June 2010 Archives

Investors.com posted an article yesterday about the arrest of eleven Russian spies in the United States.  The tendency is make light of the fact that there were Russian sleeper cells among us because we seemingly have good relations with Russia and President Obama has pressed the 'reset' button.  Well, not so fast.

The article points out that:

"...Maintaining these sleeper networks was an act of an enemy. Had there been an incident between the U.S. and Russia, they could have been activated for more nefarious tasks than what they were caught doing.

"They've also picked up the tempo in the last three years "

President Obama has been in office for more than a year.  Has the 'reset' button worked?   Reuters is reporting that the number of Russian spies in Britain is 'at Cold War levels' and reportedly involves half of the Russian Embassy staff.

The article further points out:

"Russia is the same country that votes against the U.S. on Iran, not out of contradictory interests, but to check the U.S. global leadership. It's the nation that brutally invaded Georgia in 2007, without consequence. It has poisoned dissidents in London and gotten away with that, too, as well as cut off gas to a freezing Western Europe. And it's now fomenting unrest on Kyrgyzstan in a bid to undermine the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan."

One of the major problems with the Obama Administration is that they do not seem to be able to tell the difference between our friends and our enemies.  Hopefully, they will learn to tell friend from foe before it is too late for America.

Yesterday Power Line posted an article about the actions of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan concerning the proposed ban on partial birth abortion.  I won't go into the details of the procedure here, if you are curious, google it. 

A report from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) was used to support striking down the ban the state of Nebraska had placed on the procedure of partial birth abortion.  The report stated:

"ACOG declared that the partial-birth-abortion procedure "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman." The Court relied on the ACOG statement as a key example of medical opinion supporting the abortion method."

In the papers released as part of the confirmation of Ms. Kagan, there is a different story.  According to Power Line:

"Here is the shocking part: the ACOG report, as originally drafted, said almost exactly the opposite. The initial draft said that the ACOG panel "could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman." That language horrified the rabidly pro-abortion Elena Kagan, then a deputy assistant to President Clinton for domestic policy. This is what Kagan wrote in a memo to her superiors in the Clinton White House:

"Todd Stern just discovered that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is thinking about issuing a statement (attached) that includes the following sentence: "[A] select panel convened by ACOG could identify no circumstances under which [the partial-birth] procedure ... would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman." This, of course, would be disaster -- not the less so (in fact, the more so) because ACOG continues to oppose the legislation. It is unclear whether ACOG will issue the statement; even if it does not, there is obviously a chance that the draft will become public."

The draft was changed by Ms. Kagan and the statement released saying the procedure was justified.  In other words, the scientific opinion was changed to accommodate the politics.  Please follow the link above to Power LIne and see the handwritten notes there.

I rather doubt this will come up in the Senate testimony (Republicans are too polite to bring this up), but as an American, I am appalled by this sort of behavior.  We are about to give a lifetime judicial term to someone with very questionable scruples.  

Boston.com posted an Associated Press article today about vandalism at a United Nations summer camp children's camp in Gaza.  The camp was vandalized yesterday for the second time in a month.  The vandals burned and slashed tents, toys, and a plastic swimming pool. 

According to the article:

"Islamic extremists have accused the main UN aid agency here of corrupting Gaza's youth with its summer program of games, sports, and human rights lessons for 250,000 children."

"The United Nations's main competitor in running summer camps is the ruling Islamic militant Hamas, which says it reaches 100,000 children. The Hamas camps teach Islam, military-style marching and swimming and horseback riding."

In the search for Middle East peace, we are not dealing with two sides that want peaceful co-existence.  We need to remember that.  The Hamas camps are not idyllic places where children enjoy summer recreation--they are the equivalent of the Hitler Youth Camps.  To ignore this fact is to refuse to see one of the major roadblocks to peace in the Middle East.  Right now we have too many leaders who are willing to see the Middle East through the eyes of Neville Chamberlain rather than through the eyes of Winston Churchill.  That perspective will hinder the cause of peace rather than promote peace.

The Hill reported yesterday that Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) said that he would vote against advancing the Financial Reform legislation. 

According to the article:

"As I have indicated for some time now, my test for the financial regulatory reform bill is whether it will prevent another crisis," Feingold said in a statement. "The conference committee's proposal fails that test and for that reason I will not vote to advance it."

The bill does not include any reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which played a large part in creating the mortgage meltdown that began the recession. 

This 2,000 page bill is another Congressional boondoggle.  Because of its 2000 pages, no one has studied it closely, and there are some real questions about what its actual effect will be if it passes. 

The Wall Street Journal reports today:

"And the late addition of a fee on banks and hedge funds to cover the cost of the legislation is roiling the few Republicans thought likely to vote for the package."

This is another bill that should be scrapped, redone in 25 pages or less and voted on.  Unless Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are included in the bill, it will not seriously address financial reform.  If past experience is our guide, when the government gets its hands off of Wall Street and the financial sector, things go much better for everyone.  Part of the problem that led to the financial meltdown we have experienced was Congress interfering in the way banks made mortgage loans--the subprime mortgage market was created as a result of Congressional pressure to provide housing for low-income people.  It was a noble goal, but the Congressional interference created problems no one ever dreamed of.

Yesterday the New York Times posted a staory about an FBI arrest of 11 people accused of being part of a Russian spy ring operating in the United States.  There are a few things in this story that are interesting.  The F.B.I. investigation began at least seven years ago.  This was during the Russian presidency of Vladimir Putin.  When you consider that Putin's background included approximately fifteen years in the KGB, this should not be a surprise.

The article states that:

"The alleged agents were directed to gather information on nuclear weapons, American policy toward Iran, C.I.A. leadership, Congressional politics and many other topics, prosecutors say. The Russian spies made contact with a former high-ranking American national security official and a nuclear weapons researcher, among others. But the charges did not include espionage, and it was unclear what secrets the suspected spy ring -- which included five couples -- actually managed to collect."

It is interesting that the spies were couples--not single people--designed to blend in more easily with the fabric of American life and possibly to appear less threatening.  It is also interesting that one of the couples learned the art of American expense accounts:

"There were also hints that Russian spy bosses feared their agents, ordered to go native in prosperous America, might be losing track of their official purpose. Agents in Boston submitted an expense report with such vague items as "trip to meeting" for $1,125 and "education," $3,600."

On the surface, this really doesn't seem like much of a story, but we need to put it in context.  The current Russian government is working against us on sanctioning Iran's nuclear program, and they are generally undermining us in the Middle East wherever possible.  These arrests should be taken as a reminder that even though the cold war is supposedly over, that doesn't mean that our former enemies are happy with the role of America in international affairs.  The world is not a safe place right now; there are various people who wish to do America harm, and we need to be aware of that fact. 

Power Line posted an article Saturday updating the status of the Iranian flotilla that was planning to break the Israeli 'blockade' of Gaza.  The article refers to a Michael Ledeen article at Pajamas Media. 

According to the article:

"He (Hossein Sheikholeslam, secretary general of the International Conference for the Support of the "Palestinian" Intifada, an Iranian body set up by parliament) said the voyage was cancelled as Israel "had sent a letter to the United Nations saying that the presence of Iranian and Lebanese ships in the Gaza area will be considered a declaration of war on that regime and it will confront it," IRNA quoted him as saying."

To quote Mr. Ledeen:

"That's clear enough, isn't it?  Israel said that if any Iranian ship tries to enter Israeli waters, it will be treated as an act of war.  So the Iranians bagged it."

There are lessons to be learned from this.  The article further points out:

"Now ask yourself this question: how would the regime react if the tough guy in the White House said, "If we find any evidence of Iranian support for the terrorists killing Americans in Iraq or Afghanistan, we'll consider it an act of war and will react accordingly"? ..."

The problem with the Obama Administration is that they are convinced that weakness makes friends.  Do we want to be friends with bullies, are do we want to see them stop bullying? 

Please follow the link to the Power Line article to read the conclusions John Hinderaker draws from the events regarding the Iranian flotilla.  There are a number of lessons we can learn from this that would be useful in dealing with Iran in the future.

"What is the A-Whale ?" you ask.  The A-Whale is the largest open-water oil skimmer in the world. 

According to Hot Air yesterday:

"Originally an oil and ore tanker, the ship's owners recently refitted the ship to do exactly the kind of work that the US so desperately needs in the Gulf of Mexico, and to do it on a vastly larger scale than current operations can handle.  According to the ship's project manager, the entire American effort in 66 days has skimmed off 600,000 barrels of oil.  The ship's owners claim that A-Whale can skim 500,000 barrels a day."

The Boston Human Rights Examiner also posted a story yesterday on this ship.  According to that article:

""So where is the A-Whale now? In the Gulf? Not yet. It's on its way there after being tied to a dock in Norfolk, Virginia, and won't be allowed to join the cleanup effort until the Coast Guard and the EPA figure out whether it meets their standards (h/t Deb Singer on Twitter)."

"Continually, questions are being raised about why offers to assist with the BP blowout have been rejected and why the Navy, with more resources in terms of vessels and technology have not been accessed to help."

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air points out:

"This, by the way, is Day 68 of the Gulf crisis.  The A-Whale didn't get refitted on Day 66; this work had to have been done over months, if not years.  Shouldn't the government have known about the existence of this ship two months ago, and been working on certifying it immediately?    The A-Whale shouldn't have had to stop at Norfolk at all to get the nation's attention, but should have been hired to steam directly to the Gulf and get to work immediately. It's indicative of a crisis management team that is spending more time worrying about regulations and red tape than cleaning up the mess, just as we saw with Packgen's boom."

What do we need to conclude from the disaster that is continuing in the Gulf?  Government is not the answer to all our problems, and more often than not, it is government that is the problem.  Government is not what made this country great--the productivity and genius of the American people are responsible for the prosperity of America.  We will lose that prosperity if we continue to elect people who believe that the government should be in control of everything.

Reuters is reporting today via Yahoo News that Scott Brown may complicate the Obama Administration's plans to pass 'Wall Street Reform.'  Wow!  The Democrats control the Presidency and the Congress, and Scott Brown has all the power.  This is more than a little ridiculous.

Senator Brown stated, "I was surprised and extremely disappointed to hear that $18 billion in new assessments and fees were added in the wee hours of the morning by the conference committee,"   Welcome to Washington, sir.

According to the article:

""While I'm still reviewing the bill's details, these provisions were not in the Senate version of the bill which I previously supported ... I've said repeatedly that I cannot support any bill that raises tax," Brown said." 

This is not a bill that anyone needs to support.  It ignores the role that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played in the financial meltdown and does not include any changes to these agencies at all.  It sets up a system where the government can take over any business it deems in danger of failing with no recourse for the business owners or stockholders.  It is another step toward government control of the business sector and the choking of free enterprise (the system that made this country great).

We have had problems in our economy, but most of them were due to government interference in the free market rather than lack of regulation.  To add more government interference is to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

This chart was taken from Power Line.  It shows clearly where the job growth has been.

The chart was part of an article about Vice-President Biden's visit to a custard shop in Wisconsin.  When the owner of the shop gave the Vice-President a custard, the Vice-President asked how much he owed.  The owner of the shop replied, "Nothing, just lower our taxes."  That is the cry of the small business owners who would like to hire people and turn the recession around.  Businesses are not hiring right now because of the uncertainty in what their tax burdens and health insurance costs are going to be in the near future.  Unless the runaway spending by Congress is stopped, the private sector (where the jobs that produce things and fuel economic growth are produced) will be crowded out as the federal government grows. 

If you want to see the recession end and private sector jobs recover, vote Republican in 2010--the Democrats will not stop spending.

Before I start this article, this is the link to the YouTube video of the Black Panthers intimidating voters in Philadelphia. 

Yesterday, the Washington Times posted an editorial by J. Christian Adams.  Mr. Adams explains some of the actions taken on the Black Panthers voter intimidation case in his editorial:

"The New Black Panther case was the simplest and most obvious violation of federal law I saw in my Justice Department career. Because of the corrupt nature of the dismissal, statements falsely characterizing the case and, most of all, indefensible orders for the career attorneys not to comply with lawful subpoenas investigating the dismissal, this month I resigned my position as a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney."

Mr. Adams states that the handling of this case by the Department of Justice brings into question whether the department will be able to enforce election laws in an unbiased manner in the midterm elections and the 2010 presidential election.

The editorial further points out:

"The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has opened an investigation into the dismissal and the DOJ's skewed enforcement priorities. Attorneys who brought the case are under subpoena to testify, but the department ordered us to ignore the subpoena, lawlessly placing us in an unacceptable legal limbo."

Please follow the link above and read the entire editorial.  It is a chilling account of the justice department's ignoring the rule of law.  This is a further example of the Obama Administration ignoring the rule of law and the wishes of the people.  President Obama has brought "the Chicago way" to Washington and needs to lose the support of Congress in the midterm election and to lose the Presidency in 2012. 

The information for this story comes from CBN News and Washington Post articles that were posted on Friday.

Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that people who sign referendum petitions should not expect to have their names kept secret.  This sounds like a really good idea--open government, transparency, etc., but there are some problems.

