Saturday, July 25, 2009

VINCE LOMBARDI THE PATRON SAINT OF THE GREEN BAY PACKERS. Once said: "victory isn't
everything, it is the only thing"!

Of course Vince was a football coach, but in his mind if you put on the pads you should want and expect to win!
Unfortunately we now have a Commander in Chief of our armed forces who thinks it is perfectly all right to send our young men and women into harms way(aka war) without the objective being to attain victory!
The "meat grinder"of war has claimed 58,159 victims in Vietnam, 52,246 in Korea without a victory, and now as I said in a blog six months ago, apparently Obama wants to repeat the debacle of those two killing fields.

OBAMA has ordered 21,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan, mainly in the south where Taliban militants have made a violent comeback after a U.S.-led coalition topped them from power in late 2001. The U.S. expects 68,000 troops here by year's end, double last year's total.

When the president sends men into a war zone, peace keeping action, or United Nations police action as the Vietnam and Korean war were called. There are deaths, serious wounds to mind and body of those who are sent to fight. I think it is tantamount to dereliction of the duties of the office of POTUS, to send troops off to die unless they can be allowed to win! The words out of Obama's mouth apparently indicate that he thinks differently! As this statement illustrates:

"President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.

"I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur," Obama told ABC News.

First of all, the smart and eloquent man who speaks with a silver tongue does not know that the Emperor was in his palace while the Prime Minister signed the surrender on the battleship Missouri!!
Since Obama took office 33 Americans have been killed in action. Untold number have been wounded, since the media no longer reports the statistics.But it appears 4330 brave troops have been killed in a valiant effort to win a victory over the Taliban.However, their commander in chief thinks it is not important!

Not only has the CIC said victory is not his objective, but apparently his commander in the field is more concerned with "collateral damage" than winning at all costs. He said this recently.
"We must avoid the trap of winning tactical victories - but suffering strategic defeats - by causing civilian casualties or excessive damage and thus alienating the people," McChrystal said in a recent statement.

Once again I want to state that it is criminal to send men to war unless you allow them to win!!

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Beginning during the Viet Nam war the Press and the anti-military ilk began to decry the death of indigenous peoples more than they did our own soldiers.
What was once considered the cost of winning a war, a tactic that was used in Germany and most notably in Japan. The killing of civilians to break the will of the people to continue fighting, was called "collateral damage". An unfortunate part of winning a war, but a necessary evil that was accepted in the battle plans of military leaders and the public at large.

Now it appears the lives of the people who are dressed in civilian clothes, and appear to be non-combatants are more important than the lives of the men and women our government puts in harms way!
This directive is reported in the Wall Street Journal as coming from the new general in charge of the troops in Afghanistan, but as anyone who has had any association with the military knows. The directives come from Washington, where, these days, being in a war seems to be more important, then winning a war!

The new U.S. commander in Afghanistan is finalizing a far-reaching change in tactics that will generally require U.S. troops taking fire in populated areas to break contact rather than risk civilian casualties, military officials said.

The rules being crafted by Gen. Stanley McChrystal are the clearest indication yet of how the new U.S. command team in Afghanistan plans to reduce civilian fatalities, a cause of public anger against U.S. efforts there.

When did our military get off track, and start worrying about what the civilians feel about the our presence in their country. If we are trying to win the hearts and minds of those who don't like us, we should withdraw all forces from Afghanistan now. Every man, woman and child could have a rifle or bomb inside their burka , as they all hate Americans. Send the peace corps. not the military if the object is to win the hearts and minds!

U.S. officials said the rules were designed to reduce the use of bombs, missiles and other heavy weaponry in populated areas. They will require U.S. forces that come under fire from militants operating out of houses and other buildings that may contain civilians to end the engagement and leave the area, officials said.

The restrictions could force commanders to be more cautious in the mission-planning stage and eschew operations likely to require operations in populated areas, according to an officer serving in Afghanistan.

The rules make clear exceptions for situations where the lives of U.S., North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Afghan personnel are in danger, U.S. officials said. The guidelines allow U.S. personnel to call in airstrikes or use powerful weaponry if they fear being overrun, can't leave the area safely, or need to evacuate wounded colleagues.But this is a decision that men and women in harms way should not have to make!

Gen. McChrystal, who arrived in Afghanistan last week, is "trying to make it as clear as possible that risking civilian lives for the sole goal of killing the enemy is not acceptable," said his spokesman, Rear Adm. Gregory Smith.

I am sorry, but if we don't kill the enemy, they will kill us! There is no way this war cannot turn into another Viet Nam if we try to fight a "clean surgical" war. Besides the direct order to wait until the field commander in the battle determines that they are about to be "over run" will result in more casualties of our troops you can be sure. As any captain who wants to advance in rank will not want to be brought up on charges that he applied excessive force! This is no way to fight a war, but it is consistent with our current presidents attitude toward our enemies. Talk, talk, talk and they will do our bidding. Bovine excrement!!!

Friday, May 08, 2009

It is clear that the Obama plan for the United States is to move it from a free society to a "statist" cradle to grave collective, at least it is in my mind.
The fact that during the first one hundred days of the Obama administration, Obama and the Congress have spent 100 billion dollars a day to advance the welfare state in the disguise of saving the banks and the economy.What he and Congress has done to our children and grandchildren could be called economic child abuse!

Now he has selected a man who is the current police chief of Seattle, Washington for the new Drug Czar. Chief Gil Kerlikowske is a friend of Attorney General Eric Holder, and served in the Clinton administration, will no longer have Cabinet-level status,( Obama gave that to Biden) a White House official said, but Kerlikowske "will have a seat at the table( what table, when?) when important decisions are being made ... and full access and a direct line to the president and vice president."

In the Clinton administration, Kerlikowske worked on ways to monitor grants the agency gave to local police efforts, and he frequently emphasized analysis and data, looking for "ways to prevent crime rather than reacting to it," said Tim Quinn, the COPS program's acting director.

John Carnevale, an official in the drug office from its inception in 1989 until 2000, met Kerlikowske while working on ways to measure the agency's effectiveness. "He's big on accountability," said Carnevale. Kerlikowske's Washington and local policing background is a plus, particularly if other appointees bring a strong treatment and prevention background, he said.

Seattle activists who work on drug-reform issues called Kerlikowske smart and reasonable, and they noted that his police department has largely abided by a voter-approved initiative that made marijuana possession the city's lowest law enforcement priority.

Even at the city's annual Hempfest protest and festival, police arrested only a few people despite the open-air pot smoking, said Vivian McPeak, director of the event.

Douglas Hiatt, an attorney who defends medical marijuana patients, said the chief has tried "to do the right thing on medical marijuana. He's trying to get it across to his officers not to hassle patients." My question is what are people who he considers patients doing out on the streets rather than in treatment centers or hospitals. What these people are doing is sending a message to the drug lords that they have Cart Blanche because we will be targeting users of drugs rather than stopping the flow of drugs into our country.

Colleagues expect Kelikowski to ramp up efforts to stem demand for illegal narcotics by emphasizing prevention and treatment.
He comes from a state whose citizens voted not to enforce the federal law if marijuana is used as medicine. He also comes from a city whose people voted to make marijuana possession the lowest priority for police work.

Kerlikowske didn't support that measure, but he learned to live with it. His police force has been tolerant at Seattle's annual Hempfest.

Concerning the stronger drugs, Kerlikowske has tolerated needle-exchange programs. He has supported drug court, which offers treatment to low-level offenders as an alternative to prison. He has a son who has been arrested for drugs, so he has seen the drug war from that angle, too.

I suspect that this man will find opposition to his confirmation in the Senate from those who believe that treatment is fine, but stopping the flow of drugs at our borders is still more important. The recent violence in the border cities of Texas and Arizona that have claimed hundreds of lives and seen kindnapping escalate is a priority that the Obama seems to have ignored!

Jan. 22nd, 2009 | 03:31 pm
Hollywood and the Cable Networks keep showing episodes of the Nazi death camps. Certainly a low point in mans inhumanity to his fellow man. But there is a genocide ongoing right here in the USA, that was started by seven men in Black Robes(kind of appropriate)36 years ago. Over two million unborn and partially born babies have been killed!
This quote from the Patriot Post,illustrates my feelings on this atrocity to those in the most protected place on earth--their mothers womb!
"On Thursday, the most tragic Supreme Court fiat in America's history will turn 36. The 1973 Roe v. Wade decision federalized a legal issue that historically had been individually decided by each state. Seven unelected justices struck down Texas' abortion law -- and by extension, those of the other states -- instead of having elected legislators properly decide the matter. The primary issue, of course, remains the right to life affirmed in our Declaration of Independence. Since Roe, nearly 50 million babies have been denied this foundational right, trumped by the so-called "right to choose" supported by our new president and Democrat-controlled Congress."

Link | Leave a comment

| Edit Entry | Edit Tags | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Track This

The television news, Radio, and Internet are awash with stories telling U.S.tax payers that another greedy Wall Street Baron is biting the dust!

U.S. taxpayers will bear the burden of the failure of this financial company and other financial firms, not just in the next year but over time. The Treasury may get money to cover the bill by pushing the deficit higher and borrowing money by selling bonds -- most of which will be snapped up by China. The IRS will want its "pound of flesh" at some point. That money will come from the pockets of the working man, or future, payroll deductions of our children.

This is a bad time for people like myself, who believed in the Capitalist System all our lives. It gives fodder to the Secular Socialists, and especially the Leftist controlled Democrat party at the most opportune time for them.

With Obama's popularity on the wane as more and more voters come to realize that he can talk the talk, but the way he walked the walk in the past belies his talk!

The problem simply is too much debt. In other words, the typical U.S. consumer is awash in debt brought about by the profligate use of credit cards. I believe some of the blame should be laid at the feet of the advertising sector of the World.

These are the people who put adds on television, radio, newspapers, magazines and even on the Internet, enticing us to buy a product that we should have," because we deserve it". Even if we cannot afford it. The Credit card companies are only too happy to oblige the card holder, because they make more money if you cannot pay the balance, but only pay the interest--usually 18% or more!

Couple this with the purchase of homes with little or no down payment, and barely enough income to support monthly payments. Overly aggressive lending practices by lenders,that poured millions of dollars into the home mortgage business, that were offered to these marginal home buyers at extremely low initial interest rates.

These low rates were come-ons, could and did escalate as the low initial offering rate period expired and the revised interest rates, in some cases, rose by 30-50%. These higher mortgage interest rates dramatically increased monthly payments, and over extended home purchasers simply did not have the income required to be able to make these increased payments. source:The Money Blog

To answer the financial crisis, the nine largest banks in the USA are forming a fund with a value of $70 billion. The banks are Bank of America (BAC), Barclays (BCS), Citigroup (C), Credit Suisse Group (CS), Deutsche Bank AG (DB), Goldman Sachs (GS), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Morgan Stanley (MS) and UBS AG (UBS).
Reuters reports that "any one of the 10 banks would be permitted to borrow up to one-third of the total facility." This will be on top of the Fed's plan to make more easy credit available to banks and brokerages.


Top Academic Economists believe this is a bad idea, because what becomes of the fund if any three of the members need to draw the 33% to which they are entitled? That would not only obliterate the fund. It would vex the other banks who might need capital if the credit crisis grows long and much worse. And the way things are going it may happen!
Many Economists believe this is a way to disguise a "BuyOut" plan that is disguised as a "bailout" by the three largest Capital Funds,Goldman Sachs, BAC and Deutsche Bank. These three have financial assets which are the envy of the others in the Banking business.

The underlying problem facing Americans is the continued devaluation of our Dollar. This will accompany this Bank crisis and the continued extension of credit to financial giants like now bankrupt Lehman. This will only lead to more predatory lending practices, inappropriate underwriting standards, and the potential consequences of securitization of debt instruments.

This includes the packaging of bundles of mortgages and other loans into a big single investment that are sold to pension funds and other investors around the world. If the early warnings had been heeded, the world "would have avoided the kind of meltdown we are experiencing today". source:David R. Francis

In 1995, over US $380 billion were in circulation, two-thirds of which was outside the United States. By 2005, that figure had doubled to nearly $760 billion, with an estimated half to two-thirds being held overseas,primaraly by Communit China, representing an annual growth rate of about 7.6%.
As of December 2006, the dollar was surpassed by the euro in terms of combined value, and of cash in circulation. Since then the current value of euro cash in circulation has risen to more than €695 billion, equivalent to US$991 billion at current exchange rates.

Wikapedia reports that: "Economist Paul Samuelson and others maintain that the overseas demand for dollars allows the United States to maintain persistent trade deficits without causing the value of the currency to depreciate and the flow of trade to readjust. Milton Friedman at his death believed this to be the case but, more recently, Paul Samuelson has said he now believes that at some stage in the future these pressures will precipitate a run against the U.S. dollar with serious global financial consequences!"

Hopefully, we will survive this financial crisis before the Chinese call in their notes. But all Americans, both Democrats and Republicans should realize that when so many people engaged in so many aspects of Our finance have lost their ethical compass, and put their short-term personal gains above their customers considerations.The end result is default!
This was the case in the subprime mortgage market in the U.S. It has had a profound macroeconomic impact. Putting it simply, the broad economy gets hurt by greed and selfishness as ensuing financial losses mount and trust fades. source: Christian Science Monitor


Another factor to consider is the possible election of a President who promises to introduce more expensive Wekfare programs that will further burden the taxpayers. This would be a fatal financial mistake!

Friday, August 08, 2008

During a recent visit to the United States Pope Benedict admitted that he is "deeply ashamed" of the clergy sex abuse scandal that has devastated the American church. The American Catholic Church has paid out $2 billion in abuse costs since 1950.

Benedict pledged that paedophiles would not be priests in the Catholic Church, AND HUNDREDS OF PRIESTS HAVE BEEN CAST OUT !

At the same time that Pope Benedict XVI was visiting the USA, a leader of over 20 million Muslim Ismail's, Aga Khan( The Nobel One) was visiting the USA. His branch of the Muslim religion is a group that broke away from the Shiah.

I do not want to equate child sexual abuse with terrorism To violate a child is a heinous and almost unforgivable crime. It results in not only physical trauma but mental anguish that can last a life time.
But, what I do want to point out is that no one, I repeat, not one of the Muslim leadership has ever apologized for the dastardly terrorist attacks on New York and Washington by known Muslims.

Too often we Americans separate Muslims by the county they live in to point fingers of blame for the voluminous terrorist attacks that have happened all over the world. They all were committed by Muslims, and no one has apologized or said it should stop!

Pope Benedict and the Catholic Church not only apologized , the Church has made monetary reparations.

What I write now comes straight out of the Web site of the World Muslim Congress. It illustrates in my opinion, why they have never apologized and will never do so!

"To be a Muslim is to be a peacemaker, one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for peaceful co-existence. God wants us to live in peace and harmony with his creation; life and mater. Indeed, that is the purpose of religion, any religion".
This is found under the heading: "Violence Has No Place In Islam".

But following this pious title is this; "When gross injustice befalls them, they stand up for their rights. Although the just requital for an injustice is an equivalent retribution, those who pardon and maintain righteousness are rewarded by God. He does not love the unjust. Certainly, those who stand up for their rights, when injustice befalls them, are not committing any error. The wrong ones are those who treat the people unjustly, and resort to aggression without provocation. These have incurred a painful retribution. Resorting to patience and forgiveness reflects a true strength of character." (Quran 42:37-43)

"Innocent people are victims of violence. Killing innocent people is prohibited and condemned (Quran 17:33; 6:151; 25:68). One such verse states - "You shall not kill any person - for God has made life sacred - except in the course of justice. If one is killed unjustly, then we give his heir authority to enforce justice. Thus he shall not exceed the limits in avenging the murder; he will be helped." (Quran 17:33)

"Suicide bombing, which is part of violence, is also prohibited as understood from this verse - "O you who believe, do not consume each others properties illicitly - only mutually acceptable transactions are permitted. You shall not kill yourselves. God is Merciful towards you." (Quran 4:29)"You may fight in the cause of God against those who attack you, but do not aggress. God does not love the aggressor"

I must protest, the people in the World Trade Center were not aggressors. They were people with families trying to make a living when they were killed by aggression in the worst kind short of the nuclear weapons that will certainly follow them if we do not stop them from having them!

Later in the same proclamation is the disclaimer that appears to allow all that was stated as forbidden:
"The Quran urges believers to fight in the cause of God, without any worldly intentions - "Those who readily fight in the cause of God are those who forsake this world in favor of the Hereafter. Whoever fight in the cause of God, then gets killed, or attains victory, we will surely grant him a great recompense. Why should you not fight in the cause of God when weak men, women, and children are imploring: "Our Lord, deliver us from this community whose people are oppressive, and be You our Lord and Master." (Quran 4:74-75)

Not being a Muslim I cannot say for certain, but it would appear that rather than apologize and prohibit terrorist bombers blowing themselves up within civilians groups and buildings. They are claiming that all Muslims are victims of persecution who have been invaded thereby justifying such heinous acts as using the bodies of female Muslims to carry explosives into places like Baquba City, Iraq, and blow themselves up! The voluminous robes that most Iraqi Sunni Muslims wear, conceal the explosive belts nicely.

If Muslims really want to be accepted, not legislate themselves into our society. Why in the Lord's name does not one Leader come forth and publicly state 9/11/01 was wrong and tell suicide bombers to stop killing their own people in the name of righteousness

Posted

The race for the nomination has been won. Now we begin the campaign to win the hearts and minds of the electorate. The Media has already determined that their choice will be Obama, but the people not the media get to decide who will sit in the Oval Office in January 2009.

The campaign will be filled with promises of Change from the way our government has been run in the Bush administration. The Democrats will pound away at the opinion polls that shown that Bush has a less than 30% approval rating, ignoring the fact that Congress has an even lower approval rating!

I hope their will be enough people who vote that realize this election is predictably the most important election we have had for the last 50 years.
The man who sits in the Oval Office could be faced with a decision to eliminate a large populous city to prevent the Islamic terrorists from gaining access to nuclear weapons that they would not have any compunction to use on our major cities.

Intelligence agencies have obtained information that indicates that Iran, and not much later, Syria, will have nuclear weapons capability.
Muslim radicals do not have the reticence to use nuclear weapons in their quest to rule the Earth for Allah as we do. So the President will have to have the "kahonies" to take out , if necessary, a whole city to keep the terrorists from getting their hands on nuclear weapons.

A president McCain with his military background and knowledge would probably pull the trigger, but an Obama President might talk us to the point where a nuke hits one or more U.S.cities before he reacts!

Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much.  Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic."
These are the words of Pope Benedict XVI, and they are appropriate to the promise of CHANGE of candidate Obama. Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao and Hitler all came into power with the promise of a "change", but the change was a Godless totalitarian change in each instance. Do we really want change this much? AND DO WE KNOW WHAT THE CHAANGE WILL BE, FROM WHAT HE SAID ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL?
 

Thursday, May 29, 2008

THE DOWNSIDE OF SOCIALISM

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Friday, April 18, 2008

If you listen hard enough, you can hear the crying and gnashing of teeth of the Liberals who didn't want their anointed "Savior" Obama to look bad Wednesday night.

Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, the moderators of Wednesday night’s presidential debate on ABC, became the subject of a fierce and somewhat unexpected debate themselves on Thursday, as viewers, bloggers and television critics lamented what they described as an opportunity lost: a chance to ask the two candidates for the Democratic nomination substantive questions early and often.

The key word in the excerpt from the New York Times article is "substantive". What Obama supporters wanted was "powder puff" questions from the two moderators that would give Obama a chance to Bash the Bush administration in general and McCain as the Republican nominee in particular.

What voters want is questions that pull back the curtain of deception and sleight of hand that has been the Obama campaign since he threw his hat in the nominee ring.

Obama has campaigned on the promise of change for Americans. Just what kind of change that he will produce is revealed when you understand more about his attitudes, associations, and the history of his legislative accomplishments. We learn nothing from his promises to right the perceived wrongs in Our Country. Promises are just that, promises!

George and Charles did the voters of the USA a great favor by asking the questions that would never appear in the Liberal media, especially the Washington Post or New York Times.

It was nice to hear pertinent and informative questions asked of both Obama and Hillary, before they got down to what the Liberals wanted. The bashing of the current administration!

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

WHY NOT CUT OFF GOVERNMENT FUNDING TO "FRISCO"?