Gore positions himself as a "Power Broker"

Like most messianic leaders of a movement, I have always wondered if Al Gore was “certifiable” …

What happens to a man who has been groomed his entire life to assume the Presidency of the United States and loses the prize by the narrowest of margins due to a confluence of events beyond his immediate control? Can a man who has scaled the pinnacle of presidential politics simply retire or retreat into the background while life moves on?

In Gore’s case, it seems that he was privileged to be at the right point in time and space to capitalize on the “climate” issue. An issue which provides him with continuing ego-stroking accolades and the power and money to be the acknowledged leader of a worldwide movement. Free of the political constraints of having to respond to his critics or account for his funds, it seems Al Gore has done well for himself by finding his own personal nirvana.

Generating a different kind of power …

In a sense, Al Gore is his own self-interest. Free of the constraints which require the disclosure of his business dealings, especially those which are constituted as offshore entities. Al Gore can profit from his pronouncements and earn money from his speeches, writings and by hooking into the hedge fund capital scene to raise money for investments in things that he promotes. Not that there is anything wrong with this other than the possibility that it is based on “junk science” or that government subsidies for certain investments may not be forthcoming in the future.

From Wikipedia

Gore is currently the cofounder and chairman of Generation Investment Management, cofounder and chairman of the Emmy Award - winning American television channel Current TV … He is also a partner in the venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, heading that firm's climate change solutions group.”

“Generation Investment Management LLP is a London-based investment management firm with an investment style that blends traditional equity research with a focus on sustainability factors, including social and environmental responsibility and corporate governance.”

“Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore is chairman of Generation, and David Blood — previously chief executive of Goldman Sachs Asset Management — is CEO. The pair has given the company its nickname, ‘Blood and Gore.’”

“In November 2007, Generation and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers announced a global collaboration to "find, fund and accelerate green business, technology and policy solutions with the greatest potential to help solve the current climate crisis." As part of the collaboration, prominent KPCB Partner John Doerr joined Generation's Advisory Board.”

“Generation Investment Management LLP is authorized and regulated by the Financial Services Authority in the UK.”

You would think that any organization headed by an American and run by Americans would be headquartered in the United States and subject to control by the Securities Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and other such consumer protection agencies?

The “rain making” publicity machine …

Gore’s primary task is to keep the climate story on the front page and opening the door to new business contacts for his partners to exploit. So we often see outrageous headlines that are crafted more for their ability to attract media attention than the truth they assert.

From Politico.com … 

Gore compares offshore drilling to invasion of Iraq

“In a surprise appearance at Netroots Nation — which apparently was the worst-kept secret in Austin, Texas — former Vice President Al Gore followed up a speech by Nancy Pelosi by laying out a narrative on climate change and the energy crisis that seems ready-made for the Obama campaign to download.”

“If you look at the seriousness of the climate crisis, you see how it ties to the economic crisis and the national security threat that we face,” he said. “200 billion dollars are being sent overseas just from oil.”

It is amazing that the far-left ties a phony climate crisis where time frames are measured in hundreds and thousands of years to present day military and economic threat issues. Especially since this far-left crowd is historically about weakening the United States militarily and economically.

“’The idea that we can drill our way out of this is just so absurd,’ he said, comparing the push for offshore oil drilling — which has gained popularity and put environmentalists on the defense — to dealing with a hangover by having another drink.”

A cute word-picture which is entirely inaccurate. Perhaps a more accurate picture would be dealing with the thirst of a nation by further closing the water tap and charging more for the drink. And, of course, all the while demanding that people drink costly “alternative” water bottled at a huge profit by the legislator’s friends.

“The defenders of the status quo are the ones who have dug us into this hole,” he said, commenting that Americans have been “so often fooled into finding a remedy for a problem" that has nothing to do with the problem at hand — pointing to the invasion of Iraq when America was attacked by terrorists in Afghanistan as an example.

Notice the subtle switch of subject: from environmental concerns to military commentary.

Does Gore really believe that the American people are so stupid as not to realize that it was his democrat party, himself included, that have been the traditional the defenders of the status quo? 

That the democrat who supported NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Nor Anytime) policies that created this crisis are are uniquely complicit in today’s war on terror?

Democrats who refused to expand the exploitation of our own energy reserves and which pushed us into supporting Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries on their terms. Enriching them with our money so they could support IslamoFascism.  Making it virtually impossible to attack the real source of terror in the Middle East: Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria?

Does Gore believe that, given the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, the anti-nuclear stance of the democrats which precluded the use of relatively clean and economically viable energy generation in favor of heavily subsidized unreliable energy sources, was in the best interests of America?

On this subject, Gore is like most politicians: full of crap and in full denial of historical records.

“’The engines of distraction and the great concentrated power of communication that you’ve seen turned on this issue or that issue is already hard at work,’ he says. "’They will say we can’t switch away from oil.’"

Again, with the misdirection. Most of today’s media is biased towards the liberal left and spends much of its time bashing the Bush Administration and ignoring any good news that would enlighten and embolden ordinary American citizens. And if they say anything about energy,  it is mostly about the perils of drilling and pumping oil and the problem with nuclear waste. And anything else that would keep American from becoming energy independent.

“’We have to switch our electricity generation system,” he says, noting that changing transportation fuels will take longer, before reiterating his plan to ensure that “100 percent of our electricity [comes] from renewable sources and carbon-constrained fuels over the next 10 years.”

We need to build a better fault-tolerant electrical grid. We need to reduce pollution. We need to develop a scientific basis linking carbon dioxide to anything before we simply decide to chuck carbon-source energy in the dustbin and confer a great advantage on our enemies who are less suicidal than the democrats.

"It is not partisan, it is focused on this single objective," he says. "we are trying to mobilize ten million grassroots activists.”

With Gore, it is about being post-partisan and attracting the largest possible audience for his ideas. But has anybody noticed that the “Netroots Nation” is simply the new name of the annual YearlyKos convention. A rabid far-left political blogging organization which often spews hate and filth at those who disagree with its far-left anti-America agenda?

In response to a question about whether he'd join an Obama administration as climate czar, he says he'd rather "focus on trying to enlarge the political space in which political officials address this climate crisis ... I have seen how important it is to develop a base of support.

One of my greatest criticisms of Al Gore is that he is continually playing in the political space rather than putting together conferences of scientists who will hash out what we know, what we don’t know and what we need to do in order to continue to discover the truth about global climate change.

People for a perfect planet: a new secular religion?

The sad truth regarding Al Gore’s accomplishments is that they will be forever tainted with their association of the far-left of the political spectrum. Those who have co-opted the environmental movement in order to secure their political agenda. Some of which believe man is an unrepentant, filthy stain on the planet’s ecosystem and that his effects should be minimized at all costs. Many of these people belong to splinter sects which believe that animals have legal and civil rights and that we need to reverse the tide of civilization in order to live closer to the land.

A great cover for those who want to do physical harm to America by curtailing its ability to defend itself militarily and support itself economically. Scratch many ecologists and you will find some of the older “peace at any price” and “no nukes” crowd who objected to the rise of nuclear energy, not because it may have been ecologically unfriendly in the old days, but because it put their worshiped Soviet Union at a great military disadvantage.

This has morphed into a new secular religion which requires faith to believe all of its teachings. And, like most religions, fosters a sense of community in the social sense. Where people of like mind can meet and congratulate themselves on doing good works on behalf of the planet. Somewhat like cynical apolitical guys joining the Young Democrats, Young Republicans and various protest groups to get at the hot babes that frequented such events.

This new religion seems like an amazing parallel to the Church of Scientology that was founded by the science fiction writer L.Ron Hubbard. Both profess to want to help mankind overcome its burden. With Scientology, an internal burden and with Gore, the external burden on the planet. Both purport to make the world a better place. Both have an extremely high buy-in – in terms of commitment and cost. Both have shadowy leadership which minimizes media confrontation. Both use celebrities to attract additional supporters. Both have  a following of vocal skeptics. And both feature end-results which are somewhat unbelievable to the person not a member of the religion.

While it seemed important at the time, history may evaluate both Gore’s Noble Peace Prize ,which is a non-scientific political accolade, and his Oscar for a deeply-flawed and misleading “documentary” film to be little more than a timely anti-Bush Administration “poke-in-the-eye" Granted for the purposes of pursuing a political agenda rather than for any solid accomplishment by an individual.

A warning beacon for the planet or simply a political shill for special interests?

While the science is still out on the subject of anthropogenic climate change, there is the possibility that the science will not support Gore’s assertions and that his efforts were simply as a shill for those who wanted to enlarge their bureaucratic constituencies, assume greater political power,  raise taxes, engage in further social engineering which curtails personal liberty and freedom as well as making large amounts of money for themselves and their special interest supporters. What better way to plunder the public treasury with little or no threat of an uprising of those who are being forced to pay the price of making the rich much, much richer and the moving the powerful beyond the bounds of reproach.

Most disturbing …

The most disturbing facet of Al Gore’s work is that he tightly controls media access to his high-cost, well-attended events and refuses to engage in a debate about his work or his conclusions.

What can YOU do?

Demand that there be some rationality in our plan to achieve energy independence – which is at the root of most of our economic and statecraft problems.

Do not vote for those who have been traditional obstructions or who have corrupted the system beyond all recognition. By which I mean the democrats who have placed us in this pickle.

Recognize that the sometimes inept and uncommunicative Bush Administration has performed better than the democrats; regardless of what the left-leaning media may proclaim.

Vote your pocketbook. Do you want to pay more taxes, travel less, give up air travel altogether. Are you about economic growth or economic sacrifice?

Vote the bastards on both sides of the aisle out of office. And that includes local and state elected officials who tend to think of themselves as our new royalty and able to loot the public purse at will.

Be true to yourself, your family and friends. A political party is not a sports team where strategy can be hotly discussed, but the resulting score is not open to interpretation and is instantaneously available to all citizens regardless of their position or belief.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the day:  “Everything is vague to a degree you do not realize till you have tried to make it precise.” -- Bertrand Russell

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

Ben Smith's Blog: Gore compares offshore drilling to invasion of Iraq - Politico.com


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


WHAT THE DEMOCRATS WANT YOU TO BELIEVE

I just received this video link from a good friend (and wonderful cook) who unfortunately is a rabidly hyper-partisan democrat. Her heart is always in the right place and she helps people beyond what anyone has a right to expect. However, she, like most democrats, thinks with her heart and not her head.

So to avoid wasting this opportunity to enlighten my readers, I am posting the video she sent.

"I’m Voting Republican" is one of the best anti-Republican videos I have seen. The production values are superb.

While each and every point can be refuted, it is more instructive to just see what the democrat party is up to and do the opposite.

Are they strong on national defense?

Hell no, they are “cut and run” surrender monkeys who would give further aid and comfort to our enemies by publishing withdrawal time tables. They would consign millions of people to slaughter when we precipitously withdrew from the area – remember what happened in Cambodia and Vietnam. The democrats are the ones who believe you can have a “meaningful” dialogue with brutal dictators and religious nut cases. A two-word refutation: Jimmy Carter!

About the war. Nobody likes war and the tragedy it brings to our soldiers and innocent bystanders. For the democrats to paint anyone as a “warmonger” is to dangerously ignore history and live in an ivory tower.

Do they support energy independence?

They want higher gasoline prices, it means more tax money for them. They want to force you into carpools and trains. With the democrats, a car is a luxury only to be enjoyed by the limousine liberals who talk about energy like they really know which end is up. No, they bend over for the environmental movement which believes that man is a scourge on the “pristine” planet. There votes have kept us from developing our own oil resources and clean nuclear energy. These are the “asshats” that condemned millions of Africans and others to death when they forced a ban on the pesticide DDT using junk science and publicity. A false speculation disproven by real science … and people continue to die because of their high-handed position. With these people American has become a banana republic. (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Nor Anytime)

Do they support the unions?

With their crippling work rules that have destroyed the auto industry in Detroit? Do they pander to corrupt union leadership by introducing rules which would deny workers the right to a secret ballot when being recruited by a union?

Do they want to lower your taxes?

No they want to continue spending and spending for “their” special interests. I sure hope you didn’t want to retire. They want a big government bureaucracy, especially one that votes democrat to keep government big. They want to use your money for towing clouds and other global warming initiatives – even though their is more scientific evidence against their unusual ideas when it comes to man’s ability to control nature.

Will they protect your birthright?

No they want to extend the rights of citizenship to every Pedro, Jesus and Maria that managed to illegally cross the border. To them, this is their future: voters who will beholden to the democrat party for their liberation. I hope you don’t mind that they will destroy the sovereignty of the United States and cripple our healthcare, education, retirement, judicial, social and cultural infrastructure in the process.

Do they have clean hands when it comes to massive governmental corruption and chaos?

A two-word refutation: Bill Clinton! Anther two-word refutation: Obama-Rezko.

Do they have a position on health care?

You bet. They want to tell you which doctor you can see. What treatments you can have. (None of that experimental stuff which just might save for life in a last ditch attempt) No they want to tell doctors how much they can earn. Is it any wonder the enrollment in medical schools is down and that many doctors are foreign-born and foreign trained? And not to the exacting standards of American medical schools.

How many blacks and minorities have they actually placed in positions of  high governmental power?

Last time I looked, we had two black Republicans serving as the Secretary of State.

Do they play the race, ethnicity, gender and class cards?

You bet, it’s a program of divide and conquer to assume control over small, manageable segments of the population rather than seeking broad public acceptance. By building coalitions of small fringe groups, they hope to exceed the tipping point to political power. But, you ask yourself, what have they promised to these various groups should the be elected? And will they, based on historical performance, deliver what they promise? Do some of these fringe ideas run counter to mainstream America – you bet! Especially when playing the Marxist class card: “the rich have too much and they need to share it with the unfortunate.” Now I don’t mind charity, but I will be damned if I will let rank politicians and the effete Hollywood elite tell me who I must donate to.

Believe in the bible or the ten commandments?

If so, better not read one in a public place like a library or on the steps of a Courthouse. Someone might be offended and use the ACLU (American Communist Liberties Union) to sue you for violating the separation of church and state.

Are they Marxists?

Decide for yourself whether or not they believe that the rights of the “collective” should triumph over the rights of the “individual.” Are they the party of wealth re-distribution? 

Why don’t they see the world like I do?

You would think that this is a hard question to answer? You would be wrong. The answer is simple. Many good people who happen to be democrats, trust their emotions and their feelings over what they know. Many adopt this position because they can't trust what the hear or see in the mainstream media and the alternative media like talkradio and cable news seems populated with kooks and previously-indicted talking heads.They believe in a world the way it should be or the way they would like it to be. Their are eternally optimistic and believe that every new politician that comes along will be the one to bring the required change to the world and make it a better place. Unfortunately, high-minded and well-spoken people like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton proved them wrong. The first, Carter, was singlehandedly responsible for the rise of IslamoFascism in the world. And the second, Clinton, squandered his presidency in an orgy of self-gratification and political chaos and corruption. Not that Bush has been much better in the mismanagement of the government, but he did provide the necessary defense against our enemies whereas Carter and Clinton weakened the United States and refused to engage our enemies on a meaningful level.

A last question for Barack Obama …

Why should we believe what you are saying to the American public?

You heavily criticized outsourcing and NAFTA while your representatives were telling our friends and neighbors, the Canadians, that you really didn’t mean what you were saying and that your rhetoric was for public consumption.

You denied that any of your campaign people had such a meeting and said it was more campaign slander.

But when the transcript of the conversation surfaced, along with the visit logs and the testimony of the officials involved – all you did was fire your campaign surrogate.

Again, Barack Obama, I ask: how can this nation trust you?

What can YOU do?

You are an American, demand all presidential candidates answer your questions fully, completely and without equivocation or conditions.

Do not accept answers from any surrogate as they have been known to lie, cheat and steal – and when caught, abandoned by their masters. Make the candidate say what they believe out-loud and on the record.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

THE SAD TRUTH IS THAT THE DEMOCRATS DO NOT HAVE A REAL POSITION ON ANYTHING: NO CORE BELIEFS – THEY WILL SAY OR DO ANYTHING TO GET ELECTED.

THEY ARE RUNNING ON NEGATIVES: AGAINST GEORGE BUSH AND THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION – AND IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY, BUSH AND HIS ADMINISTRATION ARE NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE.


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


John Kerry: The Enemy's Best Friend & Vice Presidential Candidate?

Obama’s man on national defense…

John Kerry, the cheese-eating surrender monkey who acts like a Frenchman, should just keep quiet on military matters since his own service seems to be riddled with self-aggrandizing claims to medals that may have been awarded under suspicious conditions. Here is a man who was “Swift-boated” by the men her served with who found him unsuitable for the position of Commander-in-Chief. In addition to his somewhat questionable service record, which he refused to release during his campaign for the Presidency and which remains unreleased at the present time, he was the first to accuse his fellow soldiers of committing various atrocities  in Vietnam; later portrayed as being second hand information. In my mind, John Kerry is Jane Fonda in drag … having given aid and comfort to our enemies.

Politics as usual …

The mere fact that he claims that John McCain is “confused” and “unbelievably out of touch” for misspeaking on a few occasions is more indicative of his own character than it is McCain’s. Although I am not running for President, I often can’t remember if it is the Shia or the Sunis who are in Iran as I consider them both enemies of the civilized world with their belief that all infidels must die or surrender to Allah.

As for his claim that McCain’s “incredulity” comment on the timing of troop withdrawal, I suppose Kerry would publish the timetable and thus provide our enemies with yet another opportunity to stick it in the eye of an America that Kerry seems to believe is deeply flawed.

From Ben Smith’s Blog…

“Kerry: McCain confused, 'unbelievably out of touch'”

John Kerry, who's served in the past as Obama's heavy-hitter on national security, expressed incredulity at McCain's remark this morning that the timing of troops return is "not too important."

This would be the very last person that I would ask on matters of national security. I would probably ask his Massachusetts' buddy and fellow-Senator Teddy Kennedy to plot national defense strategy or foreign policy before I would ask this cheese-eating French surrender monkey.

"It is unbelievably out of touch and inconsistent with the needs of Americans and particularly the families of troops who are over there. To them it’s the most important thing in the world when they come home," he said. "It’s a policy for staying in Iraq."

Inconsistent and out of touch with the needs of Americans? Most Americans don’t have a clue to what is happening in Iraq, Afghanistan or Iran due to the hyper-partisan left-leaning media and the rantings of the majority of democrats who would rather see America as a loser in order to regain political power. For these democrats, it’s not a matter of national security, it’s a matter of party politics.

Kerry and Obama aide Susan Rice also both said McCain is "confused" -- a line some in McCain's camp will surely take as a shot at the candidate's age.

McCain may be confused about many things, Senator Kerry, but patriotism, love for the United States of America and knowing which side he is on are not things he is ambivalent or confused about. On the other hand, I wonder about your confusion that apparently leads America to a resounding defeat.

"’He confuses who Iran is training, he confuses what the makeup of Al Qaedais, he confuses the history going back to 682 of what has happened to Sunni and Shia,’ Kerry said.”

So do I. But I know they are all bad, hate the United States and would kill you and your family if given the chance. What more do you have to remember? Only an asshat like John Kerry would care about this split between the sects in 682 when both parties tried to assume control over a toxic religious abomination.

“UPDATE: Asked if ‘confused’ was a shot at McCain's age, Rice responded: ‘What I meant by that was very simple: That on critical factual questions that are fundamental to understanding what is going on in Iraq and the region, Senator McCain has gotten it wrong, and not just once but repeatedly.’"

“Kerry called the suggestion it had something to do with age ‘unfair and a ridiculous.’"

A gentlemanly denial from a man who is no gentleman.

"There are plenty of Senators and Congressmen in Washington, D.C., who understand the difference and don’t make the mistakes that he has made with respect to those policies," Kerry said, mentioning

John Warner. "They know who the Sunni are and they know who the Shia are."

But the most important fact, McCain’s advisors know. The Military knows. The Intelligence agencies know. And for me that is good enough, especially because I trust John McCain with the defense of America from our enemies, both foreign and domestic. Whereas, I trust John Kerry to find rich wives to support his “French” life-style.

Fellow democrat, Joseph Lieberman weighs in …

According to TheHill.com …

“’To put it mildly, I’m disappointed by these reflexive attacks on what Sen. McCain said on the 'Today Show' this morning,’ Lieberman said. He added: ‘I regret these comments made today, and I hope we can get back to the facts.’”

“Lieberman was joined by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) on the call, and both men accused Democrats of blowing the comment out of proportion to distract from Obama’s anti-war stance ‘because they don’t want to talk about the success of the surge,’ Thune said.”

“The McCain camp responded after Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) said on a conference call arranged by the Obama campaign that McCain’s comments show that he is ‘confused’ and out of touch. “

“Lieberman said he finds it ‘most outrageous’ to suggest McCain is out of touch.”

Amazingly, the democrats did not find McCain “out of touch” or “confused” when he sponsored McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform or the McCain-Kennedy SHAMnesty legislation. Considering the nature of both these pieces of legislation, I though he was “out of his mind,” but never “confused” about what he was doing.

My personal belief is that John Kerry is angling for the Vice President position as Barack Obama's running mate. Of course, that would just add another layer to toxicity to Obama's campaign.

What can YOU do?

Ignore John Kerry as a card-carrying member of the far-left cheese-eating surrender monkeys.

Capture6-11-2008-11.16.11 AM

Consider it is better to know that your enemy is trying to kill you than the history of their origins. Besides, given their culture of death, what could you possibly say to convince them they have made a terrible mistake and should ignore years of inculcated hatred and violence and eat dinner with you?

Remember: The IslamoFascist enemy respects only strength and the will to use it. Diplomacy is only an excuse to stall for time while you become stronger -- and that is in their official religious doctrine.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the day: “Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.” -- Edward R. Murrow

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

Ben Smith's Blog: Kerry: McCain confused, 'unbelievably out of touch' - Politico.com

Lieberman: Criticism of McCain comment ‘outrageous’ TheHill.com


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


FURTHER PROOF OF HILLARY CLINTON'S (and the democrats) UNSUITABILITY FOR THE WHITE HOUSE?

The enemies list …

While all Presidents tend to bestow political largess, in the form of prestige appointments, paying jobs and first crack at some government contracts, not since the Nixon White House has there been anything as virulent as a Clinton Enemies List.

We all saw how Clinton helped his pals and witnessed the catastrophes which seem to befall his enemies. And now we are being treated to the promise of similar behavior on the part of Hillary Clinton. Perhaps for reasons of “plausible deniability,” Clinton’s friends are the ones that keep the list alive.

According to the International Herald Tribune…

“Those loyal to the Clintons take note of those who were not”

“Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was gracious in her full-throated endorsement of Senator Barack Obama. But that does not mean all is forgiven by others in the Clinton universe.”

“For proof, look no further than Doug Band, chief gatekeeper to former President Bill Clinton. Band keeps close track of the past allies and beneficiaries of the Clintons who supported Obama's campaign, three Clinton associates and campaign officials said. Indeed, he is widely known as a member of the Clinton inner circle whose memory is particularly acute on the matter of who has been there for the couple — and who has not.”

It’s not a well-kept secret if McAuliffe knows …

"’ The Clintons get hundreds of requests for favors every week,’ said Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. ‘Clearly, the people you're going to do stuff for in the future are the people who have been there for you.’ McAuliffe, who knows of Band's diligent scorekeeping, emphasized that ‘revenge is not what the Clintons are about.’ The accounting is more about being practical, he said, adding, ‘You have to keep track of this.’"

“Band, who declined to comment, is hardly alone in tallying those considered to have crossed the former candidate or the former president in recent months by supporting Obama. As the Obama bandwagon has swelled, so have the lists of people Clinton loyalists regard as some variation of ‘ingrate,’ ‘traitor’ or ‘enemy,’ according to the associates and campaign officials, who would speak only on condition of anonymity.”

“Several names and entities are common among various list makers.

  • Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico
  • Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, the House Democratic whip
  • Gregory Craig, Bill Clinton's lawyer in his impeachment and trial
  • David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist
  • Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri

and several Kennedys. Some members of the Democratic Party's rules committee, the state of Iowa and the caucus system in general are also near the top.”

“The news media have already focused on some list entries, including the online gossip purveyor Matt Drudge (who had the nerve to show up at Hillary Clinton's departure speech on Saturday), Todd Purdum of Vanity Fair (the author of a recent profile of Bill Clinton) and the cable network MSNBC (whose hosts Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann are charter list members, Clinton associates said).”

“While Hillary Clinton has a short list of people who disappointed her, Bill Clinton, who reportedly has an encyclopedic memory of all the people he has helped, employed or appointed over the years, apparently has a far longer one, the campaign officials said.”

More names can be found in the IHT article.

Do you want an angry or vindictive person in a position of power …

Can you imagine a more colossal waste of time than keeping an enemies list rather than building a “go to” list of the people who can get the job done.

It’s bad enough when a petty tyrant is your boss, but when they are given almost unlimited power as the head of a nation, major investigative or judicial agency – watch out!

Hyper-politicalization?

There is no secret that under the Clinton Administration, government agencies were highly politicalized and almost every decision was viewed through the prism of politics. Add to that the secrecy and cronyism of the Bush Administration as typified by now-Senator and former-HUD Secretary Mel Martinez and HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson.

Time for a change …

I know that the best two reasons I do not want to see a democrat in the White House is that chaos, cronyism and corruption will once again bloom, rampant and unchecked.

I want to see a leader who thinks first of his beloved nation, not how a deal can be structured to benefit the special interests who want to trade with the enemy (Clinton/Loral/China) or how it affects a particular race or ethnicity.

Focus on America …

I want to see our leadership’s focus returned to being of service to the United States instead of the special interests including their own political party. Enough of enlarging the bureaucracy. Enough of pandering to the unions.

A start …

I want to see the United States propose a shift of venue for the mostly anti-America United Nations. Perhaps to a nice location like Belgium, between France and the Netherlands. 

I want to see the unwieldy Department of Homeland Defense disbanded and reshaped into cooperative agencies. The CIA will handle foreign operations, the FBI will handle domestic criminal activities, the NSA will be in charge of communications for both foreign and domestic operations. FEMA will become a disaster response and logistics agency. INS will handle immigration and naturalization. The Border Patrol will be combined with the Coast Guard’s patrol operations. Boating safety and rescue operations will be divorced from the current Coast Guard portfolio and handed over to the states. The FAA will be refocused on aircraft safety and routing and will not be used to promote airlines as it has in the past. Likewise the FCC shall stick to the technical regulation of the airwaves, stay out of Internet operations and not be involved with policing content. And there are hundreds of other changes I would like to see to bring purpose and efficiency back into the government.

And most of all, I would like to see the Air Force reconstitute the Strategic Air Command where the old SAC mantra “"To err is human. To forgive is divine. Neither of which is current SAC policy." is reinstated. I would like to see this command take over control over the national laboratories and nuclear sites which, according to press reports, are filled with spies and leak like sieves.

Congress is worse than the Presidency …

With all that must be done, we must take a harder stand with our Congress, with their long memories and their own enemies lists.

Yes, our law-making institution is worse than the Presidency because there are hundreds of people who can stand up and demand that the legislators do the right thing – as opposed to one person in the White House. People who are more directly responsible to the people than the President. I can’t imagine calling the President and complaining, but I can call my Representative and complain. Senators are another story. Perhaps deserving of white wigs and fancy suits.

Totally dysfunctional  and have sold out America for the proverbial thirty pieces of silver …

A dysfunctional Congress where both parties blame each other for the high price of gasoline, conveniently overlooking that they have had 35 years since the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo to work on energy independence. During this time we both Republicans and Democrats in the White House and we saw Congress alternate from being democrat-controlled to Republican-controlled and back. So what the hell is their excuse for selling out the American public?

Barack, Hillary and the democrat party: owned by the far-left and their environmentalists …

It’s bad enough when the local representatives pull a “NIMBY” (Not In My Back Yard) defense, but when they all move to BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Nor Anytime) policies, it is time to put them squarely on the scrap heap of history. We need to drill in our own territories and bring that production on line while we ramp up our nuclear and geothermal capabilities – both of which are steady and reliable, unlike wind and solar power.

Enough is enough …

It is time to reconsider the democrat party as obstructionists and filled with people bent on emphasizing race, ethnicity, gender and class as well as other divisive strategies to keep them in power.

This election needs to be the start of resolving the problem which is crippling the United States and producing nothing but incompetent and ineffective leaders. Can anyone tell me why Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, Teddy Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein have done something notable in their careers that has advanced the strength and capabilities of the United States. Yes, they vote – but it is a collective process. Individually, they seem to be almost worthless as leaders as they pursue their own agendas and party politics.

What can YOU do?

Make up your mind NOW! Do you want a stronger more capable America or do you want to live in the United States of Europe – with generations of rot, decay and inbreeding in their leadership?

Are you for political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity without requiring strength of character and the ability to move mountains?

Do you want environmentalists who will cripple America’s energy production and use with their unproven science and “cap and trade system?”

Explain to me why we would even elect an empty suit who lives in the world of racial politics or a shrew hoping she can, once again, grasp the levers of power? And no I don’t mean grab Bill’s Johnson rod.

McCain might not be much in the way of a conservative Republican, and is rumored to not only harbor – but nurse – grudges. But then again, I am positive that he will not turn his back on the United States.

And paired with a Congress that is more receptive to the wants and needs of the American public, we can begin to right the Ship of State.

If America needs or wants a Black in the Office of the Presidency, let them first look at the man: forget his color, look at the man's character and past accomplishments. Make sure that they are qualified to protect and defend the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Where is Colin Powell when we need him? Now here is a leader I would vote for in a New York heartbeat. Or follow him through the gates of hell.  These are the kind of leaders we need, want and deserve. Men of substance. Not metrosexuals playing an image game. Want a woman, find me a Golda Meier or a Margaret Thatcher -- people of character and substance? Want a liberal democrat -- pick an honorable man of principle -- Joseph Lieberman, someone who understands what America is about and what it means to be an American.  There are leaders out there somewhere. Just not these two lame democrat excuses for politicians.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

Those loyal to the Clintons take note of those who were not - International Herald Tribune


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


CLINTON: IT'S SO NOT OVER!

Not so fast ...

For much of the world, it looks like Barack Obama has clinched the democrat nomination as the official presidential candidate.

Hilary's grand statements ...

"The way to continue our fight now to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama, the next president of the United States."

"Today as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him and I ask of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me."

A forced choice ...

Having run out of mathematical maneuvering room in "elected" or "designated" delegates and losing a significant number of "superdelegates," there was no longer a way she could continue her campaign activities and no be accused of losing the presidency for the democratic nominee if Barack Obama lost to McCain. The repercussions sinking her future political aspirations and career as surely as if she had jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge with a rock tied around her neck.

Parsing the principles...

As with everything Clinton, you simply have to ignore the words and watch the action. Have you not learned anything from their ability to parse words and provide alternative definitions that run counter to common sense? Or as the great man himself once said:

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement"

Yes, I know she said she would "suspend" her campaign.

Suspend:  (a) to cease operation temporarily; (b) to set aside or make temporarily inoperative; (c) to defer to a later time on specified conditions; (d) hold in an undetermined or undecided state awaiting further information.

But you must ask yourself:  what does the word suspend connote in a political sense?

Hillary Clinton herself will no longer run anti-Obama messages -- Of course, this is not binding on the Soros-style "527" groups or groups independent of her campaign.

Hillary Clinton gets to retain her delegates to the official democrat nominating convention which will be held from August 25 to August 28 at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado. -- She did not release these delegates to Barack Obama at this time, so they are still bound to vote for Hillary, at least on the first vote.

Hillary Clinton can continue to raise campaign funds which do not need to be given to Barack Obama or the democratic national committee. These funds can be used to retire Clinton's substantial campaign debt, be used to build a war-chest for continuing operations or be given to those running for state or local offices to buy additional support for her future political aspirations.

But most of all, Hillary Clinton preserves her ability to reopen her campaign for the presidency should something happen prior to the actual convention pronouncement that Barack Obama will be the "official choice" of the party.

According to my calculations, this will buy Hillary Clinton a reprieve; or respite, depending on your point of view,  of 79 days (2 months and 18 days) .

Personal loyalties ...

Can Barack Obama actually trust Hillary Clinton or her dedicated and hyper-loyal minions to support him rather than her? I think not. These are people so closely associated with Hillary Clinton that their motives and actions will always be suspect.

The future...

I am sorry that I do not possess a political crystal ball because I could simply announce the winner, place my bet on the boards in Vegas and clean up in the stock market which is sure to either go down in disappointment with the election or up with the stability a known candidate brings to the economic outlook.

I personally feel that Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton are hardscrabble fighters and are willing to do anything it takes to push their own personal and political agendas.

Likewise, I believe that Barack Obama has a number of negatives built in to his friendships with those who are corrupt, racist or were former domestic terrorists -- as well as being undeniably naive in the area of foreign policy. Add to this his hyper-liberal voting record and far-left political "tax and spend" policies to buy voter support and you have a deeply flawed candidate.

The real wild card in this race is the media. Will they continue to gush on-and-on in support of an Obama candidacy or will they do the people's work of discovering the truth about the man, his experience, his friends and his positions?

What can YOU do?

Continue to research the candidates. Remember what the democrat candidates said about each other in the run-up to the general election.

We are at an historic cross-roads. Both our foreign policy and domestic economic policy hang in the balance. And while their are Constitutional checks and balances built-in to the system, there is no guarantee that the person in the White House can override a hostile Congress to effect change.

Decide for yourself if your wants and needs, and those of your family, supercede the traditional notion of party politics. Both parties apparently have sold the American people down the drain and it is now up to us to recover our equilibrium and move forward to protect the United States from its enemies, both foreign and domestic, as well as insuring that the current economic malaise is reversed back into prosperous times. We need to deal with the repair and replacement of our crumbling infrastructure. We need to secure the borders against those who are demographically bombing the United States into a third-world nations and who may soon have enough votes to vote us out of our own citizenship.

Now is the time to adopt a serious stance on the politicians we elect.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the Day: "What I hear, I forget. What I see, I remember. What I do, I understand." --Confucius

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


SAUDI FOREIGN POLICY: GOLD, GRANTS & GIFTS?

Anywhere in the world, it is hard to find political, social and civic leaders who are not susceptible to ego-stroking and donations to their favorite causes, even if their cause is their own personal welfare. Leaders who see personal power, prestige and profits in acceding to the wishes of those with the golden touch.

Why does a sovereign nation, whose radical political policies have given rise to world-wide Islamo-fascism and whose citizens have participated in a direct and deadly attack on the United States avoid severe and direct sanctions?

Could it be that the energy interests and their bought-and-paid-for politicians are protecting the Saudi nation solely due to their position as a supplier of oil?

Time and time again, we have seen our political leaders sellout the United States citizens for their own personal profits or political party's goals.

And it continues to happen with our energy policy.

Why, you may ask, are the political leaders of both parties so resistant to domestic drilling?

Could it be that the geopolitical influence of the oil producing nations and the largest energy companies have a vested interest in keeping profits high and America dependent on their products?

The principle of "enlightened" self-interest would seem to ratify that position.

Why, you may ask, are the conservationists and ecology movement so upset with the idea of domestic drilling and the promotion of clean and relatively cheap nuclear energy?

Again, could it be that many of these entities are receiving donations, grants and gifts from the geopolitical energy power block?

Could it be that the ecological movement has been co-opted by the foreign far-left socialists who want to weaken the energy-engine which drives America's strategic power in today's mostly anti-American world? The "peace now," "peace at any price," and "blame America first" crowd?

Could it be that the Hollywood liberal elite and other left-leaning groups have tacitly bought into the idea of "save the planet" without really understanding the motivation behind the movement, let alone the science involved?

Why, you may ask,  is the government so willing to subvert scientific inquiry and promote a carbon "cap and trade" system?

Could it be that such a system would immeasurably strengthen the government's control over strategic energy producers?

Could it be that such a system would strengthen the government's ability to further control the domestic actions of its citizens on the basis of energy conservation?

Could it be that such a system would richly reward the government with increased revenues and insure jobs for the fast-growing bureaucracy?

Could it be that such a system would richly reward those who do not produce anything of value but simply create  and trade "carbon credit" packages?

Could it be that the results of such a program will not be apparent or measurable in ten lifetimes so as to stem results-oriented criticisms?

Could it be that the politically-influential polluters could continue to pollute without further government interference by purchasing the requisite number of "offset credits" and then passing the costs on to the ratepayers?

Why is the energy-astute leadership not leading?

We have a President, George W. Bush, with ties to the oil-producing State of Texas and who, after graduating from college, worked in his family's oil business. We have a Vice President, Dick Cheney, who headed one of the two largest and most adept oil service companies in the world, Halliburton.

So why, with two top Administration leaders totally familiar with the oil business, do we still have curbs on domestic drilling and a weak and severely lacking  energy policy?

Is the current conflict in the Middle East based on oil?

Yes, we have all heard the various suppositions that we went to war with Iraq to take over their oil. But can it be true?

From what I can see, the United States is hardly prospering from Iraqi oil. However, due to a lack of decent media reporting, we know that Iraqi oil is being produced and shipped somewhere... but the details remain (purposely?) sketchy.

We see the Saudi's dealing with the Americans because not only do they fear an internal revolt against an outwardly-appearing corrupt and oppressive regime, but they are worried that Iran, if not otherwise occupied by their own problems, might possibly destabilize the Saudi's grand lifestyle. The Saudis, almost more than any other nation, needs to buy the friendship of American politicians in order to continue using the United States as their defense against the rest of the Middle Eastern nations who would love to take over the Saudi oil machinery.