CBN News reports what recently happened in California with Proposition 8:

"The group known as Protect Marriage Washington organized the petition drive in an effort to give the public a chance to vote on repealing the state's domestic partnership law.

"Gay rights activists then asked the state for the petitioners names. The request left some feeling uneasy in light of what happened in California after the Proposition 8 campaign.

"The Golden State's gay rights activists targeted churches and individuals who supported overturning gay marriage. Vandalism and job threats were common. Some even faced death threats."

If transparency in a specific instance results in danger for ordinary citizens, is it something we want?

The Washington Post reports:

""There are laws against threats and intimidation; and harsh criticism, short of unlawful action, is a price our people have traditionally been willing to pay for self-governance," Scalia wrote in a separate concurrence. "Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed."

"Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter. He said the state's decision to disclose the names on all petitions is unconstitutional "because there will always be a less restrictive means by which Washington can vindicate its stated interest in preserving the integrity of its referendum process.""

I guess I am just on the minority side of this.  Until the safety of petition signers can be guaranteed (which it never can), I want signatures to be validated by the Attorney General of the state involved and not made public.

This website was started in order to publish the news that didn't make it into the mainstream media.  This article arrived in my email recently.  This is a story that needs to be told.

This is the story of Navy Petty Officer, PO2 (Petty Officer, Second Class) EOD2 (Explosive Ordnance Disposal, Second Class) "MIKE MONSOOR."

Mike Monsoor,

(April 5th ~ September 29th,2009) 
Was Awarded "The Congressional Medal Of Honor" Last Week,
For Giving His Life In Iraq, As He Jumped On, And Covered With His Body, A Live Hand Grenade,

Saving The Lives Of A Large Group Of Navy Seals That Was Passing By!
~
During Mike Monsoor's Funeral,
At Ft. Rosecrans National Cemetery , In San Diego , California,
The Six Pallbearers Removed The Rosewood Casket From The Hearse,
And Lined Up On Each Side Of Mike Monsoor's Casket,
His Family Members, Friends, Fellow Sailors, And Well-wishers.

Continued From The Hearse, All The Way To The Grave Site.

What The Group Didn't Know At The Time Was,
Every Navy Seal
(45 To Be Exact)
That Mike Monsoor Saved That Day Was Scattered Through-Out The Column!
~
As The Pallbearers Carried The Rosewood Casket
Down The Column Of People To The Grave Side.
The Column Would Collapse.. 
And Form A Group Of People That Followed Behind.

Every Time The Rosewood Casket Passed A Navy Seal,
He Would Remove His Gold Trident Pin From His Uniform,
And Slap It Down Hard,
Causing The Gold Trident Pin To Embed Itself
Into The Top Of The Wooden Casket!
Then The Navy Seal Would Step Back From The Column, And Salute!
~
Now For Those,

Who Don't Know What A Trident Pin Is,
Here Is The Definition!

~
After One Completes The Basic Navy Seals Program Which Lasts For Three Weeks,
And Is Followed By Seal Qualification Training,
Which Is 15 More Weeks Of Training,
Necessary To Continue Improving Basic Skills
And To Learn New Tactics And Techniques,
Required For An Assignment To A Navy Seal Platoon.
After successful completion,

Trainees Are Given Their Naval Enlisted Code,
And Are Awarded The Navy Seal Trident Pin.
With This Gold Pin They Are Now Officially Navy Seals!
It Was Said,
That You
Could Hear Each Of The 45 Slaps From Across The Cemetery!
By The Time The Rosewood Casket Reached The Grave Site,
It Looked As Though It Had A Gold Inlay From The 45 Trident Pins That Lined The Top!

This Was A Fitting End To An Eternal Send-Off For A Warrior Hero!

Please pray for all of our military. 

The following paragraphs are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics website--the numbers are from their press release of early June detailing employment information for May.  The boldface type was my addition.

"Temporary help services added 31,000 jobs over the month; employment
in the industry has risen by 362,000 since September 2009.

"Employment in mining continued to increase in May, with a gain of
10,000. Support activities for mining accounted for 8,000 of the over-
the-month increase. Since October 2009, mining employment has expanded
by 50,000.

"Health care employment was little changed in May (+8,000). Over the
prior 12 months, health care employment had increased by an average
of 20,000 per month.

"In May, employment in construction declined by 35,000, largely off-
setting gains in the industry in the prior 2 months. May's job loss
was spread throughout the sector.

"Employment in other private-sector industries, including wholesale
trade, retail trade, transportation and warehousing, information,
financial activities, and leisure and hospitality showed little or
no change in May.

"Government employment rose by 390,000 in May. The Federal government
hired 411,000 temporary workers for Census 2010, bringing total tem-
porary census staffing during the payroll survey reference period to
564,000. Employment in state government excluding education decreased
by 13,000.

"In May, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm pay-
rolls increased by 0.1 hour to 34.2 hours. The manufacturing workweek
for all employees increased by 0.3 hour to 40.5 hours. The average
workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private non-
farm payrolls increased by 0.1 hour to 33.5 hours over the month.

"Average hourly earnings of all employees in the private nonfarm sector
increased by 7 cents, or 0.3 percent, to $22.57 in May. Over the past
12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 1.9 percent. In
May, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsuper-
visory employees increased by 4 cents, or 0.2 percent, to $18.99."

As the government takes over more of the economy, it will crowd out the private sector.  As long as the government continues to grow at its present rate, the wealth of individuals in America will decrease.  When you take money from the producers in a society and give it to the non-productive members, the number of non-productive members increases, and the number of producers decreases.  That is the direction of the current Congress and President.  If America is to recover fully from its current financial woes, we need a total change of direction.  I strongly suggest voting Republican in November.  That won't solve the problem totally, but it will begin to take the wind out of the sails of those moving us into a socialist direction.

Today Power Line posted an article about the Birds of Paradise, an Islamic satellite channel that broadcasts from Bahrain and is aired in Gaza. 

According to the article:

"The head of the satellite channel is Khalid Maqdad, a Palestinian Jordanian. The children's choir featured in the video below is apparently also called Birds of Paradise." 

Please follow the link above and watch the video.  It is a group of beautiful young children singing about the joys of martyrdom for the sake of Palestine.  Until the teaching of Palestinian children that their destiny is to be martyrs for the sake of Palestine ends, there will not be peace in the Middle East.  The problems of rocket attacks on civilians in Israel will not end until there is a change in the Gaza Strip culture and education of children.  All the negotiations and peace talks in the world will not be successful until the next generation of Palestinians is taught the value of peace.

CNBC News reported yesterday that more than $9 million of the tax credits for homebuyers went to nearly 1,300 prison inmates. 

According to the article:

"In all, more than 14,100 taxpayers wrongly received at least $26.7 million in tax credits that were meant to boost the nation's slumping housing markets, said the report by J. Russell George, the Treasury Department's inspector general for tax administration."

The article also reported that 87 IRS employees may have improperly claimed the credit.

At a time when taxpayers are dealing with unemployement, tighter budgets, and an economy  that does not seem to be creating jobs, the last thing we need is to find out that the taxes were are paying are being badly mishandled.  This is a further example of the fact that the government has gotten too big and cannot police itself.  We need a smaller government with more transparency so that the taxpayers know where their money is going. 

The Hill is reporting that President Obama has accepted the resignation of General McChrystal and that General Petraeus will replace him in Afghanistan. 

The resignation of General McChrystal is unfortunate, but necessary in light of the Rolling Stone article.  Even if the remarks quoted in the Rolling Stone article were made by his staff and not directly by him, the remarks are still considered insubordination and have to be dealt with.

General Petraeus did a fantastic job in Iraq and hopefully can do the same in Afghanistan.  I know someone who went to high school with him, and she has told me that even then, General Petraeus was respected as a leader. 

It is difficult to change horses in midstream, but if we have to do it, I believe that General Petraeus can step into the job as commander in Afghanistan quite effectively.

Power LIne posted an article and a video today of an arrest in Dearborn, Michigan.  The people arrested were charged with disorderly conduct for handing out copies of the Gospel of John outside an Arab cultural festival.  The four Christian missionaries were arrested for handing out the literature OUTSIDE the festival.  They were not inside the festival, nor were they causing a disturbance.  If you watch the video, you will see that the police who arrested them asked them to stop filiming the arrest.  The four missionaries are currently free on bond.  What!!!???  What in the world happened to the First Amendment?   Are we in danger of having European 'no go' zones in some of our midwestern cities?  'No go' zones are places where the police will not go in some European countries.  In France, a Jewish man was kidnapped, tortured for three weeks, and finally killed.  The BBC reported on the trial last spring. 

This is America.  We are supposedly governed by our Constitution.  We need to make sure the Constitution is used as the standard for law enforcement throughout the country.

The New Orleans Times Picayune is reporting that federal authorities have ordered the state of Louisiana to stop dredging to build sand berms to stop the growing oil spill.  The actual contention has to do with dredging east of the Mississippi River. 

According to the article:

"(Governor Bobby) Jindal said about 450,000 cubic yards of sand has been dredged in the area.

"He said it would take about 5 days to build the pipeline federal authorities want to access the new dredging site. "It took so long to approve this project. We don't want to be tied up in more red tape," he said.

"Jindal, a frequent critic of the BP and federal responses to the spill, has proposed building massive berms to intercept the oil before it gets to the coast. The plan has received partial approval from the corps. BP has agreed to pay $360 million for the project."

Evidently there are some scientists that are concerned that the dredging will change tidal patterns and could lead to more long-term erosion of the islands.  That may be true, but I can guarantee that if the oil slick reaches those islands it will have long-term effects.

I really am beginning to wonder about the government's involvement in this oil spill.  It seems as if they have failed to deal with the spill successfully from the beginning.  The government stopped the skimming boats for twenty-four hours, they delayed the building of berms for a month, and generally they have been more of a hindrance than a help.  The government seems to be more concerned about the environmental impact of stopping the spill than the environmental impact of the spill.

In the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico we are seeing the results of a too big federal government  blocking states from doing the things they need to do to protect their land and economies.

Bloomberg.com is reporting that U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman has granted a preliminary injunction to lift the drilling ban in the Gulf of Mexico.  The Judge has also  "immediately prohibited" the U.S. from enforcing the ban.

According to the article:

"The court is unable to divine or fathom a relationship between the findings and the immense scope of the moratorium," Feldman said in his 22-page decision. "The blanket moratorium, with no parameters, seems to assume that because one rig failed and although no one yet fully knows why, all companies and rigs drilling new wells over 500 feet also universally present an imminent danger."

The U. S. will appeal the decision. 

The Hill is reporting today that House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) will confirm in a speech today that the Democrats will not pass a budget in 2010.  Meanwhile, the Democrats are vowing to cut spending when they do pass a budget.  Represenative Hoyer stated, "It isn't possible to debate and pass a realistic, long-term budget until we've considered the bipartisan commission's deficit-reduction plan, which is expected in December."

This is political gobbledygook!  Let me translate.  The only way the Democrats ever attempted to balance the budget was to raise taxes--it has never occurred to them to cut spending.  So this is what they are thinking:  It would be stupid to raise taxes just before an election.  Maybe the voters won't realize that when the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year, everyone's taxes will be going up.  Maybe we can get a one percent value added tax (VAT) passed after the election, and no one will be upset because it's only one percent.  Then next time we take Congress we can raise it!

If you want your country and your wallet back, vote Republican in November!

This story is based on an article today at Politico.com.  The historical perspective is based on a story in the Washington Post on October 3, 2009.  General McChrystal has been summoned to the White House after some comments he recently made to Rolling Stone magazine. 

Later this week, the magazine will publish an article entitled, "The Runaway General."  The article is based on an interview with General Stanley McChrystal, the top general in Afghanistan. 

According to the article:

"The article, titled "the Runaway General," appears in the magazine later this week.  It contains a number of jabs by McChrystal and his staff aimed not only at the President but at Vice President Biden, special envoy Richard Holbrooke, Karl Eikenberry, the ambassador to Afghanistan and others."

The relationship between the President and General McChrystal has been strained from the beginning.  The Washington Post reported that until the meeting between the two men in October 2009, the President and the General had met only once.  Considering that the general has been the leader of our troops in a major war, it would seem that they would be meeting on a regular basis.

I expect an announcement of General McChrystal's retirement in the very near future.  The President is General McChrystal's boss, and criticizing the chain of command is against the oath that military officers take.  I am not sure whether the comments published in Rolling Stone magazine were meant to be off the record, but at best they were very unwise.  Although I suspect General McChrystal may have a much better idea of what is needed in Afghanistan, what he did was inexcusable.  According to military rules, he will be fired.

UPDATE:

Byron York at the Washngton Examiner reports that according to a retired military source the comments by General McChrystal are not a surprise.  He describes the general as being arrogant and disdainful of civilians.  Byron York points out that President Obama would be fully justified in firing General McChrystal, but that firing him would seriously complicate President Obama's timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan.  It would be nice if General McChrystal's departure provided an excuse for staying in Afghanistan long enough to finish the job.  I doubt it will.

Yahoo.com posted an Associated Press article today about the lawsuit filed by  the Covington-based Hornbeck Offshore Services of Covington, Louisiana, charging that the six month moratorium on deep-water drillling in the Gulf of Mexico was arbitrarily set by the government. 

