Hugh Hewitt posted a commentary at the Washington Examiner today regarding the Democrats’ ‘deeming’ a $1.12 trillion budget passed on Thursday night. 

According to Hugh Hewitt:

“Ruses and gimmicks, games and deceits have run their course.  The public is fully aware of the crisis we face because of the Democrats’ vast desire to spend money the country doesn’t have on their political allies while waiting to spring massive taxes on their enemies–employers–until the lame duck session after the November voting but before the new Congress is seated.”

The American voter is not stupid.  The conventional wisdom says that the Democrats will use the lame-duck session (assuming they lose Congress) to pass card check, cap and trade, and raise taxes.  The voters are still angry at the way the healthcare reform bill was passed, and the majority of Americans want the healthcare reform bill repealed.  I don’t know if that will be possible, but it would truly be unwise for the Democrat party to dig themselves deeper in the spending hole they have created.  The Democrats may be insuring that it will be a long time before they find themselves in the majority again. 

Fox News reported yesterday on the new mission assignment for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).  NASA Administrator Charles Bolden detailed the three things President Obama asked him to do when he took over as the Administrator or NASA.  The first thing was to help inspire children to study science and math, the second was to expand our international relationships, and the third was to “find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science … and math and engineering,””

Meanwhile, Judicial Watch posted an article on June 9, 2010, commenting on the fact that the budget cuts to NASA will force us to rely on Russia to ferry our astronauts to and from the International Space Station.  I guess that is an example of expanding our international relationships.  Are those the same Russians who have sleeper cells throughout our country?

I guess I am not aware of the Muslim nations and their historic contributions to science, math, and engineering.  If you ‘google’ Muslim scientists, you find out that the greatest Muslim contributions to science were between the 8th and 14th centuries A.D.  The modern-day scientists and engineers seem to be nuclear physicists.  In the Western World, one of the uses of science and engineering is to improve the living conditions of society–indoor plumbing, potable drinking water, generally improved sanitary conditions, medical facilities,etc.  In the Western World, these improvements have spread through the general population–generally they are accessible to all people.  In some of the stricter Muslim countries, half of the population has not been allowed to make a contribution to society–women are not allowed to go to school, to work, or run for political office.  Until Muslim countries begin to allow freedom for their citizens (freedom of education, freedom of religion, and equality of opportunity), I think it is a mistake to believe that a program of cooperation with Muslims would benefit anyone.  Until the radical element of Islam is denounced by the moderate element, we will have no idea who we are working with or what their goals may be.

Lurita Doan at Townhall.com posted her five suggestions for cutting the deficit.  These are five suggestions that would have very little impact on the average American.

1.  Cap the number of White House staffers and Czars.  Michelle Obama alone has amassed a staff that will cost the American taxpayers $6,364,000 over four years.  (That number is from the Canadian Free Press).  There are 42 Czars in the Obama Administration, each with staffing and office space requirements. According the Ms. Doan, “getting a grip on the czar’s expenditures would equal or even exceed the $100billion-over-5-years budget cuts proposed by Defense Secretary Gates.”

2.  Eliminate Agency and Congressional Slush Funds.  According to Ms. Doan, “these slush funds range from a few million to several hundred million and are not transparent to the American taxpayer, nor are most members of Congress aware of their existence or size.”

3.  Cut certain bonuses for federal workers.  Annual retention bonuses and signing incentive bonuses can go as high as $50,000 per individual.  Ms. Doan explains, “many federal workers receive retention bonuses each month for decades while employed by the federal government.”

4.  Eliminate phantom federal employees and their contigent slush funds.  Every year all Executive agencies place a line item in their budget for payroll and benefits as if they were fully staffed.  They are not fully staffed due to normal attrition and hiring practices, but they receive this money anyway.  According to Ms. Doan, “this funding provides a convenient slush fund within federal agencies that can then be re-allocated mid-year to other agency priorities not approved by Congress.”

5.  Reduce the number of committees and subcommittes in Congress.  There are currently 23 House committees with 104 House subcommittees and17 Senate standing committees with 70 subcommittees.  There are also approximately 69 Joint (Senate/House) committees as well as several Conference committees.  Ms. Doan points out, “with fewer congressional committees and less staff, there might be less time and resources devoted to witch-hunts and show trials, and more effort spent on the business of government.”

None of these moves would even remotely impact the average American (other than to begin to reduce the deficit and grow the economy).  What are the chances of this administration even considering one of these ideas?

