count on our military might to protect them. Then the dithering about the request for more troops from the commander in Afghanistan should convince them that they have a leader of the USA that is naive and indicesive that makes him no match for their determination to destroy US and Israel!

Could you imagine FDR having three meetings with his miliatry advisors that took over thirty days after Pearl Harbor was bombed by the Japanese? No FDR declared war the next day and began plans for Doolittle's bombing raid on Tokyo!
But we have a president who recieved a request from the field commander for more troops over 30 days ago, and all he has done since then is have a teleconference meeting with three more scheduled before he makes his decision! And then left to travel to Denmark to help persuade the Olympic Committee to grant Chicago the 2016 Olympics!
And to make the situation more dangerous. Fifty(50) Congressmen sent a letter demanding that Obama not send more troops to Afghanistan before a complete exit strategy is formed. This is insanity and in my opinion tantamont to defeatism, and that is what the anti-victory people want1


But any right thinking person realizes that if we let the Taliban drive us out of Afghanistan it will become the 21sr Century version of VietNam and will destroy the military might and MORALE  that this Country once had.

Is it possible that is part of the master plan that POTUS has for the CHANGE he wants to accomplish?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

PLAY A WAITING GAME AT OUR OWN PERIL!!

Saturday, September 12, 2009

WHY WAIT??




We all know that Iran has a megalomaniac leader and the puppet of the Mullahs who are sworn haters of America and Israel. What we o not no is when they get the BOMB will they use it on Israel or will they fashion a suitcase type bomb that they will give to terrorists to inflict serious damage on whom they call "the great Satan"--the USA!!
Iran is in a race to acquire a nuclear weapon, a political game changer for the Mid-East.

What we also should know is revealed in this statement."America’s Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Vienna-based watchdog group, correctly set the tone by stating that Iran now has sufficient material to produce a nuclear weapon. Glyn Davies added that Iran’s “ongoing enrichment activities moves Iran closer to a dangerously and destabilizing breakout capacity” These were the toughest remarks so far during the Obama Administration concerning Iran’s technical capacity to build a atomic bomb, and added to the anxiety that Teheran is really not negotiating seriously but instead buying time while playing the international community for a patsy".

We have dithered around with UN resolutions and threats of embargoes for eight years, but the Iranian's keep making their nuclear killer bomb!

Will we wait until we have another 9/11 only worse??
It is as my grandfather said to me "it is time to fish or cut bait"!

We have the capability to take out the known sites where thy are enriching the nuclear materials, and we should strike before they do!
Obama and his minions seem to be concentrated on socializing the USA more than he is concerned with his main job as President. To protect the citizens and be the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces who reacts appropriately to a threat to OUR safety!

But there are fascinating twists in the storyline since last year. President Barack Obama has offered to negotiate with Tehran without preconditions and earlier in the year set a September deadline for Iran to negotiate seriously or face renewed calls for economic sanctions. Obama’s Springtime offer essentially allowed Tehran’s scientists a further six months of uninterrupted work on their nuclear program. Yet, since that time, Ahmadinejad’s own authority has been challenged in the bitter aftermath of Iran’s fraudulent Presidential elections.

Now come September we confront our own arbitrary deadline but with some definite changes in the political landscape. The Obama Administration, despite initial optimism in dealing with this Charter member of Axis of Evil, feels it may be getting scammed by Ahmadinejad. The West Europeans, while decidedly nervous over a nuclear Iran, would just like to squeeze in a few more lucrative business deals before the next slap on the wrist. And neighboring Arab states are just plain scared.This is all being done with the threat of a nuclear attack on us by Iran never being mentioned .

If we are more concerned with what the rest of the World thinks of us then we are about protecting our citizens from a nuclear disaster that will make the Twin Towers pale in comparison.
Then we should give the green light to the Israelis to take out the threat. Each day we hesitate and talk they are building air defense systems that will cost more lives of the pilots who eventually have to do the air strike. And we risk the nuclear disaster that hangs over the heads of every major city in the USA unless this madman is stopped!
Source: World Tribune. com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive