My Favorite Line in 2010 will be....'Don't Blame Me, I Voted McCain.'

Hi all! Tomorrow is V-day and we all hope the silent majority of Republicans get their way to the polls!!! As I said before, get in there and vote, and if you are voting for Barry please feel free to drop me a line and debate me on it. This cat has so many red flags it would be funny if he wasn’t leading in the polls.

I came across an interview with Steve Forbes on Fox regarding Obama’s economic plan. My educational background and experience is in business, and Obama’s lefty tax plan has looked extremely questionable from day one. Fundamentally, he is pledging all sorts of ridiculous tax cuts while at the same time discussing massive amounts of spending intentions. I found a YouTube clip of Mr. Forbes from 10/9/2008 and it seems my analysis was not totally off base….see it here at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PAGLWCh_iA

Also, here’s a great quote from Mr. Forbes in a 10/13/2008 interview with Greta van Susteren…

“STEVE FORBES, PRESIDENT AND CEO, FORBES INC.: Well, I think he (Obama) does have a mentality that there's sort of a fixed pie out there and that you can -- it's really a matter of how you slice the thing up. And what he doesn't have is what Ronald Reagan had, John Kennedy had, and that is the idea that you can expand the pie and that people can have more, that it doesn't have to be redistribution.
But if you look at his whole array of tax credits, many of which are simply Welfare payments called tax credits, if you look to his tax -- increasing taxes on people with capital, who provide the seed capital for jobs creation in this economy, it really is sort of a status (ph) mechanistic approach that really doesn't (ph) realize that we have a -- can have a dynamic economy. That's how you create jobs, get innovation. And - - but he -- I think he does have that mentality that there's only so much there and it's just a matter of how you divvy it up.”
The whole interview is at: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,437446,00.html

Is it just me, or does all of this simply sound like common sense? Why is it so many Americans are buying in? I guess the obvious answers are people ticked off that their 401K took major hits and are simply blaming Bush. Remember, the root of this problem still stems from Bill Clinton, Barney Frank and others teaming up in the late 90’s and making it easier for low-low middle income earners to get massive amounts of credit which they would never be able to pay back. The other is the alleged ‘$250K tax threshold’ where everyone below that amount gets a break. Or the other definitions are ‘95% of earners’ or ‘95% of Americans’…or whatever (it’s a complete LIE anyway.)

Here’s a fantastic summary on why everyone is going to get throttled under Obama. No rainbows or ‘but ifs’ or dollar thresholds. This is the TRUTH on what will occur. Under Obamanation, you are all going to have to cough up more, doubly so if you are actually hard working and ambitious. Check out the summary HERE:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/senator_obamas_four_tax_increa.html

This outlines all the loopholes fairly well. But even without the loopholes, there will be NOTHING to stop Obama’s true intentions and with the possibility of a Democrat controlled Congress…..yipes.

Basically, Obama voted IN FAVOR of $3,700 tax hikes at $46K per year per household in 2007….this mirrors TRUE INTENTION of Barack Obama, and adjusting for the next two years, in 2010 when the Bush tax cuts expire….prepare yourself for the triple threat of Obama, Biden and Pelosi entrenching themselves in your wallet. My current guess (when you throw in socialized health care) is about $4,500 tax hike at $50K per year per household, CONSERVATIVELY.

Anyway, all the people with the Obama stickers and Obama banners and Obama signs and Obama coffee mugs and Obama t-shirts….I wouldn’t get too attached to them. Because we’re all going to be looking for you when these tax and economic lies he has been blowing smoke on for the past year come to pass.

And don’t blame me. I AM VOTING McCAIN!

Let's Get Back to Fundamentals

Has it really been over a month? I've spent the last 6 weeks working in Southern California, Georgia, South Carolina, Colorado, New Mexico, Alabama and here around Phoenix. Nice to be home (and nice to see the weather cooling off.)

Anyway, the election is 3 weeks away. The debates are over, the mudslinging is at full 'sling.' To be honest I just want to get it over with at this point. Locally, it looks like a good shift towards the right (the sheriff and town supervisor look like Republican wins, a few others look good as well.) We had one Dem county servant funnel $500K away from our town, plus another Dem that skimmed money for Vegas trips. Besides the criminal activity, some infrastructure is just falling behind and needs to be ramped up. Hopefully some GOP influence gets some action done.

On the national front, I am concerned but still optimistic. Basically, I believe McCain would be leading if the DOW didn't take 8-day slide below 9,000. For some reason, idiots are equating what is happening directly with the president, where poor corporate decisions made IN THE 90'S are having more of an effect on what is happening now more than anything.

In fact, when Bush took office, this was a KNOWN issue that they were trying to address. Check this out, and pay attention to the dates:

***********************************

Bush Administration Call for GSE Reforms

2001
April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."

2002
May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003
January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.
February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO," OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)
September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations.
September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.
November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004
February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005
April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

2007
July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.
August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)
September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.
September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.
December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

2008
January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.
January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.
February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.
March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
· "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
· "[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
· "Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

************************************************

Many of these issues can be tied back to before Bush, with many corporate heads making short term decisions which are being called in now. Couple that with the fact INDIVIDUALS stopped paying their bills since seemingly half the country doesn't know how to do a household budget, and we arrive exactly where we are at.

Also, want to go back even FURTHER to prove this was happening under Clinton's watch? I bolded the most interesting line....

******************************************

http://www.nytimes.com/

September 30, 1999
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
By STEVEN A. HOLMES

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, b anks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.''

Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers , compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.

''Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

************************************************

So Clinton pushes to make it easier for people to get loans, it happens, Bush burns for it when people bite off more than they can chew. Does that sound fair to you?


NOW, GETTING BACK TO FUNDAMENTALS....

What amazes me even more, is that so many people believe Obama. Why? Isn't the third guarantee (besides death and taxes) 'politicians lie?' Add to this the fact the man has a 7 NTU rating (where 100 is 'tax friendly'...by comparison McCain is an 83...and FYI, Biden is a 10 and Pelosi is a 21.) Everything the man has voted for has been a tax hike. Also, after the Texas primary win, Obama EXPLICITLY STATED tax hikes would begin at $75K a year, not the BS $250K number he is throwing out today. And FYI.....that $250K number is after $75K per year went to $100K, then $110K, then $150K, then as recently as last month CNN ran a table stating $166K per year is where the tax increases per household would begin. WHY ARE THE OBAMA SUPPORTERS NOT NOTICING THIS?

Meanwhile, ALL of these numbers are bogus anyway. When Obama speaks of jacking up corporate taxes PLUS adding a windfall tax, your cost of living is going up anyway, so any of these tax cuts Obama mentions are garbage...they will be offset by higher cost, even higher for the items of high demand. Add to this the fact Pelosi's Congress sent a budget to Bush for 2007 that would have been the largest tax hike in US history....$3,700 at $48K per year per household. This is what we are REALLY in for if Obama wins. This doesn't even take into account the tax nightmare 'guaranteed' health care would cause.

When he gets in office he is going to do what he wants anyway (and what his history shows.) He will RAISE taxes across the board...it will be under the guise of 'Oh, things are worse than we thought' or some similar BS. Everyone will get a hit except for those sponging off the government currently (the entitlement lifers.)

Then the old argument takes shape...how do you spur an economy by raising taxes and raising cost of living?

This isn't even taking into account the cutting of defense and intel budget, a 'guaranteed' health care system that will soon become nationalized health care (needing a 5% tax hike per year to maintain), the death of the second amendment while Obama chokes out gun shops and regulates ammo sales causing skyrocketing prices.

Speaking of which...check out Obama's home state today...a microcosm of why guaranteed health care can't happen. I highlighted my favorite line:

*********************************************

Hawaii Ending Universal Child Health Care After 7 Mos.
Friday, October 17, 2008
ASSOCIATED PRESS

HONOLULU — Hawaii is dropping the only state universal child health care program in the country just seven months after it launched.

Gov. Linda Lingle's administration cited budget shortfalls and other available health care options for eliminating funding for the program. A state official said families were dropping private coverage so their children would be eligible for the subsidized plan.

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

State officials said Thursday they will stop giving health coverage to the 2,000 children enrolled by Nov. 1, but private partner Hawaii Medical Service Association will pay to extend their coverage through the end of the year without government support.

"We're very disappointed in the state's decision, and it came as a complete surprise to us," said Jennifer Diesman, a spokeswoman for HMSA, the state's largest health care provider. "We believe the program is working, and given Hawaii's economic uncertainty, we don't think now is the time to cut all funding for this kind of program."

Hawaii lawmakers approved the health plan in 2007 as a way to ensure every child can get basic medical help. The Keiki (child) Care program aimed to cover every child from birth to 18 years old who didn't already have health insurance — mostly immigrants and members of lower-income families.

It costs the state about $50,000 per month, or $25.50 per child — an amount that was more than matched by HMSA.

State health officials argued that most of the children enrolled in the universal child care program previously had private health insurance, indicating that it was helping those who didn't need it.

The Republican governor signed Keiki Care into law in 2007, but it and many other government services are facing cuts as the state deals with a projected $900 million general fund shortfall by 2011.

While it's difficult to determine how many children lack health coverage in the islands, estimates range from 3,500 to 16,000 in a state of about 1.3 million people. All were eligible for the program.

"Children are a lot more vulnerable in terms of needing care," said Democratic Sen. Suzanne Chun Oakland. "It's not very good to try to be a leader and then renege on that commitment."
The universal health care system was free except for copays of $7 per office visit.
Families with children currently enrolled in the universal system are being encouraged to seek more comprehensive Medicaid coverage, which may be available to children in a family of four earning up to $73,000 annually.

These children also could sign up for the HMSA Children's Plan, which costs about $55 a month.
"Most of them won't be eligible for Medicaid, and that's why they were enrolled in Keiki Care," Diesman said. "It's the gap group that we're trying to ensure has coverage."

***********************************************

Finally, just do your fact checking people. If you're a lefty, before you condemn what I write, check out what Obama SAYS and what his past history says. You will find TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE, and the history will decide the future. Obama IS the far left Marxist Socialist tax and spender his history SAYS HE WILL BE.

McCAIN IN 2008!

Under Obama, This Woman Would Be a Criminal

Hi all! I'm not really going to do any blogs on the conventions, at least at this point. I may say something in a month or so when we see the poll bounce and how the next 3-5 weeks trend. Historically, the needle moves to the right as the election approaches....we'll see how that holds (it actually was before Obama received a bounce after the Dem convention.) So far as the last few weeks, I like McCain's pick of Sarah Palin. She literally was the most powerful GOP member at the furthest geographical point from Washington DC....hard to call her any sort of 'DC Insider.' Also, the more I see the more I relate to. Life Member of the NRA, attended multiple colleges, strong independent woman with her own opinion (gee, I think I married one!) She sure beats the heck out of a guy spouting the word 'CHANGE' every 5 words then asking a 35+ year career politician to be his running mate. No thanks.

And now, the point of my headline....

This article appeared today on Foxnews.com (far be it for CNN or MSNBC showing people defending themselves) and illustrates how misguided Obama is, especially for someone that claimed to be a Constitutional Law expert:

************************************************************

Texas Woman Kills Home Intruder With His Own Gun
Associated Press
Thursday, September 04, 2008

BLUE MOUND, Texas — When two gunmen smashed through the glass front door of her suburban Fort Worth home, Kellie Hoehn didn't think twice.

The 34-year-old mother of two grabbed a shotgun that had been pointed at her face early Wednesday, starting a struggle that ended with one intruder killed with his own weapon and another in the hospital.

"I wasn't going to let them get to my babies," she said, recalling the moment when she pushed up the muzzle of the shotgun, pointing it away from her children's rooms.

Although the intruders told her to keep quiet, she screamed for her husband. She told her 12-year-old son, who was awakened by the sound of the shattering glass front door, to get his 5-year-old sister and hide.

"It was like a horror movie," her husband, 32-year-old Keith Hoehn, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "I thought I was a dead man. We're fighting for our lives."

With Kellie Hoehn clinging to the weapon's muzzle, her husband tackled the man who held the shotgun. She knocked the intruder in the head with a jar candle, giving her husband a chance to wrest the shotgun.

By then the tussle had spilled out onto the front lawn. Keith Hoehn shot one of the men who had a pistol, police said. Wounded, that man ran away.

Then the intruder who initially had the shotgun charged Keith Hoehn.

Kellie Hoehn told The Dallas Morning News that she screamed at her husband, "Shoot him, shoot him, shoot him."

Her husband fired the shotgun and the man fell to the ground. Then the shot man lunged a second time.

"Well, I shot him again, and I guess that was it," Keith Hoehn said.

Dakota Scott Benoit, 20, of Richland Hills, was pronounced dead at a hospital. John Garland Pierson, 25, of Haltom City, was in critical condition and in police custody at the hospital.
"I am not happy that someone is dead," Kellie Hoehn said. "But I am glad that my family is alive."

Police said Pierson was shot in the left arm and the bullet pierced his diaphragm and other organs but his condition was improving. He will face charges of burglary of habitation with intent to commit another felony, police said.

Investigators say the couple were just defending their family and probably won't be charged.

************************************************************

First off, this woman was lucky enough to get a shotgun away from a home invader and savvy enough to shoot it at TWO people, one of whom is still armed. There is NOTHING more dangerous than someone defending their own family and home, and even in Texas where law-abiding gun ownership is popular (let's face it, the reputation in Texas is that everyone is packing....not true, but a heckuva reputation to have and USUALLY makes idiot criminals like this think twice.

My problem with the left in general, but MORESO OBAMA, is that under certain liberal laws that HOPEFULLY would never be passed, this woman could be prosecuted and taken away from the children she was protecting. Just for Obama, the list below shows his anti-second amendment standing and it's even more insulting he blatantly lied when the Heller case was decided by the Supreme Court about 6 weeks ago.

The following can be found at http://www.nra-ila.org/obama/

************************************************************

1. FACT: Barack Obama voted against the confirmation of 2 of the 5 Justices that affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms.

2. FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.

3. FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.

4. FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.

5. FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a 500% increase in the federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition.

6. FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.

7. FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.

8. FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.

9. FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.

10. FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.

11. FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.

12. FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and "research."

13. FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.

14. FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.

15. FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.

16. FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.

17. FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.

18. FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.

19. FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.

20. FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month handgun purchase restrictions.

21. FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.

22. FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.

23. FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.

************************************************************

The last I heard, right to bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed upon. A few of those laws could be defined as infringement. Some of the laws are convoluted methods the liberals are using to get ammunition banned (i.e. sure you can have a firearm, but good luck getting ammo) or pricing them out of the market (which is why microstamping is so popular with liberals.)

Now, if NUMBER 8 on the aforementioned list became reality, the police conversation with Mrs. Hoehn would have went like this:

"Congratulations Mrs. Koehn! You defended your children and home from criminal home invaders. And Mr. Koehn, you helped! Now, you BOTH HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT...."

Luckily, this did occur in Texas, and luckily that law is not in place. Even if the police did charge them NO JURY in the state of Texas would convict....be happy it didn't happen in California or Massachusetts though.

Just something to consider with your vote this year. Someone that is supposedly well schooled in Constitutional Law selects different portions of the Bill of Rights to ignore? Not to mention flat out ignoring the fact that the 38 states that allow conceal & carry have LESS gun crime than the states/cities with liberal gun laws (DC, Chicago, Boston...the more liberal/repressive the gun laws, the more emboldened the crimal.)

NOBAMA.

Peace Through Strength and Other Dying Philosophies (that continue to be proved accurate.)

MY TWO CENTS ON THE OLYMPICS

Okay, so the Beijing Olympics are rocking right along. I'm catching bits and pieces here and there on TV. I've seen Phelps swim once. I've seen May-Treanor/Walsh play about half a game (and hoping they continue…one of the most dominant teams on the planet, and gets my vote for 'MOST VISUALLY APPEALING.') I caught the USA Men's 1-2-3 finish in the hurdles. That's about it. The Olympics are interesting, but the schedules are a mess. I've seen coverage on an HD channel, USA network, NBC and at least one other network which I believe was Lifetime if you can believe that. Not enough time in the day to really catch the sports I am interested in. I have been getting most of the news via radio and Sportscenter (where I will note a US Army competitive shooter gold medaled in trap….very cool!)