This is the letter General Petraeus sent to the troops today as he took command in Afghanistan.  Our thoughts and prayers are with him in his new assignment.

HEADQUARTERS

International Security Assistance Force/

United States Forces – Afghanistan

Kabul, Afghanistan

APO AE 09356

4 July 2010

HQ ISAF

To the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Civilians of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force:

We serve in Afghanistan at a critical time. With the surge in ISAF strength and the growth of Afghan forces, we and our Afghan comrades have a new opportunity. Together, we can ensure that Afghanistan will not once again be ruled by those who embrace indiscriminate violence and transnational extremists, and we can ensure that AI Qaeda and other extremist elements cannot once again establish sanctuaries in Afghanistan from which they can launch attacks on our homelands and on the Afghan people.

This has been a hard fight. As you have soldiered together with our Afghan partners to reverse the Taliban momentum and to take away Taliban safe havens, the enemy has fought back. ISAF and Afghan Forces sustained particularly tough losses last month. Nonetheless, in the face of an enemy willing to carry out the most barbaric of attacks, progress has been achieved in some critical areas, and we are poised to realize more.

This effort is a contest of wills. Our enemies will do all that they can to shake our confidence and the confidence of the Afghan people. In turn, we must continue to demonstrate our resolve to the enemy.

We will do so through our relentless pursuit of the Taliban and others who mean Afghanistan harm, through our compassion for the Afghan people, and through our example and the values that we live.

Together with our Afghan partners, we must secure and serve the people of Afghanistan. We must help Afghan leaders develop their security forces and build their capacity to govern, so that they can increasingly take on the tasks of securing their country and seeing to the needs of the Afghan people.

This endeavor has to be a team effort. We must strive to contribute to the “Team of Teams” at work in Afghanistan and to achieve unity of effort with our diplomatic, international civilian, and Afghan partners as we carry out a comprehensive, civil-military counterinsurgency campaign.

We must also continue our emphasis on reducing the loss of Innocent civilian life to an absolute minimum.  We must never forget that the decisive terrain in Afghanistan is the human terrain.

Protecting those we are here to help nonetheless does require killing, capturing, or turning the insurgents. We will not shrink from that; indeed, you have been taking the fight to the enemy and we will continue to do so. Beyond that, as you and our Afghan partners on the ground get into tough situations, we must employ all assets to ensure your safety, keeping in mind, again, the importance of avoiding civilian casualties.

I appreciate your sacrifices and those of your families as we serve in a mission of vital importance to the people of Afghanistan, to our nations, and to the world. And I pledge my total commitment to our mission as we work together to help achieve a brighter future for a new country in an ancient land.

(It is a privilege to serve with you.)

DAVID H. PETRAEUS   General, United States Army Commander

I asked a friend of mine who is a military wife to write a short piece for me about her thoughts on Independence Day.  This is what she said:

The Fourth of July has had various meanings to me as I have journeyed through my life.

So for this Fourth of July, I will celebrate the birth of our nation with a rare visit with my husband before he leaves on his umpteenth deployment. I implore all of my fellow citizens to celebrate, either through backyard barbeques and fireworks or civil protests. Please enjoy your freedom and rest assured my husband, and the hundreds of thousands of other dedicated members of the Armed Services, will continue to stand vigil over our freedoms.

Yesterday, the Washington Examiner reported on the fact that Congress had adjourned without passing a bill to extend unemployment benefits.  There are a few things not immediately apparent in that statement. 

The Republicans in Congress offerred a number of amendments to the bill to extend unemployment insurance–the amendments were aimed at passing the bill without increasing the deficit.  It’s an election year, and even some Democrats are beginning to be alarmed at the growth of the deficit over the past eighteen months. 

According to the article this is how some of the negotiations went:

“The House passed a sixth-month extension on Thursday, but the Senate was long gone by then, having shut down early so that the late Sen. Robert Byrd’s body could lie in repose in the chamber. Any future action by the Senate will have to wait until lawmakers return on July 12.

“On Wednesday, the Senate rejected a measure to extend benefits, with most Republicans and one Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., opposed to the bill because it would add more than $33 billion to the nation’s $1.3 trillion deficit. The Senate came up just one vote short of passage, with Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Maine Republicans, voting yes.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, then offered a bill that would extend benefits for two months, paid for by unused stimulus funds, and Senator Reid turned it down.

