Russia v. NATO

The BBC reported today on increasing Russian plans for military operations in the Arctic to support their overweening claims in the region.

While the Administration has forbidden the use of terms such as 'Long War' and 'Global War On Terrorism' in the Executive Branch, and no longer considers 'enemy combatants' an appropriate term for enemies that are met on the field of battle* . . . they are ignoring the increasing investments that Russia and China are making in their militaries.

The primary responsibility of the Federal Government (and of the Executive Branch) is to provide for the Common Defense and to secure the U.S. National Interest abroad. Obviously, socializing our health care system and propping up a failed educational system are far more important than offending murderous jihadists and revisionist regimes.

* read Andrew McCarthy's excellent article on this topic.

Socialized Medicine Kills

Thanks to stephen_taylor's post on Twitter, I just read this NY Post article on the distinct possibility that Natasha Richardson would still be alive were it not for Canada's system of socialized medicine.

What is important here is not the human tragedy (though any senseless death of an individual, especially a contributing and creative individual, is a great loss to humanity). What is important is the fact that the Democratic Party, Leftists, and Socialists of all stripes want to use the current economic crisis to force socialized medicine on the United States.

Europhiles and Socialists (aren't they really one and the same?) lambaste the United States for our expensive health care system and our unhealthy population.

I argue that the reason we have so many healthy people is that EuroSocialist countries are letting so many people die through rationed health care and lack of services, that they are skewing the statisitics. Am I right? I'm not a health care economist, but I'd rather live in a country where the emergency care is second-to-none, and I know that there is an MRI or CT scanner never more than 30 mintues away, along with trained surgeons who can save my life!

Spare me the outrage.

China is outraged that the U.S. rendered a report on the Chinese military which exposed their investments in 'disruptive technologies' (e.g., strategic nuclear forces, space weapons, internet warfare).

According to the BBC:

A foreign ministry spokesman called it a "gross distortion of the facts", and urged an end to "Cold War thinking".

Really? Chinese hackers regularly attack U.S. government and defense network. China has developed innovative radar systems to track low-flying targets (aircraft or cruise missiles). China is expanding its nuclear and space capabilities. China's military budget has doubled in the last decade, in order to transform its massive peasant army into a modern military force.

China doth protest too much, methinks.

Triumph of the Democratic Party

In the Nazi propaganda film Triumph des Willens (Triumph of the Will), Adolf Hitler reviews the the Reichsarbeitsdienst (Reich Labor Service) in their snappy uniforms and their shiny shovels. He told them:

"The entire Nation will pass through your school.
The time will come when no German can be admitted
into the community of this People when they have not
entered your community first!!"*

The leadership of the Democratic Party wants to "Enable All Americans to Serve to Meet the Nation's Challenges" and to "Integrate Service into Learning" with the goal that all middle and high school children in the United State participate in 50 hours of community service per year.

The GIVE Act is just part of the beginning . . . already, there are those swearing loyalty oaths to a man and not to the Constitution (thanks to Lona Manning and American Thinker for the link).

* my translation

The Socialist Trifecta

In virtually every speech that President Barack Obama gives on the current economic crisis, he references a trifecta of Socialist policies that he puts forth as the priorities of our nation and those we must focus on to heal the economy: health care, education, energy.

1. Health care in the United States is the best in the world. Nowhere else is there the amount of care and quality of care equaled. Liberals will trot out statistics showing that Americans are less healthy than citizens of other nations (which is true), but this is not the fault of our health care system. Liberals also cite the costs of our health care system, which is true, but the real reasons behind the high costs are the lawyers who game the system (the ambulance chasers) and those who are uninsured seeking (and receiving) free services. Those "free" services are then paid for by the increased prices doctors and hospitals charge for their services (TANSTAAFL).
2. Our education system is broken. Read The Six-Lession Schoolteacher by John Gatto. Gatto was the 1991 New York State Teacher of the Year and his essay is a damning insight into the Socialist mind-control of public education in the United States of America. Pouring more money into broken schools (and putting that money into the NEA and Socialist teachers and adminstrators) is not the answer.
3. T. Boone Pickens is right. The U.S. is transferring huge amounts of money to our enemies through our dependance on foreign oil. However, the Democrats are not pouring money into the construction of nuclear power plants and research into fusion technology. Democrats also oppose in the installation of wind and solar power farms in places where they could generate the most power.

Finally, the emphasis of the Obama Administration is placing on these three issues (and the way they plan to address them . . . through unwise and profligate spending) is far from the medicine the economy needs. The Democrats are using the economic crisis to implement the Socialist agenda they've been pining for but have never been able to fully realize. In the immortal words of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel:

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste . . . And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before."

The Obama administration is truly not allowing a crisis to go to waste. They have used the Administration's honeymoon and the virulently Socialist power of the Democratic Majority to push Federal spending through the roof and to channel power to shadow organizations (cf. Organizing for America) and acting swiftly to dismantle American credibility in the foreign policy realm.

Soak the Rich (or Class Warfare 101)

When CNN is questioning the validity of a Democratic plan to soak the rich, you can be assured that is really and truly is a bad idea. That's not a very sound rhetorical basis upon which to base an argument, but given the Mainstream Media's slavish devotion to all things Obama, it is a valid one.

For those earning an income close to the U.S. median income* of $70,354, it might seem fair to tax the "bonuses" of those greedy banker-types. However, one must keep in mind three very important factors:

1. Much of the compensation which these individuals receive is based on contractual performance bonuses. Is it the government's role to step in ex post facto and punitively tax bonuses that have been earned for expected performance, just because the word "bonus" sounds like something extra?
2. The purpose of taxation is to generate revenue for government programs, not to punish those who populist leaders and demagogues feel that it is in their best interest to pillory on any given day. Politicians like Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have made their careers by finding the Villain-Of-The-Day™ to flash in front of the cameras and capture headlines. None of these politicians are truly outraged by these bonuses, since they are just the sort of fat cats that seek preferential treatment for themselves.
   
3. Giving in to the urge to "soak the rich" proves that one's character is of insufficient fiber to combat the jealously that populist leaders (such as Schumer) are trying to invoke through their phony outrage.

The United States of America will be far better off when all Americas stop worrying about what their neighbor earns, and starts worrying about what they can do to increase their own earning potential. Punishing a successful banker out of jealously is not only morally wrong (cf. that pesky 10th Commandment) but is also greatly injurious to a system which is designed to reward great effort and productivity with great compensation.

That which you punish, you receive less of. That which you subsidize, you receive more of. If we punish financial professionals for their hard work (regardless of the current financial crisis), then we will receive less of their labor in the future. If we continue to transfer money from the wealthy to those on the dole, we will only create larger throngs calling for the dole.

In the end, this remains a fundamental issue of returning to the Foundations of our Nation and implementing the Judeo-Christian ethic on which this great Republic was founded.


* U.S. Median Income for a 4-person family for the period of October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009 (source U.S. Department of Health & Human Services).

You be the Judge of the Judge!

I encourage all Americans who understand and support the Foundations of this Nation to write and call Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. You can view her contact page and biography here. However, I will provide the information you need in the interest of time saved.

The Chambers of Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly
333 Constitution Ave NW
Washington, DC 20001

Chambers: (202) 354-3340

It is only through a constant barrage of opposition and and the voicing of our dissatisfaction that we will steer the ship of state back towards the Foundations of our Nation.

Does Personal Freedom Require an Environmental Impact Statement?

Apparently, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly thinks that personal freedoms require an environmental impact statement. Yesterday, she issued a decision blocking implementation of a Bush Administration ruling that eliminated the unreasonable restrictions placed upon the lawful bearing of defensive arms in National Parks.

Why? Because the Interior Department had not conducted an environmental analysis of the impact! So, Judge Kollar-Kotelly, do we require that that all personal freedoms be analyzed for their environmental impact, or just the ones that activist liberals in the judiciary object to?

The right to bear effective arms in defense of one's self and one's family is an inalienable right that is only guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Too often, Americans misunderstand the Constitution as granting or giving freedoms, rather than protecting them against infringement. The Bush Administration reversed decades of willful infringement of the Second Amendment through their ruling last year. Judge Kollar-Kotelly proved herself an activist of the worst sort when she threw common sense and the Constitution under the bus.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms might not be your favorite personal freedom. It might make you uncomfortable and the thought of your fellow citizens with firearms might scare you. However, there can be no picking and choosing when it comes to the protection of inalienable rights. Without arms, a citizen is vulnerable to the predation of any stronger invidual or group, and is unable to enforce their own basic right to life and security from bodily harm.

Finally, I suggest that every reads Czech President Václav Klaus' book Blue Planet in Green Shackles to learn more about the thinly veiled Socialist agenda of the environmental movement and how they are bent on the destruction of personal freedom.

Hewing the Planks from the Fabric of our Republic

My dear wife just sent me a link to MuscleDaddy's post on E3 Gazette concerning H.R. 1388 (the GIVE Act).

In a nutshell, this act creates a structure through which the Federal Government will organize, train, and equip a uniformed force of volunteers organized in Corps, stationed in "campuses" throughout rural portions of the United States where they can "be easily deployed for disaster and emergency response to such region". Mind you, before certain amendments were made, these so-called campuses were referred to as "camps" . . .

I posit that the Obama Administration is actively seeking begin realization of the Eighth Plank of the Communist Manifesto and to begin working on implementation of the Ninth Plank. Passage of this bill will result in mobs of urbanites goose-stepping through the countryside (which will be good for the crime rates in cities) and lording their volunteerism over the poor residents of flyover country. These uniformed gangs will be positioned to react to any emergencies that the Democratic Party chooses to declare.

Of course, according to a report by Chuck Baldwin, State and Federal law enforcement already consider anyone who supports politicians such as Ron Paul and Bob Barr as domestic terrorists.

Let's examine the Slippery Slope Theory of the GIVE Act:

1. GIVE Act is signed by a jubilant President before he tucks into a succulent slice of Waygu steak.
2. Uniformed urbanites (mostly youth) are trained under the careful control of cadres specially selected by Democratic appointees.
3. A terrorist attack occurs somewhere in the United States (perhaps a dirty bomb, another airliner strike, a smuggled nuclear bomb, or an Iranian missile launched from a freighter in the North Atlantic).
4. Using the cover of a national emergency, the Democratic Party deploys multiple Corps of their uniformed volunteers to seize control of vast swaths of the rural United States, while the federalized National Guard and active duty elements of NORTHCOM are used to "pacify" the cities.

Now . . . is this just a bit of tinfoil hattery? I certainly hope so . . .

Marxist Agriculture

Judy Aron (at Consent of the Governed) just posted an great article about a Connecticut Congresswoman who wants to subjugate all food production in this country to government regulation. This bill (H.R. 875) will realize the main tenet of the ninth Plank of the Communist Manifesto. This isn't just about fully industrializing farming under government scrutiny, it's also about preventing individual gardeners and farmers from providing foodstuffs independently of government control.

Just for those of you who have never seen the Planks, here they are:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equal distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

If you've never seen these before, take a close look at them. Then, play a game with yourself. Ask yourself if you see any obvious parallels to the Planks of the Communist Manifesto in the reality of the United States of America today. I'm not talking about the convoluted accusations of conspiracy-theorists . . . just take a long, hard look and see what you think!

Obama's Town Hall Speech in Costa Mesa, CA

I just came in from a run and turned on the TV while I enjoyed a whey protein shake . . . and the smiling face of the POTUS greeted me on MSNBC. Given this opportunity, let's talk about what he has to say!*

• The POTUS says that health care is crushing our families and is the fastest growing part of our State and Federal budgets. Why might that be?

Because the Democratic Party is committed to putting more than 50% of the electorate on the dole, so as to assure an unbreakable electoral majority for years to come. Most of our increasing health care costs come from lifestyle choices (smoking and poor dietary habits) and increased demand for highly expensive, life-extending medications and treatments that are a LUXURY.

If the health care system is to be fixed, there needs to be strict limits placed on what types of benefits will be paid for by the taxpayer and to whom those benefits will go.

• President Obama also claims that no family making less than $250k per year will see a tax increase. Really?

So, when you tax a corporation or a small business owner, do they merrily pay those taxes, or do they pass on those costs in the form of a higher selling price for their goods? When the Democrats "soak the rich" . . . the rich turn around and pass on the soaking to their customers. The rich and corporations don't PAY their own taxes . . . THEIR CUSTOMERS pay the taxes. That's you and I.

• President Obama also defended the Spendulus package as having "almost universal consensus" on the need for stimulus spending.
  

While, from a Keynesian economic perspective this may be true, it fails to address the way the Spendulus package was built. I recently conducted a quick analysis of the Spendulus plan using the White House's own data sheets. Infrastructure spending was SUPPOSED TO COMPRISE the largest part of any stimulus, even according to liberal [socialist] economists like the Nobel Prize-winning Paul Krugman of Princeton.

How much of the Spendulus is actually going to the job-creating construction or maintenance of physical infrastructure?

7%.

Just 7% of the $787 billion Spendulus is going to upgrade or repair America's creaking, aging, cracking, eroding infrastructure. The largest part of the rest of it is going to grow government programs and increase transfer payments (taking from those who have earned and giving to those who have not earned).

• He also justified irresponsible spending by blaming those in government who came before him.

I fail to see how Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois) wasn't part of the problem before President Obama took office. He stated that he wants to get "people back on their feet" and create jobs, but how will increases in transfer payments stimulate job creation?

• "We have to have comprehensive immigration reform."

The POTUS just called for closing the border, cracking down on employers who employ illegals, and for verification of the status of those who apply for employment. He also called for "significant fines" and a requirement to learn English for those who have illegally penetrated American borders and who wish to stay.

Wow! I am really impressed. The lack of clapping from this otherwise pro-Obama crowd in California told me all that I needed to know. My real concern is that this is just another empty "campaign promise" that will be forgotten, or more likely, actively rejected by the Congress.


* I obviously caught this most of the way through, so I am only addressing the parts of the speech that I personally saw.

Obama's NCAA Bracket Picks

The top headline on the White House website today is President Barack Obama's picks for the NCAA basketball tournament.

Is this what the Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military on Earth and the Leader of the Free World should be focusing on? Really?

Currently, we have North Korea preparing to test an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that could potentially reach the United States, an increasingly threatening Iran who will likely achieve operational nuclear weapons in the near future, a rearming Russia, a Czech Republic that just rejected to host components of our missile shield, our southern neighbor is imploding, and China is slowly backing away from our Treasuries. Do any of these foreign policy challenges (dare I say, crises) warrant the attention of the United States?

No, we should just worry about the NCAA Tournament and be outraged that AIG paid its employees what they were contractually due (and under the protection of Democratic Senator Chris Dodd's amendment to the $787 Spendulus package in February). Of course, we should absolutely not pay any attention to the two U.S. Senators who received the largest campaign contributions from AIG . . .

Feinstein: Ban Americans' guns to help Mexico!!

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) typifies the left-wing assault on American freedoms and the foundations of our Republic. This opportunistic San Franciscan is a staunch opponent of the rights guaranteed to all law-abiding Americans under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Today, as reported by KPBS, Feinstein is now calling for further restrictions on the rights of Americans to own and purchase the firearms of their choice. Why is she doing this?

To control the drug-fueled violence in Mexico that the Mexican authorities cannot control!!

So, let me get this straight . . . the corrupt Mexican government is under siege from Drug Cartels armed with military-grade weapons (i.e., grenades, rocket launchers, and machineguns), and Feinstein wants the U.S. to clamp down on the heavily-controlled sales of lawful semi-automatic rifles and pistols to law-abiding U.S. citizens?

This is preposterous. The absurdity of infringing the rights of Americans in the name of assisting a foreign government's quasi civil war flies in the face of our national sovereignty and the ideals of liberty and freedom that this nation was founded upon.

If there are arms flowing south across our border, then there are two solutions:

1) Find the traffickers who are funneling the weapons, arrest them, and imprision them.
2) Close down the border (which would kill two birds with one stone).

Senator Feinstein: leave our guns alone!!

Welcome to the Military Crest

The "military crest" is defined as: [a]n area on the forward or reverse slope of a hill or ridge just below the topographical crest from which maximum observation and direct fire covering the slope down to the base of the hill or ridge can be obtained.*

What does that mean, in layman's terms?

The military crest is a position below the top of a hill or ridge, from which a defending force can observe and engage enemy forces all the way to the bottom of the hill.

From this position on the blogosphere, I will conduct a defensive information campaign against the forces that seek to engage and destroy the foundations of the American Way. There is no individual or group, foreign or domestic, who I will not expose as enemies of America and patriotic Americans.

Welcome to my position, feel free to grab an entrenching tool** and dig in!!

* FM 1-02 'Operational Terms and Graphics'
** small, folding shovel carried in an soldier's rucksack