THE 'WEIRDNESS'

The radio/Sportscenter coverage I have heard has a common thread….how GREAT Phelps is, how well the US is playing basketball, and 'just how strange it is in China because you always feel like you're being watched.' Where's the surprise? It's China. They do that. Communism is sort of known for this.

Then I get to hear from the 'Big Brother' conspiracy theorists that see to it they get on the air, backhand Bush and the Patriot Act but in the next breath praise what a 'STELLAR' job AZ Governor Janet Napolitano is doing. Never mind there have not been any court actions that have stood up against the Patriot Act (and trust me, the ACLU would publicize ANY actions currently in place), AND the fact Napolitano's great money-making idea is placing 200 speed cameras all over the state highways. Which party is the Big Brother party? All I know is my guy wants LESS taxes (and by definition, less government), but this isn't my main point of today's far right rant.

My primary point is the 'WEIRDNESS' of China's suppression of demonstrations. Weird? Really? Does anyone here know that the Tiananmen Square footage of the student in front of the tank back in the 80's had to be smuggled out in the underwear of the photographer? This is China, suppression and security is their ball game. It is unfortunate, but it is there country. The only time this changes is massive internal uprising or outside invasion. Outside invasion isn't happening, and its people (ONE BILLION OF THEM) lack the ability to unite, mobilize and maintain a revolution. If your government can keep ONE BILLION people in line, you are evidently more skilled than your average mall rent-a-cops. This blog is NOT about what is RIGHT, it is about the reality of the situation.

This brings me to my NEXT point, the 'Free Tibet' protestors, some of which are my favorite people to sink my fangs into in the world. Anyone seen your typical 'OUTGOING' 'Free Tibeter'? There are obviously exceptions, but I have seen the 70's VW bugs and vans containing the unwashed, dreadlocked 'philosophy' major that has yet to put down the bong and get a real job. And like I said, there are exceptions to everything…..many are educated, suited 'progressives,' some are Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon and Richard Gere.

And guess what, they ALL have their methodology DEAD WRONG.

Again, this blog is NOT about what is RIGHT, it is reality. Ronald Reagan had the right phrase to define national defense philosophy in the modern age:

PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH

It is the motto of CVN-76 USS Ronald Reagan. It is the primary feeling that having the BEST defense force in the world coupled with strong intelligence community is the FIRST STEP to maintaining your country. The USA still exists because of it. If we stopped defending ourselves, How many people can count up the hostile nations and factions that would roll in here? Think standing outside with a picket sign is going to stop an AK-47 round? And don't think it can't happen. ROME fell because of liberal leanings. The twin towers fell because Clinton pulled the rug out from under the intelligence community to the tune of a 60% slash in defense and Intel spending. FEDERAL TAX MONEY IS FIRST AND FOREMOST FOR DEFENSE AND LAW. Everything else is nanny state spending that will eventually spiral out of control (SEE: Social Security.)

NOW, SOME THOUGHTS ON THE 'FREE TIBETERS'….

Ever think that the land you live on was once Native American land, much of it that was NOT purchased and agreed to at the point of a sword? Why aren't the 'Free Tibeters' fighting to hand it all back to the Navajo, Hopi, Sinagua, Anasazi, Apache, etc.? Even the original 'American' colonies we fought for and took away from the British crown. Want to give it back?

Note for the Democrat 'Free Tibeters:' Protecting your country via the military is the MOST important item you pay for in taxes. Voting for a far lefty that slashes mil/intel budget is NOT how you protect 300 million people.

Also, where were the 'Free Tibeters' yelling 'Free the Kurds and Shi'as' when Hussein was murdering them? We acted on this (part of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998) and they continue to WHINE AND MOAN ABOUT USING THE MILITARY to stop the oppression and murder of non-Sunni Iraqis. What's with the double standard? Religion-ism ('Free Tibeters' apparently like Buddhists but not non-radical Islamists?) Maybe Richard Gere didn't tell them to free the Kurds and Shi'as?

PuLEASE 'Free Tibeters.' Take a shower, put down the bong, trade in the VW bus and get a job. Change occurs from the top down. I want to help the people in Darfur, and guess what? It means using our military and pushing out the warlords. Here's a clue....China won't ever give Tibet back, period. Tibet's own policies have having a TINY post WWII military led to this, especially with a powerful military such as China nearby.

Do some good, 'Free Tibeters'...go join a blockwatch and volunteer in your own community and leave international relations to grown ups that know what the hell they are doing. I would love to see Tibet as its own country again….and this happens by uniting and fighting, not letting the world picket on their behalf. It just simply isn't REALITY. If the current situation is unacceptable, sometimes you must FIGHT for what you want. You may have heard of a certain country that figured this out, led by some guys you may have heard of named Adams, Franklin, Jefferson, Washington….

Bad Candidate? The Media is Soaking You in One!!

I will probably do more than one blog this month....90 days to election and the needle is swinging right. Here's some more nuggets to chew on....

****

From Obama's book "Dreams from my Father"

Obama harbors negative racial stereotypes as Reverend Wright, his mentor for 20 years, as Obama states in pages 98-104 "Black nationalism, a steady attack on white race would be justified if it could deliver."

MY TAKE: Didn't he say at one point he could bring the country together? I am wondering if he was talking about Kenya.

On Page 100 - Obama went out of his way to choose Marxist professors at college as his friends to avoid being mistaken as a "sell out." Obama states "the more politically active black students, the chicanos, the foreign students, the Marxist professors and the punk rock performance poets are who Obama spent time with."

MY TAKE: Didn't you tend to gravitate towards people you held common traits with in college? Hmmm....

On Page 93 - Obama drank heavily, tried drugs enthusiastically, and was helped by pot, booze and cocaine.

MY TAKE: Don't I recall Bush being bashed for Coke issues? Oh yeah....A whole far left movie called 'W' is coming out this fall that is centered on this. But I guess for Obama that is ok.

****

Also, did anyone notice Obama's 'I don't look like the guys on the dollar bill' reference? Quickly followed up by 'oh, that's not a racist comment?' Really, then what did you mean by it? No wig, ruffled shirt, wooden teeth or green tint? If that's the case, then McCain doesn't look like that either. But this is NOT the end of the story!!!!!!!

Obama may look more like guys on the dollar bill than he thinks....go out and Google/Altavista 'the Five Black Presidents' and you may get some interesting news. Would you believe:
Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding & Calvin Coolidge are ALSO of black ancestry?

Here is one link: http://www.geocities.com/cureworks1/5blkpres.htm that discusses this, but there are other sources and books written on the subject. As I recall, Jefferson, Jackson & Lincoln are ALL on American currency. Maybe you DO look like any other lefty politician that is promoting far left socialism, Barry!!

As I stated a few blogs ago, the needle TYPICALLY moves to the right as the election approaches. Both 4 & 8 years ago, Kerry and Gore were leading and wound up losing the general election from this point forward. This last quarter a few things happened....the GDP grew 1.9% which shows higher growth than projected. Also, the service industry is flat (which is an improvement because it was contracting.)

Keep in mind the fact that major companies are NOT going to add to payroll before the election....they need to see what policies will be put in place. Did anyone notice Obama wants the windfall tax? For you, that means your cost of living will be higher if he is voted in...organization never 'eat' additional costs, they are passed on to the consumer. If you run into any of the 'screw the rich' and 'screw the corporations' parrots, please remind them of this PLUS the fact the Obama+Pelosi one+two knockout punch will mean 5%+ tax hikes each year as you get socialized health care, government programs for everyone and liberal judges that put dangerous criminals back on the streets for their 15th second chance.

Anyways, that's the news of today...as well as the fact McCain is making tracks across most demographics and in states where Obama held (yesterday was the first day McCain was projected to take Florida.) It's very tight and Obama still leads the electoral projections, so keep passing the word.

McCain in '08!!

It Would Be Funny if it Wasn't So Insulting

My favorite far left whipping boy, Obama’sWeb Home Page (also known as CNN) ran the following as its top story today about the current yearly budget deficit:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/28/2009.deficit/index.html

Before continuing, I hope EVERYONE understands the difference between the budget deficit and the national debt. The way the media likes to portray everything is as if we were never in debt before 2001. The fact is, America has been in debt since 1837. The budget deficit is the yearly ‘cost of doing business’ for the government. It’s in the negative over the past 7 years for two reasons….one is Bill Clinton NOT putting that money into intelligence and military in the 90’s which led to attacks against the US such as the ’93 WTC, the ’98 Embassy Bombings and the 2000 Cole (and eventually led to 9/11.) Give the families of all those victims a call and see if they are turned on by the ‘$128 Billion Surplus’ Clinton allegedly had. That money should have been spent to ensure civilians and soldiers didn’t DIE at home and abroad. The other reason for this is, as stated by the White House, PEOPLE BEING STUPID. Maybe not in so many words, but if individuals would learn to spend within themselves, we would not have this issue.

Now, in terms of this article, let’s quickly go over exactly how we got here, and just how ‘BLAMELESS’ the Dems think they are.

If you all remember, about two years ago when the mortgage world was adjusting itself because of the artificial growth, people started simply walking away from homes. And make no mistake, ARTIFICIAL growth is what it was….it was NOT normal organic growth of 3-6% a year which is what you are supposed to get from a home….it was people artificially blowing up demand which in turn blew up supply, with no real assets behind the borrowing (OR lending it turned out.) Foundations built on vapor never stand up.

So in 2006, CNN in their predictable Act 1, Scene 1, brings us their best Meryl Streep/Susan Sarandon drama….‘oh, so many people took out mortgages they couldn’t afford and need a bail out….help us HELP US! We’re too dense to know how to budget our monies and prepare for the worst-case scenario….now I need someone to bail us out. WON’T ANYONE THINK OF THE CITIZENS?’ The name of this movie, obviously directed by Oliver Stone and financed by Michael Moore, was ‘It’s NEVER the People’s Fault.’ When this eventually reached the small screen, it came through in our homes as ‘GW Bush has messed up the mortgage and housing market.”

Excuse me? Let’s all make sure we understand that the Fed is a conglomeration of PRIVATE banks, not a national bureau. Bush had NOTHING to do with appointing Greenspan OR Bernanke. Now I will mention Greenspan, just after he hit ‘EJECT” when he saw what was going to happen, admitted people bit off more than they could chew and he would have spearheaded restriction on loans – the same kind of restrictions that are currently being passed – to make sure it didn’t happen again. I will also say Greenspan said this IMMEDIATELY before also throwing Bush and the White House under the bus. Nice way to finger-point. Seventy-seven years old and not man-enough to make a mistake. VERY impressive, Alan. Unfortunately, Bernanke isn’t as bright as Greenspan (as evidenced by his penchant for speaking at the wrong time and saying the wrong things.) Ben, here’s a hint….don’t even MENTION anything off-hand….markets rise and fall 200 points on what spews out of your mouth.

Anyway, back to the action. So what does our government do? The 2006 Dem Congress starts looking for ways to hand money out to people too dense to manage themselves, and for some reason Bush signs it….more than once. Why is it turning into ‘how many stimulus packages can I sign before I leave office, George?’ Keep in mind a fundamental base of Republicans and Libertarians is ‘work for what you get, take care of your own, minimal government interference and programs.’ Someone’s been dropping Dem vitamins in GW’s coffee in the morning, and even I am starting to get excited for CHANGE (but not THAT sort of CHANGE.) :-)

Anyway, we come to the point of this…..the SAME people that drone on and on and on about the economy and the fact it needs help are NOT celebrating the monumental mortgage package signed last weekend, but are now throwing Bush under an even BIGGER bus regarding the budget deficit. Excuse me??? The whole Republican Party doesn’t want to give out handouts. The Dem Congress does. I understand it was signed by Bush because there was a good chance 2/3 of Congress would have overturned his veto and also the fact it aided lenders and laid out new rules. But throwing him under the bus because you lobbied for and GOT exactly what the entire left-leaning populace of America WANTED???

And let’s talk about the pot and the kettle. Our government has been AHEAD of the national ‘craze’ in borrowing….it’s been borrowing against itself since 1837, LONG before people were mortgaging money they didn’t have. I don’t like the fact Bush is bending toward Congress in his last months. If it was 2007, I would honestly fear a tax increase at this point, but such a radical policy change will not happen.

So in the end I simply call out CNN….pick a side. You are throwing Bush under the bus for the housing/mortgage crisis (which he had nothing to do with) and throwing him under a bigger bus for signing stimulus packages to help end it (hence increasing the red on the ledger.) You can’t have both, and if the left’s solution involves the words TAX INCREASE then I know you also can’t be realistic. So I bring you the following:

THE MORE YOU KNOW>>>>

I’ll close with something I’ll start to do more regularly….‘The More You Know’ Saturday morning cartoon link. Do you KNOW this history of taxation in our country? Do you know enough to understand how increasing both individual and corporate taxes takes money out of your pocket from your paycheck AND makes your cost of living higher? The way people are dry-humping Obama you would think at least half the country didn’t understand this. Here’s a history on American taxation….

http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml

Stay informed and do your research!! Go McCain in’08. No tax hikes, no more entitlements for those too uneducated to manage their own money.

What are we deteriorating to??

CNN can be a horrid, left wing site. Lately it has been Barry Obama's home page. OCCASIONALLY they get an article correct. I'm not sure if the leftist gatekeeper takes a lunch break or a day off to sharpen its claws and fly its Soviet hammer and sickle, but occasionally they post an article that shows just how much some of the population is de-evolving.

Tonight is one of those nights.

Due to my respect for copyright and fair use, I link you to the following:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/18/facebook.evidence.ap/index.html

This is an article called 'Unrepentent on Facebook? Expect Jail Time.' It shows the judgment of various early 20's individuals that saw fit to get in horrible drunk driving wrecks (all causing serious injury), and in the time just before their sentencing in criminal court, they had gone out and partied and flaunted their 'achievement' in injuring another human being and posting said celebration on Facebook or MySpace.' Mom and Dad must be very proud.

Do these people have parents? Do they have ANY sort of remorse or conscience? If I run into a rabbit or squirrel on the road while driving I feel bad. These people got blitzed and injured PEOPLE. Some within an inch of their lives. And apparent in the spirit of 'gotta get back on that horse if you fall off,' went partying yet again while their victims were most likely in a hospital bed. Yee-hah?

I guess my question is, what went wrong? Near as I can tell these are the spawn of the Boomer/ME generation far lefty hippies that never instilled any discipline in their kids because their parents were hard-asses and didn't spare the rod. Actions speak louder than words, and their actions appear to dictate:

non-remorse,
no fault of my own,
everything is just cool man,
it's all about me.

Am I bashing hippies as the spawn of this? You betcha. Here's a major newsflash:

'THE HIPPIE MOVEMENT WAS A COMPLETE LIE.'

It wasn't about being a hippie, it was about being a BUM. I know this sounds like a 60 year old, but I point out what these hippies were actually doing: dropping out of productive society. 'Counterculturists' will come back and say 'oh yeah, but they were living on communes and living off the land.' OH REALLY? I will refer to the words of a hippie in my defense....the actor Peter Coyote. Check out the 'Hippy' documentary on the history channel, and you will find how those that 'dropped out' to hit the commune would 'pool their welfare checks together.' What was that? WELFARE CHECKS? That's living off the land??? That's called being a burden on society. Also, when their benefits ran out and marijuana gave way to LSD, Ludes and Heroine and the Haight-Ashbury degraded into a row of dope dwellings, AGAIN, we hear 'not our fault...it was the heavy drugs that really put everything in a bad place.' Watch the documentary if you get the chance....and DON'T watch it from the 'oh, cool music and pretty colors' standpoint....watch it from productive American citizen standpoint....it will make you sick.

Take all of the aforementioned paragraph into consideration, then add that these people had kids, and some have GRANDKIDS. Each generation builds on the shoulders of the last....now just THINK of who you are out there with on the highways. Now, are you thinking about the safety features on your car and how high your insurance coverage is? Good!

Protect yourself....as evidenced by the latest polls at least 48% of the country is populated by uneducated, immature sheep that lack conscience and have "NEVER done anything wrong" that are following a snake-oil salesman with a smooth-operating delivery. Anyone remember what this country was founded on? YOU take responsibility for your actions. YOU don't start pointing figures when things go bad (or try to add your name to something if things go well.) YOU manage your own money and NOT look for government handouts. This country was founded on the rights of the individual to go as far as their drive and talents would take them, and lacking morals, values, ethics and above all A CONSCIENCE was NOT part of the deal.

Bonus Blog!! Or Shall I call it a ‘Blonus?’

Interesting article in this week’s Aviation Week (AW) about the effect of John McCain or Barack Obama on the Aerospace and Defense Industries. I don’t really have to summarize much as you probably already know the AW verdict:

Barry Obama – Don’t Know Enough About Him.

John McCain – We May Know Him Too Well.

AW could have simply summed it up in the aforementioned two bullet points because that is the general idea. A few interesting specifics though:

1 – The article cited Obama’s brief mentions of the Orion CEV, Delta and Atlas programs. He originally stated he wanted to cut funding to throw that money at the bloated education system that doesn’t work (all the while throwing hard-working, educated engineers out on the street.) But wait WAIT!!! He later hedged and said he supports the return to the moon. IS ALL THIS SOUNDING FAMILIAR? McCain has changed stances in a career that spans decades (and let’s face it…I feel different about some things that I believe 20 years ago as well.) Obama CANNOT SEEM TO GET THROUGH A MONTH without going back and hedging on his statements. I know the far lefties hate it when they hear ‘Obama changes his web page every 2-3 weeks.’ The fact is he DOES and you can literally find transcripts of his speeches for the last 7 months where key points are directly contradicted. Is the ‘CHANGE’ he is talking about refer to daily changes of stance? When I see his tax stance and voting history you can be sure of this…HE WANTS YOUR CHANGE. Any loose change you have laying around….he and Nancy Pelosi will be bathing in it if you vote his way.

2 - McCain is highly critical of spending on many programs, including the F-22, F-35 and a few other programs near and dear to my heart. AW specifically pointed out McCain would trim defense budgets, however my impression is he wants to get rid of wasteful spending so that more defense programs can be enacted. The AW article also critized the fact that McCain does tend to ‘bite’ people verbally and step on toes. This can be good or bad depending on your point of view. Politically this is poor as you may need to come back to certain people for money someday. This is definitely a ‘skill’ that favors Obama (and in the past favored B. Clinton)….they know how to speak without saying anything and promising MUCH and delivering little. McCain is a little closer to my sideline since I can be a bit too blunt and honest….just ask my In-laws. Make no mistake, I DO NOT trust everything McCain says…I feel this way about EVERY politician. However, the politician ‘SPEECH METER’ does not read ‘lie’ on one end and ‘truth’ on the other….it’s usually some degree of ‘Mostly BS’ to ‘Mostly Realistic and Consumable’. McCain registers MUCH farther the ‘mostly realistic’ side than Obama. The problem is too many people are too dense to actually research Obama’s record or they just plain hate GW Bush.

3 – One major point that the article had: Obama DOES want to cut funding to put it in education, but he somehow believes he can entice top performing math and science students in college to go directly to public school teaching. This is interesting because he appears to want to remove high paying engineering and scientific jobs to make brilliant people low paying school-teachers. What??? First off, top performers want to get PAID. If you remove the ‘carrot’ of a high payday, where is the enticement to excel in the first place? Also, if Obama is so brilliant and yet so noble, why isn’t he teaching basic law at University of Hawaii? Oh yeah, he went for the high paying, relevant job. McCain’s idea is to try to move retiring boomers and retiring military personnel towards the classroom with inter-military programs. This idea is MUCH more realistic (and in fact is what I want to do in about 20 years….go back and teach college history.) MANY people WANT to teach…the problem is there is no money in it, 80% of the kids could care less and only 58% of the money taxed for public schools actually makes it to the classroom (at least that’s the stat for AZ…one of the worst states for public education)….teachers and parents are asked to foot more of the bill out of pocket. Now my belief is more Libertarian in the first place…education needs to be OUT of the government (along with Social Security, medical, etc.) Is this so radical? Tell me this….what was the last program that moved under the government umbrella that you said ‘MAN!!! The COST got LOWER and the QUALITY got BETTER!’ Anyone? EVERYTHING that falls under a government umbrella declines in quality and only becomes a future tax increase. Always has, always will. And no matter HOW Obama wants to sell it, the ONLY WAY TO GET TOP PERFORMERS OUT OF COLLEGE TO TAKE TEACHING JOBS IS TO REMOVE THE HIGH PAYING JOBS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Sounds like socialism, doesn’t it? I firmly believe top performers should be rewarded with higher pay…..a ‘flat class’ society is an unproductive, uncompetitive society.

So finally, what have I learned from this and you can take away? It’s actually right down party lines….Obama wants to tax and spend and cut defense funding. At least ALLEGEDLY…it depends on what he says tomorrow. There are 4 months to election….that means at least 5 more changes to Obama’s ‘Moving Target’ web site.

And remember this one fundamental statement that was given to me by a coworker:

Republicans = We’re all the same at the STARTING line.
Democrats = We’re all the same at the FINISH line.