This is obviously going to be an election issue in November.  The challenge will be to remember that the unemployment benefits could have been passed at any time if the Democrats had agreed to pay for them without increasing the deficit.  But there are two other things to keep in mind here–unemployment benefits currently extend for almost two years (I know the economy is rough and jobs are scarce, but that seems like an awfully long time), and why are we still spending stimulus money?  Hasn’t anyone figured out that the best way to stimulate the economy would be to give the stimulus money back to the taxpayer?

Newsbusters posted a story today on how unemployment numbers have been reported in recent years.  The Associated Press, in writing its story about the June unemployment figures stated:

“…Unemployment is expected to stary above 9 percent through the midterm elections in November.  And the Fed predicts joblessness could still be as high as 7.5 percent two years from now.  Normal is considered closer to 6 percent, and economists say it will probably take until the middle of this decade to achieve that.”

Let’s go back and see how unemployment numbers were handled during the Bush Administration.  According to the article at Newsbusters: 

“On October 7, 2003, USA Today told readers that “Californians face an $8 billion state budget deficit, persistent unemployment and struggling schools.”   The Golden State’s unemployment rate in September 2003 was 6.4%.“

“On June 2003, Reuters reported on consumer sentiment relayed that “Consumer sentiment deteriorated sharply in early June, suggesting persistent unemployment is taking its toll on American’s expectations for the economy’s future.”  The national unemployment rate in May 2003 was 6.1%.

The article also cites a March 29, 1987 book review at the New York Times, again declaring persistent unemployment under the Reagan Administration–the unemployment at the time was 6.5%.

If you are in the habit of getting your news from mainstream news sources, watch the wording–you can be led down the garden path before you even have a clue you are being taken for a ride.  I expect we will see many economic indicators be redefined between now and November!

Yesterday’s Los Angeles Times posted an article about the June unemployment numbers released by the Department of Labor. 

According to the article:

“Employment-seekers decline by 652,000 June, which may reflect people giving up on job-hunting and a reluctance to hire. Overall, the jobless rate falls to 9.5% from 9.7%, the Labor Department reports.”

These numbers reflect a downturn in economic growth also reflected by the fact that the average hours worked in manufacturing and other industries and average hourly earnings also declined in June.

Most of the job gains in June were in the leisure and hospitality industries–low-paying industries and also somewhat seasonal industries.  There was an increase of 9,000 in manufacturing jobs (less than the 25,400 in the prior five months).  The construction industry lost 22,000 jobs in June.

The percentage of the overall working-age population in the labor force fell in June to 64.7 per cent.  That is nearly the lowest in twenty-five years.

If this represents economic recovery, I’d hate to see what would be considered a recession.

Human Events reported yesterday on the latest financial slieght of hand done by the House of Representatives Democrats on Thursday night. 

According to the article:

“Last night, as part of a procedural vote on the emergency war supplemental bill, House Democrats attached a document that “deemed as passed” a non-existent $1.12 trillion budget. The execution of the “deeming” document allows Democrats to start spending money for Fiscal Year 2011 without the pesky constraints of a budget.

“The procedural vote passed 215-210 with no Republicans voting in favor and 38 Democrats crossing the aisle to vote against deeming the faux budget resolution passed.”

This is ridiculous.  The Democrats didn’t have the courage to actually pass a budget before the election in November, so they played political games.

The House Republican Budget staff pointed out:

–       This is not a budget. The measure fails to meet the most basic, commonly understood objectives of any budget. It does not set congressional priorities; it does not align overall spending, tax, deficit, and debt levels; and it does nothing to address the runaway spending of Federal entitlement programs.
–       It is not a ‘congressional budget resolution.’ The measure does not satisfy even the most basic criteria of a budget resolution as set forth in the Congressional Budget Act.
–       It creates a deception of spending ‘restraint.’ While claiming restraint in discretionary spending, the resolution increases non-emergency spending by $30 billion over 2010, and includes a number of gimmicks that give a green light to higher spending.
–       It continues relying on the flawed and over-sold pay-as-you-go [pay-go] procedure. Pay-go – which Democrats have used mainly to raise taxes, and have ignored when it was inconvenient – does nothing to reduce deficits or restrain spending growth in existing law.
–       Outsourcing fiscal responsibilities. The measure is another hand-off by the Democratic Majority of Congress’s power of the purse – this time relying on the Fiscal Commission created by the President to do Congress’s job.