So we must ask why Iran, with all of its oil, continues to pursue of religious zealotry while not being able to better capitalize on the  meteoric price rise of  oil?

Is the United States playing some major diplomatic game in the Middle East to further our energy policy or are we playing the game to satisfy the special interests which continue to contribute heavily to political campaigns?

With our Administration's penchant for secrecy, it is almost impossible to know what they know or believe.

Likewise the positions of today's presidential candidates with their empty rhetoric which promises a simultaneous return to stability and the change needed to solve our growing problems.

What can YOU do?

Now is the time to demand answers to the tough questions involving energy independence.

It is time to hold the political parties, especially the democrats, responsible for their failed energy policies.

It is time to curtail the crazies who believe that the welfare of the planet should trump the needs of man.

It is time to avoid electing candidates who pander to the special interests. Perhaps continuing to elect a continuing stream of "nobodies" to elected positions may break the lock that the political partys have exerted on the people.

Demand that the media publish the names of lobbyists and their clients. Especially those who represent foreign interests.

Hold the media complicit and accountable for the toxic atmosphere of today's political environment.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the day:  "

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied. "- Claud Cockburn

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Capture6-5-2008-6.25.26 PM

Capture6-5-2008-6.26.00 PM

Capture6-5-2008-6.26.24 PM


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


POLITICALLY CORRECT BULLETS LIMIT EFFECTIVE KILLING?

Who runs the war effort...

It is a toss-up who actually runs the war effort: the White House, the Generals, the liberals, the media and/or the special interests. They all claim credit for shaping the domestic and foreign battlefields. While good soldiers die!

Ignoring the prime directive...

The purpose of military action is to force the leadership of the opposing force to surrender or negotiate; but in all cases, cease hostilities toward our nation and its warrior/representatives. To do this, they break things and kill people. Collateral damage is to be expected and is often helpful in forcing the leadership to take action sooner rather than later.

What is different about this conflict?

One, it is not a declared war. Congress and the American people are deeply divided about the need to pursue action abroad. Like in the Vietnam war, we are on the verge of defeating ourselves -- all to make a partisan political point.

Two, the enemy combatants and their leaders are not conventional soldiers or leaders. True enough about the religious zealots who believe that martyrdom for the cause is the highest calling in this life and that it assures you of a pleasant afterlife. They do not fear death -- and in many cases, welcome it ... especially if they can take their enemies with them.

Three, the methods of pursuing their objective are asymmetrical which is policy-wonk-speak for they don't play by the rules and will do everything in their power to win. No tight battle plans here -- it's full-tilt boogey to kill the enemy.

Four, our leaders seem more concerned with their political future and standing within the media than they do the troops under their command. This is very hard to believe, but after viewing the actions of our past few presidents, Ronald Reagan excepted, it appears that war is more about politics and managing the media than it is decimating the enemy. 

Five, our civilian leadership appears to be micro-managing war operations, sometimes in direct contravention of expert opinion. No surprise here. Imagine someone not ordering a hit on a wanted leader because there were some civilians in the way? Sad, but true.

Six, to prevent undue negative attention in the media, our leaders often create and support "rules of engagement" that may render our fighting troops significantly less lethal and more impotent than the enemy as the goal is often to reduce collateral damage rather than kill the enemy and their support network.

Seven, special interests have corrupted many members of military's leadership who are expecting post-duty positions with vendors who business with the government. There is no shortage of ineffective weapons or weapons systems. One major military contractor couldn't even deliver a high-tech fence to be used under civilian conditions as they continued to pitch their high-tech wares to the military. Software problem, my butt. In my opinion it was a purposeful "design failure" that aided Administration policies.

Which brings us to weapons and weapons systems which are less than effective...

According to the Associated Press...

"US uses bullets ill-suited for new ways of war"

"As Sgt. Joe Higgins patrolled the streets of Saba al-Bor, a tough town north of Baghdad, he was armed with bullets that had a lot more firepower than those of his 4th Infantry Division buddies."

"As an Army sniper, Higgins was one of the select few toting an M14. The long-barreled rifle, an imposing weapon built for wars long past, spits out bullets larger and more deadly than the rounds that fit into the M4 carbines and M16 rifles that most soldiers carry."

"'Having a heavy cartridge in an urban environment like that was definitely a good choice,' says Higgins, who did two tours in Iraq and left the service last year. 'It just has more stopping power.'"

It's more than bullets, it is the provisioning of soldiers with reliable and effective weapons...

"Strange as it sounds, nearly seven years into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, bullets are a controversial subject for the U.S."

It's not strange, it appears to be business as usual. We know what works and what doesn't. So, in my opinion, it must be a joint political-military-vendor decision rather than a coincidence.

"The smaller, steel-penetrating M855 rounds continue to be a weak spot in the American arsenal. They are not lethal enough to bring down an enemy decisively, and that puts troops at risk, according to Associated Press interviews."

In 2006, the Army asked a private research organization to survey 2,600 soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nearly one-fifth of those who used the M4 and M16 rifles wanted larger caliber bullets.

Can we trust the officials?

"Yet the Army is not changing. The answer is better aim, not bigger bullets, officials say."

"'If you hit a guy in the right spot, it doesn't matter what you shoot him with,' said Maj. Thomas Henthorn, chief of the small arms division at Fort Benning, Ga., home to the Army's infantry school."

True enough, but the real question is how many times will an enemy combatant offer to place themselves in the perfect posture for a kill shot?

It's not the money ...

"At about 33 cents each, bullets do not get a lot of public attention in Washington, where the size of the debate is usually measured by how much a piece of equipment costs. But billions of M855 rounds have been produced, and Congress is preparing to pay for many more. The defense request for the budget year that begins Oct. 1 seeks $88 million for 267 million M855s, each one about the size of a AAA battery."

Rest assured that it is not about safeguarding the taxpayer's funds. As large as it sounds to the average person, 88 million dollars is chump change in the realm of weapons systems. The F-22 Raptor costs about $339 MILLION each. A single B-2 bomber costs about $2.2 BILLION. And we pick up the costs for the design, testing, manufacturing facilities, wining, dining and all of the overhead expenses including toilet paper. To be noted, the government doesn't just order one or two at a time.

"None of the M855's shortcomings is surprising, said Don Alexander, a retired Army chief warrant officer with combat tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Somalia."

"'The bullet does exactly what it was designed to do. It just doesn't do very well at close ranges against smaller-statured people that are lightly equipped and clothed,' says Alexander, who spent most of his 26-year military career with the 5th Special Forces Group."

"Dr. Martin Fackler, a former combat surgeon and a leading authority on bullet injuries, said the problem is the gun, not the bullet. The M4 rifle has a 14.5 inch barrel — too short to create the velocity needed for an M855 bullet to do maximum damage to the body."

So do some fancy reloading to +P+ rounds. For the uninitiated, this is the designation for "overpressure ammunition" which produces a higher-velocity round with greater lethality.

"'The faster a bullet hits the tissue, the more it's going to fragment,' says Fackler. 'Bullets that go faster cause more damage. It's that simple.'"

Rules of war: an oxymoron for all time...

"Rules of war limit the type of ammunition conventional military units can shoot. The Hague Convention of 1899 bars hollow point bullets that expand in the body and cause injuries that someone is less likely to survive. The United States was not a party to that agreement. Yet, as most countries do, it adheres to the treaty, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross."

In war, there is ONLY and ONLY one rule: kill or be killed. Nothing else matters. Winning is the only acceptable outcome. Unfortunately, our civilian leadership believes that it is often better to wound, than kill, as it ties up the enemy with dealing with casualties. Which is all well and fine if we were fighting a compassionate enemy such as ourselves. But, alas, we are fighting an enemy that has been steeped in the "culture of death," where martyrdom for the cause is a gloriously rewarding religious act and that anything less than killing your enemy is religiously intolerable. And by enemy we believe ALL non-believers: men, women and children! These are not honorable men -- their religion allows them to lie, cheat and steal in order to accomplish their mission. Rules -- they only have one: kill the enemy, the more the merrier it will be in the afterlife.

The police are better equipped...

"The Hague restrictions do not apply to law enforcement agencies, however. Ballistics expert Gary Roberts said that is an inconsistency that needs to be remedied, particularly at a time when so many other types of destructive ordnance are allowed in combat."

"'It is time to update this antiquated idea and allow U.S. military personnel to use the same proven ammunition,' Roberts says." 

It doesn't take a military genius or commander to simply designate everybody with a secondary MOS (Military Occupation Specialty) of law enforcement officer. Problem solved. Just as the Secondary MOS for each and every Marine, no matter his primary speciality, is rifleman.

Looking for an easy way out...

"In response to complaints from troops about the M855, the Army's Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey assigned a team of soldiers, scientists, doctors and engineers to examine the round's effectiveness. The team's findings, announced in May 2006, concluded there were no commercially available rounds of similar size better than the M855."

This is not an answer. It is a political decision. If there are no acceptable rounds, return to the older, more effective .308 caliber rifles.  For those really interested in the M855 situation, check the section following Reference Links.

Political correctness gone amok...

"But Anthony Milavic, a retired Marine Corps major, said the Army buried the study's most important conclusion: that larger-caliber bullets are more potent."

"'It was manipulated,' says Milavic, a Vietnam veteran who manages an online military affairs forum called MILINET. 'Everybody knows there are bullets out there that are better.'"

Are they talking about women in combat?

"Heavier rounds also mean more weight for soldiers to carry, as well as more recoil — the backward kick created when a round is fired. That long has been a serious issue for the military, which has troops of varied size and strength."

