I Guess It Depended On Where You Were

New England had a hot July this summer. I live in a house without central air-conditioning, and we ran between two and three air conditioners most of the month. Usually we run two for about two weeks. Well, I guess there were other places that just weren’t quite that warm.

This is a map from a website called climatedepot.com:

RecordEvents-21Aug13

The map shows high and low record temperatures from July 24 through August 21. This was posted on their website yesterday.

Meanwhile, Steven Hayward at Power Line points out that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will begin its battle to convince us that global warming is real and man-made within the next few weeks. The IPCC will bring out its report in three sections–Science, Impacts, and Mitigation. The Science report is due out next month.

We already know from past scandals that much of the data used to prove global warming was cherry-picked–important warming periods were left out to skew the data. We have the emails to prove this. So why is the UN trying to convince us that global warming is real and that we are responsible? Because any bureaucracy in any governmental organization likes to grow and likes to control more people and more money. If the IPCC can convince Americans and other wealthy countries that unless they give all kinds of money to non-wealthy countries we will all die, chances are we will give them the money. Unfortunately, this is not about concern for the earth–this is about taking money from wealthy countries and giving it to other countries (generally run by tyrants who will live gloriously at our expense while giving nothing to the people of their countries.)

The earth’s climate goes through cycles. It has gone through cycles before man was here. Those cycles are somehow built into the way the earth works. So far we have not successfully figured out how those cycles work. In recent years the National Weather Service in America has predicted catastrophic hurricane seasons caused by global warming. We have had some severe hurricanes, but it has been a long time since we have seen a catastrophic hurricane season.

The bottom line here is that we as people do not control the earth. We could give all the money we have to corrupt dictators in third-world countries, and we still would not control the earth. We need to do everything we can to keep our air and planet clean, but giving money to countries that will not spend money responsibly helps neither us or the earth.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Good Are Laws If The Government Ignores Them?

Yesterday George Will posted a column at the Washington Post about a court decision that is an attempt to make the executive branch of government follow the laws Congress passes.

The article reports:

…last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia instructed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to stop “flouting the law.” Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh said: “It is no overstatement to say that our constitutional system of separation of powers would be significantly altered if we were to allow executive and independent agencies to disregard federal law in the manner asserted in this case.”

So what is this all about? In 1982, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 stated that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) “shall consider” the Yucca Mountain application to become a repository, and “shall” approve or disapprove the application within three years of its submission. The application was submitted in 2008.

The NRC has no intention of complying with the law–former (NRC) Chairman Gregory Jaczko had previously served on the staff of Nevada Senator Harry Reid and was placed at the NRC to prevent the storage at Yucca Mountain from taking place. He resigned last year.

The NRC is considered part of the executive branch. It has no legal right to disregard a law enacted by Congress.

The article concludes:

This episode is a snapshot of contemporary Washington — small, devious people putting their lawlessness in the service of their parochialism and recklessly sacrificing public safety and constitutional propriety. One can only marvel at the measured patience with which the court has tried to teach the obvious to the willfully obtuse.

Until we elect different people to office in Washington, we can expect more of this.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The End Of Privacy As We Know It

For whatever reason, the British newspapers do a much better job of reporting news in America than American newspapers. Yesterday the U.K. Mail posted a story stating that the Department of Health and Human Services has hired more than 1,600 new employees since May 2010.

The article reports:

A total of 1,684 of those positions were filled. An analysis by MailOnline shows that at 2010 federal government salary rates, the new employees’ salaries alone cost the U.S. at least $138.8 million every year.

Had the agency filled all its available jobs, that cost would have been a minimum of $159 million.

The hiring began in May 2010 and continued through June 2013, making the later hires eligible for higher salaries as a result of annual cost-of-living increases.

The difference between what HHS spent on new Obamacare-related employees and what it was authorized to spend is explained by its failure to hire most of the 261 ‘consumer safety officers’ it was authorized to bring aboard. Only two such employees were hired.

But while OPM authorized HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Resources Denise Carter — later renamed Denise Wells — to hire 50 criminal investigators, the agency increased that number to 86 on its own.

When I first heard the idea of refusing to fund ObamaCare, I thought it was a bit drastic. However, after seeing the detective force that is being formed to spy on Americans, I think Congress needs to stop ObamaCare any way it can. If ObamaCare is allowed to move forward, it will unleash a new dimension of spying on Americans.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Oddities In The Unemployment Numbers

Breitbart.com reported today that the the unemployment numbers reported by the Gallop polling organization jumped from 7.7% on July 21 to 8.9% today.

The article reports:

At the end of July, the BLS showed a 7.4% unemployment rate, compared to Gallup‘s 7.8%. Again, a difference not worthy of note. But Gallup’s upward trend to almost 9% in just the last three weeks is alarming, especially because this is not a poll with a history of wild swings due to statistical anomalies. Gallup’s sample size is a massive 30,000 adults and the rolling average is taken over a full 30 day period.

Gallup also shows an alarming increase in the number of underemployed (those with some work seeking more). During the same 30-day period, that number has jumped from 17.1% to 17.9%.

It will be interesting to see how this lines up with the numbers that will be released shortly.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Work vs Welfare

Below is the Executive Summary from a white paper released by the CATO Institute on August 19. The white paper was entitled, “The Work versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013.”

Executive Summary

In 1995, the Cato Institute published a groundbreaking study,The Work vs. WelfareTrade-Off, which estimated the value of the full package of welfare benefits available to a typical recipient in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It found that not only did the value of such benefits greatly exceed the poverty level but, because welfare benefits are tax-free, their dollar value was greater than the amount of take-home income a worker would receive from an entry-level job.