Unless you want to see this sort of foolishness continue (as your children and grandchildren are driven deepen into debt by the government), vote anyone who supported this “deemed as passed” budget trick out of office in November.

Yesterday’s Orlando Sentinel reported that the distribution of Bibles on a Religious Freedom Day was stopped by school officials in Collier County, claiming that “Bibles do not provide any educational benefit to the students and the distribution should stop.’

A lawsuit has been filed to overturn the ruling.  World Changers, the group distributing the Bibles, included a disclaimer of any school endorsement or sponsorship and that receiving a Bible was purely voluntary.  

If you can’t distribute Bibles in celebration of religious freedom, what constitutes religious freedom?

Yesterday Big Journalism reported on a story that doesn’t seem to have gotten too much coverage in the mainstream media.  The El Paso City Hall was hit by seven bullets believed to have been fired by one or more AK-47s from across the border.  No one was hurt, but needless to say the experience was somewhat unnerving.  This is the first time since the drug war began in Juarez in 2008 that the gun fire has come across the border in El Paso. 

The story also reports:

“Similar cross-border shootings have occurred in other cities. Last September, the University of Texas at Brownsville was closed for a weekend after a building and a parked car on campus were hit by bullets fired during a shootout across the border in Matamoros, Mexico.” 

Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott has sent a letter to President Obama asking for immediate and effective action to secure the border.  It is becoming very obvious that border security needs to be a higher priority than immigration reform.  Granting amnesty to all illegals will not stop the drug war in Mexico, and it will not lessen the danger to American citizens.

CNN’s Religion Blog is reporting today that Mosab Hassan Yousef has been granted political asylum in the United States.  Right Wing Granny reported on April 30 that the homeland security department was planning to deport Yousef on charges that he was a terrorist.

I think it is wonderful that Mr.Yousef is being allowed to remain in America, but I also hope that our homeland security department will use him as a resource to understand how the terrorists target America.  Mr. Yousef is the son of a Hamas leader and in the past worked for Israel as a spy.  His insight into Hamas and other Middle Eastern terrorist organizations would be invaluable to our homeland security.

Yesterday Investors.com posted an article stating:

“On Monday, the ground-based Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, part of the U.S. missile defense shield, successfully shot down a ballistic missile launched from a ship’s deck off Kauai, Hawaii. The test simulated an Iranian SCUD launched from the deck of a ship off the U.S. coast, which, if armed with a nuke, could devastate the American heartland.”

Also on Monday, the Obama Administration revealed a new policy regarding space.  The new policy:

“the U.S. will “consider proposals and concepts for arms control measures if they are equitable, effectively verifiable and enhance the national security of the United States and its allies.””

The article further states:

“These “proposals and concepts” could come soon in the form of the PAROS (prevention of arms race in space) treaty. Like the nuclear freeze once proposed at the height of the Cold War, these Munich clones are designed not to prevent war, but to disarm America. Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, among others, would like to see us unilaterally give up our ability to render their huge investments in nuclear missiles irrelevant.”

What this means is that in the interests of ‘international friendliness’ we will take down our missle shield–leaving us unable to defend ourselves against a rogue missile attack.  How this makes the world safer in any way is totally beyond me.  Would you put a sign on your front door that says, “We have no security system, we don’t own a gun, and there is good stuff inside?”  That is what we are doing.  We are taking down defensive weapons–not offensive weapons.  There are no guarantees that all countries in the world are getting rid of their offensive weapons.  Have we simply decided that America is not worth defending?

Today’s Washington Examiner is reporting on the House Democrat’s plan to pass a war funding bill this week that includes 15 billion in domestic spening, including $10 billion to cover the salaries of about 140,000 public school employees.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has stated that he needs the $33 billion in the war spending bill to fund defense operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

So far the House has been unwilling to take up the Senate version of the war spending bill because they want to add domestic spending that they are not able to get passed any other way. 

There is also a move among liberal Democrats to attach a withdrawal date to any funding for the war. 

Admittedly, this has been a long war, and I wonder if the average American has the desire to see it through.  We need to look at some of the consequences of letting politicians (rather than the military) set a withdrawal date.  Why in the world would the Taliban negotiate with someone who is going to be gone in a year anyway?  Why in the world would the average Afghan help an American knowing that in a year that American would not be there to protect him?  We need to remember that September 11th began in Afghanistan because the Taliban were in control and planned the attack.  We have a choice–eliminate the Taliban or accept the fact that events like September 11th will occur in our country on a regular basis.