According to the article:

"Companies that ferry people and supplies to offshore oil rigs asked a federal judge Monday to lift a six-month moratorium on new deepwater drilling projects imposed in the aftermath of the massive Gulf spill.

"U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman heard two hours of arguments Monday and said he will decide by Wednesday whether to overturn the ban imposed by President Barack Obama's administration after the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion."

It will be very interesting to see how the judge rules.  The shutdown of the drilling projects has created tremendous hardship for people working in the industries that support offshore drilling.  The oil spill has already deeply impacted the tourist industry in the Gulf, and the shutdown is a further blow to the area.  If drilling is continued, there will always be the danger of a spill--underwater drilling is not perfect science, but that risk has to be weighed against the economy of the region.

On Friday, Mort Zuckerman at U. S. News & World Report posted an article about how the rest of the world views President Obama.  The article points out the failure of the Obama Administration to push the 'reset' button in our relations with countries around the world.

In discussing the President's lack of understanding of America's leadership and use of its power for good, Mr. Zuckerman states,  "One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of one's own tribe while in the lands of others."

The majority of President Obama's experience before becoming President was as a community organizer, college professor, Senator, and campaigner.  There is nothing in this resume that indicates an ability to solve problems and get things done.  Sparkling rhetoric does nothing to stop an oil spill, and protecting union workers by enforcing the Jones Act slows down the clean-up effort.

The article concludes:

"The United States for 60 years has met its responsibilities as the leader and the defender of the democracies of the free world. We have policed the sea lanes, protected the air and space domains, countered terrorism, responded to genocide, and been the bulwark against rogue states engaging in aggression. The world now senses, in the context of the erosion of America's economic power and the pressures of our budget deficits, that we will compress our commitments. But the world needs the vision, idealism, and strong leadership that America brings to international affairs. This can be done and must be done. But we are the only ones who can do it."

We need to remember that since America became a leading nation in the world, she has used her power not to build an empire, but to defend freedom.  We conquered Japan and Germany in World War II.  Both of those countries are independent democracies today.  To weaken America is to take the policeman off the beat.  As Americans, we don't always like the fact that our young men defend the freedom of other countries, but that is part of who we are.  To be unwilling to defend freedom is to give up part of our heritage.

Today Arutz Sheva (IsraelNationalNews.com) posted a story stating that Egypt has allowed at least one Isreali and eleven American warships to pass through the Suez Canal as an Iranian flotilla approaches the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip.  The Israeli government had asked the Egyptian government not to allow the Iranian flotilla to use the Suez Canal, but that request was denied by the Egyptian government.

The article points out:

"Israel has warned U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that Israel will use force, if necessary, to stop the boats, one of which is carrying approximately 70 women passengers and crew organized by Hizbullah support Samar al-Hajj. Her husband is one of several jailed suspects involved in the assassination for former Lebanese anti-Syrian Prime Rafik Hariri.

"Hizbullah has denied it is connected with the Lebanese flotilla, but it has been reported that Al Hajj met with Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah last month. (IsraelNationalNews.com)."

This will be another attempt at victory by terrorists in the propaganda war in the Middle East.  The Gazans are not starving--I have posted articles listing the amount of food and supplies flowing into Gaza, pictures of thriving street markets, and links to menus of four-star restaurants in Gaza. 

To quote Walid Shoebat, "The Holocaust never ended but the victims have decided to defend themselves..."

Anti-Semitism is growing around the world, and we need to remember that when the Jewish people are persecuted, bad things follow.

Yesterday Hot Air posted an article that had originally been posted at The Optimistic Conservative's Blog by J. E. Dyer.  The article deals with the $20 billion escrow fund that BP has set up to compensate those people adversely impacted by the Gulf oil spill.

Mr. Dyer points out that the escrow fund is an exercise in executive power outside the rule of law.  An appointee of President Obama will be in charge of dispensing these funds.  The article points out that the six-month shutdown of drilling in the Gulf is not the result of BP's actions, but of President Obama's actions.  He points out that a judge in a federal court might not hold BP totally responsible for the loss of employment caused by that shutdown--the shutdown was ordered by President Obama--it was not endorsed or ordered by the experts he consulted.  In fact, the President has had to apologize to the experts he claimed supported the shutdown--the experts have publicly stated that they did not support the shutdown.  When the President appoints someone to administer the relief fund, he will not have to bother with the risk of judges and courts that decide issues the wrong way.

The article points out that up until now, there was a $75 million or so cap on damages a corporation would be required to pay after a drilling accident such as the Gulf oil spill.  That amount was established by Congress (after much lobbying by and partying with oil company lobbyists).  Keeping that amount low lowered insurance payments for the oil companys and kept their business in the United States.

The article concludes:

"Darn good thing Congress spared us all that, huh?  With BP's liability capped by federal law, we're left with Obama and his $20 billion slush fund to address the job and property losses.  And hey, the good news is, with BP's shareholders and investors - many of them Americans - to shake down, Obama doesn't have to let this crisis go to waste!  He can shut down businesses and jobs for his own political reasons, having nothing to do with the oil rig explosion, and make BP pay off the people he's hurting!

"On such a thread hang our civil rights in Obama's America."

The $20 billion fund was extortion.  I am hoping that more people will be willing to admit that as we move forward.

Yesterday Opinion.com posted an editorial about the comments of Texas Republican Representative Joe Barton.  According to the article, Representative Barton 

"...declared that he was "ashamed" of the White House's tactics, and called it "a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown.""

I really like a politician who tells the truth.  Evidently, the leaders in the Republican Party have no spine and are afraid of telling the truth.  After Representative Barton made that statement, House Republican leader Representative John Boehner of Ohio and GOP Whip Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia demanded that he apologize immediately.

But there is more to the story.  The article reports:

"The real outrage, though, should be reserved for (Vice President) Biden if he, as radio talk show host Neal Boortz reports, "is the one who leaned across the table during the White House meeting with BP and told them that if they didn't go along with the $20 billion fund to be administered by Obama's people, then Obama would 'do it to them.' ""

Why isn't the media talking about that?  It sounds like a shakedown to me.  If it walks like a duck...

The article concludes:

"Barton wasn't thinking politics when he spoke his mind at Thursday's hearing. He was thinking about how this government has overstepped its bounds and expressed his legitimate concern over what its recent behavior means to our future.

"His GOP associates should have rallied in support rather than threatened him. Their behavior does not inspire confidence."

That is one reason we have a 'tea party.'

Fox News reported yesterday that ten of the seventeen Afghanis who deserted military training at a Texas military base are still missing.  KT McFarland wrote the story; she is a Fox News National Security Analyst who appears on the internet show "DefCon3" at FoxNews.com. 

There are a number of questions about the missing Afghanis.  The obvious question is, "Why was this information released in a 'Friday afternoon news dump' rather than a national alert?"  The last one of these seventeen people disappeared six month ago.  Why are we hearing about it now?  Has there been a previous alert concerning these missing men?  Are all of these men on the no-fly list?  The notice that was put out Wednesday (a Be-on-the-Lookout (BOLO) notice) included all seventeen men, including the seven already accounted for ?????  It was distributed to local and federal law enforcement officials and joint terrorism task force members across the country

The article points out:

"Going back to Monday night, when a couple was arrested for trying to enter MacDill Air Force Base, we learned that they were picked up in 90 seconds. I've been going to military bases for 40 years, believe me, nothing happens in 90 seconds on a military base! The lightening fast action on the base doesn't make sense. Either the folks at MacDill are lying about it or the base was on a VERY heightened state of alert. Remember these Afghan deserters had full access to bases."

It seems to me that we have some serious national security problems that need to be addressed.  It is through the grace of God that the Christmas day bomber didn't properly light his underwear and the Times Square bomber wasn't all that skilled in the art of bomb making.  We need to put some people in charge of national security who understand the seriousness of the job--who are willing to come home from vacation when a terrorism attack is attempted and who are willing to call Islamist extremists what they are.  We are in a war with people who want to kill us--regardless of what you call them.  The people who want to kill us want to kill all of us--killing military people is fine, but they also aim at civilians.  All the people in charge in our government need to keep this in mind.

Power Line had an interesting post yesterday about the $20 billion BP is setting aside to cover damages in the Gulf oil spill.  One of the Power Line readers did some basic math and drew some interesting conclusions.

This is the reader's calculation:

"In response to the notion (not necessarily yours, I understand) that Obama's generated $20B for US taxpayers, I'd like to to offer some admittedly sloppy calculations.

"First, you said yesterday US citizens own 40% of BP. Looking at my Schwab account right now (I own BP stock myself), I see their market capitalization presently stands at $99B.

"If their stock price has fallen by 40%, that means the market cap was (before all this ass-kicking started) around $165B -- so the value of the stock has fallen by $66B. 40% of that loss, or around $26 billion of it, was sustained by Americans if we hold 40% of the stock.

"So the net cost of this drama to the taxpayers is $6B and counting. And that is assuming that $20B is distributed fairly. Perhaps they can put ACORN in charge of it."

There might be a few things to consider in this transaction.  John Hinderaker points out that since much of BP stock is held in mutual funds, the Americans who actually contributed toward the $20 billion are probably not aware of their contribution.  John states, "Modern politics consists largely of promoting the interests of those who are aware they are getting money, in opposition to those who don't realize they are paying it."  That is definitely where we are.  The other aspect of this is that yet again the Obama Administration has taken money from the private sector and put it under government control.  He has moved wealth (the dividends and previous value of the stock) from people into government.  That has been the direction of the money flow during his administration.  As the public sector has grown, the private sector has been strangled. 

I wonder how long it will take the voters to realize that all of us are getting fleeced.  I hope it happens before November! 

Real Clear Politics posted this quote yesterday from Representative Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan, "I think we had to have someone say this is where you can go without limiting your criminal liability or civil liability.For instance, the question is brought up, pay for all of the health care for the people in the Gulf. No, but Ithink those who lost their job, then lost their health care would be legitimate."

There is a video at the link of the representative making this statement.  I feel as if I have entered "The Twilight Zone."  I keep waiting for Rod Serling to walk out of the oval office.  

While Congress and President Obama were taking their shots at BP in Washington, the government was standing in the way of preventing the oil leaking in the Gulf from doing any more damage.  It occurs to me that since the government won't be paying for the damage done by the oil spill, their desire to clean it up quickly might not be as strong as it would be if they were footing the bill.

According to ABC News today, the Coast Guard yesterday stopped the crude-oil barges that Governor Jindal had sent to vacuum up the oil spill.  There was sixteen barges sitting idle today after they had sucked up thousands of gallons of crude oil in the very recent past.  The Coast Guard explained that their reason for stopping the barges was that the Coast Guard "needed to confirm that there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board, and then it had trouble contacting the people who built the barges."

According to the article:

"The governor (Alabama Governor Bob Riley) said the problem is there's still no single person giving a "yes" or "no." While the Gulf Coast governors have developed plans with the Coast Guard's command center in the Gulf, things begin to shift when other agencies start weighing in, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

""It's like this huge committee down there," Riley said, "and every decision that we try to implement, any one person on that committee has absolute veto power.""

It is sad that our government is so wrapped up in red tape that they are preventing actions that will lessen the environmental impact of this oil spill. 

Yesterday, Fortune Magazine posted an article entitled, "5 painful health-care lessons from Massachusetts."  As someone who lives in Massachsuetts, I was already well aware of the problems with our state health-care program, but I will share Fortune Magazine's list.

1.  It does not control costs--Massachusetts has the most expensive health-care in the nation--in the four years the law has been in effect, the cost of health insurance has not gone down, but climbed rapidly.

2.  Community rating, guaranteed issue and mandated benefits swell costs.  Because the fines for not having health insurance are low, many people choose not to have covereage.  Insurers are getting socked by people who sign up for insurance to get expensive care mandated under state law, including hospitalization for childbirth or hip replacements, and then depart once the procedure is completed.  This has resulted in the insurance companies demanding higher premiums to pay for the additional cost.  So far the Governor of Massachusetts has generally not approved these rate increases.

3.  High subsidies for low-to-medium earners could prove extremely expensive.  This also places more cost on the insurance companies, who then must raise premiums to make a profit.  As the plans become more expensive, employers will stop covering workers and created a bigger pool of people seeking government healthcare coverage, which will in turn drive up the government's costs.

4.  The exhanges reward people for working less and earning less.  This is not a good way to encourage productivity.

5.  The generous plans and added mandates give employers an incentive to drop health insurance. 

The article concludes:

"Starting in 2017, the states will have the option of allowing companies that drop their plans to shift workers into the subsidized, state-run exchanges. That choice doesn't exist now in Massachusetts. It's not that employers are likely to dump their plans en masse. What's far more probable is a progressive erosion that relentlessly and systematically raises government spending.

"The incentives are there, both in the federal plan, and its prototype in the Bay State. And when the incentives are that big -- and when subsidies inevitably get bigger, not smaller -- no amount of regulatory tinkering can stop America's employers and employees from taking the government's money, and saving their own."

The bottom line here is simple--the free market works better than the government.  We ignore that fact at our own risk.  If we continue down this road, we will become Greece.

Yesterday Ben Stein posted an article at the American Spectator about the deal worked out between BP and the Obama Administration to pay for damages along the Gulf coast.  Mr. Stein points out that there is no legal justification for this deal.  Admittedly, there is a huge mess growing daily in the Gulf of Mexico and BP is partially responsible, but what is the legal basis for a $20 billion that we are demanding from BP and who is going to oversee this?

The fact that BP will not be paying its stockholders for the next three quarters is very troubling.  This is not playing well overseas.  Our already strained relationship with Great Britain is getting worse.  The headline of todays Mail.online is:

"Obama bullies BP into £13.5bn fund for oil spill victims... but British pensioners will pick up the bill"

Ben Stein also points out in his article:

"Without any new legislation, President Obama has used returned TARP money as a political slush fund to prop up favorite industries. This is the same problem: serious executive action without legislative authority.

"The same goes for Mr. Obama's demand that BP pay the lost wages of oil and gas workers suspended from work because of the moratorium on Gulf of Mexico underseas drilling. There simply was no legislation allowing this kind of specific demand. Mr. Obama's demand was in the nature of a threat, more than a Constitutional act."

The actions taken regarding BP are not constitutional and need to be addressed.  Yes, BP should be required to clean up the mess and pay restorations, but what happened at the White House between President Obama and BP chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg was a shakedown.

As previously stated, I attended the debate on Tuesday night among the Republican primary candidates for the Third Congressional District.  There are five men hoping to run against Jim McGovern.  The debate was friendly--it wasn't really a forum where you could challenge any claim made by a candidate, but I have learned a few things since then.

One of the candidates, Brian Herr, who has just completed his two-year term as Chief Elected Offical in the Town of Hopkinton, claimed repeatedly to be a fiscal conservative who had not raised taxes in that town.  Well, in the age of google, statements like that can be dangerous.

On November 20, 2008, the Hopkinton Crier posted a story with this headline, "Hopkinton residential property tax rate up $170."  Maybe I'm missing something here, but that sounds like a tax increase.

The article points out:

"The new rate for fiscal 2009 is $15.03 per $1,000 of assessed value, an increase from the $14.15 used last year. While taxpayers' first two quarterly bills this fiscal year relied on an estimation, the final two bills will factor in the new rate.

"Although tax bills are going up, the assessed value of the town's average single-family home fell for the second straight year. From a high of $550,265 in fiscal 2007, it fell to $518,552 in 2008 and to $499,539 this year. Even then, the 2009 value reflects market conditions 10 months ago.

"Still, multiplying the $15.03 rate by $499.54 - derived by taking out the last three digits of the 2009 value - leaves an average bill of $7,508. That's $170 and 2.3 percent higher than last year's $7,338 bill.

"The total property tax collection is going up 4.2 percent from last year, reflecting the 2.5 percent increase allowed by Proposition 2 1/2, new growth and Proposition 2 1/2 debt exclusions already approved."

This is another reason I am supporting Marty Lamb as the Republican candidate for the Third Congressional District.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air has an article posted today about the Packgen's boom that Jake Tapper wondered about--the boom that was not being used to help contain the oil spill in the Gufl.  After Jake Tapper brought it to the government's attention that this boom was available, the government replied that the boom did not meet their quality control standards.  Packgen then hired an independent analyst to analyze the quality of their product.  Ian Durham, the analyst, concluded that the product was superior to other boom and definitely met quality control standards. 

The article points out:

"The excuse prior to this has been that Packgen's product didn't meet quality control standards and didn't come with universal connectors.  Packgen has already agreed to change connectors, even though the boom already being deployed doesn't have them.  This report demolishes the quality-control argument as well.  These now appear to have been nothing but an excuse to distract people from the fact that the Obama administration's team knew nothing of Packgen's inventory despite media coverage of their production in anticipation of the demand in the Gulf."

If I were speaking for the government, I would be very careful about bragging that the government was in control of the oil spill since it happened.  If that is true, the government't track record is not very good.

As I explained yesterday, I did not hear the President's speech.  I was at a political debate among the Republican candidates for the Massachusetts Third Congressional District (see article below).  I have, however, heard the sound bites and the commentary and have a few observations.

Back in the age of dinosaurs (when I finished high school and went on to two years of Katharine Gibbs), one on my rude awakenings was the change from being graded on what you knew (or had memorized) versus what you were able to do.  For example, history grades depended on a knowledge of history--not necessarily applying the lessons of history to events today.  At Katharine Gibbs, shorthand grades depended on how fast you could take dictation (remember those days?)--not what you knew.  I think that is somewhat where we are with President Obama.  He may have a lot of facts at his fingertips and a lot of education, but that doesn't necessarily translate into an ability to do anything.  I think that in the office of President, the ability to do something is more valuable than all the theories and knowledge in the world.

Heritage.org has a short evaluation of the President's speech last night.

The article quotes Jay Leno:

"At the beginning of The Tonight Show last night he quipped: "President Obama said today he is going to use the gulf disaster to immediately push a new energy bill through Congress. I got an idea ... How about first using the Gulf disaster to fix the Gulf disaster.""

The Washington Post reports:

"The Oval Office address was Obama's most pointed attempt since the spill began to explain how the crisis should be leveraged on behalf of long-term reform."

The Los Angeles TImes and the New York Times both reported on the President's using the oil spill for push his agenda forward.  I guess the question I have is, "Why was international help from countries with experience in deep water oil spills turned away?"  Was this situation allowed to get out of control in order to push 'green energy'?

I might mention at this point that the Motor City Times pointed out in an article on June 6 that the Spanish government has admitted that their green energy initiative is responsible for Spain's economic distress.  Are we willing to learn from the mistakes of other countries, or are we doomed to repeat their mistakes?

In 2008, Representative Jim McGovern ran for his Congressional seat unopposed.  In 2010, there are five Republicans who want to run against him for that seat.  The five potential candidates met for a debate at the North Attleboro High School last night.  The Republican primary will be held on September 14th.

The Sun Chronicle (Attleboro, Massachusetts, newspaper) ran a story on the debate this morning.  The candidates were Robert Chipman of Plainville, Brian Herr of Hopkinton, Marty Lamb of Holliston, Michael Stopa, and Robert Delle.  The format for the debate was simple--Kevin Poirier moderated and asked the questions.  Each candidate was give a minute to answer the question.

When discussing the repeal (and replace) of the Obama healthcare plan all of the candidates favored repeal and replace.  Michael Stopa pointed out the the original Massachusetts healthcare plan passed under Governor Dukakis was not funded by the Massachusetts legislature and thus never implemented.  That model could be very easily used to get rid of Obamacare.

When the question of English as a national language came up, Marty Lamb took a strong stand supporting the issue.  He pointed out the encouraging literacy is a good thing for all immigrants. 

When asked about the problem of illegal immigrants and the recently passed Arizona law, Marty Lamb pointed out that his campaign has released a seven-point program for dealing with immigration.

Various ideas on cutting spending were proposed.  Marty Lamb mentioned that his campaign has released a ten-point program for dealing with the deficit.  Up until last night, Marty Lamb was the only one of the candidates that had signed the "No New Taxes" pledge.

I am supporting Marty Lamb in this primary campaign.  His stands on the issues have been carefully thought out, and he expresses them well.  One person commented after the debate last night that she believed Marty Lamb is the candidate most able to challenge Jim McGovern in the coming election.  I agree.

ABC News reported yesterday that Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has ordered the National Guard to begin building barrier walls to protect the Louisiana coastline from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.  The National Guard is using Blackhawk and Chinook helicopters to drop sandbags to fill in the gaps between the barrier islands off the Louisiana coast. 

According to the article:

"The authorities say they're keeping a tab on the cost of the project and will send a bill to BP, adding to a huge list of claims from the spill zone."

I have been thoroughly impressed with Bobby Jindal since one of my children bought a house in New Orleans in 2003.  Louisiana is fortunate to have a governor who is honest, smart, and willing to take action to protect his state.  Governor Jindal is the only hope for Louisiana in the Gulf oil crisis.  I truly hope to see him in the White House someday.

Today's Washington Examiner reports on the Stimulus II that is being discussed by the Obama Administration.  According to the Bureau of Labor statistics, unemployment in the public sector last month was 3.4 percent.  The private sector unemployment rate is above 9 percent.  So why are the Democrats planning a bill to bail out public sector employees (can you say SEIU)?

According to the article:

"President Obama is now pleading with Congress for $23 billion to prevent teacher layoffs, $25 billion for state health care programs and $2 billion for police and firemen. Bear in mind that the original stimulus, which passed in February 2009, already contained a $53.6 billion "State Fiscal Stabilization Fund," which included $39.5 billion for local school districts to prevent teacher layoffs and program cuts. Public-sector unions, the primary beneficiaries of this largesse, were already calling for a second stimulus in July 2009 -- less than five months after the original one passed."

This adds up to another $50 million dollars in government spending.  The unions that public sector employees belong to support bigger government--that's where their jobs are!  Last month American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) president Gerald McEntee pledged to spend $50 million to protect Democrat's "incumbency in the House.  We've got to protect the incumbency in the Senate."  I guess we know where the money will come from.

I will not be watching President Obama's speech tonight--I will be at a debate between Republican Primary candidates for the Third Congressional District in Massachusetts.  I pray that in November one of the men I hear tonight will be elected to replace Jim McGovern, but that is not what this article is about.

President Obama will no doubt in his speech place the lion's share of the blame for the mess on the Gulf coast on BP.  He will also say that the current disaster shows the need for bigger government and a Cap and Trade (aka Cap and Tax) bill.  There is some truth in the first statement and very little truth in the second.

On June 9, the Business Insider posted an article about the Obama Administration's refusal of international help during the early days of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.  There are countries in the world that are much more experienced in deep-water drilling than we are, and some of those countries have successfully and quickly cleaned up the type of disaster we saw in the Gulf. 

The article states:

"According to Foreign Policy, thirteen entities that had offered the U.S. oil spill assistance within about two weeks of the Horizon rig explosion.  They were the governments of Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Republic of Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United Nations.

"The U.S. response - Thank you, but no thank you, we've got it.

"...While there is no need right now that the U.S. cannot meet, the U.S. Cpast Guard is assessing these offers of assistance to see if there will be something which we will need in the near future."

The reason for declining help--"The Jones Act."  The Jones Act requires that goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried in U.S.-flag ships.  The purpose of the law is to support the U.S. merchant marine industry.  The Jones Act was waived in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina and should be waived again.  The fact that it has not been waived has resulted in much greater damage to the environment that would have otherwise happened.  There are European countries who specialize in deep-water accidents, we need their help in this.

I would love to see the President waive the Jones Act in his speech tonight, instead I think we will be watching the beginning of a government takeover of the energy sector or the economy. 

Today Alert Net, a website of the Thomas Reuters Foundation, which says under its name "alerting humanitarians to emergencies," is reporting that Iran is sending ships to challenge the Israeli blockade of Gaza.  OK.  I have a few questions.  Based on the amount of food and other goods flowing into Gaza from Israel (this is not a blockade in the true sense of the word, the Israelis are simply asking to inspect the goods going into Gaza), where is the humanitarian emergency?  I have posted links to menus of four-star restaurants in Gaza, olympic size swimming pools for children and recent pictures of markets.  I have posted lists of goods and the amounts shipped to Gaza recently.  These pictures and amounts do not show a lack of goods.  If there is a lack of food and other resources in Gaza, I would tend to ask Hamas how it is distributing the goods shipped into Gaza. 

Why is Iran getting involved--to flex their muscles and to create unrest. 

The article reports:

"A senior Iranian official said earlier Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards were ready to provide a military escort to aid ships heading to Gaza if Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei so commands. [ID:nLDE65509B]

"But the Guards' deputy head, Hossein Salami, said there were no plans to do so. "Such a thing is not on our agenda," he was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency on Monday."

While Iran is making sure the world is focused on the 'blockade' of Gaza by Israel, Iran will continue to develop its nuclear porgram.  I don't know if Israel will attack Iran's nuclear facilities, I just think it is a shame that the current administration in America has not supported the green revolution that would have made any attack unnecessary.

The New York Times posted an article yesterday on the discovery of nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan.  The minerals involved are iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium.  This is very good news and very bad news.  It is good news because the development of these mineral deposits will provide an alternative to the current economic structure of Afghanistan which is based on the opium trade.  This could potentially, a few years down the road, put the poppies out of business.  This is bad news because of the rampant corruption in the Afghan government.  This could evolve into a Saudi Arabia type society where the wealth and power are concentrated among a very small number of people and the majority of the people live in poverty.

There are a lot of potential problems with this discovery.  Will the value of Afghanistan's minerals give the Taliban more incentive to continue fighting?  Will the value of Afghanistan's minerals bring the country back to its tribal roots--with tribal leaders fighting the federal government over income derived in specific locations?  Will this discovery encourage involvement in Afghanistan by countries other than the United States and NATO, countries that might not have an agenda of a free, well-governed Afghanistan?

Stay tuned.

The North Attleboro Republican Town Committee is sponsoring the first Republican Candidates Debate for the 3rd Congressional District.

The debate will be held on Tuesday, June 15th, from 6:30 to 9:30 at the Cobb Theater, North Attleboro High School, 1 Wilson Whitty Way in North Attleboro. All five Republican candidates running in the primary against Sen. Jim McGovern will be present:

• Robert Chipman of Plainville
• Brian Herr of Hopkington
• Martin Lamb of Holliston
• Michael Stopa of Holliston
• Robert Delle of Westboro

The complete announcement from the North Attleboro Republican Town Committee follows:

On Tuesday June 15th, the 3rd Congressional District of Massachusetts will hold it's first Republican Candidates Debate In North Attleboro from 6:30pm till 9:30pm.
The Debate will be held at the Cobb Thearter: 1 Wilson Whitty Way in North Attleborough

As a taxpayer, voter and citizen I urge your devoted interest in this Democratic process that so many lives have afforded you in what we call, "Freedom". Won't you join our North Attleboro Republican Town Committee as we present you, the voter, an opportunity to directly engage the five Republican candidates running for the Peoples Seat currently held by incummbant Democrat James McGovern.

Our district currently comprises all or most of 28 cities and towns with an economic base alone equal to many 3rd world countries GNP, our population ten years ago included 1/10th of the states residents and an almost exact replica of the now coined phrase "gerrymander district" from 1812, your state comprises one of the largest congressional delegations to Washington of any of our 50 states and if you don't think your vote counts on primary day Tuesday September 28, 2010 we can only refer you to January 20 headlines of this year.

All five candidates for election as your next Congressional Representative of this 3rd Congressional District will be present: Robert Chipman of Plainville, Brian Herr of Hopkington, Martin Lamb of Holliston, Michael Stopa of Holliston and Robert Delle of Westboro. Each candidate taking questions directly from you the taxpayer, you the voter, you the citizen. Please engage your political interests, be here at the forfront, in the heartland of Scott Brown's base of support. Without your vote and interest this democracy will loose never think your vote doesn't count.

I encourage, urge and otherwise respectfully request your presence to this political debate that features a variety of individuals cut from the American fabric who will stand up for your interests, beliefs and concerns. Candidates seeking support through fair, honest, hard working, family oriented citizens like yourselves hoping to save the American Dream.

James Lang
North Attleboro Republican Town Committee

According to the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, some passengers of the Mavi Marmara and other ships from Turkey's IHH flotilla are planning to apply for visas to enter the United States on a speaking tour. It has been announced that a number of these passengers plan to speak in New York City in the coming weeks.

This link, Urge State Dept to Investigate Flotilla Passengers, is to a petition to ask the State Department to investigate any visa applicants from the flotilla to make sure that they do not have any terrorist connections. 

The link provided above points out:

"In 2006, a report issued by the Danish Institute for International Studies stated that during the 1990s the IHH maintained links with al-Qaida and a number of "global jihad networks."
"The report also stated that the Turkish government launched an investigation into the IHH starting December 1997 after receiving intelligence that the IHH had bought automatic weapons from Islamist terrorists. According to the report, the Turkish government launched a raid on the organization's Istanbul offices where they found weapons, explosives, and instructions for bomb-making. The report added that an examination of documents found at the IHH office indicated that the group was planning to take part in terrorist activities in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Bosnia. In addition, a French intelligence report found that in the mid-1990s IHH leader B'ulent Yildirim recruited soldiers for jihad activities in a number of Muslim countries and that the IHH transferred money, firearms, and explosives to jihadists in a number countries."

Please follow the link and sign the petition.  We do not need to give visas to terrorists on a speaking tour to raise funds in New York City.

The reference for this story is a May 25 article in the Washington Examiner.  The article deals with the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC).  Senator Bob Casey, (D-Pa.), introduced S. 3157 in late March.  According to Thomas.gov, the bill is currently in committee.  The bill is called "Create Jobs and Save Benefits Act of 2010."

The bill would back union pension funds with federal tax dollars.  The article in the Washington Examiner points out that in 2006, before the recession, only six percent of these union pension funds were doing well.  In a column in the Washington Examiner in April, Mark Hemingway pointed out that the average union pension plan had only enough money to cover 62 percent of its financial obligations.  Pension plans that are below 80 percent funding are considered "endangered" by the government; below 65 percent is considered "critical."  Union membership is declining, which means that less people are paying into these funds.

In July 2009, the PBGC bailed out the pension liabilities of auto parts manufacturer Delphi ($6.2 billion).  In 2007, the PBGC had a deficit of almost $1 billion.  They are expected to assume $86 billion in liabilities by 2015.  This is not good business practice.

I am sorry that the unions cannot cover their pension funds, but maybe it's time for them to consider taking steps to make their pension funds affordable.  I do not think the American taxpayer should be required to save a union pension fund. 

Can you cover a lie with an expensive public relations campaign?  We are about to find out.  Today's Washington Examiner posted an article about the Obama Administration's efforts to sell the healthcare reform law to senior citizens as a good thing.  President Obama told a group of senior citizens in Maryland last week, "what you need to know is that the guaranteed Medicare benefits that you've earned will not change, regardless of whether you receive them through Medicare or Medicare Advantage."  The Wall Street Journal pointed out that nothing in that statement is true.  Nevertheless, it has become the official position of the Obama Administration.  The problem is that the health care bill cuts Medicare by $500 billion over the next ten years.  The next ten years is the time when the amount of people who will be expecting to join Medicare rapidly increases as the baby boomers turn 65.  There is no way that you can cut the program by $500 billion, add millions of baby boomers, and provide the same coverage and service you are providing now.

According to the article:

"As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week in response to Obama's Maryland statement, seniors have been told repeatedly by the White House and congressional Democrats "that if they liked their plan they could keep it.  Yet now we hear that millions of seniors will lose the Medicare Advantage benefits they have and like as a result of the Democrats' health care bill...That's been the story all along about this bill--a lot of promises that couldn't be kept.  And that's why the story now isn't the bill itself, but the administration's broken promises."

The Obama Administration is planning a $125 million public relations campaign to sell Obamacare.  The money is coming from unions and liberal nonprofit organizations, and the co-chairman of the campaign is former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle. 

I guess we will see if an expensive public relations campaign can successfully sell a lie.

Can you cover a lie with an expensive public relations campaign?  We are about to find out.  Today's Washington Examiner posted an article about the Obama Administration's efforts to sell the healthcare reform law to senior citizens as a good thing.  President Obama told a group of senior citizens in Maryland last week, "what you need to know is that the guaranteed Medicare benefits that you've earned will not change, regardless of whether you receive them through Medicare or Medicare Advantage."  The Wall Street Journal pointed out that nothing in that statement is true.  Nevertheless, it has become the official position of the Obama Administration.  The problem is that the health care bill cuts Medicare by $500 billion over the next ten years.  The next ten years is the time when the amount of people who will be expecting to join Medicare rapidly increases as the baby boomers turn 65.  There is no way that you can cut the program by $500 billion, add millions of baby boomers, and provide the same coverage and service you are providing now.

According to the article:

"As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week in response to Obama's Maryland statement, seniors have been told repeatedly by the White House and congressional Democrats "that if they liked their plan they could keep it.  Yet now we hear that millions of seniors will lose the Medicare Advantage benefits they have and like as a result of the Democrats' health care bill...That's been the story all along about this bill--a lot of promises that couldn't be kept.  And that's why the story now isn't the bill itself, but the administration's broken promises."

The Obama Administration is planning a $125 million public relations campaign to sell Obamacare.  The money is coming from unions and liberal nonprofit organizations, and the co-chairman of the campaign is former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle. 

I guess we will see if an expensive public relations campaign can successfully sell a lie.

It's not working.  Charles Krauthammer posted an article at the Washington Post on Friday regarding the Obama Administration's declaration that it was moving to isolate Iran.  Let's look at some facts.

On Tuesday, Russia, Turkey and Iran held a security summit in Istanbul.  The growing relationship between Iran and Turkey, a NATO member, is disconcerting.  Last month there was a meeting in Tehran between Brazil, Turkey, and Iran.  That meeting resulted in the uranium transfer agreement that supposedly would end the need for sanctions against Iran because of its nuclear program.  Six weeks ago, Iran was elected to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women.  (Another reason we should get out of the U.N. and ask it to leave America.)

Mr. Krauthammer points out:

"Increasing isolation? In the past year alone, Ahmadinejad has been welcomed in Kabul, Istanbul, Copenhagen, Caracas, Brasilia, La Paz, Senegal, Gambia and Uganda. Today, he is in China.

"Three Iran sanctions resolutions passed in the Bush years. They were all passed without a single "no" vote. But after 16 months of laboring to produce a mouse, Obama garnered only 12 votes for his sorry sanctions, with Lebanon abstaining and Turkey and Brazil voting against."

The headline in Wednesday's Washington Post was, "U.S. alliance against Iran is showing new signs of vulnerability."   I think we are seeing the results of electing an American President that the world views as weak.  There are billboards in various places around America with pictures of George W. Bush and the words, "Do you miss me yet?" printed on them.  Yes, President Bush, I do.

Sometimes the information on what is going on isn't found in the obvious headlines--it's found in seemingly unrelated headlines.  The UK Times Online reported today that the Saudi Arabian government has conducted tests to take down its radar temporarily in order to allow Israel to fly over to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.  I guess the Saudis don't have a lot of faith in the latest round of United Nations sanctions against Iran.

On Thursday, Investors.com reported on the latest sanctions leveled against Iran.  The article points out that the fact that Brazil and Turkey voted against the sanctions will probably embolden Iran to continue its nuclear program. 

The article points out:

"Somehow, President Bush, the unilateralist, the practitioner of cowboy diplomacy, was able to get all the members on board on sanctions. Obama, charismatic consensus builder, couldn't. Might it have something to do with the perception of a decline in U.S. power under this new leadership?"

The sanctions did not stop Russia from supplying S-300 missiles to Iran to defend Iran's nuclear sights, but it looks as if Russia may have cancelled the shipment on its own.  I wonder about this and wonder what will go on between Russia and Iran that we don't know about regarding the shipment of these missiles.

The article concludes:

"The paper (Britain's left-wing Guardian) also believes the dubiously re-elected Ahmadinejad comes out the better, having been given "the opportunity of defying the world, and winning."

"These new sanctions are not aimed at getting Iran to stop going nuclear; they're aimed at getting Iran to agree to talk -- leading to new concessions. And all the while, the jihadists' nuclear clock is ticking."

This is not a Republican or Democrat issue.  George Bush was not successful at stopping Iran's nuclear program either, although I believe he was hampered by a hostile media and a hostile Congress.  I don't believe attacking Iran is the answer--I believe funding the opposition to the current government any way you can is the answer.  A stronger stand during the unrest after the last Iranian election would have been helpful.  Israel will be condemned by the world if it attacks Iran's nuclear facilities, but at the same time, most of the world will breathe a sigh of relief. 

One of the problems with telling a lie is that you eventually get found out.  That is what has happened regarding the Obama Administration's call for a six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.  The Obama Administration stated that he moratorium was declared at the request of a panel of seven experts selected by the National Academy of Engineering. 

Yesterday Power Line Blog reported that the experts have stated that they never saw the recommendation for a moratorium, and in fact oppose it: 

According to Fox News yesterday:

"Salazar's report to Obama said a panel of seven experts "peer reviewed" his recommendations, which included a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs and an immediate halt to drilling operations.

""None of us actually reviewed the memorandum as it is in the report," oil expert Ken Arnold told Fox News. "What was in the report at the time it was reviewed was quite a bit different in its impact to what there is now. So we wanted to distance ourselves from that recommendation."

"Salazar apologized to those experts Thursday."

This is something that needs to be looked at more closely.  It has crossed my mind and the minds of some people much smarter than I am that the handling of the Gulf oil spill is another example of "never let a crisis go to waste."  I can't believe this level of incompetence on the part of a group of supposedly smart people.  Let's look at what the ongoing crisis in the Gulf and the shutdown of the deepwater rigs will do.  It will increase our dependency upon foreign oil--eventually raising gasoline prices to $5 a gallon or more. 

According to Heritage.org: 

To meet the Obama administration's targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, some researchers say, Americans may have to experience a sobering reality: gas at $7 a gallon. To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, the cost of driving must simply increase, according to a forthcoming report by researchers at Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. The 14 percent target was set in the Environmental Protection Agency's budget for fiscal 2010."

Remember the EPA takeover of the control of greenhouse gas emissions?  There is a pattern here, and the actions taken by this administration will destroy the American economy.  The only way to prevent the government takeover ov the energy section of our economy is to elect people in November who will take a stand against big government.

The above picture is a recent photo of Gaza's fruit and vegetable market.  This picture is from the website, Tom Gross Mideast Media Analysis.  If you follow the link, you will find pictures of an Olympic-size swimming pool the Children of Gaza swim in and various menus from some of the restuarants in Gaza.  There is a similar article in the May 27 Jerusalem Post.  This is the story that the mainstream media is not telling.

Wednesday's Washington Times posted an article about and a picture of President Obama's meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas with the customary handshake.  Along with that handshake, $400 million dollars went to the Palestinian Authority.  Just for the record, when it was decided in 1917 that a Jewish state would be established in the Middle East, the land that was known as Palestine was given to the Jews.  At that time there were no Palestinians--just a few nomads on camels that wandered through the area.  In 1920, at the League of Nations Conference of San Remo, the boundaries for the new state of Israel were drawn up.  They included that land that is now Jordan west to the Mediterranean Sea.  That land was to be the new State of Israel.  In 1921, Britain reneged on that agreement and gave 75% of the land it had promised Israel (then considered East Palestine) to the Hashemites, who had been driven out of Mecca and Medina by the Wahabi Muslims.  Thus, Trans-Jordan was established as a Palestinian Arab state with land that had been promised to Israel. 

Israel was to have what was considered West Palestine (25 percent of what they were originally promised).  I guess that's why I have such a hard time sympathizing with the terrorists who have continually tried to take land away from Israel since 1948.

Contrast the photo-op with President Obama and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas with the total lack of a photo-op when Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington recently.  We as a country are on the wrong side of history in the struggles between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.  This administration seems to have a tendency to support tyranny over democracy.  This needs to end.

Joint Resoltuion 26 was voted on in the Senate yesterday and did not pass.  The vote was 47 yeas and 53 nays.  All the Republicans voted for the bill, and six Democrats voted for the bill.  You can find out more about the bill and the vote at Thomas.gov.  The six Democrats who voted for the bill were Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln, Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, and Jay Rockefeller.

According to Thomas.gov, Joint Resolution 26 is described as "A joint resolution disapproving a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the endangerment finding and the cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under Section 202 (a) of the Clean Air Act."

In simple terms, this is the Cap and Trade legislation that President Obama could not get through Congress.  It is now law--it will be implemented through the Environmental Protection Agency.  This is bad news for everyone (especially the U. S. Constitution).  We can expect all utility bills to increase rapidly; we can expect more government control over the cars we drive and how much we drive them.  We can expect more restrictions on the use of our own natural resources, and we can expect a very negative impact on an already struggling economy.

There was a second bill sponsored by Jay Rockefeller that would also have stopped this power grab, but because of procedures, it would need sixty votes to get to the floor of the Senate.  I don't think that is likely, but I would love to be wrong.

On Sunday, June 6, the Wall Street Journal posted an article by Arthur Laffer on the coming expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts.  Contrary to idea that these were only "tax cuts for the rich", these tax cuts were structured to keep the economy growing by putting money in the pockets of consumers at all economic levels. 

According to the article:

"On or about Jan. 1, 2011, federal, state and local tax rates are scheduled to rise quite sharply. President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire on that date, meaning that the highest federal personal income tax rate will go 39.6% from 35%, the highest federal dividend tax rate pops up to 39.6% from 15%, the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 15%, and the estate tax rate to 55% from zero. Lots and lots of other changes will also occur as a result of the sunset provision in the Bush tax cuts."

One of the basic rules of economics is that you don't raise taxes during a recession.  If you follow the above link to the article, you will see the graph showing what happened in the early 1980's when President Reagan lowered tax rates.  Mr. Laffer believes that the inverse of this graph will occur if the Bush tax cuts expire. 

It is doubful that Congress will take responsibility for the economic meltdown that follows the expiration of these tax cuts, but the American people need to hold them responsible.  It is important to remember that when tax rates go up, the amount of revenue received goes down.  When tax rates are lowered, the amount of revenue coming in to the government increases because the amount of taxable economic activity increase.  This seems illogical, but historically has been proven to be true.  If you google the "Laffer Curve", you will see the evidence of this.

The only conclusion I can draw from the fact that Congress seems to be willing to let these tax cuts expire is that the only hope America has is to elect a new Congress.  Support your Congressional candidates that call for less spending and renewing the Bush tax cuts.

CNS News is reporting today on an end run the Obama Administration is about to do around Congress.  Because the Cap and Trade (also knows as Cap and Tax) energy bill is stalled in Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency is planning to regulate carbon and other greenhouse gasses under the Clean Air Act.  If this is carried out, Cap and Tax will essentially be put into effect without anyone having the chance to vote on it!  Some Congressmen are objecting to being cut out of the lawmaking process.  They have proposed a bill to stop the power grab.

According to the article:

"The Republican-led measure coming to a vote late Thursday would stop the Environmental Protection Agency from carrying out rules to regulate carbon and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
 
"At least four Democrats have indicated their support for the legislation, and the vote is expected to be close. The measure will produce the most important vote this year on the climate change issue and is seen as a test of where lawmaker sentiments lie."

The bill to stop the EPA power grab has the support of Democrat Senator Jay Rockefeller, who stated, "I believe we must send a strong message that the fate of West Virginia's economy, our manufacturing industries and our workers should not be solely in the hands of EPA."  He is correct.  This is a power grab and needs to be stopped.

The supposed justification for this action by the EPA is a Supreme Court decision in 2007 which stated that the Clean Air Act should allow the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases if they were shown the be a health risk.  The EPA then decided that Global Warming was a health risk and therefore they should be allowed to regulate these gases.

Senate Joint Resolution 26 comes up for a vote today.  Please call your Congressman and tell him (or her) to stop the EPA power grab.

The Chicago Sun Times is reporting today on the opening remarks made by defense lawyer Sam Adam Jr. during the trial of Rod Blagojevich, who is charged with scheming to sell or trade President Obama's US Senate seat.

Attorney Adams attempted to make the case that Mr. Blagojevich was "an insecure but honest politician who unwittingly got himself in this mess by trusting the wrong people."  This is going to be an interesting trial.  There is a real chance here that a lot of the ugly underside of Chicago politics will be revealed in this trial.  Evidently there are many hours of wiretapped conversations that may be played in the course of the trial.  It will be very informative to see who was making deals and what those deals were.

Rod Blagojevich is expected to take the stand as a witness during his trial.  Get out the popcorn, this is going to be very entertaining. 

Politico.com today reports that in yesterday's primary elections, being endorsed by Sarah Palin was a definite asset.  Ms. Palin endorsed four candidates; of those four, three won or moved on to a runoff election.

Nikki Haley, running in the primary for Governor of South Carolina, was the victim of a serious smear campaign with very little evidence to back it up.  Sarah Palin endorsed her and she carried about 49 per cent of the vote.  Because Ms. Haley did not receive 50 per cent of the vote, there will be a runoff election on June 22.

In endorsing Carly Fiorina, Sarah Palin went against the Tea Party, which supported Chuck DeVore.  Sarah Palin, in endorseing Ms. Fiorina, cited her pro-life stand and her 100 per cent NRA rating.   Carly Fiorina will run against Barbara Boxer in November.

Sarah Palin supported Terry Branstad in the Iowa gubernatorial primary.  Again, this was not the obvious choice, but Terry Branstad won.

The forth candidate Ms. Palin endorsed, Cecile Bledsoe, was defeated (52% to 48%).  Ms. Bledsoe was running for Congress in the Republican primary for the Arkansas 3rd Congressional District.

The point being illustrated here is that regardless of how you feel about Sarah Palin, she has the ability to pick candidates successfully.  Her backing probably made the difference in the South Carolina gubernatorial primary and in the California Senate primary.  I don't know whether or not Sarah Palin is planning to run for President in 2012, but at any rate, she is no longer a newcomer who can be ignored.  She has shown herself to be a very able politician. 

One of the things that has happened in this country over the past fifteen years or so is the growing influence of the SEIU (Service Employees International Union).  Their past president, Andy Stern, was the most frequent visitor to the White House during President Obama's first year in office.  They are aligned with ACORN and generally have a lot of influence on elections.  However, people are beginning to wake up and see that this influence is not always positive.  Chris Christie is taking them on in New Jersey on the issue of salaries and pensions of public employees and will probably win, but I can guarantee that it will be an uphill climb. 

The SEIU supported Bill Halter in a Democrat Primary for Senate in Arkansas.  Former President Clinton and President Obama both supported Blanche Lincoln. 

Politico.com reported yesterday:

"A senior White House official just called me with a very pointed message for the administration's sometime allies in organized labor, who invested heavily in beating Blanche Lincoln, Obama's candidate, in Arkansas.

""Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet on a pointless exercise," the official said. "If even half that total had been well-targeted and applied in key House races across this country, that could have made a real difference in November.""

The victory by Blanche LIncoln is this preimary is interesting.  Even the Democrats in Arkansas are not as liberal as the SEIU--Bill Halter challenged Blanche LIncoln from the left--he was more liberal than she was!  Ms. Lincoln voted for Obamacare, but for the unions that was not enough.  If I were a union member, I think I would be more than a little upset about how my union dues were being used.  Unions were started to help their members receive fair wages and to make sure workers were treated fairly--not to control elections.

Ed Morrissey posted an article at Hot Air today about the Virginia firm nHealth, which announced that it will close its doors at the end of the year.  The company stated that the uncentainties created by the Democrats' health care overhaul are the reason for the closing. 

According to the article:

"The firm, nHealth, appears to be the first to claim that the new law has driven it out of business. "We don't know what the rules are going to be, and, as a start-up, our investors need certainty," nHealth CEO and President Paul Kitchen told POLITICO. "The law created so much uncertainty that is beyond our control.""

This is what the healthcare reform bill will do--it will drive private insurers out of business so that the government can take over health care.  The nHealth company issued the kind of health insurance that saves subscribers money--high-deductible, HSA-driven plans that put patients in charge of routine care and leave insurance to cover the crises instead.  That type of company is actually part of the solution to the high cost of health insurance--not part of the problem--and Obamacare has driven them out of business.

"Repeal and Replace" needs to be the goal of the House of Representatives and Senate after the 2010 elections.  Even if we can't repeal Obamacare, the House of Representatives can refuse to fund it.  That is why we need Republicans and fiscally conservative people elected to the House of Representatives.  Support whatever local candidate fits that description.

Please do not follow this link unless you are prepared for graphic images.   Normally I would not post something this graphic, but unfortunately, that is part of the story.  Camera.org (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) has posted pictures showing how Reuters edited pictures of the Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmari,  Two pictures of the activists on the ship were cropped in such a way that the knives in their hands did not show in the pictures.

There is an update on the story posted on the Camera.org site today that states:

"Reuters photo archive (pictures.Reuters.com) now includes both the earlier cropped version of the photos, as well as the original, uncropped version.   Reuters representatives continue  to justify the cropped pictures by insisting that cropping the edges of a photo is normal editing procedure for photographs.  Perhaps so, but the fact that the cropping was carefully limited to the specific evidence of  the "peace" activists' weapons has prompted the Israeli government press office to weigh in on the matter with a letter to Reuters CEO Tom Glocer demanding a clarification of the apparent photo abuse  by Reuters."

The battles in the Middle East always involve propaganda.  The question becomes, "Who can you trust as a news source when looking at news from that area of the world?"  Generally I have found that the press releases on the website of the Israeli Defense Force have the most reliable information.  Although they are a part of the Israeli government, they seem dedicated to telling the truth.  They are also a good source of information about the propaganda coming from the other side.

Today's Boston Herald posted a story about a retired U.S. Marine who runs a high school ROTC program in Worcester.  Major Stephen L. Godin has been told that he will be fired if he does not pay union dues.  Major Godin is the senior naval science instructor at the Naval Junior ROTC Unit of North High School. 

According to the article:

"Major Godin, a 20-year Marine veteran until 1994, who flew F-4 Phantoms and was deployed five times, said he refuses to join the union because he receives all his benefits, including health insurance and half his salary, from the military. Unlike other teachers, he doesn't earn a stipend for after-school activities, such as the hours he spends coaching the high school's regional champion drill team. His salary is dictated by the U.S. Military, not labor negotiators, Godin said."

I guess I just don't understand.  Why should anyone be forced to join a union or pay union dues?  This is the battle that Governor Christie is fighting in New Jersey.  The unions have taken over the schools and state jobs, and their demands are such that New Jersey (and other states) are going bankrupt.  If the man is doing a good job, and his job is not paid by teh City of Worcester, someone needs to tell the unions to go away.

Yesterday, the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported that Anadarko Petroleum Corp. is moving three deep-water drilling platforms from their current locations off the Louisiana Coast to foreign locations.  This is the result of President Barack Obama's deepwater drilling moratorium. 

According to the article:

"In separate letters to top federal officials Monday, two major trade groups urged the federal government to protect what they claim are more than 100,000 jobs by reducing the six-month stoppage and by introducing new safety regulations more quickly.

"The Offshore Marine Service Association, the national trade group for U.S.-flagged vessels working in the energy sector, suggested to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar that the safety measures Obama demands can be established by the federal Minerals Management Service in less than a month."

Maybe it's my imagination, but the impact of the Obama Administration on the private sector of the American economy is staggering.  The oil platforms that are being removed will not come back.  The removal will destroy an already struggling Louisiana economy.  The removal will also increase our dependency on foreign oil imports.  Meanwhile, the east coast fishing industry is being destroyed by new regulations (see rightwinggranny.com article of May 17, 2010).  The car industry has been partially taken over, the banking industry has been partially taken over, the healthcare insurance industry is being taken over, and unemployment nationwide is still almost 10 per cent.  The major job increases have been in government jobs.  We need to stop a minute and look at the whole picture--not just pieces of the puzzle.

If we want to stop this runaway train that has taken over our economy, we need to seriously consider how we vote in November.  Look at the voting records of your local, state, and national candidates.  If they support big government programs, vote them out.

The hope for Louisiana is Governor Bobby Jindal.  I have told this story before, but I will tell it again.  I met Governor Jindal at the New Orleans aquarium years ago when he was coming out of the elevator pushing one of his children in a stroller.  My daughter stopped him and said how much she appreciated his contributions to Louisiana.  I told him then that I was from Massachusetts and hoped that I would have the opportunity to vote for him for President some day.  I still feel that way.  He is a smart, able executive who is the best hope for Louisiana at this time.  I only wish he lived in Massachusetts!

CBN News is reporting today on a protest of the building of a mosque near Ground Zero in New York.  More than five thousand people from across the country converged on New York City for the protest.  Many of them had lost family members on September 11, 2001.  The slap in the face is that the planned Mosque will open on September 11, 2011.  One of the comments made during the protest was that the building of a mosque represents victory to a Muslim.  This mosque would be a Muslim celebration of their destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11.

The man behind the mosque, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has some questionable ties with radical Islam.  In his writings, he advocates Sharia law.  There are also questions as to where the $50 million to construct the mosque is coming from. 

The article points out:

"Many of the protestors were immigrants, including Russian Jews, Arab Christians and Indians who love American freedoms and who fear the growing Islamization of America is slowly eroding that liberty.

""We are very happy. America has given us freedom of religion, but we do not want to destroy this country! Islam wants to destroy this country that's the big difference between them and us," said Narain Kataia, an Indian American."  

A New York City community board has already approved the construction of this mosque.  The protesters hope that their protest might cause the city board to review that approval.  There are many places in New York City to build a mosque.  Ground Zero does not have to be one of them.

John Hinderaker at Power Line reported yesterday that Iran's Revolutionary Guard are ready to provide a military escort for ships attempting to break the blockade of Gaza by Israel. 

The article concludes:

"The prospect of a Revolutionary Guards escort tells you all you need to know about the "peace and freedom convoys." If Iran follows through on this threat, it would seem that the prospect of war will become very real. One wonders what could have happened on the international scene over the last sixteen months to embolden Iran to threaten such a provocation."

When America has a weak President (or a President who appears weak), the world is less safe.  I am not sure who said that, but it appears to be true.  A President who has not stood strong on America's support for Israel also seems to be a problem.

Iran would love a war between Israel and anyone this summer.  As Iran completes its development of a nuclear bomb, it needs to divert the attention of the world from that program.  Anyone's war with Israel will do.  Because world opinion (fed by Arab propaganda) tends to be against Israel (even when they defend themselves), this would be the perfect diversion.  Unfortunately, a lot of innocent people will be harmed in the process.

If you are a praying person reading this, please pray.

Today's Washington Examiner posted an editorial about a Harvard Business School study of the effects of pork barrel projects on local businesses.  The researchers at Harvard studied forty years of data to see what effect kickbacks like the "Louisiana Purchase" and "Cornhusker Kickback" have on the businesses in their areas.  The study began with the assumption that when a senator was given a powerful committee assignment, he would begin the channel pork back to his state.   It was also assumed that the businesses in that state would benefit from this action.  Well, that's not what they found out.

According to the article:

"In fact, the study found that in the years following a congressman acquiring a powerful committee assignment, the average company in his state cut back capital expenditures by 15 percent. In one prominent example, Alabama went from receiving $6 million less in annual earmark spending than other states to $90 million above the state average after Republican Sen. Richard Shelby assumed the chairmanship of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 1997. Shelby earmarked $15 million for low-cost fabricated housing, but the study found that one of Alabama's largest suppliers of this housing, Homes Inc., correspondingly reduced capital expenditures by 79.5 percent and downsized its work force by 30 percent."

Essentially, the study found that federal spending distorts the free market and is not good for the economy.  This is not good news for Senators attempting to win re-election by 'bringing home the bacon', but if the word of this study gets out, it may be very good news for American taxpayers!

Yahoo News reported yesterday that a Cairo court has upheld a ruling that will strip Egyptian men married to Jewish Israeli women of their citizenship.  The court requires that each case be considered separately, with no appeal. 

According to the article:

"The court's decision is taking into account Egypt's national security," the judge said.

Lawyer Nabil al-Wahsh said he originally brought the case to court in order to prevent the creation of a generation "disloyal to Egypt and the Arab world."

Children of such marriages "should not be allowed to perform their military service," he said.

The number of Egyptian men married to Israeli women is thought to be around 30,000, according to Wahsh. Only 10 percent of them are married to Arab Israelis.

"This ruling is for the benefit of Egypt, a nation of leadership, history and civilisation," Wahsh said. "It is for the protection of Egypt and Egypt's youth and its national security."

."The decision comes as Israel continues its assault on those who love peace. The latest example is the aggression against the aid boat which was heading towards the blockaded Gaza Strip," he added.

 

As long as this kind of animosity toward Israel is acceptable in Arab countries and Arab courts, there will be no peace in the Middle East.

My Fellow Americans:

Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our Allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest -- until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.

Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

And for us at home -- fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas, whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them -- help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.

Many people have urged that I call the nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

Give us strength, too -- strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.

And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.

And, O Lord, give us faith. Give us faith in Thee; faith in our sons; faith in each other; faith in our united crusade. Let not the keeness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment -- let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogances. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace -- a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen.

Franklin D. Roosevelt - June 6, 1944

Since the early 1990's, there have been sources of news other than the three major networks, the New York Times, and National Public Radio.  First there was the rebirth of AM radio, then the internet, then FOX news.  These additional news outlets have had an impact on American politics.  The forged papers regarding George W. Bush's National Guard service that CBS put forth would have been accepted by the American public if the blog LIttle Green Footballs had not pointed out that the font used in the documents did not exist at the time the documents were supposedly created.  The 'blue dress' that was revealed on the Drudge Report during the Clinton Administration impacted the view people had of President Clinton.  Alternative news sources are now an acceptable way for people to investigate a story on their own and draw their own conclusions.  That fact is not always appreciated by some of the people in power.  There is an expression "when you tax something, there will be less of it."  Keep that in mind as you read the following.

Yesterday's Washington Times reported that the Federal Trade Commission is investigating the idea of taxing internet websites.  Aside from the fact that this will limit the free distribution of news, it is another example of the government stealing money from the people who earn it.  The government makes no contribution to internet websites, the people who author them do the work.  Why in the world should the government make money from them?

The article states:

"In other words, government policy would encourage a tax on websites like the Drudge Report, a must-read source for the news links of the day, so that the agency can redistribute the funds collected to various newspapers."

Loosely translated, that means taking money from the websites that are profitable (advertisements, etc.--just for the record, this website is not profitable!) and giving to businesses that are not profitable, thus overriding free enterprise.  If newspapers were more balanced in their reporting, I believe they would be more successful.  The alternative media has arisen out of need--that is why it is successful.  The taxing of internet news is dangerous to our freedom as well as to our pocketbooks.

This is the text of the Balfour Declaration::

Foreign Office,
November 2nd, 1917.

Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely
Arthur James Balfour

The Balfour Declaration declared the intention of Great Britain to establish a Jewish state in Palestine.  In 1920, the League of Nations drew up the map to establish the Jewish state.    In 1920, at the League of Nations Conference of San Remo, the boundaries for the new state of Israel were drawn up.  That state included land extending west to the Mediterranean Sea and east through what is now known as Jordan.  At the same time, Arab statehodd was granted to Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia.  That land was referred to as (Eastern) Palestine.  On January 4, 1919, Feisal ibn-Hussein, representing the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Chaim Weitzman, representing the Zionists, signed a formal agreement establishing the Jewish homeland.  Feisal ibn-Hussein agreed to abandon all claim of his father to (Western) Palestine if he secured Iraq and Eastern Palestine as Arab territories. 

In 1921, Britain reneged on the original agreement and give away 75 percent of the land it had promised to Israel.  The country of Transjordan was given to Abdullah, brother of Feisal ibn Hussein.  Abdullah, a Hashemite, was in Transjordan because the Wahabi Muslims had driven the Hasemites out of Mecca and Medina, where they had been custodians of the holy sites for centuries.  Transjordan was set up as a Palistinian-Arab state.

This short history lesson is in response to a statement by reporter Helen Thomas at the White House Jewish Heritage Celebration on May 27, 2010.  When asked to make a statement relative to the Jewish Heritage Celebration, Ms. Thomas stated, "Tell them (the Jews) to get the hell out of Palestine." and went on the claim that the Jews were occupiers and needed to go home to Germany, Poland, and the United States.  It is really sad to see that kind of ignorance and bigotry in someone who is supposed to objectively report news.  If you would like to see the YouTube video of her statements, go to YouTube, put "Helen Thomas tells Jews to go back to Germany" in search, and you will find the entire statement.  I refuse to post the link here.

Historically, Israel is Jewish land.  Jerusalem was the capital of ancient Israel.  The Arabs are in charge of the vast majority of land in the Middle East, but for some reason, they want to destroy the Jewish state.  It makes no sense.  The amount of land in the state of Israel is the equivalent of a matchbook cover on a football field.

The best quote I have heard on the problems the Arabs have with Israel is from Walid Shoebat, who said, "Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?"

There was never even a concept of a Palestinian state until the Arabs lost the 1967 war.  At that time they began a propaganda war that there needed to be two states in Israel.  The goal has always been for the destruction of Israel.  Until that goal changes, there will never be a peaceful solution.

On June 2, the Canada-Israel Committee released the statistics on the amount of humanitarian aid that Israel routinely allows to go into the Gaza strip. 

According to the article:

"Over one million tons of humanitarian supplies were delivered by Israel to the people of Gaza in the past 18 months - that's equal to nearly one ton of aid for every man, woman and child in Gaza. 

"In the first quarter of 2010 alone (January-March), Israel delivered 94,500 tons of supplies to Gaza. It's very easy to miss what that actually means for the people of Gaza. The breakdown includes:

• 40,000 tons of wheat - which is equal to 53 million loaves of bread;
• 2,760 tons of rice - which equals 69 million servings;
• 1,987 tons of clothes and footwear - the equivalent weight of 3.6 million pairs of jeans; and
• 553 tons of milk powder and baby food - equivalent to over 3.1 million days of formula for an average six-month-old baby.

"This reflects a long-term effort on the part of Israel to deliver a massive and comprehensive supply of aid to Gaza's civilians, while restricting the ability of Hamas to import missiles that have been launched at the cities of southern Israel. In 2009 alone:

• During the Muslim holy days of Ramadan and Eid al-Adha, Israel shipped some 11,000 head of cattle into Gaza - enough to provide 8.8 million meals of beef;
• More than 3,000 tons of hypochlorite were delivered by Israel to Gaza for water purification purposes - that's 60 billion gallons of purified water; and
• Israel brought some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine into Gaza - a weight equivalent to over 360,000 260-piece mobile trauma first aid kits."

Before we get all sympathetic to the starving Gazans, we need to look at some of the above numbers.  Life in Gaza is probably not fun--the government is not really concerned with the needs of the people there--they are only concerned with destroying Israel.  The government is run by Hamas--a terrorist organization.  Terrorists have not historically turned out to be good government administrators.  I have no idea if the people of Gaza are happy with Hamas as their government.  Hamas defeated Fatah (another terrorist organization) to take over Gaza.  Until Gaza has a government that does not routinely lob rockets at civilian populations in Israel, they can expect to stay under an arms blockade.

Marty Lamb is running for Congress in the third Congressional District in Massachusetts.  His campaign released this today.

MARTY LAMB FOR CONGRESS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT:
June 4, 2010 Marty@MartyForCongress.com 617-513-4368

LAMB SAYS ISRAEL HAS RIGHT TO DEFEND

Lamb Calls on Incumbent to Support Israel

Holliston, MA...Today Marty Lamb, Republican candidate for Congress in Massachusetts Third District, stated, in response to the flotilla raid, that Israel has the right to defend itself against attacks and terrorists.

"I stand by Israel's right to defend its borders and citizens. The country lives under constant threat of violence from Hamas and other terrorist organizations," said Lamb. "I call upon Congressman Jim McGovern to stand with me in support of Israel and to join me in cautioning the United Nations from condemning Israel's raid."

"The United States must stand by its allies," stated Lamb.

For more information on Marty's candidacy, voters can visit his website www.MartyforCongress.com or follow him on twitter and facebook.

We need Congressmen with the courage to stand up for what is right.  I will be voting for Marty Lamb.

My best advice to anyone who is currently unemployed would be to apply for a government job--they seem to be the only ones hiring!  Bloomberg.com reported today that according to Labor Department figures payrolls rose by 431,000 last month, including a 411,000 jump in government hiring of temporary workers for the 2010 census.  Private payrolls increased 41,000.  The current jobless rate is 9.7 percent. 

Other statistics cited in the article:

"The so-called underemployment rate -- which includes part- time workers who'd prefer a full-time position and people who want work but have given up looking -- decreased to 16.6 percent from 17.1 percent.

"The number of temporary workers increased 31,000. Payrolls at temporary-help agencies often picks up before companies take on permanent staff." 

Unless some move is made to cut taxes in the private sector and to legislate a tax structure that is stable and can be used in economic planning, we will continue to see little or no job growth in the private sector.  Another reason companies are hesitant to hire new employees right now is the confusion about how much government healthcare reform is going to cost.  Until a corporation has a definite idea of what its future spending is, it is going to be very cautious in its hiring practices. 

In the past six months, Massachusetts has undergone some major changes.  Scott Brown was elected to the United States Senate to fill Ted Kennedy's term, and a Republican was elected to the Massachusetts legislature to replace Scott Brown.  There will be Republican primaries this summer to choose candidates for state, local, and national offices.  Something is brewing.

When I went to my local supermarket this morning, I was stopped by a very polite person who asked me if I was a registered voter.  He asked me if I was willing to sign a petition to put a question on the ballot in November to roll back the Massachusetts state sales tax to 3 percent.  Wow.  I signed.  To learn more about what this ballot question is about, please visit rollbacktaxes.com.  On August 1 of last year, the sales tax was raised from 5 per cent to 6.25 per cent.  Please visit the website to see the calculations on the impact of rolling back the state sales tax.

Yesterday, Breitbart.com posted an article about President Obama's lastest speech regarding the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.  According to the article:

"Seeking opportunity in a crisis, Obama argued for action in Congress as crews struggled into a seventh week to contain BP's mangled oil well in the Gulf of Mexico. He urged lawmakers to shift the tax-break money toward clean-energy research and approve a major energy bill, now stalled in the Senate, that would slap a price on carbon emissions. "

Meanwhile, marshlands in Louisiana are possibly permanently damaged, and the oil spill threatens the tourist industry in the Southeast.  This is pure opportunism.  This administration believes any crisis can be used to increase taxes or costs of living on every American.  Do they honestly believe that a tax hike on the oil companies will not be passed on to the consumer? 

The fact is that our economy runs on carbon fuel.  Since the environmentalists have closed down much of the easily accessible oil, we are forced to drill in places where drilling is difficult and not totally without risk.  Maybe it's time to reconsider ANWR.

"None of the four wars in my lifetime came about because we were too strong.  It is weakness that invites adventurous adversaries to make mistaken judgments.  America is the most peaceful, least warlike nation in modern history.  We are not the cause of all the ills of the world.  We're a patient and generous people.  But for the sake of our freedom and that of others, we cannot permit our reserve to be confused with a lack of resolve."

                       Ronald Reagan

Yesterday, Power Line posted an article about Andrew McCarthy's new book The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.  Andrew McCarthy was the federal prosecutor who prosecuted the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman, after the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.

In responding to a request from the Power Line writers to provide something about his new book, Mr. McCarthy replied.  This paragraph was included in his write-up:

"The problem is that those who say Islam is the problem have the better case. I was first struck by this sad fact during our terrorism trial in 1995, when I had to get ready to cross-examine the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman. Though he ended up opting not to testify, I still had to prepare. Back then I thought that if what we were saying as a government were true - if these terrorists were lying about Islam and perverting its doctrine in order to justify mass-murder attacks - then surely I should be able to locate three or four places where the Blind Sheikh had misstated the Koran and the other species of Muslim scripture. I searched high and low, but there were none."

Just as there are Christians who have no idea what the Bible says (or feel that it is not relevant to today's world), there are Muslims who are quite comfortable ignoring many aspects of the Koran.  As long as those Muslims live in a country (or area of a country) that is not ruled by Sharia Law, that is not a problem--they can dress as they like, hold hands in public, and women have basic human rights.  However, if they live in a country with Sharia Law, the option of being a 'moderate Muslim' is not available.  The problem is that there is an element of Islam that seeks to make the entire world a caliphate ruled by Sharia Law.  The goal is to achieve this by both violent and non-violent means.  The non-violent means are already at work in America--that is what Andrew McCarthy's book is about.

We ignore both the violent and non-violent attacks on our culture at our own risk.

Last week Big Journalism reported that President Obama and General McChrystal have asked Michael Yon to leave Afghanistan. 

The article reports:

"And yet nobody in the media seems to have much of a problem with Michael Yon being removed from the front lines by Obama/General McChrystal. Yon has openly stated the problems in Afghanistan right now and how we could lose this war, unless changes are made. He has been critical of the current rules of engagement that have put our troops in danger and could actually make this war like the Vietnam that the leftist media claimed it was early and often when Bush was president (it's strange you don't hear those comparisons from them anymore).

"Yon's reward? He's lost his embed status, banished to Bangkok. Yon could return but his access might be limited and you can't just pop in and out of that theater like it's the neighborhood movie palace.  Mess with Yon enough and his resources wear thin, but his patience will not.  You will not stop this soldier. He is the ultimate warrior for those who fight and die for this country. His reports are honest, chilling, gripping and are as reflective of the battles they represent as anything I have ever read.  But this administration is making it as difficult for him to do his job. You can't believe this is by accident. The most critical battle in Afghanistan is about to take place, the battle for Kandahar, and the voice of the American soldier is not allowed in."

I don't always like or agree with Michael Yon's reports, but I respect his honesty and his experience.  He was the voice who spoke out against the current rules of engagement which will result in more American soldiers getting killed and more Taliban soldiers living to fight another day.  As someone with a family member currently serving in Afghanistan, I am disturbed by the current rules of engagement.  As a former green beret, Michael Yon understands the impact those rules have and had the courage to speak against them.  That may be why he is no longer there.

If we are truly to have freedom of the press in America, Michael Yon needs to be back in Afghanistan, embedded with the troops and reporting the truth.

Yesterday, Andrew McCarthy posted an article in the New York Post about the war to preserve western culture.  This is a war that America to a large extent is not fighting, but is being fought against us. 

In his article, Mr. McCarthy cites some of the evidence of the war:

"In 1991, Mohamed Akram, a US-based chieftain of the Brotherhood, penned a memo for the eyes of the central leadership in Egypt. Later seized by the FBI, this self-described "Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" outlined the game-plan for what the organization regards as its "civilizational" war against the West:

""The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions.""

The goal is to bring the world (including America) under sharia law.  We need to understand what that means.  Sharia law includes all aspects of life--it is not simply limited to religion.  Sharia law controls economics--interest is not allowed on loans.  It controls social life--women must be completely covered--they may be arrested if their clothes are too tight or too revealing, holding hands in public by an unmarried couple is a crime, coverting to another religion from Islam is punishable by death.  Women may be stoned for adultery; homosexuals are hung.  This is not what we understand as freedom.

There are some problems with western culture.  I would love to turn the clock back fifty years in terms of culture--I think "Father Knows Best" was much better television than "The Simpsons",  I'm not necessarily into bobby socks, but I do think skirts should be long enough to cover most of your thighs.  I am not sure clothes are manufactured in America for anyone over the age of eighteen.  I would like to see adolescence begin after age thrteen and be over by age twenty--I think western culture has turned it into a way of life!  But even with its faults, I think western civilization is the culture that most successfully allows people to achieve whatever goals they may have and reaping the approriate rewards.  The idea of a worldwide caliphate is unacceptable to me, and I suspect it would be unacceptable to any American who understands exactly what it means.  The cultural war against an Islamic society in America is one that we need to fight.

This picture is from the Israel Defense Force (IDF) Blog.  I think it says it all.

On May 21, Israel Today reported that the United States has joined the United Nations group the Alliance of Civilizations which began in 2006.  The stated goal of the group is to bridge the gap between Muslim and western civilizations.  However, that is not actually what they have done. 

The Jerusalem Post reported in May that George Bush had refused to join the organization because of its anti-Semitic tendencies.  The Jerusalem Post pointed out that the present administration feels these concerns have been addressed:

"The officials said earlier fears about the "imbalances" in the group, which was set up by Spain and Turkey, had been addressed after the US expressed "serious concerns" about the alliance's 2006 report. That document focused on the Middle East and identified Israel's "disproportionate retaliatory actions in Gaza and Lebanon" as a main cause of Muslim-Western tension."

This is not an organization America needs to be a part of.  The group holds the United States and Israel responsible for all problems between the western culture and the Muslim culture.  We need to remember that the Muslim culture is not an 'open, tolerant' culture.  You can't build a Christian church or a Jewish synagogue in Saudi Arabia.  How many mosques have been built in America?  We need to remember that part of the Muslim culture is the total subjugation of women.  They are not inclined to be flexible in that area either.  The purpose of this organization is the bring the west into Muslim ideas--not to bring harmony.  Sharia law dictates that anyone who converts from Islam to Christianity should be killed--that doesn't sound like a desire to co-exist--that sounds like a desire to take over.  This is a bad decision--it will not promote peace, it will encourage more Muslim activity aimed at destroying western culture.

On Sunday, Breitbart.com reported that the United States is supporting a United Nations Resolution for a nuclear-free Middle East.  The resolution targets Israel, but makes no mention of Iran. 

According to the article:

"The resolution adopted by the United Nations on Friday calls on Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and urges it to open its facilities to inspection.

"It also calls for a regional conference in 2012 to advance the goal of a nuclear-free Middle East.

"Israel is widely believed to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, with around 200 warheads, but has maintained a policy of deliberate ambiguity about its capabilities since the mid-1960s."

It really doesn't take much thought to figure out how long Israel will continue to exist in the neighborhood it resides without the threat of using nuclear weapons.  The Arab nations have finally figured out a way that they think they can put an end to the Jewish state wihile looking peace-loving. 

I think Walid Shoebat summed up the situation when he stated, "The Holocaust never ended but the victims have decided to defend themselves..."

America is doing a very foolish thing by siding with the Arab nations against Israel.  We are supporting thuggery instead of democracy.  That sort of thing always comes back to bite you.

Any discussion of the "two-state solution" to the problems in the Middle East needs to consider a few of the things that have happened since Israel turned over the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to the Palestinians.  First of all, Hamas, who controls the Gaza Strip, gained that control through violence against Fatah.  Secondly, Hamas has, as part of its charter, the pledge to eliminate the state of Israel.  Third, how much of the aid from around the world poured into Gaza has been used to infrastructure--roads, hospitals, industries that produce jobs?  How much has been used to buy weapons?  Is the only profession in Gaza terrorism?

Today, My Way (part of AP news) is reporting that thousands of residents of Gaza are fleeing Gaza--taking advantage of the currently open border between Gaza and Egypt.  Egypt announced today that it was temporarily opening its border with Gaza.  The site also reports that there are two more boats headed for the Israeli blockade.  They are expected to arrive later this week or early next week.

We need to remember why Israel is blockading Gaza.  We also need to mention that this is not a true blockade--the Israelis are letting boats dock in Israel, have their cargo checked, and shipping that cargo to Gaza (if the cargo is not weapons and rockets).  This is not a blockade--it is a necessary move for Israel to survive.  According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1,750 rockets and 1,528 mortar bombs fired from the Gaza Strip struck southern Israel in 2008.  Would any other country in the world be asked to tolerate that kind of continuing attack on civilians?

Jonathan Schanzer, a former terrorism finance analyst at the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, posted an article at The Weekly Standard about some of the people involved in the incident involving the Gaza Strip-bound flotilla.  The group that put the flotilla together was Turkish IHH (Islan Haklary Ve Hurriyetleri Vakfi in Turkish).  The group was banned by the Israeli government in 2008 for its ties to terrorism finance.  The United States also designated the group as terrorists in 2008 stating that the group was started by the leadership of Hamas in order to transfer money into Hamas.  In the past, the group has provided aid to Muslims, but that is not the total picture of its history.

According to the article:

"...the organization is not a force for good. The Turkish nonprofit belongs to a Saudi-based umbrella organization known to finance terrorism called the Union of Good (Ittilaf al-Kheir in Arabic). Notably, the Union is chaired by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, who is known best for his religious ruling that encourages suicide attacks against Israeli civilians.  According to one report, Qardawi personally transferred millions of dollars to the Union in an effort to provide financial support to Hamas."

Terrorist organizations typically use charities as front organizations to raise money and to do charity work with the aim of radicalizing communities.  Some of the charity work includes paying money to the familites of suicide bombers.  This is not charity as we know it.

This was not an innocent group of well-intentioned people bringing supplies to a besieged Gaza.  Israel (and Egypt) routinely let supplies in after inspecting them.  This was an attempt to get something in without its being inspected.  Please note that Egypt is also attempting to prevent the flow of rockets and weaponry into Gaza--it's not just Israel.

The ship and its crew and passengers are now in Israel.  Israel is examining the cargo.  There may not be weapons on this ship, but you don't have to be brilliant to conclude that if this ship had been given uninterrupted passage, the blockade would have ended and the next ship would have been loaded with weapons.

I'm sure we will be hearing more about this in the coming days.  We just need to remember that the war against Israel by Hamas is a propaganda war as well as a military war.

UPDATE:  The news is reporting today that Egypt has opened its border with Gaza.  I would also like to note that the protest signs in Turkey were written in English!