Since then, many welfare programs have undergone significant change, including the 1996 welfare reform legislation that ended the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program. Accordingly, this paper examines the current welfare system in the same manner as the 1995 paper. Welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry-level job, and the balance between welfare and work may actually have grown worse in recent years.

The current welfare system provides such a high level of benefits that it acts as a disincentive for work. Welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 35 states, even after accounting for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and in 13 states it pays more than $15 per hour. If Congress and state legislatures are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, they should consider strengthening welfare work requirements, removing exemptions, and narrowing the definition of work. Moreover, states should consider ways to shrink the gap between the value of welfare and work by reducing current benefit levels and tightening eligibility requirements.

One of the things that has made America great has been the willingness of Americans to work hard, knowing their diligence would be rewarded. When the government creates a situation where staying home doing nothing pays as well as working, it undermines the work ethic in America and weakens our country. It might also be a good idea to examine the role the tax burden plays in this–does the working person earn less because of the tax burden that comes with working? Is the welfare recipient subject to a lesser tax burden?

The bottom line here is simple. People are not stupid. If a person can make as much money not working as he would working, why should he work? I recently posted a story with a striking example of this philosophy at rightwinggranny.com. We need to reinstate the work requirements to receive aid, and we need to be more aware of who is getting aid so that we can limit fraud.

It’s time to make sure that the people who are working hard are rewarded for their hard work.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Voting With Your Feet

CBN News posted a story today about the relationship between tax rates in different states and where people choose to live.

The article reports:

Brown (author Travis H. Brown) discovered that the nine states with no personal income tax gained $146.2 billion in AGI. Those states include Alaska, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming.

Conversely, the states with the highest personal income tax rates lost a total of $107.4 billion. They are California, Hawaii, Oregon, Iowa, New Jersey, Vermont, New York, and Maine. Washington, D.C., was also included.

Another measurement delivers similar results. Brown looked at the 10 states with the lowest per capita state and local tax burdens and found they netted $69.9 billion in AGI. Those states include Alaska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Louisiana, Wyoming, Texas, New Hampshire, Alabama, Nevada, and South Carolina.

The 10 states with the highest state and local tax burden lost $139 billion in AGI. They are New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, California, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Maine, and Pennsylvania.

This story has personal relevance to me. My husband will be retiring at the end of the year, and we are about to put our house on the market. (If anyone wants a five-bedroom house in Southeastern Massachusetts, please leave a comment). We are moving for many reasons–one of those reasons is the cost of living in Massachusetts. We will be headed to North Carolina where we have family and the cost of living is lower.

Recently, Massachusetts raised the taxes on cigarettes. I don’t smoke, so that doesn’t impact me, but I was in a store yesterday in Rhode Island near the Massachusetts state line. The person ahead of me in line was commenting that she would no longer be buying cigarettes in Massachusetts because they were cheaper in Rhode Island. Right now, gasoline is more expensive in Rhode Island than in Massachusetts, but since the gasoline tax in Massachusetts is now indexed to inflation, I wonder how long that will be the case.

When people have an option, they give less money to the government, whether it is state or federal government. The Laffer Curve explains one aspect of that.

At some point, government needs to realize that at some point it has all of the money we have earned that it is entitled to. The question is exactly where the point of enough taxes is reached.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Fight For Democracy In Egypt

The thing to remember when watching events in the Middle East is that the propaganda war is as important (if not more so) than what is actually happening on the ground. This was made evident recently with a video that has gone viral.

The Blaze posted the story and the video today:

It is amazing how a supposedly seriously wounded man could push away medical help with his foot! The video is also available on YouTube.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Unfortunately This Is Not A Surprise

Yesterday’s Daily Beast reported that Secretary of State John Kerry has cleared the Benghazi officials placed on administrative leave by Hillary Clinton after the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi. The four State Department officials come back to work at the State Department starting today.

The article reports:

Last December, Clinton’s staff told four mid-level officials to clean out their desks and hand in their badges after the release of the report of its own internal investigation into the Benghazi attack, compiled by the Administrative Review Board led by former State Department official Tom Pickering and former Joint Chiefs Chairman Ret. Adm. Mike Mullen. Those four officials have been in legal and professional limbo, not fired but unable to return to their jobs, for eight months… until today.

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Raymond Maxwell, the only official from the State Department’s Near Eastern Affairs bureau to lose his job over the Benghazi attack, told The Daily Beast Monday he received a memo from the State Department’s human resources department informing him his administrative leave status has been lifted and he should report for duty Tuesday morning.

No explanation, no briefing, just come back to work. So I will go in tomorrow,” Maxwell said.

This a classic cover-up operation. Choose four scapegoats, wait until the scandal is no longer on the front pages of the newspaper, and then re-instate them. The article mentions that none of the four officials will be able to get his previous job back.

The article concludes:

There was also concern in Congress that only mid-level officials with little direct responsibility for the Benghazi attack had been taken out of their jobs following the ARB report release.

“The ARB tried to blame everyone but hold no one responsible, except for some of the lower level people who were not in control of the situation,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), chairman of the House Oversight National Security subcommittee, told The Daily Beast in May.

Unless Congress develops a backbone and truly investigates what happened at Benghazi and why, this scandal will fade quietly into the sunset. This is what happens when organizations investigate themselves.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Unions Have Opposed ObamaCare For A While

On July 18, the Schoolcraft County Republican Party website posted a copy of a letter from Jimmy Hoffa, Teamsters’ President, Joseph Hamsen UFCW President, and D. Taylor UNITE-HERE President.

This is the letter:

Dear Leader Reid and Leader Pelosi:

When you and the President sought our support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), you pledged that if we liked the health plans we have now, we could keep them. Sadly, that promise is under threat. Right now, unless you and the Obama Administration enact an equitable fix, the ACA will shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.

Like millions of other Americans, our members are front-line workers in the American economy. We have been strong supporters of the notion that all Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. We have also been strong supporters of you. In campaign after campaign we have put boots on the ground, gone door-to-door to get out the vote, run phone banks and raised money to secure this vision.

Now this vision has come back to haunt us.

Since the ACA was enacted, we have been bringing our deep concerns to the Administration, seeking reasonable regulatory interpretations to the statute that would help prevent the destruction of non-profit health plans. As you both know first-hand, our persuasive arguments have been disregarded and met with a stone wall by the White House and the pertinent agencies. This is especially stinging because other stakeholders have repeatedly received successful interpretations for their respective grievances. Most disconcerting of course is last week’s huge accommodation for the employer community—extending the statutorily mandated “December 31, 2013” deadline for the employer mandate and penalties.

Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it. The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios:

First, the law creates an incentive for employers to keep employees’ work hours below 30 hours a week. Numerous employers have begun to cut workers’ hours to avoid this obligation, and many of them are doing so openly. The impact is two-fold: fewer hours means less pay while also losing our current health benefits.

Second, millions of Americans are covered by non-profit health insurance plans like the ones in which most of our members participate. These non-profit plans are governed jointly by unions and companies under the Taft-Hartley Act. Our health plans have been built over decades by working men and women. Under the ACA as interpreted by the Administration, our employees will treated differently and not be eligible for subsidies afforded other citizens. As such, many employees will be relegated to second-class status and shut out of the help the law offers to for-profit insurance plans.

And finally, even though non-profit plans like ours won’t receive the same subsidies as for-profit plans, they’ll be taxed to pay for those subsidies. Taken together, these restrictions will make non-profit plans like ours unsustainable, and will undermine the health-care market of viable alternatives to the big health insurance companies.

On behalf of the millions of working men and women we represent and the families they support, we can no longer stand silent in the face of elements of the Affordable Care Act that will destroy the very health and wellbeing of our members along with millions of other hardworking Americans.

We believe that there are common-sense corrections that can be made within the existing statute that will allow our members to continue to keep their current health plans and benefits just as you and the President pledged. Unless changes are made, however, that promise is hollow.

We continue to stand behind real health care reform, but the law as it stands will hurt millions of Americans including the members of our respective unions.

We are looking to you to make sure these changes are made.

James P. Hoffa
General President
International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Joseph Hansen
International President
UFCW

D. Taylor
President
UNITE-HERE

I am not under the illusion that union leaders will suddenly become conservatives–that is not going to happen. But understand that the unions provide the majority of funding and volunteers for Democrat Party candidates. The unions often pay their members to show up at rallies or to do stand-outs for Democrats. If the unions are unhappy with ObamaCare and decide to sit on their hands in 2014, the Democrat Party will be severely impacted. This is a letter that will that Congressmen Pelosi and Reid will read carefully.

Just for the record, the worst-case scenario on this would be for President Obama to somehow carve out an exception for the unions. Hopefully enough Americans are paying attention right now to prevent that from happening.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Following The Letter Of The Rule While Missing The Spirit Of The Rule

On Sunday, Yahoo Sports reported the story of Steven Rhodes, a 24-year-old Marine sergeant who just completed his five years in the Marines. After ending his service in the Marines, Steven contacted Middle Tennessee State’s football coaches to ask for a chance to play on the team.

The article continues:

…They happily accepted the 6’ 3”, 240-pound veteran and have been using him as a tight end and defensive lineman during practice.

Great story, right?

Well, it would be, except Rhodes isn’t eligible to play this season because he took part in an intramural league while in the service. He received no money to play in some extremely disorganized games.

“Man, it was like intramurals for us. There were guys out there anywhere from 18 to 40-something years old,” said Rhodes to Adam Sparks of the Daily News Journal (Murfreesboro, Tenn.). “The games were spread out. We once went six weeks between games.”

Needless to say, the coaches at Middle Tennessee State are appealing the ruling.

The article further reports:

“For a guy to go serve our country, you’d think there would be some compassion and understanding so this guy is not prevented from playing college football,” said Middle Tennessee coach Rick Stockstill. “He’s going to be almost 30 years old when his (eligibility) clock runs out. He needs to be allowed to play right now. Hopefully, they let him.”

Steven Rhodes is being penalized because he spent six years in the Marines. Good grief!

WONDERFUL UPDATE!!!!!

From the Blue Raider Athletics Website:

ATTENTION BLUE RAIDER NATION! Steven Rhodes has been cleared to play this season and for the next 4 years! Thank you for all of your support over the last 36 hours, it’s been a crazy time around here. We look forward to seeing everyone out Aug. 29th for our first game against Western Carolina! BE LOUD. BE PROUD. BE BLUE.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Governments Run Amok

CNN posted an article today about the detention of David Miranda at London’s Heathrow Airport when Mr. Miranda was returning to his home in Brazil. Mr. Miranda lives and works with Glenn Greenwald, the man who released the information Edward Snowden collected regarding government surveillance in America and England.

The article reports:

Greenwald’s partner, 28-year-old David Miranda, was held for nearly nine hours. He was reportedly passing through the airport on his way home to Brazil after leaving Berlin. Authorities seized his laptop, phone, and other materials.

The White House knew the move was coming.

“There was a heads up that was provided by the British government,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday.

So the United States knew it “was likely to occur, but it’s not something that we’ve requested and it’s something that was done specifically by the British law enforcement officials there,” he said.

He would not comment on whether the United States has obtained material from Miranda’s laptop — and would not say whether President Obama condemns the detention.

The Guardian also posted this story today. Their article stated:

David Miranda‘s detention should be seen in the context of the implicit acceptance by the Home Office, which is bringing forward the current changes, that parts of the law are too sweeping. But Mr Miranda’s detention is extraordinary nevertheless. It raises important new issues that parliament cannot now ignore and will have to debate if its terrorism law reform bill is to be in any way meaningful, just or proportionate.

Part of this is because there is not the slightest suggestion that Mr Miranda is a terrorist. But Mr Miranda does live with and work with Mr Greenwald, who has broken most of the stories about US and UK state surveillance based on leaks from the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. None of that work involves committing, preparing or instigating acts of terrorism, or anything that could reasonably fall within even the most capacious definition of such activities. Yet anyone who imagines that Mr Miranda was detained at random at Heathrow is not living in the real world.

This is alarming. Whether you see Edward Snowden as a hero or a traitor, there was no reason to detain Mr. Miranda. There was also no reason to seize his computer, cell phone, and other possessions. There was no suspicion that Mr. Miranda was a terrorist–he was simply guilty of partnering with Glenn Greenwald. The government needs expanded power to deal with terrorists at border locations–airports, etc.–but it needs to use those powers carefully. This is not the way free societies should act.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Next Birther Controversy

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted a story today about the next birther controversy–it’s not Barack Obama–it’s Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz has released his birth certificate to the Dallas Morning News. Senator Cruz was born in Canada to an American mother and a father who fled Castro’s Cuba. Under American law, Cruz became an American citizen at birth because his mother was an American. Under Canadian law, Cruz is a Canadian citizen because he was born in Canada.

The article reports:

The presidential requirement of being a “natural born citizen” in Article 2, Section 1 of the US Constitution is unique, in that the concept has pretty much no other application in American life.  However, it’s not so unique as to be completely without analogy or comprehension.  A natural-born citizen can be defined as an American that does not require extra intervention to access citizenship rights.  If Cruz had to go through the naturalization process to vote, for instance, or to get a US passport, then he would not qualify to run for President.  Instead, Cruz has been able to legally exercise his rights as a citizen without any other intervention except his coming of age, as all American citizens do.  Current law makes it clear that regardless of how Canada sees Cruz, the US saw him as a citizen by provenance of his birth — a natural-born citizen.

Senator Cruz’s birth certificate is actually not related to this controversy. Ed Morrissey wonders if Senator Cruz is being a little tongue-in-cheek here. Since the controversy is rather silly to begin with, he might as well have a good laugh about it.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Obvious Answer Is Not Always The Best One

First the Saturday People, then the Sunday People. That is an example of graffiti found in Muslim countries around the world. We are now seeing that idea acted out in Egypt. The Jewish population has already been driven out, now the Muslim Brotherhood is going after the Christians. There are two stories up at the Drudge Report this morning that illustrate that principle in action.

One of those stories was posted yesterday in the U.K. Mail. The story relates the story of an Islamist mob in Egypt that attacked a Christian school, knocked the cross off the gate, and paraded the nuns from the school through the streets as prisoners of war.

The article reports:

Police told Sister Manal that the nuns had been targeted by hardline Islamists, convinced that they had given Muslim children an inappropriate education.

‘We are nuns. We rely on God and the angels to protect us,’ she said. ‘At the end, they paraded us like prisoners of war and hurled abuse at us as they led us from one alley to another without telling us where they were taking us.’

Siblings Wardah and Bedour, two Christian women employed by the school, also found themselves having to fight their way through the mob while being groped, hit and insulted by the extremists.

So far two Christians have been killed since the military-backed government moved against protesters calling for former president Mohamed Morsi’s reinstatement.

And dozens of churches, homes and businesses owned by Christians have been attacked and razed to the ground.

The second story, from The Christian Science Monitor, was also posted yesterday.

That article reports:

The Saint Virgin Mary church in Al Nazla is one of 47 churches and monasteries that have been burned, robbed, or attacked since Aug. 14 in a wave of violence against Christians since the brutal police crackdown on the former president’s supporters, according to Ishak Ibrahim of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. He adds that dozens of Christian schools, other religious buildings, homes and shops have also been attacked and burned, and seven Christians killed. Police have done little to stop the attacks.

The victims say the attackers are Morsi supporters angered by the deaths in Cairo, and spurred on by Islamist rhetoric blaming Christians for Morsi’s ouster. The attacks are a realization of the long-held fears of many Christians and have prompted deep worry about widening religious violence in Egypt.

Had President Morsi remained in power in Egypt, these events would have been condoned by the Egyptian government. Although the bloodshed in Egypt is horrendous and will probably continue for a while, there would have been bloodshed if President Morsi had remained in office. A parallel to the coup in Egypt would have been a coup that ousted Hitler shortly after he came to power. Would the world have supported the leaders of that coup? That is the choice we are faced with.

This is not the time to deny aid to Egypt’s military. Egypt’s military will eventually bring stability to Egypt. It would not be wise for the United States to alienate them–they support peace with Israel, they keep the Suez Canal available to American warships, etc. I know our law says we will not give aid to a country after a coup, but we need to look at what this coup removed. The Obama Administration has had a habit of making up laws as they go along and ignoring the actual law. In this case that would be a good idea.

To deny aid to Egypt at this time would be a serious mistake in foreign policy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Of The People Who Actually Understands What Is Going On In The Middle East

There are a number of people who actually understand what is happening in Egypt and the Middle East. One of them is Michael Ledeen. He posted an article at PJMedia today to help the rest of us get some perspective.

Mr. Ledeen begins by explaining that there is a global war going on and we shouldn’t be looking at each country involved as a separate entity–this is one big picture with many parts–not many little pictures.

Some of Mr. Ledeen’s ideas:

For the most part, the deep thinkers zero in on the single battlefields.