Is it possible that the standards for a combat infantryman have been reduced over the years or that his modern equipment is some type of computer-modeled tradeoff between soldier safety and lethal effectiveness?

"The M14 rifle used by Joe Higgins was once destined to be the weapon of choice for all U.S. military personnel. When switched to the automatic fire mode, the M14 could shoot several hundred rounds a minute. But most soldiers could not control the gun, and in the mid-1960s it gave way to the M16 and its smaller cartridge. The few remaining M14s are used by snipers and marksman."

"U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., is buying a carbine called the SCAR Heavy for its commandos, and it shoots the same round as the M14. The regular Army, though, has invested heavily in M4 and M16 rifles and has no plans to get rid of them."

Perhaps that is symptomatic of the new political and military leadership -- they are slow to admit errors and will do almost anything to cover up a mistake?

"A change in expectations is needed more than a change in gear, said Col. Robert Radcliffe, chief of combat developments at Fort Benning. Soldiers go through training believing that simply hitting a part of their target is enough to kill it. On a training range, getting close to the bulls-eye counts. But in actual combat, nicking the edges isn't enough."

If this is true, someone deserves to be fired; starting with the Colonel with his head up his six. We have known the truth about the use of weapons in hostile environments and in asymmetrical warfare situations since Vietnam where the enemy was smaller in stature and lighter clothed. Is this Colonel to be believed? That no gunny sergeant or chief petty officer gave his men a "no shitter" lesson on what can be expected in combat as well as in weapon performance?   

"'Where you hit is essential to the equation,' Radcliffe says. 'I think the expectations are a little bit off in terms of combat performance against target range performance. And part of that is our fault for allowing that expectation to grow when it's really not there at all.'

"The arguments over larger calibers, Radcliffe says, are normal in military circles where emotions over guns and bullets can run high."

"'One of the things I've discovered in guns is that damned near everyone is an expert,' he says. 'And they all have opinions.'"

Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that the Colonel is merely reflecting the position of his superiors and, in all likelihood, would not provide the media with a true situation report without compromising his career.

The strength of military leadership and performance lies in its noncoms: non-commissioned officers...

Screw the Colonels -- ask the sergeants and chiefs about what really works. The guys on the ground that make it happen. Don't ask range rabbits or the customized weaponry crowd what works. Ask the ordinary guy who works in the field.

Get some old farts like Ollie North, Dale Dye or Richard Marcinko to do your market research and then listen to what they have to say. I am sure that you will be surprised at the difference between the official line and what is needed in the field.

Where are we headed?

With the sole exception of Ronald Reagan, I have serious doubts about the leadership abilities and competence of our government. While it could be that politics and the special interests have so permeated the government that its institutions are crippled and no longer able to function effectively, it could also be that our elected leaders are a mirror of the wants and needs of an increasingly dysfunctional public. A public which feeds on superficial media events and demands instant gratification. A public which has lost their "unified sense of patriotism" in favor of "feel good" policies promoted by the far-left liberals; all with a purpose of driving us toward a more Marxist environment in which the people increasingly look to the government for support with their daily activities. Perhaps the bureaucracy has reached a critical, self-sustaining mass, where its blind ambition is to feed off the work of ordinary citizens.  To exert even greater control over the population while simultaneously raising tax revenues. Even to the point of ignoring science and pursuing specious schemes which will not produce results for hundreds of years after we are all dead.

What can YOU do?

It is now  time to put aside the partisan differences which have been carefully crafted by the politicians, special interests and the media in favor of returning the functioning of the United States to politicians who want nothing more than to enlarge upon the glory that is the United States. 

It is time you clip articles about problems in the military and send them to your elected officials. Ask them for an answer. Inform them that your next letter will be to the media. Put pressure on our politicians to do right by our soldiers.

As I write this, I cannot help think about what Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would do to our military if elected. Clinton's husband did everything in his power to weaken both our military and intelligence agencies. Obama seems more interested in playing diplomatic games in the Zbigniew Brzezinski-Madeleine Albright style with our enemies than he does looking at the situation through the eyes of a Commander-in-Chief. While McCain may not be what I want as a Reagan-style conservative, I have no doubts that he will stand up and defend America to the gates of hell if necessary.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the day: "

We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are." -- Anais Nin

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

US uses bullets ill-suited for new ways of war - Yahoo! News

Could it be that the vendor is delivering inadequate rounds and that the military has inadequate testing?

The true test of any bullet is if domestic gurus would voluntarily recommend the round as a choice for self-defense among all of the other choices available.

Let's see what the experts say:

"The well-documented performance of the M855 as a fragmenting bullet in the diagrams above is an exception; the fragmentation contributes significantly to its performance. Please refer to the Ammo FAQ for further discussion. You will note that M193/M855 are NOT on the recommended list below. While these are not bad bullets, you will note that they are subject to large variations in neck length (distance the bullet penetrates before fragmenting); this variability is not desirable. In case of the short neck length, it is indeed an effective bullet. When 855 doesn't begin to fragment until 8"+, it will not be very effective on front torso shots and thin individuals; this explains the dissatisfaction of US combat troops with M855 in some cases."

"While the M855-type ammunition generally meets performance requirements, there have been quite a few reports in inadequate fragmentation. Please remember that this is military ammo, and while the fragmenting properties are well documented and understood, there is no requirement for the bullet to fragment when being tested for acceptance. There can be significant variations in constructions which could make some lots perform much worse than others. For this reason, it is not on the list.

What? The military apparently does not test the very property that gives the round its effectiveness? This is hard to believe -- unless there is a known problem and cover-up in procurement procedures.


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


JIMMY CARTER HITS HOME RUN WITH HAMAS MEETING

Hail to the ex-Chief...

Jimmy Carter should be widely congratulated by world leaders, democrats, Republicans and all Americans for revealing the truth about Hamas and the peace process.

I believe those press reports that claim "Carter-Hamas meeting achieved nothing" are absolutely wrong.

According to press reports by the AFP...

"Carter-Hamas meeting achieved nothing: Palestinians"

"Last week's meeting between former US president Jimmy Carter and the exiled leader of Hamas militants did not produce any results, Palestinian foreign minister Riyad al-Malki said here Wednesday."

"'President Carter came to the region thinking he could achieve something. Unfortunately president Carter left without anything concrete,' he told a conference in the Spanish capital."

"'The only thing he achieved was permission on the part of Khaled Meshaal of Hamas to deliver a letter from a detained Israeli soldier to his family. Nothing else,' he said."

"'Hamas offered nothing to president Carter. They reiterated the same positions. There was no change on the part of Hamas,' Malki added."

"Carter's meetings with top Hamas leader Meshaal and his deputy in Syria angered Israel and the United States, which consider the movement a terror group despite its victory in 2006 elections."

"He was unable to secure a ceasefire or a prisoner exchange for an Israeli soldier seized by Gaza militants in 2006, but on Monday Carter said Hamas told him it would recognize Israel's right to exist such a deal was approved by a Palestinian vote."

"Just hours later Meshaal told a press conference in Damascus that Hamas would not recognise the Jewish state and would insist on the right of return for 4.5 million Palestinian refugees."

Carter: the useful idiot...

Carter, a useful idiot at best and an ignorant anti-Semite at worst, did manage to demonstrate clearly and convincingly to the entire world that HAMAS was not willing to engage with the Israelis or call a halt to the shelling of innocent Israeli citizens to provide a sign that they were willing to talk about peace.

Hamas: unchanged and impenitent...

Their position remained unchanged and they remained impenitent. They are terrorists and will continue their campaign of terror.

Deflects criticism by attacking Condoleezza Rice...

"Former US President Jimmy Carter on Wednesday accused Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of being untruthful over remarks made about his controversial meeting with the Islamist Hamas group."

"Rice had chided Carter for meeting with Hamas, saying US State Department officials had told him such talks would not help the Middle East peace process. "

"But a statement from the Atlanta-based Carter Center, which speaks on the ex-president's behalf, said no one from the US government told him not to meet with exiled Hamas chief Khaled Meshaal or other leaders of the group."

"'President Carter has the greatest respect for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and believes her to be a truthful person,' the statement said.

"'However, perhaps inadvertently, she is continuing to make a statement that is not true,' it said."

"According to the statement, 'No one in the State Department or any other department of the US government ever asked him to refrain from his recent visit to the Middle East or even suggested that he not meet with Syrian President Assad or leaders of Hamas.'"

"Rice had said Tuesday that the United States would not deal with Hamas and 'we certainly told president Carter that we didn't think meeting with Hamas was going to help the Palestinians who (are) actually devoted to peace.'"

"Commenting on Carter's statement, Rice's spokesman Sean McCormack defended his boss, saying, 'We stand by the statements.  We stand by them as statements of fact.'"

Final analysis...

There is no doubt in my mind that Jimmy Carter enhanced the perceived prestige of Hamas and its leader, Khaled Meshaal among the terrorists and Islamo-fascists, by traveling to Meshaal in Syria to ask for favors. Even the letter provided to Carter was being laughed at by the terrorists who only respect strength and the resolve to use it to win your position.

What can YOU do?

Keep in mind that terrorists and especially the Islamo-fascists ONLY respect strength and those who have the resolve to use it. They hide behind women and children when the commit acts of aggression as any counter-strike to suppress fire is liable to kill innocent non-combatants which will then be portrayed to the world as the wanton killing of innocents.

