WEEK OF JANUARY 25, 2009

Respect, where respect is due 

There are no articles here about Barack Obama’s inauguration speech. I confess, I did not watch it or listen to it on the radio. I did not tune in to watch him take the oath of office, nor did see the giddy crowds in Washington, D.C. except for pictures posted on some internet sites.  As a matter of fact, I didn’t turn on the television all week. Oh yes, I heard snippets from Rush, from Sean, from Hugh, and from the Great One regarding the speech, but they were as predictable as the speech itself, and sufficiently diffuse so as to render them almost irrelevant. 

That is not to say that I am not interested or focused on the change in administrations. Instead, it is the glamour and the glitter that hold no interest for me. It is somewhat like Super Bowl Sunday. I never watch the pre-show, half time, or the post show programs. Give me the meat and potatoes. You can have all of the finger-food. 

Nonetheless, during the week my thoughts did turn to what it would be like to be a president leaving office, whether the feeling would be one of sadness or relief. Perhaps, a little of both. George W. Bush may have been pilloried and vilified, but he leaves office knowing that there is a group of Americans out here who admire and respect him for being the good human being that he is, for his courage and stamina, whether we agreed with all of his political decisions or not. I know that our men and women in military uniform felt this way. In my opinion, there is no higher accolade for a commander-in-chief than to be held in such high regard by the very people that he sent out to serve their country and to be in harm’s way. Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan epitomized this love and respect. George Bush has earned a spot on this List of the Few.  

But perhaps no one has expressed his admiration better than a certain member of the media, which may come as a surprise to many. I have not been able to locate the original source for the following opinion; it came to me in an e-mail message from a friend. I will therefore post it here in its entirety. And only time will validate the accuracy of his adulation.

RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE                  RETURN TO HOME PAGE

America's Destination - And where the British want to leave

When voters elect government leaders who follow their hearts instead of their brains, they usually find themselves on a trip to somewhere they really do not want to be. But all too often, they find that they have only a one-way ticket.

Such is the case shown in the video below. It clearly illustrates the path that Americans have chosen, beginning in 2006 when we gave the Left control of Congress. But our train picked up speed in November when we elected the most liberal candidate to ever run for president. We see here an example of just one of our basic constitutional rights that is now being threatened. There may be no turning back, as our British cousins have learned.

RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE                  RETURN TO HOME PAGE

It's Time to Come Together - Not!

Has the English language changed, has economic inflation set in this quickly, or has America, especially the media, become a nation of hypocrites? We report, you decipher.

Apparently anything can be accomplished with "Hope" and "Change". I just can't wait to hear the Democrats' first comments on pork-barrel spending. Just call it "economic stimulus".
_________________________

A tip of the hat to Jim and Heidi Stenson of Green Bay, WI

RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE                  RETURN TO HOME PAGE

A Crisis Too Great to Waste
By Jeff Lukens 

So Barack Obama proposes massive government spending like we have never seen before as our way back to economic prosperity. Yet wasn't it a mountain of unpayable debt that got us into this financial crisis in the first place? The rivers of red ink he proposes would make FDR and LBJ blush. This approach may have worked politically for FDR and LBJ, but neither time did it work economically for the country. It may work politically for Obama too, but deficit spending will not work economically today either. 

Banana republics are known for this kind of governance. It is a recipe for a treasury default or hyperinflation that no industrialized county has seen since Germany's Weimar Republic in the 1920s. And that debacle sewed the seeds for the despotism of the Third Reich.  

Obama is a smart guy. He can't possibly be naive enough to think more debt piled on the existing $10.6 trillion national debt is the solution to the economic mess we are in. Recessions are a natural part of the economic cycle and only market forces can correct them. One can only wonder about his true motives. 

A common characteristic of all authoritarian regimes is the need to control their populace by some crisis, real or imagined. Could it be that the genuine financial crisis we now face will give Obama and the Left a ready-made excuse to regulate, tax, socialize and otherwise control our lives in unprecedented ways? 

Over the past year, the American public has learned a bit about community organizers from Chicago. The first among them to come to mind is Barack Obama. Then there is William Ayres. However, another individual is the mentor to them all. He is Saul Alinsky. 

Alinsky is considered a father of American radicalism. His 1971 book, “Rules for Radicals" laid out the uncompromising tactics necessary to force radical change upon society. These rules have come to define the lawless methods of Leftist protestors and activists since the Vietnam era. Now, more than ever, the disregard of constitutional principles by the Left threatens the personal liberties of all Americans.  

Obama is the latest and most successful Alinkyite ever to gain power. He is a charismatic cross between a 1960s radical and a Chicago machine politician. His campaign was a testament to the policy of having no principle other than to do whatever was necessary to win.  

To paraphrase Rahm Emanuel, this is certainly a crisis too great for the Left to waste. This could be a once in a lifetime opportunity to push their agenda wholesale upon the American people. The worsening recession opens the way for government intervention on a scale greater than the New Deal or the Great Society. A Republican administration has already paved the way. And the people, wanting action, will accept any stimulus package of any size no matter what the consequences to the deficit.  

Fear makes normally constitutionally minded people behave in strange ways. When someone is about to lose his job or her life savings, most people will sacrifice their personal freedoms to prevent that from happening. Self-survival trumps rationality, and the herd mentality soon becomes mob rule. The rule of law becomes the rule of men. In such an emotionally charged atmosphere, most people run to anyone who offers them any glimmer of hope. And for many people today, that person is Barack Obama. 

As Obama said recently, "this painful crisis also gives us an opportunity to transform our economy to improve the lives of ordinary people." Transformation is a key word. Crisis gives him the opportunity, and now he has the personal mandate to do it. 

The erosions of the constitutional liberties will probably be gradual. Each step will have its explanation. The fawning media will cheer it on. And Obama will provide a reasoned justification for it all. Yet it is an illusion. The skeptics among us would say the real game is about tightening the Leftist grip on power.  

Think about it. We have the $700 billion TARP bailout and an $800 billion stimulus package. These come in addition to the $407 billion general deficit , plus more than $140 billion for AIG, more than $100 billion for Fannie and Freddie, $29 billion for Bear Stearns, $20 billion for CitiGroup, and $25 billion for the auto companies. While some of funds overlap and will be recovered, it is fair to say the total deficit will far exceed $1 trillion. And all that is before Obama takes office. Then there is his promise of universal health care and other social programs.  

Federal, state and local government spending already consumes about one-third of the Gross Domestic Product. Obama proposals, if enacted, could conceivably grow the total government spending to more than 40 percent of the GDP. Obama seems to believe we can borrow our way out a crisis that was created by borrowing in the first place. It is a house of cards.  

We are headed either for national bankruptcy or inflation so great that the dollar becomes worthless. Crisis drives fear, which drives rapid change in our national fabric toward collective socialism. Once the people become dependant on a government rescue in their lives, the social programs Obama enacts will become a fixture in Washington never to be undone. It is all right out of the Alinsky playbook.  

Constitutionally minded people have fought the socialist agenda for years. Yet they've never fought it with so much of government controlled by the Left while led by such a charismatic leader. Soon enough, Bush will be a memory and Obama will own the economic mess with no answers except more government. Unemployment, inflation, and other economic maladies will painfully show themselves no matter what spin is used to explain them.  

Conservatives must frame the conversation in a reasoned way based on less regulation and the unharnessing of free enterprise. Therein lies the only true strategy for renewed economic growth. The conservative position will require a very energetic and skillful response by the GOP to stop the incremental governmental control over society by the Obama and the Left. It will require Republicans to pull themselves together and rediscover the principles for which they truly stand. Let's hope they can do it before it is too late. 
____________________

Related Articles:

The Telescope - Editor's Letter ‘Budget cut’ takes on new definition By BOB BEAUPREZ January 20, 2009 at Line of Sight

Leave it to government to give entirely new meaning to some of the most easily understood words in the English language – like “cut” and “freeze.” 
____________________

Jeff Lukens is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc., a non-profit (501c3) coalition of writers and grass-roots media outlets. He can be contacted at www.jefflukens.com

 RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE                  RETURN TO HOME PAGE

Merely an observation…

Michelle Malkin, in an article about prosecuting Bush Administration officials for crimes allegedly committed, included a report by Bill Sammon at FOX News Channel in which he quoted Barack Obama: 

If I were an advisor to the soon-to-be President, I would tell him that this would be a good statement to file away for future use, in the event that the Supreme Court or Congress ever find the courage to address the issue of his constitutional eligibility to serve.

RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE                  RETURN TO HOME PAGE

Is there a cease-fire or not?
Sunday, January 18, 2009 

FOX News is reporting tonight that the Hamas leadership in Gaza has agreed to the cease-fire initiated by Israel on Saturday, but established the conditions that Israel must withdraw all of its troops within one week and reopen all border crossings into Gaza. Israel’s leaders, meanwhile, made no commitment as to when its troops would leave Gaza, and adopted a wait-and-see approach. According to the report, “An Israeli security chief told Cabinet ministers the military operation ‘is not over’ and that the next few days would be critical to determining whether it would be relaunched.   

The report also claims that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wants to withdraw Israel's forces from the Gaza Strip as soon as possible, but was not committed to any specific time period. Meanwhile, some of the Israeli troops have begun returning home. It appears that some Israeli troops will remain behind in Gaza in the event that Hamas resumes rocket attacks on southern Israel before or after the tentative truce expires after one week. 

Here is one skeptic who firmly believes that Hamas will resume firing rockets into Israel before the week is over. Even after the Israelis announced a unilateral cease-fire yesterday, Palestinian rockets continued to be launched into Israel. 

There are two unknowns that prevent an optimistic outlook for the conflict. The first is the question of how successful the Israelis were in shutting down the influx of missiles via the tunnels in southern Gaza on its border with Egypt. The second unknown is the true intent of the Israeli government. It is entirely possible that the current cease-fire was put in place as a PR ploy to placate the international community. If, as expected, Hamas then continues to fire rockets, the Israeli Defense Force might then commence Phase III of its three-stage plan to destroy Hamas. As things stand now, the Palestinians could make the claim that they withstood the onslaught of the Israeli forces and had defeated them. 

Yet another question is whether Israel may be taking advantage of the lull in the fighting to reinforce its northern border with Lebanon. In the past week, Hamas sympathizers in Lebanon have launched at least six rockets into northern Israel, doing little damage but reminding Israel that it faces threats from two sides. Supposedly, the Lebanese Army and the UN Peacekeeping force in Lebanon are responsible for preventing such attacks, but, in reality, neither force would be capable of preventing the Little Sisters of the Poor from holding a prayer meeting. 

At this point, it would be difficult to predict what effect the latest flare-up will have on the seemingly never-ending conflict in Palestine. As things stand now, it is likely that there could be a lull for a matter of days or even weeks, but the peace will not last and, once again, the nation of Israel will be forced to defend its borders from the horde that wants to see her annihilation. 

RETURN TO ARCHIVES PAGE                  RETURN TO HOME PAGE