McCain in ’08!!

War with Iran? The Media Sure Hopes So…

Before continuing, I would recommend everyone get an actual MILITARY bearing on what we are talking about….check the article out here:

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/archive/story.asp?STORY_ID=167

The aforementioned article is written by Col. John M. Collins, and gives a wonderful ‘soldier on the ground’ view of what challenges would face our military should we engage Iran.

Intelligence in Action

In case you missed it, an article in ‘The New Yorker’ has been gaining attention this week…

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh

The article is from Sy Hersh, a Pulitzer that has seemingly been around forever (and remember, yesterday’s Democrat is usually tomorrow’s Republican.) At first look I will say the info appears on the level. The primary problem I have is twofold:

1 > Is this really news? We have been using counterintelligence against Iran since the hostage crisis of the late 70’s, and

2 > Is it so shocking that we would be acting in the best interests of our allies and ourselves???

It seems the uneducated (or naïve) that do not study history and international foreign relations like to paint war with a broad brush….OOOOOHHHH…ALL WAR BAD…NO WAR NO WAR! MAKE LOVE NOT WAR! PEACE AT ALL COSTS. Ugh….try to sound like someone that is aware the world is a rough place, and so long as power and ambition are part of human nature war is unfortunately always going to be a reality. That being said….

Does the US always need to go to war? Obviously not. Case in point is North Korea….WOW! DIPLOMACY WORKS SO LONG AS IT IS TWO WAY!! North Korea sat at the table, bargained and agreed. Again, their country still has an oppressed population, but we can do nothing about it because we don’t have any sort of removal of government treaty or pact with their government. What many people forget is that WE HAD EXACTLY THAT WITH IRAQ. How many people out there think we just decided to pick on Iraq? From some of the anti-war geniuses I’ve seen, it appears to be the far left MoveON.org take that we just arbitrarily acted. Two items:

1 > The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Go research this. For those that like detail: http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/iraq/libact103198.pdf
…and for those that like Cliff’s Notes…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act

2. Iraq had clearly violated terms of peace from the 1991 Gulf War Accord.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect2.html

When you stop reinforcing your treaties, pacts and alliances, YOU VOID THEM ALL. The fact is Clinton spoke tough and never did anything meaningful (lobbing a few cruise missiles does not count.) When an organization declares war (or Jihad) on you and starts attacking your homeland (’93 WTC, 98 Embassies, 00 Cole) you better do something before something bigger happens (9/11.)

With all this being said, diplomacy is the route we have taken with Iran, and it is a model of diplomacy where Iran will not compromise and back down. There is no given treaty with Iran, however we DO have an alliance with Israel, and here is a list of statements the leader of Iran has stated about our ally:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

Now, I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but it sounds like he may have a ‘less than stellar’ opinion of Israel. But that is just me.

So what should the US do?

Well, if you have read all the links up until now, you probably have a good idea of where we currently stand on Iran. History tells us that Israel MUST strike first for self-preservation. They did it in 1981 with Iraq and they just hit Syria last year because of Ba’ath Party threats against them. Iran is a ground war geographical nightmare….it would be like fighting a 4-front war in some ways, though I believe Col. Collins’ article does not emphasize the air superiority we could add to Israel’s forces. In my opinion we are working with Israeli’s intelligence community to measure the extent of nuclear capabilities of Iran, and at the appropriate time (most likely before November) Israel will hit Iran’s nuclear targets. I do NOT believe we will take part in that action outside of aerial strikes UNLESS IRAN TRIES TO COUNTERATTACK ISRAEL. I feel if they do this Iran’s leader will also attack our bases in Iraq. Is Ahmadinejad going to do this? Well, Syria felt Israel wouldn’t hit them, and the only time Syria knew what happened was AFTER Israel was done hitting their targets (Israel’s aircraft has some fantastic electronic warfare capabilities….courtesy of the engineers of the USA.) So my feeling is strikes on Iran will go much the same way, and once Iran’s air power is completely neutralized, I feel that invitation to the chair of diplomacy will look more appealing.

I will say I feel for the people of Iran. Their leader does not represent the whole as many of these folks are of Persian descent and I pray they have the sense to move away from potential targets since many of these despotic rulers tend to build centrifuges next to orphanages. Let’s all hope cool heads prevail, but in the end alliances exist for a reason…mutual benefit of protection for your people.

Now, What Does my Title Mean?

Does the media REALLY hope for war with Iran? Of course they do. Since when does the media NOT want war, carnage, bad news, ‘If it BLEEDS it LEADS’ mentality. It’s unfortunate but true, but always remember: News Producers will always seek body count, while it is the anchors job to feign concern and fake condemnation of the perpetrators. Without them, these news people would pretty much be out of a job.

The First of Many....

Guten Tag! This blog is for those that wish to vent their views on politics, sports, global cultures, economics and history. There is but one rule:

ALL I ASK IS THAT YOU VOICE AND CITE FACTS TO BACK YOUR ARGUMENTS!

No BS is allowed and neither is name calling. Any points of view are welcome, but endeavour to professionally state your viewpoints. I will not pull punches in my views, and I will cite sources and statistics to back them up. If you have a counterargument, please post with all enthusiasm and back your statements up. Then we ALL get to learn and benefit fromt he knowledge of others....productive conversation, debate and learning....WHAT A CONCEPT!!

My first blog will be forthcoming....just wanted to say Aloha and welcome!!