Recognize that it was on Carter's watch that we saw the beginning of Iran's theocracy (when Carter abandoned the Shah of Iran and urged the Ayatollah Khomeini to return to Iran to run for office. It was on Carter's watch that the North Koreans lied about the nuclear ambitions and thus became a nuclear power. (Note: the Syrian's were trying to build their nuclear capability by purchasing North Korean technology and were bombed by Israel to halt their nuclear ambitions.) And it was on Carter's watch that the American embassy was placed under siege and American hostages taken. Carter's inability to take definitive action to secure the return of the hostages cost Carter a potential second presidential term.

Carter, as well as most of our elected democrats, is a proponent of the far-left who believe that they can simply talk to a dictator and convince them of their errant ways. In many ways, the far left movement has been infiltrated by those who believe that they can capture and subdue America without a shot being fired -- by using our own freedoms and laws against us. And they are trying their level best to insure that we have weak leaders who will refuse to defend the United States from its enemies, both foreign and domestic.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the Day: "At times the whole world seems to be in conspiracy to importune you with emphatic trifles." --Ralph Waldo Emerson

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

Carter-Hamas meeting achieved nothing: Palestinians 

Carter accuses Rice of being untruthful over Hamas meeting


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


What are the bounds of religious freedom?

UPDATE 05-22-08 APPEALS COURT "NO RIGHT TO SEIZE CHILDRN" ...

According to the Associated Press...

"In a ruling that could torpedo the case against the West Texas polygamist sect, a state appeals court Thursday said authorities had no right to seize more than 440 children in a raid on the splinter group's compound last month."

"The Third Court of Appeals in Austin said the state failed to show the youngsters were in any immediate danger, the only grounds in Texas law for taking children from their parents without court action."

"It was not clear when the children — now scattered in foster homes across the state — might be returned to their parents. The ruling gave a lower-court judge 10 days to release the youngsters from custody, but the state could appeal to the Texas Supreme Court and block that."

The decision is a procedural one: dealing with the "probable cause" that allowed the authorities to take action and does not provide any guidance with respect to religious freedoms. What the ruling may do, however, is to highlight the egregious action of the authorities -- possibly to pursue an interest of self-aggrandisement and publicity for political purposes.

Original blog entry ...

An important question for humanity...

If, as everybody often says, that the Freedoms expressed in the Constitution are God-given and absolute, why is the State of Texas interfering with a religious sect that appears to abide by its own rules and does not overtly appear to harm anyone outside their own community?

Collision of religion with secular law...

What happens when there is a collision between religious practice and secular law? Does secular law always win over religion?

From the Wikipedia...

"Religious practice may also conflict with secular law creating debates on religious freedom. For instance, even though polygamy is permitted in Islam it is prohibited in secular law in many Western countries. Does prohibiting polygamy then curtail the religious freedom of Muslims? The USA and India have taken two different views of this. In India polygamy is permitted, but only for Muslims, under Muslim Personal Law. In the USA polygamy is prohibited for all. This was a major source of conflict between the early Mormon Church and the United States until the Church amended its position on polygamy."

But it's to protect the children...

"It's for the children" is a phrase commonly used by liberals and loonies to justify their own egregious actions in exerting more political control on citizens or raiding their wallets. In many cases, the stories of abuse appear to be manufactured by those seeking to take action or increase their own personal prestige, power or profits. 

Do we see anyone punishing the Amish for denying their children access to educational computers and games. Or forcing them to labor long hours on the family farms?

For those who claim that the sect is mistreating children, there has been no credible evidence published to-date that would support the allegation or abuse. But plenty has been published on the supposition that there is a possibility that "children are being harmed and describing the State's ham-fisted handling of the case or cases as it may be.

According to the Associated Press...

"False abuse claim investigated in Texas polygamist raid"

"Officials say the Texas Rangers are pursuing Rozita Swinton of Colorado as a 'person of interest' regarding telephone calls related to the polygamist compound in west Texas.
Child Protective Services officials say they launched a raid on the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints compound earlier this month after receiving an anonymous tip from a 16-year-old girl named 'Sarah' who said she was being abused by her 49-year-old husband."

"The investigation of Swinton headed by the Rangers and disclosed by the Texas Department of Public Safety suggests that the phone call that initiated the raid may have been a false complaint."

And, as time goes on, law enforcement and the judiciary have a politically-vested interest in finding something, anything, to justify their somewhat egregious actions. On the other side, you can bet the attorneys have a vested interest in making the state wrong, so as to pocket large fees based on state incompetence and malfeasance.

Meanwhile the children appear to be suffering. And who knows what psychological manipulations are being exerted on young children? Just "say this" and "we will let you go back to your family" is a powerful motivation to create false accounts and memories against otherwise innocent adults.

Enter the psychiatrists...

"Earlier Friday a cult expert told the judge in the West Texas polygamous sect child custody hearing that the group's belief system is abusive."

"Psychiatrist Bruce Perry testified that teen girls don't resist early marriages because they are trained to be obedient and compliant.
Perry took the stand in a hearing about 416 youngsters removed this month from a polygamist compound near Eldorado and placed with Texas Child Protective Services.
Perry, who's an expert on children in cults, says while the teen girls believed they were marrying out of free choice -- it's a choice based on lessons they've had from birth.
Perry interviewed three girls removed during the raid."

"He also said that many of the adults at the Yearning For Zion Ranch are loving parents and that the boys seemed emotionally healthy when he interacted with them."

"But he says the sect's belief system 'is abusive. The culture is very authoritarian.'

Poor planning and even worse execution...

One need only to remember the egregious McMartin prosecution in Los Angeles where children were encouraged to create ever more fanciful stories to win the expert's approval and one child falsely identified a picture of Chuck Norris as a molester in court proceedings.

We should be thankful that Janet Reno's Department of Justice was not involved as the American people are unlikely tolerate another scene like those at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

But like both Waco and Ruby Ridge, it appears that the authorities could have spent a little time planning and interviewing the sect members prior to the wholesale removal and sequestration of the children. It is not a selective or prudent removal process when hundreds of children are rounded up and removed without the proper identification of both the child and the parents.

But why I did I choose this blog subject?

First, am I the only one who finds it absurd that the State of Texas was allowed to separate hundreds of children from those who claim parentage in an ill-planned venture with no planned objective or outcome? Especially when other means to interview individuals were available?

Second, and more importantly, I believe that this entire exercise could serve as a metaphor for the war on terror.  Do you see the similarity? An apparently abusive, authoritarian religious cult that indoctrinates children at an early age and who directly places children in harm's way. A comparatively massive outside force that seems compelled to act to protect the children.

So, I ask you, is this the path that Islam is treading and will the United States take action on a more global scale?

What can YOU do?

Ask yourself what are the bounds of religious freedom? Question whether or not these bounds are absolute or conditional? And ask yourself if the protection of a future generation of children (on both sides) would be worth the massive dislocations that may occur should further action be required?

Ask yourself, should a religion be required to change under the pressure of world opinion? Or just change its toxic leadership?

There is no doubt in my mind that the Texas situation is completely analogous to our much broader world.

What say you?

-- steve

Quote of the Day: "The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking." --John Kenneth Galbraith

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

False abuse claim investigated in Texas polygamist raid


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


L.A. MAYOR TRIES TO DEFLECT ANGER OF CITIZENS OVER ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION... WANTS TO EASE ADMINISTRATION PRESSURE ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

The straw which may have broken the camel's back... A senseless killing of  an honor student by an illegal alien gang-banger who should have been held for ICE one day after being released onto the streets by Los Angeles County authorities.

The Los Angeles Times on Jamiel Shaw...

"Stanford University called about Jamiel Shaw a week or so ago, intrigued by the slight but speedy running back for Los Angeles High School, the Southern League's most valuable player last year. Rutgers University called a few days later."

"The Shaw family already had reason to be proud. Jamiel's mother, Army Sgt. Anita Shaw, was on her second tour of duty in Iraq."

"On Sunday night, it was Jamiel's father on the phone and then his son's girlfriend, Chrystale Miles. Jamiel Sr. called to tell him to hurry home from the mall. The 17-year-old boy was three doors away when someone shot him to death while he was still talking on his cellphone to Chrystale, friends say."

"Jamiel Sr. heard the shots almost as soon as he hung up. He ran out of the house, raced around the corner and found his son lying on the sidewalk, bleeding."

"'She's over there trying to protect us from guns and bombs, and then she has to hear that her son is dead over here,' he said of Anita on Monday. 'I've got my own personal Iraq now.'"

"Los Angeles police officials described the killing as random and senseless, cutting down a youth who had been doing everything right in his life -- from hitting the books to never missing church to inspiring the Los Angeles High Romans to last year's Southern League title."

The killer...

"Pedro Espinoza, the 19-year-old suspect in Shaw's death, was released from jail without authorities questioning his citizenship on March 1, the day before he allegedly shot Shaw to death, according to reports by MyFOXLA.com."

"Police say Shaw was walking home from a mall on March 2 when Hispanic gang members pulled up in a car and asked him, 'Where are you from?' — code for what gang did he belong to, police said. Espinoza then allegedly shot Shaw, who was not a gang member."

And the Los Angeles Mayor is requesting ICE to target gang members and abusive employers rather than concentrating on all illegal aliens...

Orwell was right about politicians. In the Orwellian world of politics; where black is white, up is down and the truth is portrayed as a lie, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (Tony Villar) is suggesting that Homeland Secretary Chertoff may be damaging the Los Angeles economy by continuing to enforce the existing immigration laws.

The economy needs illegal Mexicans...

In spite of a well-documented study that shows that illegal workers cost up to $22,000 over and above any and all benefits of their presence in the country and the anecdotal evidence that the Los Angeles traffic was significantly lighter on the last "Day without a Mexican," the Los Angeles Mayor is, once again, turning to an economic reason for easing Federal efforts to control immigration.

