VISION4FREEDOM.NET

While Washington Bleeds Taxpayers Dry, Here is a Conservative Solution

administrator — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:59:00 GMT

Exclusive: While Washington Bleeds Taxpayers Dry, Here is a Conservative Solution

Dick McDonald

Your "stimulus" tax dollars are not going to the private sector economy where people and jobs are, but to government employees and unions. Is it any wonder why it isn't working?

America, the Silly Nation

administrator — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:35:00 GMT

America, the Silly Nation

By Alan Caruba

As we prepare to celebrate Independence Day, we will hear about our Founding Fathers, about those who fought our wars to preserve and safeguard our nation, and other men and women who contributed to the nation’s greatness.

It is good to look back, but future generations will look back as well and wonder how such a great nation became such a silly nation, the object of scorn and ridicule around the world, challenged by every gangster nation that shares the planet; attacked by Al Qaeda, threatened by North Korea, mocked by Venezuela, insulted by Iran, and sustained by the wealth of China and other lenders.

What other republic is governed by fools who voted without reading "climate" legislation whose 1,200 pages of rules and regulations will enrich a few and leave the rest scrambling to pay the light bill? That is, if the light turns on. If passed by the Senate, it will be the largest tax increase in the history of the nation. It exists to "save the planet" from a "global warming" that is not happening.

What other nation would systematically ensure that its vast resources of coal, enough to power plants to produce electricity for the next hundred or two hundred years, not be used because no new plants will be built? Fully fifty percent of our electricity comes from coal, but this nation is about to waste billions of dollars on wind and solar energy—so called "clean" energy—which accounts for about one percent.

If wind or solar was a sensible way to produce electricity, surely utilities would have invested in it long ago. It isn’t. It never will be. Only a very silly nation would shift billions of dollars to such "clean" and "renewable" energy when it was sitting on top of tons of coal.

Only a silly nation would ensure that its other vast, natural and national resource, oil, would be put off limits to all exploration and extraction in Alaska and along our vast coastlines, as well as huge reserves in the nation’s interior. Only a silly nation would do this while listening to its politicians talk about "energy independence."

Only a silly nation would ignore the vast potential of nuclear power and use all manner of bureaucratic obstacles to drive up the cost of building plants to generate electricity.

Only a silly nation would ignore the security of its southern border as a virtual invasion of illegal aliens pours across, and take advantage of all manner of welfare programs, special education programs for their children, and free medical services. Our prisons, too, are filling up with illegal aliens.

Only a silly nation with twelve million or more of these illegal aliens in its midst would actually be looking for a way to magically make them citizens overnight while ignoring the fact that they having been taking jobs from natural born and naturalized citizens by working "off the books" and sending billions back to Mexico and points south. Amnesty would double or triple the existing population of formerly illegal aliens in America as family members joined them.

Only a silly nation would allow the teachers unions to totally control the quality of education and transfer power to Washington, D.C., away from the States and local communities where it rightfully belongs.

Only a silly nation would spend thousands of dollars per student and, at the same time, ignore the message they are sending with obscene drop-out rates. Only a silly nation would impose a one-size-fits-all system of testing on millions of students.

Only a silly nation would to allow the graduation, year after year, of students lacking the most basic math, science, reading, and other skills necessary to provide the workforce we require.

Only a silly nation would ensure that the costs of a college education were so high that graduates enter the workplace burdened by years of debt.

Only a silly nation would continue to seek negotiations with Iran whose leaders cry "Death to America" every day. Only a silly nation would elect a President who, when the desire for freedom and democracy broke out on the streets of Tehran, expressed respect for the "Supreme Leader" and outrage only after protesters had been shot to death and clubbed into submission.

Only a silly nation would permit itself to literally go broke, along with most of its States, and then vote billions more in a "stimulus" bill while, at the same time, giving billions to failed auto companies and taking government ownership. We own an insurance company as well. This is contrary to the Constitution. It is nationalization.

It was, however, a silly nation that caused the housing mortgage meltdown with government mandates that required banks and mortgage firms to lend money to people who would not normally qualify for them.

It is a silly nation that proposes to provide healthcare insurance to everyone at the same time Medicare is on the brink of bankruptcy. Nationalizing the healthcare system will kill a lot of Americans by rationing health services, but that’s what a silly nation does.

Only a silly nation would raise taxes in the midst of a major Recession verging on a Depression. The last Great Depression lasted ten years because of such foolish actions and ended only because the nation had to gear up for World War Two.

There was a time when mature people led the nation prudently and, when necessary, boldly. What we have now are petulant and indifferent children intent on personal enrichment.

What we have is a President that does not like America..

What we have is a silly nation.

Alan Caruba writes a daily blog at factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com and a weekly commentary at www.anxietycenter.com, the website of The National Anxiety Center.

David Jr. Meets His commander In Chief

administrator — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:30:00 GMT

David Jr. Meets His commander In Chief

Published on 06/18/09

For those who do not know Dave Borden, he is a former Black & Decker employee who lives in Hanover. His son Dave Jr was serving in Iraq and was badly injured from a bomb explosion. Dave Jr has had over 38 surgeries to date. The email below is from a recent visit from President Obama, the email speaks for its self. . . . . . . . . . .

Since Dave Jr. has been injured he has met and been overwhelmed by many, many political and military “celebs”. The list includes Bob Gates, Sec. of Defense, who came into his room and told him 3 or 4 times that if Dave Jr. had any issues to call his cell phone number. It includes Gen. Petereus who sat and talked with Dave Jr. for almost 45 minutes.

The General recalled vividly all of the circumstances around the events that led to fighting that Dave was involved in. It includes Sen. McCain who arrived late on a Saturday afternoon during a thunder storm, unannounced, and talked to Dave Jr. about how similar their experiences with fate. It includes George Bush when Dave Jr. was invited to attend the very last Christmas party at the White House for the White House Staff.

President Bush and his wife entered the ballroom and immediately went to Dave Jr.. President Bush knew Dave Jr.’s name as well as when and how he was injured. Dave Jr. had a picture taken with Laura and the President that he has framed and will cherish forever. The list goes on and on of people coming in to meet Dave Jr. and the other wounded warriors at Waler Reed and Bethesda.

Yesterday. Dave Jr. was ordered to be at the National Naval Hospital with another 12 soldiers and Marines to meet with Obama. Obama was supposed to arrive at 11:30 AM. He finally got there at 3:00 PM. He entered the room with the wounded warriors and quickly shook each of their hands. He never asked their names, where they were from, or how they were injured. Then he left.

Dave Jr. has met the people who really care about the military. All he remembers from Obama is a weak handshake. The others in the room, younger and less exposed to the people that Dave Jr. has met, were so disappointed. Word about Obama’s “insensitive” visit has spread to the MATC( the rehab facility) at Walter Reed and throughout Bethesda. The military sees through his phonyness.

All I can say is that it is such a dissappointment that this man is Commander-In-Chief of our Armed Forces. He is an embarrasment to our Nation.

Regards, Dave

URL: http://standupamericaus.com/-david-jr-meets-his-commander-in-chief:11957
StandUpAmericaUS Project

The '10' Cannots

administrator — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 06:00:00 GMT

The Ten Cannots

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

-- Rev. William John Henry Boetcker, 1873

Oversight of US Programs in Afghanistan Faulted

administrator — Tue, 19 May 2009 15:06:00 GMT

Oversight of US programs in Afghanistan faulted

FIXING PRIORITIES IN THE 21st CENTURY

administrator — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:47:00 GMT

21st Century Threats
'Unproven Technology' Lays Basis for Missile Defense
Update By: John Cornyn, R-TX

The following op-ed ran in today’s edition of the Defense News, which can be accessed here.

On April 5, North Korea launched a missile - and sent the world a wake-up call.

Ballistic missiles in the hands of rogue states, potentially armed with weapons of mass destruction, remain one of the most serious security threats of the 21st century. Change of administrations in Washington does not change this strategic imperative: Free nations must defend themselves from ballistic missile attack through robust and layered missile defense capabilities.

North Korea's launch continues a ballistic missile development program that is now four decades old, and which many believe is the most advanced in the developing world. North Korea's Taepo Dong-2 long-range missile has the potential capability to strike Hawaii, Alaska and possibly the West Coast of the United States.

Many observers agree that North Korea has proliferated elements of its missile program, along with those of its nuclear program, and has helped accelerate development of dangerous capabilities in Iran and other nations. Iran's capabilities, in turn, could threaten all our allies in Europe, Central and South Asia, and the Middle East, including Israel.

Despite the growing risk, the new U.S. administration seems determined to scale back our missile defense capabilities and leave us and our allies more vulnerable.

On the same day that North Korea tested its new capabilities, President Barack Obama announced that America's capabilities would be subject to new restrictions. He said in Prague that our missile defense partnership with NATO, including a tracking radar to be based on Czech soil, would go forward only if it is cost-effective and proven, and if the threat from Iran persists. These qualifications may seem reasonable, yet they signal unreasonable cutbacks throughout our missile defense program.

The next day, Defense Secretary Robert Gates made clear which U.S. missile defense capabilities meet the administration's new standards. Approved for more funding are the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, the Standard Missile 3 program, and the conversion of six Aegis cruisers for missile defense.

Defunded or delayed are the Multiple Kill Vehicle program, the Airborne Laser program and additional ground-based interceptors in Alaska. Overall, the administration plans to cut funding for missile defense by nearly $1.5 billion, or about 15 percent.

Reading between the lines, we can see the new administration's priorities. They recognize our proven but limited capability to destroy missiles in the midcourse and terminal stages of flight, yet they resist developing new technologies that would defeat such missiles much earlier, in the critical boost phase. In Europe, what they haven't left out of the budget they seem eager to give away at the negotiating table.

And while trillions of dollars in domestic spending are justified as economic stimulus, new defenses against ballistic missiles - built right here in America - must overcome much higher hurdles from the budgetary bean counters.

FIXING THE PRIORITIES

The administration has set the wrong priorities, partly because it takes too lightly the growing missile threat from rogue states, but mostly because it has failed to recognize three crucial developments over the past 25 years.

First, new technologies have proved the skeptics wrong. During the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan's vision of defenses against ballistic missiles was dismissed as science fiction. Today, our nation has deployed ground-based interceptors, early warning satellites, land- and sea-based radars, and an integrated command, control, battle management and communications infrastructure. Together these components give us an emergency capability against a limited long-range ballistic missile attack, yet each of them, decades ago, was merely an "unproven" technology.

Research, development and deployment of today's unproven technologies are the key to improving our defenses in the decades to come.

Second, the administration seems unaware of the sea change in international public opinion on the issue of missile defense. At the close of the 20th century, our allies and friends were still very skeptical of missile defense. Yet, consistent and patient diplomacy by the Bush administration changed all that. Today, our nation has cooperative agreements on missile defense with the United Kingdom, Denmark, Italy, Japan and Australia.

We are working with Poland and the Czech Republic to give NATO a missile defense capability, and with Israel to improve its defenses against medium-range rockets. India, France and many other nations have expressed interest in cooperating with us on these technologies. Cutting back on U.S. missile defense capabilities makes no sense when so many allies and friends want to deepen their cooperation with us.

Third, support for U.S. missile defenses now crosses partisan lines. Five of my colleagues, including Independent Joe Lieberman and Democrat Mark Begich, wrote President Obama following his administration's proposed funding cuts for missile defense. They urged him to reconsider these recommendations and to continue development of an integrated, layered defense against the ballistic missile threat.

I share my colleagues' concerns, as do millions of Americans across the political spectrum. The president has inspired so many with his vision of crossing ideological divides to pursue common, long-term objectives. Building the infrastructure of missile defense presents a tremendous opportunity to make that vision a reality.

President Obama, like every commander in chief, must make difficult choices to protect our people, advance freedom and defend our strategic interests. I applaud his surge of forces in Afghanistan and appreciate the additional defense capabilities he appears willing to fund. Yet I will oppose any cuts to missile defenses, and to any program that gives us a fighting chance to deter and defeat the security threats of the 21st century.

When the Inmates Are In Charge

administrator — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 02:30:00 GMT

When the Inmates are in Charge

By: Alan Caruba

If you ever wondered what it would be like if seriously deranged people were close to the seat of power in America, you can stop wondering.

In January, the Competitive Enterprise Institute issued a three-page memorandum. William Yeatman, the author of the memorandum, had serious concerns about the nomination of Dr. John P. Holdren to be the White House Science Adviser.

This position heads the Office of Science and Technology Policy which, in official lingo, "serves as a source of scientific and technological analysis and judgment for the President with respect to major policies, plans and programs of the Federal Government."

"John Holdren’s 40-year record of outlandish scientific assertions, consistently wrong predictions, and dangerous public policy choices make him unfit to serve as White House Science Adviser," warned Yeatman.

Just how crazy is Holdren? On April 8, according to the Associated Press, Holdren said that "global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth’s air." Holdren suggested that one option includes "shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays."

The last time anything of this nature was discussed, it was called "a nuclear winter" in which the debris from a nuclear war would fill the atmosphere and keep the Sun’s warming and nourishing rays from getting through.

According to Holdren, "It’s got to be looked at. We don’t have the luxury of taking any approach off the table." Holdren believes that the Earth is in the grip of global warming, but the difference between belief and science is that the latter demands proof. Take, for example, the data our weather satellites have been sending back since 1998 all of which points to a cooling Earth.

Twice during the interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in a fog." The truth, however, is that Holdren is a genuine cuckoo who probably checks under the bed every night to make sure the bogyman isn’t there.

Yeatman described him more charitably as a "chronic alarmist", citing just a few of his paranoid fantasies. In 1971, Holdren predicted that "some form of ecocatastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century." We are now safely into a new century and the only catastrophe is the Obama administration.

The really neat thing about making catastrophic predictions is that they always take place way into a future. In 1986, Holdren was predicting that global warming would cause the deaths of one billion people by 2020. This is eight years beyond 2012 when devotees of the ancient Mayan calendar predict the end of the world will occur. Neither are likely to occur.

In 1998 Holdren warned that we just can’t go on using energy fuels like oil, natural gas, and coal that represent nearly one hundred percent of everything we and everyone else uses now and will into the future. These days we hear President Obama blathering away about "clean energy", but there is reality and there is the increasingly weird world of the White House.

In a recent article, Robert Bryce, one of the nation’s leading authorities on energy, pointed out that "Oil now provides nearly 40 percent of America’s total primary energy use. It also provides nearly all of the energy needed for the transportation sector. Coal and natural gas together provide about 50 percent of America’s primary needs."

That leaves "clean energy", solar and wind power, "but together," Bryce notes, "these sources currently provide about 0.16 percent of Americans total needs." It should also be pointed out that solar, wind, and ethanol production would not exist were it not for huge government subsidies and mandates for their use.

Both President Obama and Holdren think "clean energy" should receive billions of dollars while the White House does everything in its power to destroy the nation’s oil and coal industries.

The Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, recently said that windmills off the East Coast "could generate one million megawatts of power, roughly the equivalent of 3,000 medium coal-fired power plants, or nearly five times the number of coal plants now in the United States."

The reality, however, is that there aren’t 3,000 coal fired plants operating. There isn’t even half that number. The Institute for Energy Research estimates that, to achieve Salazar’s insane goal, there would have to be 309,587 giant 3.15 megawatt wind turbines spread over 1,800 miles of coastline or about 172 turbines per mile of coastline. And, of course, the wind would have to blow 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Are these people crazy? You bet! Are the inmates in charge of the asylum? Yes, indeed.

They aren’t the only ones. The American Meteorological Society and several other otherwise respected science groups have completely lost their wits. The AMS wants to explore "geoengineering’s potential to understand its limits and to avoid rash deployment."

Geoengineering? Remember that Star Trek movie that featured the "Genesis" machine that could convert a dead planet into one with grass and trees, rivers and oceans? When the AMS starts talking about geoengineering, it is strictly into cloud cuckoo land.

Absolutely nothing humans can or should do to mess with the unimaginably huge forces that determine the Earth’s atmosphere should even be contemplated. It is insane! It’s beyond science fiction. It is global genocide. Holdren has been urging "population control measures" since the 1960s.

In 1969, Holdren wrote that it was necessary "to convince society and its leaders that there is no alternative but the cessation of our irresponsible, all-demanding, and all-consuming population growth." This is another way of saying that there are too many

people sharing the planet with Holdren and he has been thinking about that "problem" for a very long time.

So have others in the Obama White House and, in terms of energy use, their "solution" is to make energy so expensive that people will stop driving, starting using mass transit, or just telecommute without going anywhere ever again. Forget about air conditioning and other aspects of modern life.

They intend to achieve this by scaring everyone with global warming talk and by claiming carbon dioxide is a "pollutant". Then they intend to have the Environmental Protection Agency regulate it. Then they will tax it in the form of cap-and-trade "carbon credits" that must be purchased by all forms of industry and business in America. The costs will be passed along to consumers.

Billions would flow to a government that already is spending trillions in a mad scheme to fix the financial crisis.

What ever happened to just doing nothing? Sometimes when there is no problem, doing nothing is the most brilliant answer. There is no global warming. And, left alone, the financial crisis would correct itself in time. Everything the government is currently doing was tried in the 1930s and it just prolonged the Depression and made it worse!

In the meantime, loonies like Dr. John Holdren will be whispering into Obama’s ear about "shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays."

Alan Caruba writes a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com. Every week, he posts a column on the website of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com.

Let's All Surrender Our Weapons -- You First!

administrator — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:44:00 GMT

Posted By admin On April 9, 2009 (10:06 am) In Opinion

By Ann Coulter

The rash of recent shooting incidents has led people who wouldn’t know an AK-47 from a paintball gun to issue demands for more restrictions on guns. To be sure, it’s hard to find any factor in these shootings that could be responsible — other than the gun.

So far, this year’s public multiple shootings were committed by:

– Richard Poplawski, 23, product of a broken family, expelled from high school and dishonorably discharged from the Marines, who killed three policemen in Pittsburgh.

– Former crack addict Jiverly Wong, 41, who told co-workers “America sucks” yet somehow was not offered a job as a speechwriter for Barack Obama, who blockaded his victims in a civic center in Binghamton, N.Y., and shot as many people as he could, before killing himself.

– Robert Stewart, 45, a three-time divorcee and high school dropout with “violent tendencies” — according to one of his ex-wives — who shot up the nursing home in Carthage, N.C., where his newly estranged wife worked.

– Lovelle Mixon, 26, a paroled felon, struggling to get his life back on track by pimping, who shot four cops in Oakland, Calif. — before eventually being shot himself.

– Twenty-eight-year-old Michael McLendon, child of divorce, living with his mother and boycotting family funerals because he hated his relatives, who killed 10 of those relatives and their neighbors in Samson, Ala.

It might make more sense to outlaw men than guns. Or divorce. Or crack. Or to prohibit felons from having guns. Except we already outlaw crack and felons owning guns and yet still, somehow, Wong got crack and Mixon got a gun.

After being pulled over for a routine traffic violation, Lovelle Mixon did exactly what they teach in driver’s ed by immediately shooting four cops. Mixon’s supporters held a posthumous rally in his honor, claiming he shot the cops only in “self-defense,” which I take it includes the cop Mixon shot while the officer was lying on the ground.

I guess Mixon also raped that 12-year-old girl in “self-defense.” Clearly, the pimping industry has lost a good man. I wish I’d known him. I tip my green velvet fedora with the dollar signs all over it to him. Why do the good ones always die young? Pimps, I mean.

Liberals tolerate rallies on behalf of cop-killers, but they prohibit law-abiding citizens working at community centers in Binghamton, N.Y., from being armed to defend themselves from disturbed, crack-addicted America-haters like Jiverly Wong.

It’s something in liberals’ DNA: They think they can pass a law eliminating guns and nuclear weapons, but teenagers having sex is completely beyond our control.

The demand for more gun control in response to any crime involving a gun is exactly like Obama’s response to North Korea’s openly belligerent act of launching a long-range missile this week: Obama leapt to action by calling for worldwide nuclear disarmament.

If the SAT test were used to determine how stupid a liberal is, one question would be: “The best defense against lawless rogues who possess _______ is for law-abiding individuals to surrender their own _______________.”

Correct answer: Guns. We would also have accepted nuclear weapons.

Obama explained that “the United States has a moral responsibility” to lead disarmament efforts because America is “the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon.”

So don’t go feeling all morally superior to a country whose business model consists of exporting heroin, nuclear bombs and counterfeit U.S. dollars, and of importing Swedish prostitutes, you yahoo Americans with your little flag lapel pins.

On the other hand, the Japanese haven’t acted up much in the last, say, 64 years …

Fortunately, our sailors didn’t wait around for Obama to save them when Somali pirates boarded their ship this week. Stop right now or I’ll ask the U.N. to remind the “international community” that “the U.S. is not at war with Somali pirates.”

Gun-toting Americans are clearly more self-sufficient than the sissy Europeans. This is great news for everyone except Barney Frank, who’s always secretly wondered what it would be like to be taken by a Somali pirate.

Police — whom I gather liberals intend to continue having guns — and intrepid U.N. resolution drafters can’t be everywhere, all the time.

If a single civilian in that Binghamton community center had been armed, instead of 14 dead, there might have only been one or two — including the shooter. In the end, the cops didn’t stop Wong. His killing spree ended only when he decided to stop, and he killed himself.

“The shooter will eventually run out of ammo” strategy may not be the best one for stopping deranged multiple murderers.

But it’s highly unlikely that any community center in the entire state would be safe from a disturbed former crack-addict like Wong because New York’s restrictive gun laws require a citizen to prove he has a need for a gun to obtain a concealed carry permit.

Instead of having Planned Parenthood distribute condoms in schools, they ought get the NRA to pass out revolvers. It would save more lives.

Ann Coulter is a columnist and author of Guilty: Liberal Victim and Their Assault On America.

Article taken from Texas Insider - http://www.texasinsider.org
URL to article: http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=7529

The Greens Hate Energy, America, and You!

administrator — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 04:54:00 GMT

By: Alan Caruba

I doubt that most Americans have a clue what the leading Green organizations like Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club have as their agenda for 2009. They have already made it known their members, so I will share it with you.

There are literally dozens of these groups in the United States and each has their own particular focus of attention, but the largest among them play well together in the giant sandbox of Green utopian fantasies. That’s why both FOE and Sierra Club announced they are looking forward to “a clean slate” from the Obama administration.

“There’s nothing like a fresh start. On his first day in office, President Obama could make four decisions that would start 2009 with a ‘clean slate’ of energy policies,” said Friends of the Earth at the same time, the Sierra Club announced its own “Clean Slate Energy Agenda” that—surprise—was the same.

The focus of both is on energy use and accessibility. Both want a lot LESS energy use. Along with all other environmental organizations both use the bogy man of “global warming” to demand huge reductions in “emissions.”

The Sierra Club informed its members that it wants to “reduce global warming emissions quickly by making it possible for over a dozen states to implement their clean car requirements.” This is the objective of one of President Obama’s earliest executive orders. Driving up the cost of owning and operating a car directly strikes at the ability of Americans to be mobile and independent. Justifying it as necessary to reduce global warming is just a big fat lie. There is NO global warming.

Friends of the Earth are totally opposed to any economy stimulus that might include improving the nation’s infrastructure of highways. They warned the plan “is in danger of being hijacked by the road-building lobby, which wants billions of dollars for unnecessary new roads that would increase global warming pollution.”

Over the years I have come to marvel at the ability of environmental organizations to conjure up statistics faster than a magician can pull a rabbit out of a hat. “”Transportation is responsible for 30 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and 70 percent of our oil consumption” warned Friends of the Earth. What does it matter that carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) have no impact whatever on the Earth’s climate? And just what is wrong with oil consumption if it contributes to the success and growth of the nation’s economy?

“Just 10 miles of a new four-lane highway lead to emissions that are equivalent to the lifetime emissions of 46,700 new Hummers,” said Friends of the Earth. To which I reply, who cares? With oil prices plunging, those Hummers, particularly in parts of the nation hit by bad weather, look like a good idea. Bottom line: if you can afford a Hummer, where is it written you should not be allowed to own one?

Friends of the Earth, however, want to “shift the debate” in the environmental community to get the nation to avoid “car-centric highways and toward sustainable alternatives such as transit, biking, walking, and smart growth development, that will help fight global warming.”

What are these Green groups going to do when the vast population of the United States and elsewhere around the world concludes that there is no global warming? That day is not far off insofar as the Earth is now fully a decade into a cooling cycle that promises longer, harsher winters and a shift to generally cooler temperatures that will affect all northern hemisphere nations in particular and to an extent those in the southern hemisphere as well.

This explains why the United Nations environmental program has shifted into high gear to get the bogus Kyoto Protocols ratified. Not surprisingly, the U.S. has never signed on to it and even European nations that did are balking at emission reduction mandates. Meanwhile, neither China, nor India, nor many under-developed nations are subject to any of the restrictions. It’s a plan to undermine the economies of developed nations because greens hate humanity in general and successful economies in particular.

We’re not even halfway through the “clean slate” proposals. They include Sierra Club’s call to “require new and existing coal power plants to limit their global warming emissions” and to “end destructive mountaintop removal mining…” Finally, they want to “restore America’s international leadership in the fight to end global warming by publicly committing the U.S.to cut its CO2 emissions at least 35 percent by 2020.”

The Greens are so demented that the American Bird Conservancy released a statement in mid-December hailing the appointments of the new Obama administration. Its idea of stimulating the economy was to “invest $29 million dollars over the next four years in the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act” because “bird watching is now big business.” The Conservancy wants the U.S. to “invest “$540 million in America’s 543 national wildlife refuges” to create more “green jobs.” What a big help that will be to Americans who live primarily in America’s cities and suburbs.

The bird-lovers are a bit conflicted over another recommendation to “invest $30.5 million in the five year extension of the renewable energy production tax credit and making renewable energy tax incentives fully refundable. Wind energy is one of the alternative sources of energy” they recommend, but “if left unregulated, has the potential to kill large numbers of birds and bats and harm fragile habitats.” Well, which is it? Dead birds or more “alternative” energy? Both are extremely bad ideas.

The Greens for all their enthusiasm to spend tax dollars on their favorite notions remain opposed to any real energy generation by coal-fired or nuclear plants to meet current and future needs for electricity. They are utterly opposed to people driving around in cars for any reason and, one must assume, trucks that deliver the goods we require to live.

The longer one listens to what the Greens want, the more one becomes convinced that the members of these organizations must be utterly brain dead and that their objective is to render America a third-world nation by opposing the building of new power plants, along with the exploration and extraction of our natural resources of coal, natural gas, and oil.

Does this sound like a good plan to you?

Alan Caruba writes a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com. Every week, he posts a column on the website of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com.

You Could Have Heard A Pin Drop

administrator — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 09:38:00 GMT

You Could Have Heard A Pin Drop

February 4, 2009

When in England, at a fairly large conference, Condi Rice was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building' by George Bush.

She answered by saying,

'Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.'

You could have heard a pin drop.

There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break, one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intended to do, bomb them ?'

A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck. We have eleven such ships; how many does France have ?'

You could have heard a pin drop.

A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S., English, Canadian, Australian and French Navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of Officers that included personnel from most of those countries.

Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English.' He then asked, 'Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French ?' Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied...
'Maybe it's because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German.'

You could have heard a pin drop.

AND THIS STORY FITS RIGHT IN WITH THE ABOVE...

Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on. 'You have been to France before, monsieur ?' the customs officer asked sarcastically. Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously. Then you should know enough to have your passport ready.' The American said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it.' 'Impossible... Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in France!' The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, 'Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find a single Frenchmen to show a passport to.'

You could have heard a pin drop.

In short, Obama is merely the continuation of disastrous, non-American policies that have brought economic ruin upon us and the rest of the world. The Obama experience rivals that of Jimmy Carter, whose campaign slogan was..."I will never lie to you."

If you are proud, pass this on!

WSJ-Editorial Exegesis on Daschle

administrator — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:19:00 GMT

EDITORIAL EXEGESIS

"Just as Tom Daschle's Senate pals were preparing to grant absolution for his six-figure tax-free limousine -- could've happened to anyone -- the former Majority Leader [Tuesday] withdrew his nomination to be Secretary of Health and Human Services. Give Mr. Daschle credit for making the honorable choice, and sparing President Obama from a bipartisan populist revolt. ... Mr. Daschle's embarrassment of riches is a typical story, and in fact is the result of the liberal ideology his critics have been advocating for decades."

"The main story of the Obama Presidency so far isn't the contradiction between Mr. Obama's campaign promises and the messier reality of his nominees. That was always inevitable. The real story is the massive transfer of power and wealth now underway from the private sector to the political class. Mr. Daschle could make so much money and achieve such prominence because he was expected to be a central broker in that wealth transfer. ... What Mr. Daschle's lucrative career as influence peddler really illustrates is how much Washington is now expanding its reach over the economy. ... As for Mr. Obama, as recently as Monday night the President was saying he 'absolutely' stood by his nominee before reluctantly accepting his withdrawal."

"So much for promising to vanquish the lobbyists before banishing the special interests. This was always an implausible bill of goods, considering that the major special interest in Washington is Washington itself." --The Wall Street Journal

Good News - Good Choice!

administrator — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 00:10:00 GMT

Republicans Choose First African-American as Party Leader
By Jim Malone Washington 31 January 2009

Former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele speaks after being elected first black RNC chairman at Party's winter meetings in Washington DC, 30 Jan. 2009

U.S. Republicans have elected the first African-American to head their party's national committee. Top Republicans from around the country chose former Maryland Lieutenant-Governor Michael Steele to be the next chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Steele is the first black American to hold the post and he will now become a leading spokesman and candidate recruiter as Republicans try to recover after losing the presidency in November and losing their majorities in both chambers of Congress in 2006.

Steele beat out four challengers including the incumbent Republican chairman, Mike Duncan, and Steele vowed to bring change to the Republican Party.

"To those who support us, to those who believe in the ideals and those conservative principles that have made us the strong and proud party that we are, to Americans who believe in the future of this country, to those who stand in difference with us - it is time for something completely different, and we are going to bring it to them," he said.

Steele promised to reach out to voters who have been turned off by Republican candidates and Republican themes in recent elections, and to broaden the base of a party that has narrowed in recent years.

"We are going to bring this party to every corner, every boardroom, every neighborhood, every community, and we are going to say to friend and foe alike, we want you to be a part of us, we want you to work with us," he said. "And for those of you who wish to obstruct, get ready to get knocked over."

Steele has the difficult job of trying to rebuild a dispirited Republican Party following President Barack Obama's victory in November over John McCain and Democratic gains in Congress in the past two election cycles.

Democrats gained majorities in both the Senate and House of Representatives in 2006 and expanded those majorities in the November elections.

The U.S. Looks North

administrator — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 11:53:00 GMT

The U.S. Looks North
17 January 2009

In the days of U.S. expansion during the 19th century, a New York newspaper editor famously urged Americans looking for their fortunes: "Go West, young man, and grow with the frontier."

The West of endless possibilities is gone now, but the promise of another frontier has the United States looking in a new direction: North to its lands in the Arctic region.

President George W. Bush recently issued a broad directive outlining U.S. policy toward the Arctic, a region of growing interest for many purposes, including scientific research and maritime shipping routes. It reaffirms that with territory in Alaska fronting the Arctic Ocean, America is an Arctic nation with interests in the region as varied and compelling as those of fellow Arctic nations such as Canada, Russia and Norway.

It has been 15 years since the U.S. last reviewed its policy for the region, and much has happened in that time. With the increase in summer melting of Arctic sea ice, human activity is increasing, potentially leading to expanded fishing, energy exploration and other economic development, and pollution in the region.

The new directive highlights several areas where U.S. initiatives in the Arctic may be warranted, such as fisheries and tourism management, scientific cooperation, resource development and environmental protection.

In the Arctic region, the U.S. wants to cooperate with its neighbors and respect international law. The best way to address both the challenges and opportunities of the Arctic is through cooperation.

Israel Will Lose Again

administrator — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:21:00 GMT

January 8, 2009

Why Israel Will Lose Again

By: Ben Shapiro

It’s déjà vu all over again. At least that’s how it always feels when Israel undertakes a major operation against the Muslim terror groups that surround it. Whether it’s Fatah or Force 17 or Hezbollah or Hamas, the story always stays the same. First, Israel appeases its terrorist enemies in order to promote peace. Next, Israel’s enemies do violence to her. Then Israel responds with sporadic outbursts of tremendous force. In response, the international community caterwauls. Finally, Israel retreats. And the cycle begins again.

Israel need not apologize for its existence. It must remain a proudly Jewish nation. For 2,000 years, Jews were persecuted in other lands. In Israel, they have a refuge. Not only that – in Israel, Jewish principles can be promoted. And those principles are worth promoting. After all, it is the Judeo-Christian ethic that underlies Western Civilization. It is the Islamist ethic that underlies the murderous, terrorist-sponsoring regimes in the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria and Egypt.

In order for Israel to win its long fight against its Muslim enemies, Israel’s population must shake itself off and stand together -- proud, unified, and strong. Israel must stop making excuses for defending herself.

Until then, Israel will continue its losing streak. In a week or two, a cease-fire will be declared. Hamas will celebrate victory. Ehud Olmert will go, and Netanyahu will be elected. And a year or two from now the cycle will repeat. This endless conflict will end only when Israel decides to end it.

Read More: FamilySecurityMatters.org

Stand Up USA

administrator — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:36:00 GMT

Israel Gaza

Posted by Editor on Jan 8th, 2009

Please consider this observation by Bebe Netanyahu:

The charge that Israel is using disproportionate force is equally baseless. Does proportionality demand that Israel fire 6,000 rockets indiscriminately back at Gaza? Does it demand an equal number of casualties on both sides? Using that logic, one would conclude that the United States employed disproportionate force against the Germans because 20 times as many Germans as Americans died in World War II.

In that same war, Britain responded to the firing of thousands of rockets on its population with the wholesale bombing of German cities. Israel’s measured response to rocket fire on its cities has come in the form of surgical strikes. To further root out Hamas terrorists in a way that minimizes Palestinian civilian casualties, Israel’s army is now engaged in a ground operation that places its soldiers in great peril. Carpet-bombing of Palestinian cities is not an option that any Israeli leader will entertain.

The goal of this mission should be clear: To end the current round of missile attacks and to remove the threat of such attacks in the future. The only cease-fire or diplomatic initiative that should be accepted is one that achieves this dual objective.

If our enemies assumed that the Israeli public would be divided on the eve of an election, they were wrong. When it comes to exercising our most basic right of self-defense, there is no opposition and no coalition. We stand united against Hamas because we know that only by defeating Hamas can we provide security for our people and hope for a future peace.

We fight to defend ourselves, but in so doing we are also fighting a fanatical ideology that seeks to reverse the course of history and throw the civilized world back into a new dark age. The struggle between militant Islam and modernity — whether fought in Afghanistan, Iraq, India or Gaza — will decide our common future. It is a battle we cannot afford to lose.

Latest News

Quotes From & About Islam

administrator — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:56:00 GMT

Quotes From and About Islam

"The sword of Muhammad and the Quran are the most fatal enemies of civilization, liberty, and the truth which the world has yet known." - The eminent orientalist Sir William Muir (1819-1905)

"Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step." -- Sir Winston Churchill - circa 1899

Ayatollah Khomeini

Khomeini accordingly delivered notorious rebuke to the Islam-is-a-religion-of-peace crowd:

“Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter [their armies].... Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur’anic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

Texas Insider - Star Parker - 12/23/08

administrator — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 16:48:00 GMT

'Tis The Season To Be Jolly'

By: Star Parker Published: 12-23-08

But this year it's going to be a challenge for many Americans. A Washington Post survey this week reported two thirds saying they were being impacted by the current recession. In another poll, 57 percent said they'd be cutting back on their Christmas spending.

Nothing unsettles the human heart and mind more than the unknown. I think our general discomfort is compounded by a feeling of not knowing exactly what is causing this economic tsunami and how and when we will recover.

Posted: Tuesday, December 23 @ 10:01:37 CST

(Read More... | comments?)

Texas Insider - 12/05/08

administrator — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 13:56:00 GMT

Time for GOP to Become the Anti-Bailout Party?

By Robert Romano Published: 12-05-08

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” — Albert Einstein

America has preserved some semblance of a two-party system with the re-election of Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) to the U.S. Senate.

But it will not make any difference in the short or long run unless the Republican Party takes a hard, introspective look at itself and what it stands for, and how it can begin to mend its ways.

Posted on Friday, December 05 @ 14:57:21 CST

(Read More... | comments?)

Don't Confirm Her!

administrator — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:54:00 GMT

By: Quin Hillyer* on 12.4.08 @ 6:10AM

The idea of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State ought to make conservatives tremble with foreboding. It is truly bizarre to see so many on the right unquestioningly accepting a notion that just a year ago would have been laughable, namely that she is a relative "moderate" on foreign policy. And it's even more astonishing that any reasonable news organization, or any serious senator, would consider her manifold ethical lapses as being anything other than immediately disqualifying for such a lofty appointive position.

*(Quin Hillyer is an associate editor at the Washington Examiner and a senior editor of The American Spectator.
He can be reached at qhillyer@gmail.com. )

Read full article & Comments: http://amspec.org/archives/2008/12/04/dont-confirm-her

Quote of the Day

administrator — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 04:02:00 GMT

“I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.”

William F. Buckley, Jr.