…It could not be otherwise, since our government, our universities, our news organizations and our think tanks are all primarily organized to deal with countries, and our analysts, policy makers and military strategists inevitably think inside those boxes.  We don’t have an assistant secretary of defense for global strategy (FOOTNOTE:  actually we do, his name is Andrew Marshall, he’s a sprightly genius of 92 years, and he runs a largely-ignored corner of the Pentagon called “Net Assessments”), but we do have one for the Near East and South Asia.

…So there’s a global war, we’re the main target of the aggressors, and our leaders don’t see it and therefore have no idea how to win it.

…The war is easily described:  there is a global alliance of radical leftists and radical Islamists, supported by a group of countries that includes Russia, at least some Chinese leaders, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua).  The radicals include the Sunni and Shi’ite terrorist organizations and leftist groups, and they all work seamlessly with the narcotics mafias.  Their objective is the destruction of the West, above all, of the United States.

…Let’s get outside these little boxes and look at the big board.  There’s an alliance plotting against us, bound together by two radical views of the world that share a profound, fundamental hatred of us.  If they win, it’s hell to pay, because then we will be attacked directly and often, and we will be faced with only two options, winning or losing.

That’s the bad news.  The good news is that they’re divided, and slaughtering each other.  And it’s not always possible for us to sort out what “each other” even means.  But one thing is quite clear, and I know it’s an unpopular idea, but it’s a true fact:  they’re not an awesome force.  The radical left has failed everywhere, and so have the radical Islamists.  Both claim to have history (and/or the Almighty) on their side, but they go right on failing.  The left is now pretty much in the garbage bin of history (you can hire Gorbachev for your next annual meeting if you can afford his speaking fee), and the “Muslim world”–sorry to be so blunt–is a fossilized remnant of a failed civilization.  Look at the shambles in Iran, look at the colossal mess the Brothers unleashed on a once-great nation.

…So we’ve got opportunities, lots of them.  We’ve already passed up many:  failing to support the Iranian people against the evil regime that is the central source of terror against us and our would-be friends, failing to support Mubarak against the Brothers, failing to quickly support the opposition to Assad at the outset, before the enterprise got buried under a heap of jihadi manure, and so forth.  OK, we’re human, we’re led, if that’s the right verb, very badly, by ideologues who think we are the root cause of most of the world’s problems.  Which is the same thing our enemies believe, as luck would have it.  But this will pass, and even now we could transform the big global board by doing the strategically sound and morally correct thing, and support the Iranian people against the regime.  Don’t bomb them, don’t invade them, just tell the regime we know who and what they are, and start talking to their most dangerous enemies, the overwhelming majority of the Iranian nation.  We may not know exactly how to do it, but they do, and if we showed up, they would tell us.

That the regime fears them was demonstrated once again when the Iranian parliament rejected three nominees for the new government.  All three would have commanded ministries having to do with culture and education, which is to say young Iranians, the core of the opposition. Two of those candidates were associates of the Green Movement leaders, Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi.  During the debate, the word “Green” was heard more than 150 times, underlying the alarm of the deputies.

Of course they’re afraid.  They are right to be afraid.  And just think of the consequences of a free Iran:  the fall of the Syrian regime, a devastating blow to Hezbollah, the Revolutionary Guards, Islamic Jihad and Hamas.  Bad news for the Brothers.  A kick in the solar plexus of the nasty lefties in South America…

Think globally.  Act as if you understood it.  On our side, confound it.  And yes, faster, please.  Especially those of you who pretend to be capable of leading us after the departure of these guys…

As I said, Michael Ledeen is one of the most knowledgeable and rational experts on the Middle East.

Enhanced by Zemanta

From A Friend On Facebook

A picture of the Muslim Brotherhood in America:

In July 2007, seven key leaders of an Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) went on trial for charges that they had: (a) provided “material support and resources” to a foreign terrorist organization (namely Hamas); (b) engaged in money laundering; and (c) breached the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which prohibits transactions that threaten American national security. Along with the seven named defendants, the U.S. government released a list of approximately 300 “unindicted co-conspirators” and “joint venturers.” During the course of the HLF trial, many incriminating documents were entered into evidence. Perhaps the most significant of these was “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” by the Muslim Brotherhood operative Mohamed Akram. Federal investigators found Akram’s memo in the home of Ismael Elbarasse, a founder of the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, during a 2004 search. Elbarasse was a member of the Palestine Committee, which the Muslim Brotherhood had created to support Hamas in the United States.

Written sometime in 1987 but not formally published until May 22, 1991, Akram’s 18-page document listed the Brotherhood’s 29 likeminded “organizations of our friends” that shared the common goal of dismantling American institutions and turning the U.S. into a Muslim nation. These “friends” were identified by Akram and the Brotherhood as groups that could help convince Muslims “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 … so that … God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions.”

Akram was well aware that in the U.S., it would be extremely difficult to promote Islam by means of terror attacks. Thus the “grand jihad” that he and his Brotherhood comrades envisioned was not a violent one involving bombings and shootings, but rather a stealth (or “soft”) jihad aiming to impose Islamic law (Sharia) over every region of the earth by incremental, non-confrontational means, such as working to “expand the observant Muslim base”; to “unif[y] and direc[t] Muslims’ efforts”; and to “present Islam as a civilization alternative.” At its heart, Akram’s document details a plan to conquer and Islamize the United States – not as an ultimate objective, but merely as a stepping stone toward the larger goal of one day creating “the global Islamic state.”

In line with this objective, Akram and the Brotherhood resolved to “settle” Islam and the Islamic movement within the United States, so that the Muslim religion could be “enabled within the souls, minds and the lives of the people of the country.” Akram explained that this could be accomplished “through the establishment of firmly-rooted organizations on whose bases civilization, structure and testimony are built.” He urged Muslim leaders to make “a shift from the collision mentality to the absorption mentality,” meaning that they should abandon any tactics involving defiance or confrontation, and seek instead to implant into the larger society a host of seemingly benign Islamic groups with ostensibly unobjectionable motives; once those groups had gained a measure of public acceptance, they would be in a position to more effectively promote societal transformation by the old Communist technique of “boring from within.”

“The heart and the core” of this strategy, said Akram, was contingent upon these groups’ ability to develop “a mastery of the art of ‘coalitions.’” That is, by working synergistically they could complement, augment, and amplify one another’s efforts. Added Akram: “The big challenge that is ahead of us is how to turn these seeds or ‘scattered’ elements into comprehensive, stable, ‘settled’ organizations that are connected with our Movement and which fly in our orbit and take orders from our guidance.” The ultimate objective was not only an enlarged Muslim presence, but also implementation of the Brotherhood objectives of transforming pluralistic societies, particularly America, into Islamic states, and sweeping away Western notions of legal equality, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.

Akram and the Brotherhood understood that in order to succeed in this endeavor, they needed to appeal to different strata of the American population in different ways; that whereas some people could be influenced by messages delivered from a religious perspective, others would be more responsive to messages delivered by educators, or bankers, or political figures, or journalists, etc. Thus, Akram’s blueprint for the advancement of the Islamic movement stressed the need to form a coalition of groups coming from the worlds of education; religious proselytization; political activism; audio and video production; print media; banking and finance; the physical sciences; the social sciences; professional and business networking; cultural affairs; the publishing and distribution of books; children and teenagers; women’s rights; vocational concerns; and jurisprudence.

By promoting the Islamic movement on such a wide variety of fronts, the Brotherhood and its allies could multiply exponentially their influence. Toward that end, the Akram/Brotherhood “Explanatory Memorandum” named the following 29 groups as the organizations they believed could collaborate effectively to destroy America from within – “if they all march according to one plan”:

Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)

ISNA Fiqh Committee (now known as the Fiqh Council of North America)

ISNA Political Awareness Committee

Muslim Youth of North America

Muslim Students Association of the U.S. and Canada

Association of Muslim Scientists and Engineers

Islamic Medical Association (of North America)

Islamic Teaching Center

Malaysian Islamic Study Group

Foundation for International Development

North American Islamic Trust

Islamic Centers Division

American Trust Publications

Audio-Visual Center

Islamic Book Service

Islamic Circle of North America

Muslim Arab Youth Association

Islamic Association for Palestine

United Association for Studies and Research

International Institute of Islamic Thought

Muslim Communities Association

Association of Muslim Social Scientists (of North America)

Islamic Housing Cooperative

Muslim Businessmen Association

Islamic Education Department

Occupied Land Fund (later known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development)

Mercy International Association

Baitul Mal Inc.

Islamic Information Center (of America)

By setting up these many front groups, the Muslim Brotherhood was emulating the Communist Party tactic of creating interlocking front groups during the Cold War in order to confuse its enemies and make it more difficult to combat.

This information comes from the exhibits in the Holy Land Foundation trial. The plan for ending democracy in America is 32 pages long–the English translation begins on page 16. It is well worth reading.

Not every Muslim in America wants to turn America into an Islamic state–many are peace-loving, patriotic Americans. Unfortunately, there are many Muslims who have influence in our government who do want to end our constitutional republic. This is the battle to save America. Please be informed. Learn what your children are being taught in school and pay attention to the actions of your elected officials. Now is the time to protect our republic.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Objective Commentary On America’s Foreign Policy In The Middle East

One of the best sources of objective information on the Middle East is the Middle East Forum. The Middle East Forum posted an article last week entitled, “America‘s Problems in the Middle East are Just Beginning.” The article is not particularly encouraging, but it is frank and objective.

The opening paragraphs of the article state:

It’s 2015, and there is a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas), financed by Iran, wins an election on a platform demanding the expulsion of the Jews from Israel. Iran meanwhile smuggles shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles to terrorist cells in Palestine that can take down civilian airlines at Ben-Gurion airport. With backing from the Egyptian military, Fatah throws out the elected Hamas government and kills larger number of Hamas supporters. What will Washington do? Given the track record of both the Obama administration and the Republican mainstream, one would expect America to denounce the use of violence against a democratically-elected government.

Such is the absurdity of both parties’ stance towards Egypt: the Egyptian military is doing America’s dirty work, suppressing a virulently anti-modern, anti-Semitic and anti-Western Islamist movement whose leader, Mohammed Morsi, famously referred to Israelis as “apes and pigs.” It did so with the enthusiastic support of tens of millions of Egyptians who rallied in the streets in support of the military. And the American mainstream reacted with an ideological knee jerk. America’s presence in the Middle East has imploded.

It is obvious to even the most casual observer that America’s Middle East policy is a disaster. It has been so dictated by our dependence on oil and by our lack of understanding of the civilizations and organizations we are dealing with that we have absolutely no moral authority or solid ground to stand on. Our government has been infiltrated and influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood since the 1990’s (see government exhibit 3-85.pdf–as it was called during the first part of the Holy Land Foundation Trial). The first half of the exhibit is in Arabic, you have to scroll about halfway through it to find the English translation. The document explains how to present Islam as a civilization alternative with the goal of bringing America into a world-wide caliphate.

The article at the Middle East Forum concludes:

America cannot bear to think about its own Civil War because the wounds are too painful; in order to reunite the country after 1865, we concocted a myth of tragic fratricide. Wilsonian idealism was born of the South’s attempt to suppress its guilt for the war, I have argued in the past. That is an academic consideration now. America’s credibility in the Middle East, thanks to the delusions of both parties, is broken, and it cannot be repaired within the time frame required to forestall the next stage of violence. Egypt’s military and its Saudi backers are aghast at American stupidity. Israel is frustrated by America’s inability to understand that Egypt’s military is committed to upholding the peace treaty with Israel while the Muslim Brotherhood wants war. Both Israel and the Gulf States observe the utter fecklessness of Washington’s efforts to contain Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

The events of the past week have demonstrated that America’s allies in the Middle East from Israel to the Persian Gulf can trust no-one in Washington–neither Barack Obama nor John McCain. Those of us in America who try to analyze events in the region will be the last to hear the news, and the value of our work will diminish over time.

I don’t know if democracy is possible in the Arab world. Turkey did a reasonable job of it for a while, but the Islamists are in the process of taking over Turkey, and democracy and Sharia Law are not compatible. Western civilization promotes freedom, property rights, and individual achievement. Those values are not part of Sharia Law. Until we acknowledge that there is such a thing as a superior civilization, we will continue attempting to negotiate with people who simply want us dead or under their control.

Please follow the link above to the Middle East Forum and read the entire article. It is not encouraging, but it is honest.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Great Weekend Story

Yesterday Yahoo News posted a story that reminds us that compassion is still a part of our world. Inbar Chomsky of Rehovot, Israel, was on her way to Camp Simcha in Glen Spey, New York, a camp for children who suffer from cancer and other hematologic illnesses. As she was seated on the plane in Israel, preparing for the flight to New York, the flight attendants could not find her passport. After an extensive search, her passport was not found, she was taken off the plane and her mother was called to pick her up. The plane prepared for take off and headed for the runway.

As the plane approached the runway, someone located Inbar Chomsky’s passport. The plane turned around, picked up the child and headed for New York.

The article reports:

Although Yahoo! Shine could not reach an El Al spokesperson for comment, the airline sent a statement to the Times of Israel that read, “Planes rarely return to the gate after departing. The plane was on its way to the runway, when the passport was found on the plane. After consulting with El Al crew on the plane and El Al staff at the airport the decision was made and the plane returned to pick up Inbar. El Al was honored and proud to help Inbar’s dream to go to the camp in the USA come true. We wish Inbar full recovery and health.”

What a fantastic story!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Exactly What Is Hate Speech?

The beginning of this story is about a month old, but there are some recent events related to the story, so I am posting it now. Admittedly, I missed it when it happened.

On July 24, Breitbart.com posted an article about Lt. Col. Kenneth Reyes, a U.S. Air Force Christian chaplain currently serving at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska. Col. Reyes has a page on the base’s website called “Chaplain’s Corner.”

The article reports:

Reyes recently wrote an essay entitled, “No Atheists in Foxholes: Chaplains Gave All in World War II.” This common saying is attributed to a Catholic priest in World War II, made famous when President Dwight D. Eisenhower said during a 1954 speech: “I am delighted that our veterans are sponsoring a movement to increase our awareness of God in our daily lives. In battle, they learned a great truth that there are no atheists in the foxholes.”

As reported by Fox News’s Todd Starnes, when Reyes referenced this famous line in his essay, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) contacted the base commander, Col. Brian Duffy, demanding he take action on Reyes’s “anti-secular diatribe.”

MRFF’s letter says that by Reyes’s “use of the bigoted, religious supremacist phrase, ‘no atheists in foxholes,’ he defiles the dignity of service members.” They accuse him of violating military regulations.

The essay was removed from the website and Col. Duffy apologized to the MRFF. However, the MRFF wanted more. They stated, “Faith based hate, is hate all the same,” and, “Lt. Col. Reyes must be appropriately punished.” (Emphasis added).

The article quotes the response of Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin of the Family Research Council, “A chaplain has been censored for expressing his beliefs about the role of faith in the lives of service members… Why do we have chaplains if they aren’t allowed to fulfill that purpose?”

Thanks to the actions of the American Family Association, the essay has been put back up on the website. Base commander Colonel Brian Duffy was influenced by over 70,000 emails and scores of posts on the base’s Facebook page by AFA supporters.

So what is the lesson we can learn from this episode? Anyone can call anything they want hate speech. If you are someone that supports the rights of military chaplains to speak of their faith, you need to be ready to respond when something like this happens. The response of everyday people like us makes a difference–even the military will respond to public opinion. If you hear of an incident like this one, speak up, be heard. If this is important to you, get involved with an organization such as the American Family Association or the Family Research Council. If we do not speak up when something like this happens, we may lose the right to speak at all.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Poem For A Saturday

The following poem was written by Tarzana Joe. His website is tarzanajoe.blogspot.com. He is available to fill all of your poetry needs. He appears on the Hugh Hewitt radio show on Salem Network on Fridays at 8:55 pm eastern time.

HOPE AND CHANGE REVISITED

I feel like such a dope
I thought it was the hope
Just like the pundits told us
Our aspirations sold us
But clearly, truth to tell
Hope’s a thing ALL politicians sell

So as involved persuasion
Hope was only part of the equation

And in this double feature
Change is quite a different creature
Now even on vacation
The leader of our nation
Is starting to perceive
Change is somewhat harder to achieve
As scientist all say
An object that’s at rest tends to stay that way
Plus when the dust is cleared
Hope is always welcome
Change is often feared
Sure I want a brand new phone
But I’ll stay in my comfort zone
And seeing what’s occurred
Change has been delayed, waived and deferred
With laws subject to erasure
Change may come…but slower than a glacier
And though the goal was laudable
It’s taking more than hope
To make health care affordable

 

What In The World Is This About?

Yesterday the Washington Times reported that The American Political Action Committee, or AMPAC, is planning a “Million Muslim March” in Washington, D.C., on September 11.

The article reports:

The American Political Action Committee, or AMPAC, is demanding “that laws be enacted protecting our 1st amendment. We are asking President Obama to fulfill his promise from his first campaign for Presidency of a transparent government. Lastly, we are asking for the release of the 9/11 commission report to the American people,” the event posting states on their website.

AMPAC’s Chief of Operations Isa Hodge writes that Muslims and non-Muslims alike were traumatized by the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, “but we as Muslims continue 12 years later to be victimized by being made the villains.”

I don’t know how to break this gently to AMPAC, but Muslim terrorists were the villains on 911.

The article quotes one of the leaders of the group:

“These lies told to the American population has made it impossible for us to do true Dawa,” Ms. Hodge continues, referring to the practice of proselytizing or preaching Islam.

“It is time for us as Muslims in America to stop being defensive and start being proactive by using our right to vote and our freedom of assemble and let our voices be heard by our country and the world. Stand with us help us fight the injustices being committed against us.”

According to AMPAC’s website, part of the group’s mission statement seeks “to encourage and seek Muslim American candidates for public office and explain positions of other political candidates to Muslim American voters.”

I think I am a rather typical American, and I don’t have any objection at all to Muslims sharing their faith. I do, however, object to them bringing some of their customs to America–discrimination against women, female genital mutilation, honor killing, Sharia Law–just to name a few. If Muslims want to run for office, that is fine, as long as they understand that the Oath of Office they take in that office requires them to uphold the American Constitution.

There are a few things we need to remember when we hear Muslim groups complain that they are being targeted. First of all, they are not being targeted. The fact remains that the 911 hijackers were all Muslim terrorists–that was the religion they practiced and their religion was their motivation for the attack. Second, there is a concept in Islam called “taqiyya.” Taqiyya is loosely described as lying for the sake of Islam. Make no mistake. The goal of Islam is a world-wide caliphate. Putting Islamists in office (their religion allows them to lie when taking the Oath of Office) is risky at best. I am sure there are Muslims who love America and embrace America’s freedoms, but there are many who refuse to assimilate. I don’t expect to see a lot of America-loving Muslims in the march on 911. (Actually, there may not be a lot of people there to begin with–Facebook shows five people attending as of yesterday.)

We may not be at war with Islam, but we need to understand that a very large part of Islam is at war with us–their goal is the destruction of western civilization. We can defend our civilization or we can lose it–the choice is ours.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Prepare For An Exponential Increase In Government Intrusion

Yesterday The Examiner posted an article about a provision of ObamaCare that has not gotten a lot of publicity. The provision allows government agents to engage in “home health visits” for those in certain “high-risk” categories. Doesn’t sound too ominous until you look at the “high-risk” categories.

The article lists the categories:

Families where mom is not yet 21;
• Families where someone is a tobacco user;
• Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities, and
• Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States.

Missing from the list given in the article is families with firearms, but that is now included in the questions your doctor is supposed to ask you.

The article explains how this program will totally invade the privacy of Americans and undermine the authority of American parents:

Constitutional attorney and author Kent Masterson Brown said that despite what HHS says, the program is not “voluntary.”

“The eligible entity receiving the grant for performing the home visits is to identify the individuals to be visited and intervene so as to meet the improvement benchmarks,” he said. “A homeschooling family, for instance, may be subject to ‘intervention’ in ‘school readiness’ and ‘social-emotional developmental indicators.’ A farm family may be subject to ‘intervention’ in order to ‘prevent child injuries.’ The sky is the limit.”

Joshua Cook said that while the administration would claim the program only applies to those on Medicaid, the new law, by its own definition, has no such limitation.

“Intervention,” he added, quoting Brown, “may be with any family for any reason. It may also result in the child or children being required to go to certain schools or taking certain medications and vaccines and even having more limited – or no – interaction with parents. The federal government will now set the standards for raising children and will enforce them by home visits.”

The Health and Human Services Department has allocated $224 million for these home visits.

This needs to be stopped before it begins.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Lt. Col. Allen West Speaks In Stoughton

Tonight I had the privilege of hearing Lt. Col. Allen West speak at the Ahavath Torah Congregation in Stoughton, Massachusetts. The subject of his speech was America’s past promises and current realities. Below are some of his observations:

Col. West reminded us that Massachusetts was the birthplace of America. The spirit that gave birth to those documents was born in Massachusetts. The promise was one of limited government whose power rested in the individual. That promise has allowed America to exist for 237 years. The promise included the individual freedom to participate in the free market. Part of the promises of the past was faith in something bigger than ourselves.

We need to protect the promises of the past. In our own homes we need to practice fiscal responsibility. We need to demand that our government also practice fiscal responsibility.

Booker T. Washington described the three pillars of society as education, entrepreneurship, and self-reliance. Right now our children are not receiving the education they need to prepare them to be responsible citizens, the government is taking more control of the economy, and the government is encouraging dependency by actively recruiting people to sign up for food stamps. Our current government is destroying the promises of the past.

We need to bring America back to the promises of the past.  Col. West ended his planned remarks with a question all of us need to ask ourselves, “What did I do today to insure that my children and grandchildren will have a greater America?”

During the question and answer period after his remarks, Col. West pointed out the need for a select committee to investigate Benghazi. He suggested that we tell our Congressmen to support House Resolution 36. He also pointed out some of the areas that we as Americans need to challenge the current politicians. He mentioned that school choice is the number one issue in the black community, yet one of the first things President Obama did after taking office was to shut down a school choice program in Washington, D.C. As Americans who care about our country, we need to learn to frame the issues in a way that shows how those issues impact people’s lives every day. Abstract numbers are not nearly as effective in getting out a candidate’s message as pointing out to a person how something the government is doing directly impacts their standard of living.

Enhanced by Zemanta