From the Los Angeles Times...

"Villaraigosa tells Homeland Security chief that agents should target criminal gang members and not legitimate businesses. Agency spokeswoman says the priorities are proper."

"Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa [real name Tony Villar] has asked the federal government to review its immigration enforcement priorities, warning that work-site raids on 'non-exploitative' businesses could have 'severe and lasting effects' on the local economy."

"'I am concerned that ICE enforcement actions are creating an impression that this region is somehow less hospitable to these critical businesses than other regions,' Villaraigosa wrote in a March 27 letter to Michael Chertoff, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security."

"Immigration and Customs Enforcement has cracked down on businesses that hire undocumented workers in California and around the nation in recent years, arresting scores of workers and their employers. In fiscal 2007, ICE made more than 4,900 work-site arrests, a 45-fold increase over the number in 2001, authorities said."

Which is a very minimal, and mostly ineffective, measure when it is compared to the millions of illegal aliens destroying our healthcare, educational, judicial, retirement and cultural infrastructure.

"Illegal Aliens in Los Angeles County Cost Taxpayers 3 Billion Dollars Annually"

"County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich released new statistics from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services showing that Illegal Aliens collected more than $37 million in welfare and food stamp allocations in November, up $3 million from September 2007. Illegals collected more than $20 million in welfare assistance in November and more than $16 million in food stamp allocations, for a projected annual cost of $444 million."

"That is not the entire picture of the taxpayer burden. When you add in the cost of free Emergency Room services, free Public School education as well as public safety and free housing the annual cost is $3,000,000,000. ($3 Billion) a year and rising!"

You could close thousands of businesses and still not exceed the cost of the illegal aliens.

Where is the tipping point?

Again, from the Los Angeles Times...

"In February, more than 130 undocumented workers were arrested at a Van Nuys manufacturing company during an ongoing investigation. Last week, more than 60 workers were arrested on immigration violations during routine federal inspections at South Bay area import warehouses. Other Los Angeles companies, including giant clothing manufacturer American Apparel, have reported that ICE recently inquired about its hiring procedures."

Numbers which are not even worth talking about.

Responsible employers?

"In his letter, Villaraigosa said ICE has targeted 'established, responsible employers' in industries that have a 'significant reliance on workforces that include undocumented immigrants.'"

"In these industries, including most areas of manufacturing, even the most scrupulous and responsible employers have no choice but to rely on workers whose documentation, while facially valid, may raise questions about their lawful presence," he wrote."

Orwell again: Shift from enforcing immigration laws to penalizing employers who exploit illegal immigrants...

"He said ICE should spend its limited resources targeting employers who exploit wage and hour laws."

The Mayor is a disingenuous hypocrite, at best...

Imagine telling Secretary Chertoff that he needs to control gang violence...

"'At a time when we are facing an economic downturn and gang violence at epidemic levels, the federal government should focus its resources on deporting criminal gang members rather than targeting legitimate businesses,'" said Matt Szabo, the mayor's spokesman."

...while the Los Angeles City Council and city agencies maintain a sanctuary city policy built around the Los Angeles Police Department's "Special Order 40," which forbids LAPD officers to question known violent gang members about their immigration status even though a gang detail officer may have personal knowledge of the criminal's previous deportment. The LAPD insures that cooperation between the Department and ICE (Immigrations and Customs Enforcement) is minimal at best.

The rest of the story:  the battle of legal vs. illegal...

Judicial Watch, a non-profit citizen's advocacy group is suing the Los Angeles Police Department over Special Order 40. 

According to Judicial Watch...

"Special Order 40 is a police mandate that originated in 1979 by former Los Angeles Police Chief Gates and the L.A. City Council to prevent police from inquiring about the immigration status of arrestees.  The downside to Special Order 40 is quite substantial because it is a powerful incentive for more illegal immigrants to flaunt U.S. law.  Illegal immigrants recognize Los Angeles – and many other cities that have adopted similar laws – as a safe haven where they can’t be touched because of their immigration status.  Special Order 40 is also at odds with the law.  No police officer can be ordered to ignore and flout the law, including federal immigration laws."

Enter the far-left socialist group, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) supporting the illegals...

"American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (ACLU) of Southern California has filed a motion to allow illegal immigrant and other groups to intervene in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit against the LAPD over 'Special Order 40,' a set of policies that prevents police officers from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status and communicating freely with federal immigration officials (Harold P. Sturgeon v. William J. Bratton, et al., Case No. BC351646)."

"The ACLU is representing Break the Cycle, Los Jornaleros, El Comite de Jornaleros, and El Instituto de Educacion Popular del Sur de California.  These organizations have admitted, according to Judicial Watch’s court filing, 'that they provide some form of assistance to undocumented aliens and that their members include undocumented aliens who fear discovery of their illegal immigration status.'” 

Orwell again: Why should those who have admittedly broken the law be granted standing in a Court for the sole purpose of allowing them to continue their illegal behavior? And possibly continue to circumvent laws which protect legal citizens against illegal gang activity?

The Mayor acts more like a Mexican Socialist beholden to Mexico...

This is nothing new since the Mayor was a Mexican activist advocating radical "reconquista" policies while attending UCLA.

According to an article from the UCLA Bruin Alumni Association...

"Antonio Villaraigosa, a one-time juvenile delinquent still tattooed with the slogan 'Born to Raise Hell,' entered the UCLA campus as a transfer student from East Los Angeles Community College in 1972.  Known then simply as Tony Villar, he would not successfully graduate by the time he left in 1975. But Villar did leave a wide swath of influence in other, more radical ways."

"While on campus, Villar joined the UCLA chapter of Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA), and was part of its leadership by 1974.  MEChA had only been founded as a regional movement in 1969, and in many ways, the UCLA chapter, and the radical Chicano student left today, is a direct product of Villar’s work then."

"Fellow MEChA alumni from the period remember Villaraigosa’s exploits well: "'He was one of the guys that would go out there and start the slogans because he was the loudest one,' said Arturo Chavez, a fellow activist in college. 'He was one of the people who would make sure people were riled up.'"

Chavez underemphasizes what young Tony Villar did on the UCLA campus.  Archives from the campus newspaper The Daily Bruin of 1974 have revealed that Villar led a campaign to ensure an advisory role in the UCLA Chicano Studies Center for a communist Chicano community group, and successfully engineered the dismissal of the Chicano director of the Center who stood in the way of this goal."

The solution: Jamiel's Law...

This is a proposed ordinance to deny "sanctuary city" protection to illegal aliens in gangs in the City of Los Angeles.

WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles is now a "sanctuary city" for illegal aliens due to
City policies that prohibit and inhibit the Los Angeles Police Department from investigating
violations of federal immigration law (e.g., LAPD Manual Vol. 1, § 390 and Vol. 4, § 264.50);

WHEREAS, the City of Los Angeles is unsafe for law-abiding citizens and legal aliens due to the prevalence of gangs that routinely commit crimes including but not limited to murder, extortion, robbery, rape, theft, drug-trafficking, and vandalism;

WHEREAS, many, if not most, of the members of the criminal gangs in Los Angeles are
illegal aliens; and

WHEREAS, there is no legitimate public policy reason for the City to extend "sanctuary
city" protection to illegal aliens in the gangs that are ravaging our city;

NOW THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Jamiel's Law. This short title of this ordinance shall be "Jamiel's Law," in honor of Jamiel Andre Shaw, II, a young man who had an exceptionally promising future until he was murdered in Los Angeles in 2008.

Section 2. No Sanctuary For Gang Members. The policy of this City from this point forward is, and shall be, to deny any "sanctuary city" protection to illegal aliens in gangs. Neither the Mayor, the Chief of the Police nor any other City employee shall prohibit or inhibit
Los Angeles Police Department officers from lawfully investigating possible violations of
federal immigration laws by persons who are, or appear to, be gang members or affiliate gang
members.

Section 3. Mandate To Investigate, Arrest And Assist. The Mayor and the Chief of Police shall immediately develop and implement a plan for the Los Angeles Police Department, in cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the United States Attorney, to identify, arrest, prosecute, imprison and deport illegal aliens who are, or appear to be, gang members or affiliate gang members, regardless whether those illegal aliens have committed crimes in addition to entering the country illegally.

Section 4. Reporting Requirement. The Mayor shall provide the City Council and the
public with quarterly written reports describing in reasonable detail the City's efforts to implement Jamiel's Law. The reports will include, at a minimum, the number of persons arrested by the Los Angeles Police Department for violating federal immigration laws, and the number of those persons  suspected of being gang members and affiliate gang members.

What can YOU do?

If you live in Los Angeles, contact your City Council members and demand that they support Jamiel's law.

Do not re-elect any of the Hispanic politicians who are hell bent on turning Los Angeles into a Mexican province ... or their liberal democrat supporters.

Demand that Chief Bratton immediately abandon Special Order 40 or face disciplinary action.

Demand that Secretary Chertoff fulfill his sworn Constitutional duties to protect the United States from all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

Commend ICE for their efforts in trying to enforce the law while fighting against their superior's wishes to implement the Administration's welcoming policy for illegal aliens.

Support the laws which protect you, your family, your friends and neighbors against vicious street hoodlums who are rapidly taking over the city -- with the overt assistance of politically-correct politicians pandering for votes.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or limit an individual's right of self-defense for their personal philosophy, power, prestige or profits.

-- steve

Quote of the day: "

History is indeed little more than the register of the crimes, follies and misfortunes of mankind.     - - Edward Gibbon

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

L.A. mayor chides ICE for workplace immigration raids - Los Angeles Times


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS