John Allen Aregood was convicted of conspiring to transport and harbor illegal aliens.
President Bush pardoned him just days ago.
And what about former Border Agents Ignacio Compean and Jose Compean who, according to Congress Tom Tancredo and so many others, were sent to prison for "doing their jobs?"
NOTHING! Not a word!
In total, President Bush - just weeks after issuing 14 pardons - bestowed his good graces on YET ANOTHER 20 individuals.
Here's a partial list of the 19 pardons (courtesy of the Associated Press):
William Alvis III of Flushing, Ohio. Possession of an unregistered firearm and cocaine distribution.
Eric Charles Blanke of Parker, Colo. Counterfeiting.
Steve Doyle Cavender of The Villages, Fla. Conspiring to import, possess, distribute and dispense marijuana.
Marie Elena Eppens of Lynden, Wash. Conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute marijuana.
Eduviges Duvi Gonzalez-Matsumura of Clovis, Calif. Aiding and abetting embezzlement of bank funds.
President Bush also commuted the prison sentence of Reed Raymond Prior who was convicted of possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute and sentenced in 1996 to life in prison.
a trafficker of illegal aliens
drug pushers
embezzlers
Were these people more deserving of a pardon than two American heroes who put their lives on the line every single day to protect our border?
And what happened to "compassionate conservatism?"
With days to go before he leaves office, time is running out for President Bush to do the right thing, answer those questions and release these brave American heroes from prison!
Use the hyperlink below to send a tough personalized Blast Fax to President Bush and the Republican and Democrat Leadership of the House and Senate.
Tell them that the railroading of Ramos and Compean is a gross miscarriage of justice and perhaps one of the most cynical misuses of power in our nation's recent history. Tell them that their continued imprisonment demeans the American people and our government.
Tell them that these brave American heroes are owed apologies for the injustice they have suffered and that this horrible wrong can be righted only if the President pardons these men or commutes their sentences.
http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/releasecompeanandramosiv.html
AOL Members May Also Use This Hyperlink
If the above hyperlinks do not work, please copy and paste the first hyperlink into your browser address bar.
Only A Matter Of Days Until It Is All Over...
It is highly doubtful that Barack Obama will champion the cause of these wrongfully and vindictively prosecuted American heroes.
What does that mean?
It means that if President Bush fails to act soon, these brave men are destined to spend a DECADE behind bars... NO TIME OFF FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR... NO CHANCE OF PAROLE.
Some might say that Compean and Ramos were prosecuted to appease a foreign government.
Others might even say they were offered as sacrificial lambs to advance a political agenda.
Still others might say that it was just a horrible miscarriage of justice.
Assuming that any one (or any combination) of these opinions is true:
The foreign government, that some would say their prosecution was intended to appease, has long since forgotten about them.
The political agenda that some would say their imprisonment was meant to advance - namely amnesty - was defeated (in fact you helped defeat it)!
And the freakish miscarriage of justice has simply gone on too long.
No matter which option you choose, the only reason NOW not to pardon the brave Border Agents or at least commute their sentences is hard-hearted vindictiveness.
THERE IS NO ACCEPTABLE REASON NOT TO RELEASE COMPEAN AND RAMOS!
And THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE!
You've heard a great deal about Compean and Ramos recently.
You may have sent Blast Faxes and made phone calls to our elected officials - PERHAPS MULTIPLE TIMES - on their behalf.
We're asking you to do it AGAIN... AND AGAIN... AND AGAIN ... if needed!
Because once President Bush leaves office, their time may be up.
Over the past several years we've won our share of battles and we've lost some battles too. But, out of them all, this is one fight that we simply cannot lose!
At the very least we must fight to the very last minute!
Use the hyperlink below to send a tough personalized Blast Fax to President Bush and the Republican and Democrat Leadership of the House and Senate.
Tell them that the railroading of Ramos and Compean is a gross miscarriage of justice and perhaps one of the most cynical misuses of power in our nation's recent history. Tell them that their continued imprisonment demeans the American people and our government.
Tell them that these brave American heroes are owed apologies for the injustice they have suffered and that this horrible wrong can be righted only if the President pardons these men or commutes their sentences.
http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/releasecompeanandramosiv.html
AOL Members May Also Use This Hyperlink
If the above hyperlinks do not work, please copy and paste the first hyperlink into your browser address bar.
Harsh Words For The Administration...
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher:
“The fact that the president has neglected to free these men from their imprisonment while freeing drug dealers, embezzlers and other criminals is insulting to the American people.”
According to Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum:
"The end of President Bush's final term is quickly approaching... we cannot let him leave office without resolving one very important issue: he must commute the prison sentences of convicted U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean!"
Others were not as polite.
Conservative columnist Doug Patton called this travesty "a stench in the nostrils of every thinking American who loves justice."
Patton adds:
"But I will lose my last ounce of respect for this man as my president if he does not pardon Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean before he leaves office. These men put their lives on the line for us just as surely as our brave troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, and justice demands a full presidential pardon."
You're already familiar with the case.
Compean and Ramos were convicted almost solely on the word of a known illegal alien drug smuggler who claimed that Compean and Ramos shot him in the butt while he was attempting to escape.
Incidentally, this smuggler was attempting to transport 743 pounds of marijuana into the United States at the time of the incident.
In exchange for his testimony, the smuggler was granted immunity and allowed to come and go across the border almost at will and was actually caught attempting to transport more drugs into the United States while waiting to testify against Compean and Ramos.
The court WOULD NOT allow this fact to be submitted during the trial.
And, in what may be the greatest irony of this whole case, the smuggler was eventually convicted of the smuggling offenses that occurred AFTER he was granted immunity and was sentenced to LESS TIME than Compean and Ramos.
Patton again:
"It also turns out that this low-life drug smuggler re-entered the United States at least 10 different times in 2005 and that he was caught smuggling drugs while he was waiting to testify against Ramos and Compean. These facts were not brought up at their trial."
Schlafly again:
"The severity of these charges and the harshness of the punishment are totally disproportionate to the violation in question."
"Even the illegal drug smuggler, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, was sentenced to less prison time than our fellow American border guards!"
Such irony is shameful!
Now is the time to demand justice!
Use the hyperlink below to send a tough personalized Blast Fax to President Bush and the Republican and Democrat Leadership of the House and Senate.
Tell them that the railroading of Ramos and Compean is a gross miscarriage of justice and perhaps one of the most cynical misuses of power in our nation's recent history. Tell them that their continued imprisonment demeans the American people and our government.
Tell them that these brave American heroes are owed apologies for the injustice they have suffered and that this horrible wrong can be righted only if the President pardons these men or commutes their sentences.
http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/releasecompeanandramosiv.html
AOL Members May Also Use This Hyperlink
If the above hyperlinks do not work, please copy and paste the first hyperlink into your browser address bar.
Blindness, Baffling and Disappointing...
The Washington Times also called President Bush's failure to act, "blindness."
The Times wrote the following in a recent editorial:
"It's both baffling and disappointing that President Bush has not already pardoned two U.S. Border Patrol agents imprisoned since 2007... Time is running out for Mr. Bush to act to correct what one Congressman [Rep. Dana Rohrabacher] calls 'the worst miscarriage of justice that I have witnessed in the 30 years I've been in Washington.'"
Congressman Tom Tancredo:
"These are the kinds of men whose government failed and destroyed them - all while they were serving a cause greater than themselves. These men deserve justice. I, and many other members of Congress, have repeatedly called upon President Bush to exercise his power to pardon - but he has not done so.”
Congressman Ed Royce stated:
“Ramos and Compean have been living in the torture of solitary confinement for almost two years for something they never should have been prosecuted for in the first place. We are pleading with the Pardon Attorney to make a favorable recommendation of commutation to the President so he can finally do the right thing by these men and their families."
Blogger Andrew T. Durham claims the case "stinks to high Heaven" and wrote:
"It is literally a crime that apparently President Bush is not granting pardons to immorally imprisoned border [patrol] agents Ramos and Compean."
Now may be your last chance to make your voice heard!
At the very least, this may be President Bush's last opportunity to listen!
The time to release Compean and Ramos is NOW!
Use the hyperlink below to send a tough personalized Blast Fax to President Bush and the Republican and Democrat Leadership of the House and Senate.
Tell them that the railroading of Ramos and Compean is a gross miscarriage of justice and perhaps one of the most cynical misuses of power in our nation's recent history. Tell them that their continued imprisonment demeans the American people and our government.
Tell them that these brave American heroes are owed apologies for the injustice they have suffered and that this horrible wrong can be righted only if the President pardons these men or commutes their sentences.
http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/releasecompeanandramosiv.html
AOL Members May Also Use This Hyperlink
If the above hyperlinks do not work, please copy and paste the first hyperlink into your browser address bar.
Yours In Freedom,
Jeff Mazzella
President
www.cfif.org
P.S. Please help us reach as many concerned Americans as possible by forwarding this e-mail to at least 10 of your friends and family members.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
The Mustang Ranch and $750 billion bail-out
A FRIEND WORRY WART SENT THIS, GIVES RISE TO THOUGHT DOESN'T IT?
The Mustang Ranch and $750 billion bail-out
Back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting the economy of our country and 850+ Billion Dollars to a pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling booze.
Now if that doesn't make you nervous, what does???
The Mustang Ranch and $750 billion bail-out
Back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting the economy of our country and 850+ Billion Dollars to a pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling booze.
Now if that doesn't make you nervous, what does???
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Insider Report from Newsmax.com
Insider Report from Newsmax.com
Headlines (Scroll down for complete stories):
1. Liberals Angry With Matthews for Senate
2. Rahm Made Millions at Investment Bank
3. Protests Rise Over U.S. Efforts to Deny Bail to Jew
4. Middle Class Got Tax Cut Under Bush
5. Scientist Fired by Gore Calls Warming Fears ‘Mistaken’
6. We Heard: Bret Baier, Howard Wolfson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Liberals Angry with Matthews for Senate
Speculation has been rampant that MSNBC host Chris Matthews will seek Republican Sen. Arlen Specter’s seat in Pennsylvania in 2010. But if he runs, he’ll likely face serious heat from liberals over his on-air comments.
The left-wing group Media Matters for America fired an early volley against the “Hardball” host with a lengthy diatribe castigating Matthews for, among other things, expressing admiration for President George W. Bush and ridiculing Democrats.
“Few politicians are as aggressive as Chris Matthews in purporting to speak for average voters — or as quick to declare [liberal] politicians to be out of touch with those voters,” the group’s Web site states. “But there is no real accountability in cable news . . . Should he run for the Senate, however, Matthews might finally have to answer for his dubious track record.”
Included in that “track record” are a number of comments cited by Media Matters:
In 2005, Matthews said of Bush: “I like him. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left.”
The following year, Matthews referred to Bush as “a wise man.”
When Bush gave his “Mission Accomplished” speech in 2003, Matthews lauded his “amazing display of leadership” and said, “He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics.”
Later that same day Matthews gushed, “We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical.”
When Bush discussed his “strategy for victory in Iraq” in late 2005, Matthews praised the move and derided Democrats as “carpers and complainers.”
While Matthews has praised Barack Obama at times, he told viewers during the campaign that the candidate’s bowling form was insufficiently “macho,” and asserted that his lack of bowling skill “tells you something about the Democratic Party.”
When Matthews interviewed conservative pundit Ann Coulter and she called former Vice President Al Gore a “total fag,” Matthews said of Coulter, “We’d love to have her back.”
Matthews has also been criticized for his treatment of women. He said the reason Hillary Clinton was a senator and candidate for president "is that her husband messed around." He also said point-black, “I hate her,” and called her “uppity” and a “she-devil.”
He described House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as “scary” and said she would “castrate” House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Media Matters opined, “If Matthews does run for the Senate, he may soon discover that Pennsylvania Democratic primary voters share neither his hatred of Hillary Clinton nor his view that Barack Obama is insufficiently ‘macho.’”
The group’s Web site added that Matthews may also find those voters to be “less indulgent of his cheerleading for Bush, his near-constant ridicule of Democrats, and his frequently offensive treatment of women.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Rahm Made Millions at Investment Bank
Congressional dealmaker and incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel made millions of dollars brokering deals of another sort as an investment banker.
Emanuel was a fundraiser for Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, directed the Bill Clinton presidential campaign’s finance committee and was a senior adviser to Clinton in the White House, where he helped broker the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Congress.
But after he left his post in 1998, political friends helped him land a job with the investment banking firm Wasserstein Perella, and Emanuel made out nicely when the company was bought by investment bank Dresdner Kleinwort, Barron’s columnist Jim McTague reported.
Emanuel’s biggest deal was investment bank Goldner Rauner’s purchase of the alarm company SecurityLink from SBC Communications for $479 million in 2000. In what McTague calls “perhaps the greatest coup,” Emanuel convinced SBC to provide 80 percent of the funding for the purchase.
By the time Emanuel left the firm in January to prepare for what was to be a successful run for Congress, he had made $16.2 million in 2.5 years, The New York Times reported.
During his stint as an investment banker, Emanuel also helped utility company Unicom in an $82 billion merger with Peco Energy, which created Exelon, a utility with nearly $19 billion in annual revenue.
Exelon has 17 nuclear reactors, the most in the U.S., and McTague wonders if Emanuel will “recuse himself on nuclear-energy issues.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Protests Rise Over U.S. Efforts to Deny Bail to Jew
Lawyers for a Jewish businessman are protesting prosecutors’ efforts to deny bail to their client on the grounds that he is entitled to Israeli citizenship and could flee to the Jewish state.
Sholom Rubashkin faces charges related to the alleged hiring of illegal immigrants at Agriprocessors Inc.’s kosher meatpacking plant in Pottsville, Iowa, where he was the top executive. He has been in jail since Nov. 14.
Federal agents raided the slaughterhouse in May and arrested almost 400 illegal immigrants.
Justice Department prosecutors have argued that Rubashkin’s “Jewish heritage” made him a “de factor dual citizen” who could flee to Israel, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Israel’s “Law of Return” allows Jews from around the world to become Israeli citizens.
One of Rubashkin’s attorneys, Baruch Weiss, said in legal papers that the government’s argument discriminates against Jews, and “means that 5,300,000 Americans would be viewed as heightened bail risks simply because they are Jews.”
Prosecutors also note that Rubashkin, 49, had a large amount of cash in a travel bag found at his home, along with passports for some of his 10 children, and that two other former Agriprocessors managers are believed to have fled to Israel.
But Deborah Lauter, civil rights director for the Anti-Defamation League, told the Des Moines Register: “There can’t be a rule that every Jew is a flight risk, and that’s essentially what this is saying.”
Rubashkin’s lawyers point out that he has surrendered his passport, offered to post bond, agreed to wear an electronic monitor, and offered to hire a private security company to watch him, according to the Register.
Prosecutors maintain that those measures are insufficient.
Israel and the U.S. signed an extradition treaty in 1962, but The Journal reports that federal prosecutors have complained about roadblocks to bringing Israeli defendants to the U.S. for trial.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Middle Class Got Tax Cut Under Bush
Barack Obama's campaign pledge to "rebuild the middle class" by giving tax breaks to 95 percent of workers and their families surely won him votes.
But an analysis by Investor’s Business Daily found that the middle class already got a large tax break under President George W. Bush.
Citing data from the Congressional Budget Office, IBD disclosed that the
effective tax rate on the middle fifth of households fell from an average of about 17.1 percent under President Bill Clinton to 14.4 percent under Bush. That's a
16 percent tax cut for the middle class.
As for the oft-heard claim from the left that middle-class incomes are stagnant or shrinking, a study last year by the Minneapolis Fed concluded that "incomes of most types of middle American households have increased substantially over the past three decades."
Real household income did grow just 18 percent over the past 30 years. But after correcting for distortions in the data, Terry Fitzgerald, a Fed senior economist, found that "median household income for most household types . . . increased
by 44 percent to 62 percent from 1976 to 2006." And per-person income surged 80 percent.
IBD observes, “Yes, many Americans are suffering in this recession, including the middle class. But the last thing we need is another general in a phony class war telling people how bad they have it.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Scientist Fired by Gore Calls Warming Fears ‘Mistaken’
Princeton University physicist Dr. Will Happer, who says he was fired by Vice President Al Gore for failing to adhere to Gore’s views on global warming, has now declared that man-made warming fears are “mistaken.”
Happer, who served as the director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy from 1990 to 1993, said, “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism. I did not need the job that badly.”
He said in 1993, “I was told that science was not going to intrude on policy."
Now Happer has asked to join the more than 650 international scientists who have spoken out against man-made global warming fears and are cited in the 2008 U.S. Senate Minority Report from Environmental and Public Works Committee ranking member James Inhofe, R-Okla.
“I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken,” Happer told the committee on Dec. 22.
President-elect Barack Obama’s choice as his top science adviser, Harvard University professor John Holdren, is a staunch believer in the dangers of man-made global warming and advised Gore on his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”
Dr. Happer has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.
Sen. Inhofe said that the statements of prominent scientists like Happer who are willing to publicly dissent from climate fears strike a blow to the United Nations, Gore, and the media’s claims about global warming.
“The endless claims of a 'consensus' about man-made global warming grow less and less credible every day," Inhofe said.
Happer declared, “I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect — for example, absorption and emission of visible and infrared radiation, and fluid flow. Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth's climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past . . .
“Computer models used to generate frightening scenarios from increasing levels of carbon dioxide have scant credibility.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. We Heard . . .
THAT Fox News has chosen its chief White House correspondent Bret Baier to succeed Brit Hume as the primary anchor on Fox’s “Special Report” nightly newscast.
Baier joined Fox in 1998 and was previously the network’s Pentagon correspondent. He has covered a wide range of stories including the 9/11 attacks, the Kosovo War, and the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Hume’s last show aired on Tuesday. But Politico.com reported that he will continue at Fox News as a senior political analyst and panelist on “Fox News Sunday.”
THAT Howard Wolfson, the top spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, has signed on as senior communications adviser to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s third-term bid in 2009.
The news surprised many observers, since Wolfson called Bloomberg an "out-of-touch billionaire" in 2003.
Wolfson told the New York Post that when the mayor's team first approached him, he pointed out he'd once said some "rather unkind things" about Bloomberg.
But he added: "I was impressed with the fact that they were willing to bring on a former critic.”
Headlines (Scroll down for complete stories):
1. Liberals Angry With Matthews for Senate
2. Rahm Made Millions at Investment Bank
3. Protests Rise Over U.S. Efforts to Deny Bail to Jew
4. Middle Class Got Tax Cut Under Bush
5. Scientist Fired by Gore Calls Warming Fears ‘Mistaken’
6. We Heard: Bret Baier, Howard Wolfson
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Liberals Angry with Matthews for Senate
Speculation has been rampant that MSNBC host Chris Matthews will seek Republican Sen. Arlen Specter’s seat in Pennsylvania in 2010. But if he runs, he’ll likely face serious heat from liberals over his on-air comments.
The left-wing group Media Matters for America fired an early volley against the “Hardball” host with a lengthy diatribe castigating Matthews for, among other things, expressing admiration for President George W. Bush and ridiculing Democrats.
“Few politicians are as aggressive as Chris Matthews in purporting to speak for average voters — or as quick to declare [liberal] politicians to be out of touch with those voters,” the group’s Web site states. “But there is no real accountability in cable news . . . Should he run for the Senate, however, Matthews might finally have to answer for his dubious track record.”
Included in that “track record” are a number of comments cited by Media Matters:
In 2005, Matthews said of Bush: “I like him. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left.”
The following year, Matthews referred to Bush as “a wise man.”
When Bush gave his “Mission Accomplished” speech in 2003, Matthews lauded his “amazing display of leadership” and said, “He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics.”
Later that same day Matthews gushed, “We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical.”
When Bush discussed his “strategy for victory in Iraq” in late 2005, Matthews praised the move and derided Democrats as “carpers and complainers.”
While Matthews has praised Barack Obama at times, he told viewers during the campaign that the candidate’s bowling form was insufficiently “macho,” and asserted that his lack of bowling skill “tells you something about the Democratic Party.”
When Matthews interviewed conservative pundit Ann Coulter and she called former Vice President Al Gore a “total fag,” Matthews said of Coulter, “We’d love to have her back.”
Matthews has also been criticized for his treatment of women. He said the reason Hillary Clinton was a senator and candidate for president "is that her husband messed around." He also said point-black, “I hate her,” and called her “uppity” and a “she-devil.”
He described House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as “scary” and said she would “castrate” House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Media Matters opined, “If Matthews does run for the Senate, he may soon discover that Pennsylvania Democratic primary voters share neither his hatred of Hillary Clinton nor his view that Barack Obama is insufficiently ‘macho.’”
The group’s Web site added that Matthews may also find those voters to be “less indulgent of his cheerleading for Bush, his near-constant ridicule of Democrats, and his frequently offensive treatment of women.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Rahm Made Millions at Investment Bank
Congressional dealmaker and incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel made millions of dollars brokering deals of another sort as an investment banker.
Emanuel was a fundraiser for Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, directed the Bill Clinton presidential campaign’s finance committee and was a senior adviser to Clinton in the White House, where he helped broker the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Congress.
But after he left his post in 1998, political friends helped him land a job with the investment banking firm Wasserstein Perella, and Emanuel made out nicely when the company was bought by investment bank Dresdner Kleinwort, Barron’s columnist Jim McTague reported.
Emanuel’s biggest deal was investment bank Goldner Rauner’s purchase of the alarm company SecurityLink from SBC Communications for $479 million in 2000. In what McTague calls “perhaps the greatest coup,” Emanuel convinced SBC to provide 80 percent of the funding for the purchase.
By the time Emanuel left the firm in January to prepare for what was to be a successful run for Congress, he had made $16.2 million in 2.5 years, The New York Times reported.
During his stint as an investment banker, Emanuel also helped utility company Unicom in an $82 billion merger with Peco Energy, which created Exelon, a utility with nearly $19 billion in annual revenue.
Exelon has 17 nuclear reactors, the most in the U.S., and McTague wonders if Emanuel will “recuse himself on nuclear-energy issues.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Protests Rise Over U.S. Efforts to Deny Bail to Jew
Lawyers for a Jewish businessman are protesting prosecutors’ efforts to deny bail to their client on the grounds that he is entitled to Israeli citizenship and could flee to the Jewish state.
Sholom Rubashkin faces charges related to the alleged hiring of illegal immigrants at Agriprocessors Inc.’s kosher meatpacking plant in Pottsville, Iowa, where he was the top executive. He has been in jail since Nov. 14.
Federal agents raided the slaughterhouse in May and arrested almost 400 illegal immigrants.
Justice Department prosecutors have argued that Rubashkin’s “Jewish heritage” made him a “de factor dual citizen” who could flee to Israel, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Israel’s “Law of Return” allows Jews from around the world to become Israeli citizens.
One of Rubashkin’s attorneys, Baruch Weiss, said in legal papers that the government’s argument discriminates against Jews, and “means that 5,300,000 Americans would be viewed as heightened bail risks simply because they are Jews.”
Prosecutors also note that Rubashkin, 49, had a large amount of cash in a travel bag found at his home, along with passports for some of his 10 children, and that two other former Agriprocessors managers are believed to have fled to Israel.
But Deborah Lauter, civil rights director for the Anti-Defamation League, told the Des Moines Register: “There can’t be a rule that every Jew is a flight risk, and that’s essentially what this is saying.”
Rubashkin’s lawyers point out that he has surrendered his passport, offered to post bond, agreed to wear an electronic monitor, and offered to hire a private security company to watch him, according to the Register.
Prosecutors maintain that those measures are insufficient.
Israel and the U.S. signed an extradition treaty in 1962, but The Journal reports that federal prosecutors have complained about roadblocks to bringing Israeli defendants to the U.S. for trial.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Middle Class Got Tax Cut Under Bush
Barack Obama's campaign pledge to "rebuild the middle class" by giving tax breaks to 95 percent of workers and their families surely won him votes.
But an analysis by Investor’s Business Daily found that the middle class already got a large tax break under President George W. Bush.
Citing data from the Congressional Budget Office, IBD disclosed that the
effective tax rate on the middle fifth of households fell from an average of about 17.1 percent under President Bill Clinton to 14.4 percent under Bush. That's a
16 percent tax cut for the middle class.
As for the oft-heard claim from the left that middle-class incomes are stagnant or shrinking, a study last year by the Minneapolis Fed concluded that "incomes of most types of middle American households have increased substantially over the past three decades."
Real household income did grow just 18 percent over the past 30 years. But after correcting for distortions in the data, Terry Fitzgerald, a Fed senior economist, found that "median household income for most household types . . . increased
by 44 percent to 62 percent from 1976 to 2006." And per-person income surged 80 percent.
IBD observes, “Yes, many Americans are suffering in this recession, including the middle class. But the last thing we need is another general in a phony class war telling people how bad they have it.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Scientist Fired by Gore Calls Warming Fears ‘Mistaken’
Princeton University physicist Dr. Will Happer, who says he was fired by Vice President Al Gore for failing to adhere to Gore’s views on global warming, has now declared that man-made warming fears are “mistaken.”
Happer, who served as the director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy from 1990 to 1993, said, “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism. I did not need the job that badly.”
He said in 1993, “I was told that science was not going to intrude on policy."
Now Happer has asked to join the more than 650 international scientists who have spoken out against man-made global warming fears and are cited in the 2008 U.S. Senate Minority Report from Environmental and Public Works Committee ranking member James Inhofe, R-Okla.
“I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken,” Happer told the committee on Dec. 22.
President-elect Barack Obama’s choice as his top science adviser, Harvard University professor John Holdren, is a staunch believer in the dangers of man-made global warming and advised Gore on his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”
Dr. Happer has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.
Sen. Inhofe said that the statements of prominent scientists like Happer who are willing to publicly dissent from climate fears strike a blow to the United Nations, Gore, and the media’s claims about global warming.
“The endless claims of a 'consensus' about man-made global warming grow less and less credible every day," Inhofe said.
Happer declared, “I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect — for example, absorption and emission of visible and infrared radiation, and fluid flow. Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth's climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past . . .
“Computer models used to generate frightening scenarios from increasing levels of carbon dioxide have scant credibility.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. We Heard . . .
THAT Fox News has chosen its chief White House correspondent Bret Baier to succeed Brit Hume as the primary anchor on Fox’s “Special Report” nightly newscast.
Baier joined Fox in 1998 and was previously the network’s Pentagon correspondent. He has covered a wide range of stories including the 9/11 attacks, the Kosovo War, and the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Hume’s last show aired on Tuesday. But Politico.com reported that he will continue at Fox News as a senior political analyst and panelist on “Fox News Sunday.”
THAT Howard Wolfson, the top spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, has signed on as senior communications adviser to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s third-term bid in 2009.
The news surprised many observers, since Wolfson called Bloomberg an "out-of-touch billionaire" in 2003.
Wolfson told the New York Post that when the mayor's team first approached him, he pointed out he'd once said some "rather unkind things" about Bloomberg.
But he added: "I was impressed with the fact that they were willing to bring on a former critic.”
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Reality For Radicals
Reality For Radicals
Investor's Business Daily. All Rights Reserved.
December 26, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Transition: During the campaign, Democrats pledged radical change. But recession has forced them to rein in their agenda, from soaking the rich to nationalizing health care. How the worm turns.
In debate after debate, Barack Obama assured voters he'd pay for his national health care plan by taxing the rich. But now that appears unreasonable even to the fawning reporters who cover him.
"How are you actually planning to fund your health care program?" asked one earlier this month. "It has been estimated that it could cost up to $65 billion, and you had planned originally to fund it through getting rid of the tax cuts to the wealthy. But in the current economic situation, maybe that's not so reasonable?"
Obama stammered before answering, "I have not made yet a determination in terms of how we're going to deal with the rollback of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans." He allowed that he may need "additional dollars to pay for some investments."
In other words, he's hard-pressed for revenues to fund his ambitious spending programs. Redistribution's no fun in a recession.
His health care plan, which was supposed to at least cover all children, has been reduced to a medical cost-savings program that includes modernizing doctors' antiquated medical records systems. Somehow "health IT," as Obama calls his savings program, wasn't the health care reform Moveon.org had in mind.
"We can't simply insure everybody under the current program without bankrupting the government or bankrupting business or states," Obama said, "So our starting point is savings."
The president-elect is also having to rethink his anti-industry energy policies. With crude under $40 a barrel, he won't pursue a windfall-profit tax on oil companies, which he'd hoped would fund new green initiatives and other domestic programs.
And a planned assault on the coal industry is also on the back burner. It would likely mean higher utility bills and more pain for depressed regions that depend on coal mining.
The cooling climate is also giving Obama fits. With snow falling from New Orleans to Las Vegas and Malibu, Calif., efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions now seem forced.
What's more, we have it on good authority that Obama's promised support for a card-check system for unions trying to organize a new workplace is also a nonstarter. That, too, had been a priority.
Obama owes unions, big-time, but he's also rethinking his plan to add labor, as well as environmental, protections to NAFTA. The Democrat-controlled Congress is also backing off pro-union, anti-trade measures for fear of delaying the economic recovery.
"Card check, tax increases, major moves to the left are off the table," a Republican leader on the Hill told us.
Just months ago, Democrats were toying with the idea of taxing 401(k)s. Now that's dead in the water. So is the Global Poverty Act, a bill Obama co-sponsored in the Senate.
One by one, Obama is backing off campaign promises as his radical agenda runs into the buzz saw of reality. That doesn't mean he's changing his agenda, but he admits "we're going to have to prioritize" as conditions change. Call it the education of Barack Obama.
Email To Friend |
Investor's Business Daily. All Rights Reserved.
December 26, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Transition: During the campaign, Democrats pledged radical change. But recession has forced them to rein in their agenda, from soaking the rich to nationalizing health care. How the worm turns.
In debate after debate, Barack Obama assured voters he'd pay for his national health care plan by taxing the rich. But now that appears unreasonable even to the fawning reporters who cover him.
"How are you actually planning to fund your health care program?" asked one earlier this month. "It has been estimated that it could cost up to $65 billion, and you had planned originally to fund it through getting rid of the tax cuts to the wealthy. But in the current economic situation, maybe that's not so reasonable?"
Obama stammered before answering, "I have not made yet a determination in terms of how we're going to deal with the rollback of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans." He allowed that he may need "additional dollars to pay for some investments."
In other words, he's hard-pressed for revenues to fund his ambitious spending programs. Redistribution's no fun in a recession.
His health care plan, which was supposed to at least cover all children, has been reduced to a medical cost-savings program that includes modernizing doctors' antiquated medical records systems. Somehow "health IT," as Obama calls his savings program, wasn't the health care reform Moveon.org had in mind.
"We can't simply insure everybody under the current program without bankrupting the government or bankrupting business or states," Obama said, "So our starting point is savings."
The president-elect is also having to rethink his anti-industry energy policies. With crude under $40 a barrel, he won't pursue a windfall-profit tax on oil companies, which he'd hoped would fund new green initiatives and other domestic programs.
And a planned assault on the coal industry is also on the back burner. It would likely mean higher utility bills and more pain for depressed regions that depend on coal mining.
The cooling climate is also giving Obama fits. With snow falling from New Orleans to Las Vegas and Malibu, Calif., efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions now seem forced.
What's more, we have it on good authority that Obama's promised support for a card-check system for unions trying to organize a new workplace is also a nonstarter. That, too, had been a priority.
Obama owes unions, big-time, but he's also rethinking his plan to add labor, as well as environmental, protections to NAFTA. The Democrat-controlled Congress is also backing off pro-union, anti-trade measures for fear of delaying the economic recovery.
"Card check, tax increases, major moves to the left are off the table," a Republican leader on the Hill told us.
Just months ago, Democrats were toying with the idea of taxing 401(k)s. Now that's dead in the water. So is the Global Poverty Act, a bill Obama co-sponsored in the Senate.
One by one, Obama is backing off campaign promises as his radical agenda runs into the buzz saw of reality. That doesn't mean he's changing his agenda, but he admits "we're going to have to prioritize" as conditions change. Call it the education of Barack Obama.
Email To Friend |
Friday, December 26, 2008
Hey Caroline: You're Not Entitled
Hey Caroline: You're Not Entitled
Tuesday, December 23, 2008 1:36 PM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
Caroline Kennedy apparently thinks that she is entitled to be appointed as the next junior senator from New York.
She shouldn’t be. Think about it.
Her qualifications? Her name is Kennedy and she can raise a lot of fat-cat money for herself and for New York Democrats who support her.
Her strategy? Ignore the voters and the press and meet with the political bosses behind closed doors to persuade them to pressure Gov. David Paterson to appoint her to Hillary Clinton’s seat.
Is there a more cynical message in the Age of Obama?
Who’s supporting her? Among her chief backers is New York City’s billionaire Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who recently decided to ignore a legitimate and binding citywide referendum that prohibited him from seeking a third term. In one of the most appalling examples of an arrogant “the public be damned” attitude, Bloomberg persuaded the city council to overrule the will of the people so he could stay in city hall. He’s a big contributor to many of the folks who supported this brazen move. Legendary Tammany Hall boss Carmine De Sapio would love both Bloomberg and Caroline for bringing back the old “power to the bosses” style of politics.
Her position on issues that will face the next senator? She won’t tell you. She has refused adamantly to speak about any issues. In her first foray outside Manhattan, she declined all questions from the press. She wouldn’t even say whether she had ever been to Syracuse before. Does that suggest what the answer would have been? Her handlers finally provided written answers to some of the questions posed by The New York Times. She picked out the questions she wanted to answer and ignored some of the tough issues, such as whether she supports increased taxes for rich people. She’s not saying, Now, SHE WON’T DISCLOSE HER PERSONAL FINANCES OR PROVIDE A LIST OF COMPANIES THAT SHE HAS A STAKE IN!
Sound like the good old days? Is this woman kidding?
Her involvement in politics? Not much. She campaigned for Obama and worked on his committee that recommended the vice-presidential candidate. She’s never been active in New York politics and she hasn’t even voted in about half the contested elections in New York since 1988. During the past 15 years, she’s contributed to her uncle, Sen. Ted Kennedy; her cousin Rep. Patrick Kennedy; Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton; John Kerry; Al Gore; Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and Connecticut wanna-be Ned Lamont; and former Pennsylvania Sen. Harris Wofford (1991). Not much interest in New York’s candidates or issues!
Her experience?
She is a longtime patron of the American Ballet Theatre.
She is active in her father’s presidential library.
She was a part-time volunteer fund raiser for the NYC schools for less than two years.
She’s co-authored two books on civil liberties.
She’s written five books. She is her most derivative in her published works. Of four New York Times best-sellers, three were compilations of other peoples’ work. One was “The Patriot’s Handbook: Songs, Poems, Stories, and Speeches Celebrating the Land We Love.” The only thing these songs, poems, stories, and speeches had in common was that she didn’t write any of them.
Then followed “The Best-Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis.” In this book, she not only didn’t write the poetry but also didn’t even choose it. Her third best seller-was “A Family of Poems: My Favorite Poetry for Children,” again a compilation of works that were not her own.
Then there’s “A Family Christmas,” another anthology of her favorite short stories, poems, etc. about Christmas (all written by other people).
In another book, “Profiles in Courage For Our Time”, she swiped only the title from her late father but wrote the copy herself.
She hasn’t had a job since before she went to law school in the 1980s.
So, why should Caroline be appointed senator?
Does anyone seriously believe that her audacious grab for the New York Senate seat is based on anything more than a misplaced and somewhat grandiose sense of entitlement coupled with a cynical claim of access to big money for the next election?
If her name weren’t Kennedy, would anyone give any consideration at all to someone without any experience to prepare her for the job or to even inform the voters about what she stands for?
ANSWER: NO
Is there a single person in the United States who doesn’t wish Caroline Kennedy well and hope that she’s spared from further tragedy?
Probably not.
But affection, sympathy, and nostalgia shouldn’t be the basis for appointing this woefully inexperienced woman to a key Senate seat in these troubles times.
Her father’s and uncles’ names are the only things that make her a contender.
Doesn’t anyone in New York politics use their own names anymore? Caroline Kennedy, the daughter of the former president, wants to take the Senate seat of Hillary Clinton, the wife of the former president. But some people are pushing for Andrew Cuomo, the son of the former governor. Are we stuck in political dynasties? And who will make the decision? New York’s David Paterson, the son of Basil Paterson, the former New York state senator, secretary of state, and deputy mayor of New York City.
Don’t we have any talented people who don’t feel entitled to inherit a seat? Can’t we stop the political dynasties?
At least Cuomo has his own accomplishments. He was the secretary of HUD in the Clinton administration, and as the elected New York state attorney general, he’s done an outstanding job. Caroline Kennedy has done absolutely nothing to deserve elevation to the United States Senate. A review of hundreds of newspaper articles mentioning her name during the past 20 years show rare substantive issues: her books and book tours, awarding the Profiles in Courage Award to Lowell Weicker for instituting an income tax in Connecticut, very part-time fundraising for the city schools. Even in that regard, her influence is questioned and others are given as much or more credit. The majority of the articles are about her wedding, her mother, her brother, her socialite activities, and her lucrative auction of her mother’s old blankets, picnic baskets, and other household effects.
No, Caroline has not been heard from on any of the important issues facing New Yorkers.
Paterson is a talented politician. He probably will appoint Cuomo anyway for one simple reason: to get him out of the way. Acutely aware that he was not elected governor but only got the job when Eliot Spitzer self-destructed, Paterson probably would face an uphill primary fight against Cuomo in 2010 if he doesn’t shunt him off into the Senate. Other than the attorney general, there is nobody with the stature to offer Paterson serious opposition in the Democratic Party.
Paterson should not succumb to the lobbying of the bosses and the fat cats for Caroline. She’s not entitled.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008 1:36 PM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
Caroline Kennedy apparently thinks that she is entitled to be appointed as the next junior senator from New York.
She shouldn’t be. Think about it.
Her qualifications? Her name is Kennedy and she can raise a lot of fat-cat money for herself and for New York Democrats who support her.
Her strategy? Ignore the voters and the press and meet with the political bosses behind closed doors to persuade them to pressure Gov. David Paterson to appoint her to Hillary Clinton’s seat.
Is there a more cynical message in the Age of Obama?
Who’s supporting her? Among her chief backers is New York City’s billionaire Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who recently decided to ignore a legitimate and binding citywide referendum that prohibited him from seeking a third term. In one of the most appalling examples of an arrogant “the public be damned” attitude, Bloomberg persuaded the city council to overrule the will of the people so he could stay in city hall. He’s a big contributor to many of the folks who supported this brazen move. Legendary Tammany Hall boss Carmine De Sapio would love both Bloomberg and Caroline for bringing back the old “power to the bosses” style of politics.
Her position on issues that will face the next senator? She won’t tell you. She has refused adamantly to speak about any issues. In her first foray outside Manhattan, she declined all questions from the press. She wouldn’t even say whether she had ever been to Syracuse before. Does that suggest what the answer would have been? Her handlers finally provided written answers to some of the questions posed by The New York Times. She picked out the questions she wanted to answer and ignored some of the tough issues, such as whether she supports increased taxes for rich people. She’s not saying, Now, SHE WON’T DISCLOSE HER PERSONAL FINANCES OR PROVIDE A LIST OF COMPANIES THAT SHE HAS A STAKE IN!
Sound like the good old days? Is this woman kidding?
Her involvement in politics? Not much. She campaigned for Obama and worked on his committee that recommended the vice-presidential candidate. She’s never been active in New York politics and she hasn’t even voted in about half the contested elections in New York since 1988. During the past 15 years, she’s contributed to her uncle, Sen. Ted Kennedy; her cousin Rep. Patrick Kennedy; Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton; John Kerry; Al Gore; Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and Connecticut wanna-be Ned Lamont; and former Pennsylvania Sen. Harris Wofford (1991). Not much interest in New York’s candidates or issues!
Her experience?
She is a longtime patron of the American Ballet Theatre.
She is active in her father’s presidential library.
She was a part-time volunteer fund raiser for the NYC schools for less than two years.
She’s co-authored two books on civil liberties.
She’s written five books. She is her most derivative in her published works. Of four New York Times best-sellers, three were compilations of other peoples’ work. One was “The Patriot’s Handbook: Songs, Poems, Stories, and Speeches Celebrating the Land We Love.” The only thing these songs, poems, stories, and speeches had in common was that she didn’t write any of them.
Then followed “The Best-Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis.” In this book, she not only didn’t write the poetry but also didn’t even choose it. Her third best seller-was “A Family of Poems: My Favorite Poetry for Children,” again a compilation of works that were not her own.
Then there’s “A Family Christmas,” another anthology of her favorite short stories, poems, etc. about Christmas (all written by other people).
In another book, “Profiles in Courage For Our Time”, she swiped only the title from her late father but wrote the copy herself.
She hasn’t had a job since before she went to law school in the 1980s.
So, why should Caroline be appointed senator?
Does anyone seriously believe that her audacious grab for the New York Senate seat is based on anything more than a misplaced and somewhat grandiose sense of entitlement coupled with a cynical claim of access to big money for the next election?
If her name weren’t Kennedy, would anyone give any consideration at all to someone without any experience to prepare her for the job or to even inform the voters about what she stands for?
ANSWER: NO
Is there a single person in the United States who doesn’t wish Caroline Kennedy well and hope that she’s spared from further tragedy?
Probably not.
But affection, sympathy, and nostalgia shouldn’t be the basis for appointing this woefully inexperienced woman to a key Senate seat in these troubles times.
Her father’s and uncles’ names are the only things that make her a contender.
Doesn’t anyone in New York politics use their own names anymore? Caroline Kennedy, the daughter of the former president, wants to take the Senate seat of Hillary Clinton, the wife of the former president. But some people are pushing for Andrew Cuomo, the son of the former governor. Are we stuck in political dynasties? And who will make the decision? New York’s David Paterson, the son of Basil Paterson, the former New York state senator, secretary of state, and deputy mayor of New York City.
Don’t we have any talented people who don’t feel entitled to inherit a seat? Can’t we stop the political dynasties?
At least Cuomo has his own accomplishments. He was the secretary of HUD in the Clinton administration, and as the elected New York state attorney general, he’s done an outstanding job. Caroline Kennedy has done absolutely nothing to deserve elevation to the United States Senate. A review of hundreds of newspaper articles mentioning her name during the past 20 years show rare substantive issues: her books and book tours, awarding the Profiles in Courage Award to Lowell Weicker for instituting an income tax in Connecticut, very part-time fundraising for the city schools. Even in that regard, her influence is questioned and others are given as much or more credit. The majority of the articles are about her wedding, her mother, her brother, her socialite activities, and her lucrative auction of her mother’s old blankets, picnic baskets, and other household effects.
No, Caroline has not been heard from on any of the important issues facing New Yorkers.
Paterson is a talented politician. He probably will appoint Cuomo anyway for one simple reason: to get him out of the way. Acutely aware that he was not elected governor but only got the job when Eliot Spitzer self-destructed, Paterson probably would face an uphill primary fight against Cuomo in 2010 if he doesn’t shunt him off into the Senate. Other than the attorney general, there is nobody with the stature to offer Paterson serious opposition in the Democratic Party.
Paterson should not succumb to the lobbying of the bosses and the fat cats for Caroline. She’s not entitled.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Which California?
Which California?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, December 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Governance: The new "alpha state," as the Web site Politico calls it, is a study in dysfunction at home but a rising power in Washington. Maybe it can teach through its bad example.
It was probably inevitable. With a Democratic Congress in place and a Democratic administration on the way, the biggest and one of the bluest states in the union is emerging as the most influential. Politico compares California's political heft to that of Texas in the heyday of Tom DeLay and George W. Bush.
It lists a host of reasons why. Mostly these are people in powerful places — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, senators and House members chairing a half-dozen key committees and the incoming secretaries of energy and labor and top presidential advisers on the economy and the environment.
California's 34-member Democratic bloc in the House is larger than the whole delegation of any other state. Zoe Lofgren, who leads that herd, says the state "has always been the ATM to the nation in terms of political fundraising. We're policy leaders now."
If Lofgren's right, then the question is whether all this new power will be used for good. To put it another way: Will California politicians help lead the country into the sunny uplands or into the sort of dank fog that so often engulfs the state's capital, Sacramento, at this time of year? The most likely answer: Don't get your hopes up.
To judge from the record of California's political class, the state right now can help Washington only by serving as a bad example. Years of overspending, fueled by a union-owned Legislature and unwise ballot initiatives, have thrown the state deeply into the red.
The state faces a shortfall of $15 billion in the current fiscal year and $25 billion in the next. Democrats, having run the Legislature nonstop for the past 38 years, can fairly be called the main architects of this fiasco and similar fiscal crackups in the past.
Republican minorities and Republican governors have some power to shape budgets and block tax hikes, but they've had little luck putting the brakes on spending. Their main contribution in recent years has been to hold taxes down with borrowing — a strategy that can only go so far before destroying the state's credit.
Added to this chronic lack of fiscal responsibility is a cavalier attitude toward the state's business climate. Past Republican governors provided some adult supervision in this area, but Arnold Schwarzenegger has sided with the greens and gone on a potentially costly crusade to end global warming one state — his — at a time.
California has a huge economy, with world-leading roles in computer technology and popular culture. And as every winter reminds us, it's a pleasant place to live. But the state's blessings also lead to complacency, over-regulation and steep taxes.
Currently, California has the third-highest unemployment rate in the nation, at 8.2%. Only Michigan, home to imploding automakers, and Rhode Island, a state that ranks near California for high business taxes, were worse.
It's this California — the one that can't get the hang of governance — that we fear is showing up in Washington to replicate itself on a national scale. Then again, maybe the individuals who have come out of its political culture will rise above it. We can only hope.
There is also another California: a dynamic, freedom-loving society whose natural leaders are its innovators and entrepreneurs, not its elected officials. It has something of value to teach, as long as it survives.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, December 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Governance: The new "alpha state," as the Web site Politico calls it, is a study in dysfunction at home but a rising power in Washington. Maybe it can teach through its bad example.
It was probably inevitable. With a Democratic Congress in place and a Democratic administration on the way, the biggest and one of the bluest states in the union is emerging as the most influential. Politico compares California's political heft to that of Texas in the heyday of Tom DeLay and George W. Bush.
It lists a host of reasons why. Mostly these are people in powerful places — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, senators and House members chairing a half-dozen key committees and the incoming secretaries of energy and labor and top presidential advisers on the economy and the environment.
California's 34-member Democratic bloc in the House is larger than the whole delegation of any other state. Zoe Lofgren, who leads that herd, says the state "has always been the ATM to the nation in terms of political fundraising. We're policy leaders now."
If Lofgren's right, then the question is whether all this new power will be used for good. To put it another way: Will California politicians help lead the country into the sunny uplands or into the sort of dank fog that so often engulfs the state's capital, Sacramento, at this time of year? The most likely answer: Don't get your hopes up.
To judge from the record of California's political class, the state right now can help Washington only by serving as a bad example. Years of overspending, fueled by a union-owned Legislature and unwise ballot initiatives, have thrown the state deeply into the red.
The state faces a shortfall of $15 billion in the current fiscal year and $25 billion in the next. Democrats, having run the Legislature nonstop for the past 38 years, can fairly be called the main architects of this fiasco and similar fiscal crackups in the past.
Republican minorities and Republican governors have some power to shape budgets and block tax hikes, but they've had little luck putting the brakes on spending. Their main contribution in recent years has been to hold taxes down with borrowing — a strategy that can only go so far before destroying the state's credit.
Added to this chronic lack of fiscal responsibility is a cavalier attitude toward the state's business climate. Past Republican governors provided some adult supervision in this area, but Arnold Schwarzenegger has sided with the greens and gone on a potentially costly crusade to end global warming one state — his — at a time.
California has a huge economy, with world-leading roles in computer technology and popular culture. And as every winter reminds us, it's a pleasant place to live. But the state's blessings also lead to complacency, over-regulation and steep taxes.
Currently, California has the third-highest unemployment rate in the nation, at 8.2%. Only Michigan, home to imploding automakers, and Rhode Island, a state that ranks near California for high business taxes, were worse.
It's this California — the one that can't get the hang of governance — that we fear is showing up in Washington to replicate itself on a national scale. Then again, maybe the individuals who have come out of its political culture will rise above it. We can only hope.
There is also another California: a dynamic, freedom-loving society whose natural leaders are its innovators and entrepreneurs, not its elected officials. It has something of value to teach, as long as it survives.
Email To Friend |
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Your Average Joe
I WOULD NOT PUT ANY OF THIS PAST THE NEW FOLKS IN DC??
Your Average Joe
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Class Warfare: President-elect Obama finally has a job for Vice President-elect Biden — czar of Obama's "middle-class task force." So what will that involve? Stirring up class envy and resentment is our guess.
Here's Biden on his job: "We'll look at everything from college affordability to after-school programs, the things that affect people's daily lives," he told ABC's "This Week."
We're not sure Biden could even tell us what the middle class is — in terms of income, wealth, education or any other meaningful measure. But we are sure one thing is certain to come out of this: A greater resentment between economic classes, stirred up intentionally as part of a divide-and-conquer strategy ultimately intended to impose punitive taxes on those deemed "wealthy."
The media and the left, which are often indistinguishable, have spent the last eight years telling those in the middle class that they're "losing ground" or will be the "first generation to have less than their parents did."
It's all nonsense, of course, but it seems to be effective. Obama's pledge to " rebuild the middle class" by giving tax breaks to "95% of workers and their families" no doubt won him a lot of votes.
But guess what? The middle class did get a tax break — a big one, it turns out — under President Bush. As Congressional Budget Office data show, the effective tax rate on the middle fifth of households fell from an average of about 17.1% under President Clinton to 14.4% under Bush. That's a 16% tax cut for the middle class.
Another oft-heard claim is that middle-class incomes are stagnant or shrinking. But a study last year by the Minneapolis Fed concluded that "incomes of most types of middle American households have increased substantially over the past three decades."
Class warriors such as Biden like to cite median household income as evidence of stagnation. And on the surface, it seems convincing: Real household income did grow just 18% over the past 30 years.
But after correcting for distortions in the data, Terry Fitzgerald, a Fed senior economist, found something else: "Median household income for most household types . . . increased by 44% to 62% from 1976 to 2006." And per-person income surged 80%.
Rather than stagnating, income has grown at an extraordinary pace. Yet that story never quite gets told.
Instead, we hear about another myth: "growing inequality." But according to the accepted measure, the Census Bureau's Gini ratio, there was virtually no change in inequality from 2000 to 2007.
Yes, many Americans are suffering in this recession, including the middle class. But the last thing we need is another general in a phony class war telling people how bad they have it.
Email To Friend |
Your Average Joe
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Class Warfare: President-elect Obama finally has a job for Vice President-elect Biden — czar of Obama's "middle-class task force." So what will that involve? Stirring up class envy and resentment is our guess.
Here's Biden on his job: "We'll look at everything from college affordability to after-school programs, the things that affect people's daily lives," he told ABC's "This Week."
We're not sure Biden could even tell us what the middle class is — in terms of income, wealth, education or any other meaningful measure. But we are sure one thing is certain to come out of this: A greater resentment between economic classes, stirred up intentionally as part of a divide-and-conquer strategy ultimately intended to impose punitive taxes on those deemed "wealthy."
The media and the left, which are often indistinguishable, have spent the last eight years telling those in the middle class that they're "losing ground" or will be the "first generation to have less than their parents did."
It's all nonsense, of course, but it seems to be effective. Obama's pledge to " rebuild the middle class" by giving tax breaks to "95% of workers and their families" no doubt won him a lot of votes.
But guess what? The middle class did get a tax break — a big one, it turns out — under President Bush. As Congressional Budget Office data show, the effective tax rate on the middle fifth of households fell from an average of about 17.1% under President Clinton to 14.4% under Bush. That's a 16% tax cut for the middle class.
Another oft-heard claim is that middle-class incomes are stagnant or shrinking. But a study last year by the Minneapolis Fed concluded that "incomes of most types of middle American households have increased substantially over the past three decades."
Class warriors such as Biden like to cite median household income as evidence of stagnation. And on the surface, it seems convincing: Real household income did grow just 18% over the past 30 years.
But after correcting for distortions in the data, Terry Fitzgerald, a Fed senior economist, found something else: "Median household income for most household types . . . increased by 44% to 62% from 1976 to 2006." And per-person income surged 80%.
Rather than stagnating, income has grown at an extraordinary pace. Yet that story never quite gets told.
Instead, we hear about another myth: "growing inequality." But according to the accepted measure, the Census Bureau's Gini ratio, there was virtually no change in inequality from 2000 to 2007.
Yes, many Americans are suffering in this recession, including the middle class. But the last thing we need is another general in a phony class war telling people how bad they have it.
Email To Friend |
Obama's Surge
Obama's Surge
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT
War On Terrorism: The Pentagon will add thousands of troops to Afghanistan next summer, setting up the smart war Barack Obama prefers. We hope he won't one day regret his choice and pull troops out too soon.
In October 2002, as President Bush and Congress were finalizing plans to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein's brutal regime, Obama told participants at an anti-war rally in Chicago that he didn't "oppose all wars," but was certainly against "a dumb war" that is "based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."
If Obama is indeed against dumb wars — he repeated his opposition to the "dumb war" in Iraq several times in that speech — then we have to assume he is in favor of smart wars. And given his comments about Afghanistan — in July he said more troops needed to be deployed in that country, because it should be the central focus in the war on terrorism — we must conclude that fighting in Afghanistan is a smart war.
We don't disagree. The ruling Taliban, routed from the country nearly seven years ago but not destroyed, has to be eliminated with finality. Terrorist strongholds must be dismantled, violent uprisings snuffed out, links to Iran severed, and the government prevented from falling into chaos. The rugged, mountainous badlands around Afghanistan's border with Pakistan have to be brought under control.
But knowing what needs to be done and having the audacity to actually do it are not the same things.
Taming Afghanistan and exterminating the terrorist network operating there will require a determination that a Democratic administration might find tough to maintain. There will be intense pressure from the left to exit Afghanistan when the campaign becomes a slog, as it ineluctably will.
Simply reminding those who put Obama into office that he is fighting a smart war will not be enough to quell the yawping, because the only sound ringing in their ears is his well-known opposition to the war in Iraq and promises of a hasty exit that got him elected.
Consequently, Obama will have to develop the deep resolve that Bush demonstrated in fully finishing the job in Iraq. Despite great media and political pressure to flee Iraq when it looked to many as if the post-war insurgency was unwinnable, Bush remained unmoved because he refused to compromise national security. Obama will serve well both his and America's long-term interests if he employs the same steadfastness in regard to Afghanistan.
But while Iraq was being won, Afghanistan boiled over. Despite the quick vanquishing of the Taliban, a stable post-war state in this historically poor and troubled nation has been elusive, partly due to the Afghanistan government's failures, partly due to a measure of international negligence.
Without an escalation of troops and aggression similar to the surge that delivered Iraq, Afghanistan will remain one of the world's most troubled — and dangerous — spots.
Losing Afghanistan to radicals would be tragic, especially after the coalition so easily crushed the Taliban and spilled precious blood to do it. Terrorists should never be able to return to their sanctuaries, from where they can wage jihad against the innocent. They cannot be allowed to draw power from a perceived lack of U.S. strength, or from the sympathetic tribal areas.
In less than a month, Afghanistan will be Obama's war. By the summer, when as many as 30,000 U.S. troops are added to the 70,000-man coalition force, it will be Obama's surge. Should he fail to see it through to the end, he would be laying the foundation for a poor presidential legacy.
Email To Friend |
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT
War On Terrorism: The Pentagon will add thousands of troops to Afghanistan next summer, setting up the smart war Barack Obama prefers. We hope he won't one day regret his choice and pull troops out too soon.
In October 2002, as President Bush and Congress were finalizing plans to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein's brutal regime, Obama told participants at an anti-war rally in Chicago that he didn't "oppose all wars," but was certainly against "a dumb war" that is "based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."
If Obama is indeed against dumb wars — he repeated his opposition to the "dumb war" in Iraq several times in that speech — then we have to assume he is in favor of smart wars. And given his comments about Afghanistan — in July he said more troops needed to be deployed in that country, because it should be the central focus in the war on terrorism — we must conclude that fighting in Afghanistan is a smart war.
We don't disagree. The ruling Taliban, routed from the country nearly seven years ago but not destroyed, has to be eliminated with finality. Terrorist strongholds must be dismantled, violent uprisings snuffed out, links to Iran severed, and the government prevented from falling into chaos. The rugged, mountainous badlands around Afghanistan's border with Pakistan have to be brought under control.
But knowing what needs to be done and having the audacity to actually do it are not the same things.
Taming Afghanistan and exterminating the terrorist network operating there will require a determination that a Democratic administration might find tough to maintain. There will be intense pressure from the left to exit Afghanistan when the campaign becomes a slog, as it ineluctably will.
Simply reminding those who put Obama into office that he is fighting a smart war will not be enough to quell the yawping, because the only sound ringing in their ears is his well-known opposition to the war in Iraq and promises of a hasty exit that got him elected.
Consequently, Obama will have to develop the deep resolve that Bush demonstrated in fully finishing the job in Iraq. Despite great media and political pressure to flee Iraq when it looked to many as if the post-war insurgency was unwinnable, Bush remained unmoved because he refused to compromise national security. Obama will serve well both his and America's long-term interests if he employs the same steadfastness in regard to Afghanistan.
But while Iraq was being won, Afghanistan boiled over. Despite the quick vanquishing of the Taliban, a stable post-war state in this historically poor and troubled nation has been elusive, partly due to the Afghanistan government's failures, partly due to a measure of international negligence.
Without an escalation of troops and aggression similar to the surge that delivered Iraq, Afghanistan will remain one of the world's most troubled — and dangerous — spots.
Losing Afghanistan to radicals would be tragic, especially after the coalition so easily crushed the Taliban and spilled precious blood to do it. Terrorists should never be able to return to their sanctuaries, from where they can wage jihad against the innocent. They cannot be allowed to draw power from a perceived lack of U.S. strength, or from the sympathetic tribal areas.
In less than a month, Afghanistan will be Obama's war. By the summer, when as many as 30,000 U.S. troops are added to the 70,000-man coalition force, it will be Obama's surge. Should he fail to see it through to the end, he would be laying the foundation for a poor presidential legacy.
Email To Friend |
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Economic Bailout ?
Economic Bailout ?
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CAN DO, OR NOT?
In 1999, the government seized the Mustang
Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and,
As required by law, tried to run it.
They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting
The economy of our country and $800+ billion to a
Pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money running a
Whore house and selling booze..
Now, if that 'don't' make you nervous, what does?
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CAN DO, OR NOT?
In 1999, the government seized the Mustang
Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and,
As required by law, tried to run it.
They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting
The economy of our country and $800+ billion to a
Pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money running a
Whore house and selling booze..
Now, if that 'don't' make you nervous, what does?
A WARNING FOR AMERICA FROM AFRICA
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:10:04 +0000
A WARNING FOR AMERICA FROM AFRICA
by Alan Stang
November 6, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
I read this warning on my daily radio talk show last week,
before the election. It is even more relevant now, because
the same thing that was imposed on South Africa – by the
United States – is now happening here. So ma ny people
have asked for a copy of this message from a South African
journalist that I post it here. My comments on her comments
are in bold. Of course the parallels cannot be exact, but
see whether you recognize any of this.
By Gemma Meyer (Gemma Meyer is the pseudonym of a South
African journalist. She and her husband, a former
conservative member of parliament, still reside in South
Africa.)
People used to say that South Africa was 20 years behind
the rest of the Western world. Television, for example, came
late to South Africa (but so did pornography and the gay
rights movement).
Today, however, South Africa may be the grim model of the
future Wester n world, for events in America reveal trends
chillingly similar to those that destroyed our country.
America's structures are Western. Your Congress, your
lobbying groups, your free speech, and the way ordinary
Americans either get involved or ignore politics are
peculiarly Western, not the way most of the world operates.
But the fact that only about a third of Americans deem it
important to vote is horrifying in light of how close you
are to losing your Western character.
Writing letters to the press, manning stands at county
fairs, hosting fund-raising dinners, attending rallies,
setting up conferences, writing your Congressman - that is
what you know, and what you are comfortable with. Those are
the political methods you've created for yourselves to
keep your cou ntry on track and to ensure political
accountability.
But woe to you if - or more likely, when - the rules
change. White Americans may soon find themsel ves unable or
unwilling to stand up to challenge the new political methods
that will be the inevitable result of the ethnic
metamorphosis now taking place in America. Unable to cope
with the new rules of the game - violence, mob riots,
intimidation through accusations of racism, demands for
proportionality based on racial numbers, and all the other
social and political weapons used by the have-nots to
bludgeon treasure and power from the haves - Americans, like
others before them, will no doubt cave in. They will
compromise away their independence and ultimately their way
of life.
That is exactly what happened in Sou th Africa. I know,
because I was there and I saw it happen.
South Africa used to be one of the most advanced nations on
earth. Then Washington intervened.
Faced with revolution in the streets, strikes, civil unrest
and the sheer terror and murder practiced by Nelson
Mandela's African National Congress (ANC), the white
government simply capitulated in order to achieve
"peace."
Mandela was in jail for twenty seven years not because he
was an innocent black man but because he was a Communist
terrorist who said in court that he was planning to kill
people with bombs. He could have been released at any time
simply by renouncing terrorism. He re fused.
Westerners need peace. They need order and stability. They
are builders and planners. But what we got was the peace of
the grave for our society.
The Third World is different - different peoples with
different pasts and different cultures. Yet Westerners
continue to mistake the psychology of the Third World and
its peoples. Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe are perfect examples
of those mistakes. Sierra Leone is in perpetual civil war,
and Zimbabwe - once the thriving, stable Rhodesia - is
looting the very people (the white men) who feed the
country. Yet Westerners do not admit that the same kind of
savagery could come to America when enough immigrants of the
right type assert themselves. The fact is, Americans are
sitting ducks for Third World exploitation of the Western
conscience of compassion.
Those in the West who forced South Africa to surrender to
the ANC and its leaders did not consider Africa to be the
dangerous, corrupt, and savage place it is now in Zimbabwe
and South Africa. Those Western politicians now have a
similar problem looming on their own doorsteps: the demand
for power and treasure from the non-Western peoples inside
the realm.
Again, Washington forced Rhodesia into Communist hands.
Rhodesia exported tons of food. Zimbabwe typically starves.
Washington did this.
It is already too late for South Africa, but not for
America if enough people strengthen their spine and take on
the race terrorists, the armies of the "politically
correct" and, most dangerous of all, the craven
politicians who believe "co mpassionate
conservatism" will buy them a few more votes, a few
more days of peace.
White South Africans, you should remember, have been in
that part of Africa for the same amount of time whites have
inhabited North America; yet ultimately South Africans voted
for their own suicide. We are not so very different from
you.
South Africans voted for their own suicide. Did you?
We lost our country through skillful propaganda, pressure
from abroad (not least from the U.S.A.), unrelenting charges
of "oppression" and "racism," and the
shrewd assessment by African tyrants that the white man has
many Achilles' heels, the most significant of which are
his compassion, his belief in the "equality of
man," and his "love your neighbor" philosophy
- none of which are part of the Third World's history.
See my recent
piece
– Before the Election: What You Must Do – about the
deliberate cultivation of white guilt in the Communist
government schools.
The mainline churches played a big role in the demise of
Western influence throughout Africa, too; especially in
South Africa. Today's tyrants were yesterday's
mission-school protégés. Many dictators in Africa were men
of the cloth. They knew their clerical collars would deflect
criticism and obfuscate their real aims, which20had nothing
whatever to do with the "brotherhood of man."
Other tyrants, like the infamous Idi Amin, were trained and
schooled by the whites themselves, at Oxford, Cambridge, and
Harvard. After receiving the best from the West, they
unleashed a resentful bloodlust against their benefactors.
From what I have seen and read thus far, I fear Americans
will capitulate just as we did. Americans are, generally, a
soft lot. They don't want to quarrel or obstruct the
claims of those who believe they were wronged. They like
peace and quiet, and they want to compromise and be nice.
A television program that aired in South Africa showed a
town meeting somewhere in Southern California where people
met to complain about falling standards in the schools.
Whites who politely spoke at the meeting clearly resented
the influx of Mexican immigrants into their community. When
a handful of Chicanos at the back of the hall shouted and
waved their hands at them, the whites simply shrunk back
into their seats rather than tell the noisemakers to shut
up. They didn't want to quarrel.
In America, the courts are still the final arbiters of
society's laws. But what will happen when your future
majority refuses to abide by court rulings - as in Zimbabwe.
What w ill happen when the new majority says the judges are
racists, and that they refuse to acknowledge "white
man's justice"? What will happen when the courts
are filled with their people, or their sympathizers? In
California, Proposition 187 has already been overturned.
What will you do when the future non-white majority decides
to change the names of streets and cities? (*Actually this
has already happend in places like New Orleans, Detroit and
Washington State.) What will you do when they no longer want
to use money that carries the portraits of old, dead white
"racists" and slave owners? Will you cave in, like
you did on flying the Confederate flag? What about the nat
ional anthem? Your official language? (*Right now in many
parts of the country Spanish is the de facto language.)
Don't laugh. When the "majority" took over in
South Africa, the first targets were our national symbols.
In another generation, America may well face what Africa is
now experiencing - invasions of private land by the
"have-nots;" the decline in health care quality;
roads and buildings in disrepair; the banishment of your
history from the education of the young; the
revolutionization of your justice system.
In South Africa today, only 9 percent of murderers end up
in jail. Court dockets are regularly purchased and simply
disappear. Magistrates can be bribed as can the prison
authorities, making escapes commonplace. Vehicle and
airplane licenses are regularly purchased, and forged school
and university certificates are ro utine.
What would you think of the ritual slaughter of animals in
your neighbor's backyard? (* Again, already happening in
Louisiana, Georgia and Florida.) How do you clean up the
blood and entrails that litter your suburban streets? How do
you feel about the practice of witchcraft, in which the
parts of young girls and boys are needed for
"medicinal" purposes? How do you react to the
burning of witches?
Don't laugh. All that is quite common in South Africa
today.
Don't imagine that government officials caught with
their fingers in the till will be punished. Excuses - like
the need to overcome generations of white racism - will be
found to exonerate the guilty.
In fact, known criminals will be voted into office because
of a racial solidarity among the majority that doesn't
exist among the whites. (Yet again, already happening,
especially among blacks.) When Ian Smith of the old Rhodesia
tried to stand up to the world, white South African
politicians were among the Westerners pressuring him to
surrender.
When Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe murders his political
opponents, ignores unfavorable court decisions, terrorizes
the population and siphons off millions from the state
treasury for himself and his friends, South Africa's new
President Thabo Mbeki holds his hand and declares his
support. That just happened a few weeks ago.
Your tax dollars will go to those who don't earn and
don't pay. (* You mean "spreading the wealth"
?) In South Africa, organizations that used to have access t
o state funds such as old age homes, the arts, and
veterans' services, are simply abandoned.
What will happen is that Western structures in America will
be either destroyed from without, or transformed from
within, used to suit the goals of the new rulers. And they
will reign either through terror, as in Zimbabwe today, or
exert other corrupt pressures to obtain, or buy votes. Once
power is in the hands of aliens, don't expect loyalty or
devotion to principle from those whose jobs are at stake.
One of the most surprising and tragic components of the
disaster in South Africa is how many previously anti-ANC
whites simply moved to the other side.
Once you lose social, cultural, and political dominance,
there is no getting it back again.
Please note. Once it's gone, it's gone. Whatever
you do later, however hard you fight, you cannot get it
back.
Unfortunately, your habits and values work against you. You
cannot fight terror and street mobs with letters to your
Congressmen. You cannot fight accusations of racism with
prayer meetings. You cannot appeal to the goodness of your
fellow man when the fellow man despises you for your
weaknesses and hacks off the arms and legs of his political
opponents.
To=2 0survive, Americans must never lose the power they now
enjoy to people from alien cultures. Above all, don't
put yourselves to the test of fighting only when you r backs
are against the wall. You will probably fail.
Millions around the world want your good life. But make no
mistake: They care not for the high-minded ideals of Thomas
Jefferson and George Washington, and your Constitution. What
they want are your possessions, your power, and your status.
And they already know that their allies among you, the
"human rights activists," the skillful lawyers and
the left-wing politicians will fight for them, and not for
you. They will exploit your compassion and your Christian
charity, and your good will.
They have studied you, Mr. and Mrs. America, and they know
your weaknesses well.
They know what to do.
Do you?
A WARNING FOR AMERICA FROM AFRICA
by Alan Stang
November 6, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
I read this warning on my daily radio talk show last week,
before the election. It is even more relevant now, because
the same thing that was imposed on South Africa – by the
United States – is now happening here. So ma ny people
have asked for a copy of this message from a South African
journalist that I post it here. My comments on her comments
are in bold. Of course the parallels cannot be exact, but
see whether you recognize any of this.
By Gemma Meyer (Gemma Meyer is the pseudonym of a South
African journalist. She and her husband, a former
conservative member of parliament, still reside in South
Africa.)
People used to say that South Africa was 20 years behind
the rest of the Western world. Television, for example, came
late to South Africa (but so did pornography and the gay
rights movement).
Today, however, South Africa may be the grim model of the
future Wester n world, for events in America reveal trends
chillingly similar to those that destroyed our country.
America's structures are Western. Your Congress, your
lobbying groups, your free speech, and the way ordinary
Americans either get involved or ignore politics are
peculiarly Western, not the way most of the world operates.
But the fact that only about a third of Americans deem it
important to vote is horrifying in light of how close you
are to losing your Western character.
Writing letters to the press, manning stands at county
fairs, hosting fund-raising dinners, attending rallies,
setting up conferences, writing your Congressman - that is
what you know, and what you are comfortable with. Those are
the political methods you've created for yourselves to
keep your cou ntry on track and to ensure political
accountability.
But woe to you if - or more likely, when - the rules
change. White Americans may soon find themsel ves unable or
unwilling to stand up to challenge the new political methods
that will be the inevitable result of the ethnic
metamorphosis now taking place in America. Unable to cope
with the new rules of the game - violence, mob riots,
intimidation through accusations of racism, demands for
proportionality based on racial numbers, and all the other
social and political weapons used by the have-nots to
bludgeon treasure and power from the haves - Americans, like
others before them, will no doubt cave in. They will
compromise away their independence and ultimately their way
of life.
That is exactly what happened in Sou th Africa. I know,
because I was there and I saw it happen.
South Africa used to be one of the most advanced nations on
earth. Then Washington intervened.
Faced with revolution in the streets, strikes, civil unrest
and the sheer terror and murder practiced by Nelson
Mandela's African National Congress (ANC), the white
government simply capitulated in order to achieve
"peace."
Mandela was in jail for twenty seven years not because he
was an innocent black man but because he was a Communist
terrorist who said in court that he was planning to kill
people with bombs. He could have been released at any time
simply by renouncing terrorism. He re fused.
Westerners need peace. They need order and stability. They
are builders and planners. But what we got was the peace of
the grave for our society.
The Third World is different - different peoples with
different pasts and different cultures. Yet Westerners
continue to mistake the psychology of the Third World and
its peoples. Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe are perfect examples
of those mistakes. Sierra Leone is in perpetual civil war,
and Zimbabwe - once the thriving, stable Rhodesia - is
looting the very people (the white men) who feed the
country. Yet Westerners do not admit that the same kind of
savagery could come to America when enough immigrants of the
right type assert themselves. The fact is, Americans are
sitting ducks for Third World exploitation of the Western
conscience of compassion.
Those in the West who forced South Africa to surrender to
the ANC and its leaders did not consider Africa to be the
dangerous, corrupt, and savage place it is now in Zimbabwe
and South Africa. Those Western politicians now have a
similar problem looming on their own doorsteps: the demand
for power and treasure from the non-Western peoples inside
the realm.
Again, Washington forced Rhodesia into Communist hands.
Rhodesia exported tons of food. Zimbabwe typically starves.
Washington did this.
It is already too late for South Africa, but not for
America if enough people strengthen their spine and take on
the race terrorists, the armies of the "politically
correct" and, most dangerous of all, the craven
politicians who believe "co mpassionate
conservatism" will buy them a few more votes, a few
more days of peace.
White South Africans, you should remember, have been in
that part of Africa for the same amount of time whites have
inhabited North America; yet ultimately South Africans voted
for their own suicide. We are not so very different from
you.
South Africans voted for their own suicide. Did you?
We lost our country through skillful propaganda, pressure
from abroad (not least from the U.S.A.), unrelenting charges
of "oppression" and "racism," and the
shrewd assessment by African tyrants that the white man has
many Achilles' heels, the most significant of which are
his compassion, his belief in the "equality of
man," and his "love your neighbor" philosophy
- none of which are part of the Third World's history.
See my recent
piece
– Before the Election: What You Must Do – about the
deliberate cultivation of white guilt in the Communist
government schools.
The mainline churches played a big role in the demise of
Western influence throughout Africa, too; especially in
South Africa. Today's tyrants were yesterday's
mission-school protégés. Many dictators in Africa were men
of the cloth. They knew their clerical collars would deflect
criticism and obfuscate their real aims, which20had nothing
whatever to do with the "brotherhood of man."
Other tyrants, like the infamous Idi Amin, were trained and
schooled by the whites themselves, at Oxford, Cambridge, and
Harvard. After receiving the best from the West, they
unleashed a resentful bloodlust against their benefactors.
From what I have seen and read thus far, I fear Americans
will capitulate just as we did. Americans are, generally, a
soft lot. They don't want to quarrel or obstruct the
claims of those who believe they were wronged. They like
peace and quiet, and they want to compromise and be nice.
A television program that aired in South Africa showed a
town meeting somewhere in Southern California where people
met to complain about falling standards in the schools.
Whites who politely spoke at the meeting clearly resented
the influx of Mexican immigrants into their community. When
a handful of Chicanos at the back of the hall shouted and
waved their hands at them, the whites simply shrunk back
into their seats rather than tell the noisemakers to shut
up. They didn't want to quarrel.
In America, the courts are still the final arbiters of
society's laws. But what will happen when your future
majority refuses to abide by court rulings - as in Zimbabwe.
What w ill happen when the new majority says the judges are
racists, and that they refuse to acknowledge "white
man's justice"? What will happen when the courts
are filled with their people, or their sympathizers? In
California, Proposition 187 has already been overturned.
What will you do when the future non-white majority decides
to change the names of streets and cities? (*Actually this
has already happend in places like New Orleans, Detroit and
Washington State.) What will you do when they no longer want
to use money that carries the portraits of old, dead white
"racists" and slave owners? Will you cave in, like
you did on flying the Confederate flag? What about the nat
ional anthem? Your official language? (*Right now in many
parts of the country Spanish is the de facto language.)
Don't laugh. When the "majority" took over in
South Africa, the first targets were our national symbols.
In another generation, America may well face what Africa is
now experiencing - invasions of private land by the
"have-nots;" the decline in health care quality;
roads and buildings in disrepair; the banishment of your
history from the education of the young; the
revolutionization of your justice system.
In South Africa today, only 9 percent of murderers end up
in jail. Court dockets are regularly purchased and simply
disappear. Magistrates can be bribed as can the prison
authorities, making escapes commonplace. Vehicle and
airplane licenses are regularly purchased, and forged school
and university certificates are ro utine.
What would you think of the ritual slaughter of animals in
your neighbor's backyard? (* Again, already happening in
Louisiana, Georgia and Florida.) How do you clean up the
blood and entrails that litter your suburban streets? How do
you feel about the practice of witchcraft, in which the
parts of young girls and boys are needed for
"medicinal" purposes? How do you react to the
burning of witches?
Don't laugh. All that is quite common in South Africa
today.
Don't imagine that government officials caught with
their fingers in the till will be punished. Excuses - like
the need to overcome generations of white racism - will be
found to exonerate the guilty.
In fact, known criminals will be voted into office because
of a racial solidarity among the majority that doesn't
exist among the whites. (Yet again, already happening,
especially among blacks.) When Ian Smith of the old Rhodesia
tried to stand up to the world, white South African
politicians were among the Westerners pressuring him to
surrender.
When Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe murders his political
opponents, ignores unfavorable court decisions, terrorizes
the population and siphons off millions from the state
treasury for himself and his friends, South Africa's new
President Thabo Mbeki holds his hand and declares his
support. That just happened a few weeks ago.
Your tax dollars will go to those who don't earn and
don't pay. (* You mean "spreading the wealth"
?) In South Africa, organizations that used to have access t
o state funds such as old age homes, the arts, and
veterans' services, are simply abandoned.
What will happen is that Western structures in America will
be either destroyed from without, or transformed from
within, used to suit the goals of the new rulers. And they
will reign either through terror, as in Zimbabwe today, or
exert other corrupt pressures to obtain, or buy votes. Once
power is in the hands of aliens, don't expect loyalty or
devotion to principle from those whose jobs are at stake.
One of the most surprising and tragic components of the
disaster in South Africa is how many previously anti-ANC
whites simply moved to the other side.
Once you lose social, cultural, and political dominance,
there is no getting it back again.
Please note. Once it's gone, it's gone. Whatever
you do later, however hard you fight, you cannot get it
back.
Unfortunately, your habits and values work against you. You
cannot fight terror and street mobs with letters to your
Congressmen. You cannot fight accusations of racism with
prayer meetings. You cannot appeal to the goodness of your
fellow man when the fellow man despises you for your
weaknesses and hacks off the arms and legs of his political
opponents.
To=2 0survive, Americans must never lose the power they now
enjoy to people from alien cultures. Above all, don't
put yourselves to the test of fighting only when you r backs
are against the wall. You will probably fail.
Millions around the world want your good life. But make no
mistake: They care not for the high-minded ideals of Thomas
Jefferson and George Washington, and your Constitution. What
they want are your possessions, your power, and your status.
And they already know that their allies among you, the
"human rights activists," the skillful lawyers and
the left-wing politicians will fight for them, and not for
you. They will exploit your compassion and your Christian
charity, and your good will.
They have studied you, Mr. and Mrs. America, and they know
your weaknesses well.
They know what to do.
Do you?
Friday, December 19, 2008
House Republicans Tell Bush: No Bailout for Detroit
House Republicans Tell Bush: No Bailout for Detroit
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 5:50 PM
By: David A. Patten
In letters sent from both House and Senate Republicans, President Bush has been warned not to give funds that Congress expressly appropriated for "financial institutions" to Detroit automakers.
The House letter also suggested such a move by Bush may be illegal and unconstitutional, noting that only Congress has the right to appropriate taxpayer funds.
Last week, Democrats suffered a major rebuke after their proposed bailout bill failed in the Senate. Senate Democrats could not muster enough voters to overcome a Republican filibuster of the bill.
Facing growing opposition from conservatives, President Bush may be backing away from a quick auto-industry bailout.
“I think you all led yourselves to believe that [the bailout] would be almost immediately,” White House Press Secretary Dana Perino told the White House press corps Tuesday. “We did not signal that it would be almost immediate.”
Bush faces a growing phalanx of conservative foes who staunchly oppose any use of federal bailout funds to help car manufacturers unless the United Auto Workers (UAW) union offers more concessions.
White House officials insist they remain committed to rescuing carmakers and are merely gathering more financial information to precisely gauge how much money the auto executives actually need.
On Monday, Bush received a letter signed by 26 House Republicans opposing the use of funds from the $700 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to bailout the “Big Three” automakers. The TARP legislation, the representatives said, specified that the money was for “financial institutions.”
[To view the complete letter sent to the president by 26 members of the House of Representatives - Go Here Now]
The conservative congressmen opposing the presidential bailout are led by Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, and Rep. Thomas Price, R-Texas. Other signatories include GOP representatives Tom Feeney of Florida, Lamar Smith of Texas, and John Shadegg of Arizona.
American taxpayers, the congressmen insisted, “cannot afford to save every company facing financial peril.” Their letter urges Bush “not expand the use of TARP money to bailout American auto manufacturers” for the sake of “the long-term stability of our nation and our automotive manufacturers.”
The White House received more non-greeting card mail on Tuesday – this time a letter from seven Republican senators also urging President Bush not to use TARP funds to rescue carmakers.
Those GOP senators -- Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, John Ensign of Nevada, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, John Cornyn of Texas , Michael Enzi of Wyoming, and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia -- noted that Congress rejected the bailout after “the United Auto Workers (UAW) union refused to agree to changes necessary to help the Big Three automakers become competitive.”
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., tried to broker a last-minute agreement, but the deal fell through after the UAW balked at lowering compensation to levels “at parity” with the pay of autoworkers employed by Japanese companies in the United States.
Without such an agreement, the senators wrote, “we do not believe any amount of money will succeed in saving these companies.”
When it became clear the $14 billion auto bailout bill had little chance of being passed in the Senate last week, President-elect Barack Obama urged President Bush to intervene.
“My hope is that the administration and the Congress will still find a way to give the industry the temporary assistance it needs, while demanding the long-term restructuring that is absolutely required,” Obama said.
The Bush administration promised it would act to halt a “precipitous collapse” of the U.S. auto industry.
TARP is thought to be the only source of funds sufficient to keep auto makers afloat, but authorities have already burned through most of the first $350 billion that can be spent without further authorization.
CBS News has reported that only about $15 billion remains unspent from the first $350 billion -- just enough to keep the Big 3 on the road to economic recovery without having to file for bankruptcy protection in coming weeks. Dipping into the second $350 will require further action by Congress.
There is no word yet on when the review of automakers’ financial needs by the Bush administration will be completed.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 5:50 PM
By: David A. Patten
In letters sent from both House and Senate Republicans, President Bush has been warned not to give funds that Congress expressly appropriated for "financial institutions" to Detroit automakers.
The House letter also suggested such a move by Bush may be illegal and unconstitutional, noting that only Congress has the right to appropriate taxpayer funds.
Last week, Democrats suffered a major rebuke after their proposed bailout bill failed in the Senate. Senate Democrats could not muster enough voters to overcome a Republican filibuster of the bill.
Facing growing opposition from conservatives, President Bush may be backing away from a quick auto-industry bailout.
“I think you all led yourselves to believe that [the bailout] would be almost immediately,” White House Press Secretary Dana Perino told the White House press corps Tuesday. “We did not signal that it would be almost immediate.”
Bush faces a growing phalanx of conservative foes who staunchly oppose any use of federal bailout funds to help car manufacturers unless the United Auto Workers (UAW) union offers more concessions.
White House officials insist they remain committed to rescuing carmakers and are merely gathering more financial information to precisely gauge how much money the auto executives actually need.
On Monday, Bush received a letter signed by 26 House Republicans opposing the use of funds from the $700 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to bailout the “Big Three” automakers. The TARP legislation, the representatives said, specified that the money was for “financial institutions.”
[To view the complete letter sent to the president by 26 members of the House of Representatives - Go Here Now]
The conservative congressmen opposing the presidential bailout are led by Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, and Rep. Thomas Price, R-Texas. Other signatories include GOP representatives Tom Feeney of Florida, Lamar Smith of Texas, and John Shadegg of Arizona.
American taxpayers, the congressmen insisted, “cannot afford to save every company facing financial peril.” Their letter urges Bush “not expand the use of TARP money to bailout American auto manufacturers” for the sake of “the long-term stability of our nation and our automotive manufacturers.”
The White House received more non-greeting card mail on Tuesday – this time a letter from seven Republican senators also urging President Bush not to use TARP funds to rescue carmakers.
Those GOP senators -- Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, John Ensign of Nevada, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, John Cornyn of Texas , Michael Enzi of Wyoming, and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia -- noted that Congress rejected the bailout after “the United Auto Workers (UAW) union refused to agree to changes necessary to help the Big Three automakers become competitive.”
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., tried to broker a last-minute agreement, but the deal fell through after the UAW balked at lowering compensation to levels “at parity” with the pay of autoworkers employed by Japanese companies in the United States.
Without such an agreement, the senators wrote, “we do not believe any amount of money will succeed in saving these companies.”
When it became clear the $14 billion auto bailout bill had little chance of being passed in the Senate last week, President-elect Barack Obama urged President Bush to intervene.
“My hope is that the administration and the Congress will still find a way to give the industry the temporary assistance it needs, while demanding the long-term restructuring that is absolutely required,” Obama said.
The Bush administration promised it would act to halt a “precipitous collapse” of the U.S. auto industry.
TARP is thought to be the only source of funds sufficient to keep auto makers afloat, but authorities have already burned through most of the first $350 billion that can be spent without further authorization.
CBS News has reported that only about $15 billion remains unspent from the first $350 billion -- just enough to keep the Big 3 on the road to economic recovery without having to file for bankruptcy protection in coming weeks. Dipping into the second $350 will require further action by Congress.
There is no word yet on when the review of automakers’ financial needs by the Bush administration will be completed.
Why government is NOT the answer....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim@foodforlife.com
To: westcoastwest@verizon.net; mizmal2@verizon.net; musclemedics@hotmail.com; rockywinds@aol.com; brick9@hotmail.com; DKKAIN@aol.com; bmiller@imaginesystems.net; rachie01@rocketmail.com; dmcgreg1@mindspring.com; torr313@aol.com; wbarela@peakhotels.com; icrandall@peakhotels.com; pauletorres@yahoo.com; dtorres87801@yahoo.com; mtorres@beall-biehler.com; minniebtorres@hotmail.com; jay@foodforlife.com; gary@foodforlife.com; davidrnf@hughes.net; art@foodforlife.com; tony@foodforlife.com; charlie@foodforlife.com; jaci@foodforlife.com; danrealtyexec@sbcglobal.net; HMoore3284@aol.com; bajawinemaker@yahoo.com; oldmancorny@yahoo.com
Subject: FW: Why government is NOT the answer....
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:59:54 -0800
From: OUT READER AND CONTRIBUTOR MINNIE TORRES
Subject: Fwd: Why government is NOT the answer....
Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter Administration? Anybody? Anything? No?
Didn't think so.
Bottom line . . we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.
Ready?
It was very simple, and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate.
The Department of Energy was instituted August 4, 1977 TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL . HEY, PRETTY EFFICIENT, HUH?
AND NOW IT'S 2008, 31 YEARS LATER, AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR, THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES AND LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE!
THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?'
Ah yes, good ole bureaucracy. And now we are going to turn the Banking system over to them?
God Help us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suspicious message? There’s an alert for that. Get your Hotmail® account now.
From: Jim@foodforlife.com
To: westcoastwest@verizon.net; mizmal2@verizon.net; musclemedics@hotmail.com; rockywinds@aol.com; brick9@hotmail.com; DKKAIN@aol.com; bmiller@imaginesystems.net; rachie01@rocketmail.com; dmcgreg1@mindspring.com; torr313@aol.com; wbarela@peakhotels.com; icrandall@peakhotels.com; pauletorres@yahoo.com; dtorres87801@yahoo.com; mtorres@beall-biehler.com; minniebtorres@hotmail.com; jay@foodforlife.com; gary@foodforlife.com; davidrnf@hughes.net; art@foodforlife.com; tony@foodforlife.com; charlie@foodforlife.com; jaci@foodforlife.com; danrealtyexec@sbcglobal.net; HMoore3284@aol.com; bajawinemaker@yahoo.com; oldmancorny@yahoo.com
Subject: FW: Why government is NOT the answer....
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:59:54 -0800
From: OUT READER AND CONTRIBUTOR MINNIE TORRES
Subject: Fwd: Why government is NOT the answer....
Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter Administration? Anybody? Anything? No?
Didn't think so.
Bottom line . . we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.
Ready?
It was very simple, and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate.
The Department of Energy was instituted August 4, 1977 TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL . HEY, PRETTY EFFICIENT, HUH?
AND NOW IT'S 2008, 31 YEARS LATER, AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR, THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES AND LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE!
THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?'
Ah yes, good ole bureaucracy. And now we are going to turn the Banking system over to them?
God Help us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suspicious message? There’s an alert for that. Get your Hotmail® account now.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
--Israeli agent's advice & warning.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mrs M
Being prepared--Israeli agent's advice & warning.
Juval Aviv was the Israeli Agent upon whom the movie ' Munich ' was based. He was Golda Meir's bodyguard--she appointed him to track down and bring to justice the Palestinian terrorists who took the Israeli athletes hostage in 1972 and killed them during the Munich Olympic Games. (Aviv's bio is noted at end.) He predicted the London subway bombing on the Bill O'Reilly show on Fox News stating publicly that it would happen within a week. At the time, O'Reilly laughed and mocked him saying that in a week he wanted him back on the show. But, unfortunately, within a week the terrorist attack had occurred.
Now for his future predictions. He predicts the next terrorist attack on the U.S. will occur within the next few months. Forget hijacking airplanes, because he says terrorists will NEVER try and hijack a plane again as they know the people onboard will never go down quietly again. Aviv believes our airport security is a joke--that we have been reactionary rather than proactivein developing strategies that are truly effective.
For example:
1) Our airport technology is outdated. We look for metal, and the new explosives are made of plastic.
2) He talked about how some idiot tried to light his shoe on fire. Because of that, now everyone has to take off their shoes. A group of idiots tried to bring aboard liquid explosives. Now we can't bring liquids on board. He says he's waiting for some suicidal maniac to pour liquid explosive on his underwear; at which point, security will have us all traveling naked! Every strategy we have is 'reactionary.'
3) We only focus on security when people are heading to the gates. Aviv says that if a terrorist attack targets airports in the future, they will targ et busy times on the front end of the airport when/where people are checking in. It would be easy for someone to take two suitcases of explosives, walk up to a busy check-in line, ask a person next to them to watch their bags for a minute while they go to the restroom, and then detonate the bags BEFORE security even gets involved. In Israel, security checks bags BEFORE people can even ENTER the airport.
Aviv says the next terrorist attack here in America is imminent and will involve suicide bombers and non-suicide bombers in places where large groups of people congregate. (I. E., Disneyland, Las Vegas casinos, big cities ( New York , San Francisco, Chicago, etc.) and that it will also include shopping malls, subways in rush hour, train stations, etc., as well20as rural America this time ( Wyoming, Montana, etc.).
The attack will be characterized by simultaneous detonations around the country (terrorists like big impact), involving at least 5-8 cities, including rural areas. Aviv says terrorists won't need to use suicide bombers in many of the larger cities, because at places like the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, they can simply valet park a car loaded with explosives and walk away.
Aviv says all of the above is well known in intelligence circles, but that our U.S. government does not want to 'alarm American citizens' with the facts. The world is quickly going to become 'a different place,' and issue like 'global warming' and political correctness will become totally irrelevant.
On an encouraging note, he says the terrorists who want to destroy America will not use sophisticated weapons. They like to use suicide as a front-line approach. It's cheap, it's easy, it's effective; and they have an infinite abundance of young militants more than willing to 'meet their destiny.'
He also says the next level of terrorists, over which America should be most concerned, will not be coming from abroad. But will be, instead, 'homegrown' - having attended and been educated in our own schools and universities right here in the U. S. He says to look for 'students' who frequently travel back and forth to the Middle East . These young terrorists will be most dangerous because they will know our language and will fully understand the habits of Americans; but that we Americans won't know/understand a thing about them.
Aviv says that, as a people, Americans are unaware and uneducated about the terroristic threats we will, inevitably, face. America still has only a handful of Arabic and Farsi speaking people in our intelligence networks, and Aviv says it is critical that we change that fact - SOON.
So, what can America do to protect itself? From an intelligence perspective, Aviv says the U.S. needs to stop relying on satellites and technology for intelligence. We need to, instead, follow Israel's, Ireland 's, and England 's hands-on examples of human intelligence, both from an infiltration perspective as well as to trust 'aware' citizens to help.
We need to engage and educate ourselves as citizens; however, our U.S. government continues to treat us, its citizens, 'like babies.' Our government thinks we 'can't handle the truth' and are concerned that we'll panic if we understand the realities of terrorism. Aviv says this is a deadly mistake.
Aviv recently created/executed a security test for our Congress, by placing an empty briefcase in five well-traveled spots in five major cities. The results? Not one person called 911 or sought a policeman to check it out. In fact, in Chicago, someone tried to steal the briefcase!
In comparison, Aviv says that citizens of Israel are so well 'trained that an unattended bag or package would be reported in seconds by citizen(s) who know to publicly shout, 'Unattended Bag.' The area would be quickly & calmly cleared by the citizens themselves.. But, unfortunately, America hasn't been yet 'hurt enough' by terrorism for their government to fully understand the need to educate its citizens or for the government to understand that it's their citizens who are, inevitably, the best first-line of defense against terrorism.
Aviv also was concerned about the high number of children here in America who were in preschool and kindergarten after 9/ 11, who were 'lost' without parents being able to pick them up, and about our schools that had no plan in place to best care for the students until parents could get there. (In New York City, this was days, in some cases!)
He stresses the importance of having a plan, that's agreed upon within your family, to respond to in the event of a terroristic emergency. He urges parents to contact their children's schools and demand that the schools, too, develop plans of actions, as they do in Israel .
Does your family know what to do if you can't contact one another by phone? Where would you gather in an emergency? He says we should all have a plan that is easy enough for even our youngest children to remember and follow.
Aviv says that the U S. government has in force a plan that, in the event of another terrorist attack, will immediately cut-off EVERYONE's ability to use cell phones, blackberries, etc., as this is the preferred communication source used by terrorists and is often the way that their bombs are detonated. How will you communicate with your loved ones in the event you cannot speak? You need to have a plan.
Aviv's Bio as follows:
He holds an M. A. in Business from Tel Aviv University and is President and CEO of Interfor, Inc., an international corporate intelligence and investigations firm. Interfor, Inc. is now based in New York , with offices around the world. It was founded in 1979 and provides foreign and domestic intelligence services to legal, corporate, and financial communities around the world. Interfor, Inc. also conducts investigations into terrorism, and Mr. Aviv now serves as a special consultant to the U.S. Congress, and other policy makers, here within the U. S. on issues of terrorism, fraud, and money laundering. Interfor's services encompass white-collar crime investigations, asset search and recovery, corporate due diligence, litigation support, fraud investigations, internal compliance investigations, and security and vulnerability assessments.
Since its inception, Interfor's asset investigation services have recovered over $2 billion worldwide for its clients.
A leading authority on terrorist networks, Mr. Aviv served as lead investigator for Pan Am Airways into the Pan Am 103-Lockerbie terrorist bombing. He wa s featured in the recent film, Munich, as the leader of the Israeli team that tracked down the terrorists who kidnapped the Israeli Olympic team. Before founding Interfor, Mr. Aviv served as an officer in the Israel Defense Force (Major, retired) leading an elite Commando/Intelligence Unit, and was later selected by the Israeli Secret Service (Mossad) to participate in a number of intelligence special operations, serving in many countries in the late 1960s and 1970s.
While working as a consultant with El Al, Mr. Aviv surveyed the existing security measures in place and updated El Al's security program, making El Al the safest airline in business today. Most recently, Mr. Aviv wrote a book entit led, 'Staying Safe: The Complete Guide to Protecting Yourself, Your Family, and Your Business.' (2004, Harper Resource)
He has been a featured guest on ABC Nightline, FOX News, CNN , BBC Newsnight, ZDF (German Nat ional Television), and RAI (Italian National Television)-and has been featured in numerous articles in major magazines and newspapers worldwide.
From: Mrs M
Being prepared--Israeli agent's advice & warning.
Juval Aviv was the Israeli Agent upon whom the movie ' Munich ' was based. He was Golda Meir's bodyguard--she appointed him to track down and bring to justice the Palestinian terrorists who took the Israeli athletes hostage in 1972 and killed them during the Munich Olympic Games. (Aviv's bio is noted at end.) He predicted the London subway bombing on the Bill O'Reilly show on Fox News stating publicly that it would happen within a week. At the time, O'Reilly laughed and mocked him saying that in a week he wanted him back on the show. But, unfortunately, within a week the terrorist attack had occurred.
Now for his future predictions. He predicts the next terrorist attack on the U.S. will occur within the next few months. Forget hijacking airplanes, because he says terrorists will NEVER try and hijack a plane again as they know the people onboard will never go down quietly again. Aviv believes our airport security is a joke--that we have been reactionary rather than proactivein developing strategies that are truly effective.
For example:
1) Our airport technology is outdated. We look for metal, and the new explosives are made of plastic.
2) He talked about how some idiot tried to light his shoe on fire. Because of that, now everyone has to take off their shoes. A group of idiots tried to bring aboard liquid explosives. Now we can't bring liquids on board. He says he's waiting for some suicidal maniac to pour liquid explosive on his underwear; at which point, security will have us all traveling naked! Every strategy we have is 'reactionary.'
3) We only focus on security when people are heading to the gates. Aviv says that if a terrorist attack targets airports in the future, they will targ et busy times on the front end of the airport when/where people are checking in. It would be easy for someone to take two suitcases of explosives, walk up to a busy check-in line, ask a person next to them to watch their bags for a minute while they go to the restroom, and then detonate the bags BEFORE security even gets involved. In Israel, security checks bags BEFORE people can even ENTER the airport.
Aviv says the next terrorist attack here in America is imminent and will involve suicide bombers and non-suicide bombers in places where large groups of people congregate. (I. E., Disneyland, Las Vegas casinos, big cities ( New York , San Francisco, Chicago, etc.) and that it will also include shopping malls, subways in rush hour, train stations, etc., as well20as rural America this time ( Wyoming, Montana, etc.).
The attack will be characterized by simultaneous detonations around the country (terrorists like big impact), involving at least 5-8 cities, including rural areas. Aviv says terrorists won't need to use suicide bombers in many of the larger cities, because at places like the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, they can simply valet park a car loaded with explosives and walk away.
Aviv says all of the above is well known in intelligence circles, but that our U.S. government does not want to 'alarm American citizens' with the facts. The world is quickly going to become 'a different place,' and issue like 'global warming' and political correctness will become totally irrelevant.
On an encouraging note, he says the terrorists who want to destroy America will not use sophisticated weapons. They like to use suicide as a front-line approach. It's cheap, it's easy, it's effective; and they have an infinite abundance of young militants more than willing to 'meet their destiny.'
He also says the next level of terrorists, over which America should be most concerned, will not be coming from abroad. But will be, instead, 'homegrown' - having attended and been educated in our own schools and universities right here in the U. S. He says to look for 'students' who frequently travel back and forth to the Middle East . These young terrorists will be most dangerous because they will know our language and will fully understand the habits of Americans; but that we Americans won't know/understand a thing about them.
Aviv says that, as a people, Americans are unaware and uneducated about the terroristic threats we will, inevitably, face. America still has only a handful of Arabic and Farsi speaking people in our intelligence networks, and Aviv says it is critical that we change that fact - SOON.
So, what can America do to protect itself? From an intelligence perspective, Aviv says the U.S. needs to stop relying on satellites and technology for intelligence. We need to, instead, follow Israel's, Ireland 's, and England 's hands-on examples of human intelligence, both from an infiltration perspective as well as to trust 'aware' citizens to help.
We need to engage and educate ourselves as citizens; however, our U.S. government continues to treat us, its citizens, 'like babies.' Our government thinks we 'can't handle the truth' and are concerned that we'll panic if we understand the realities of terrorism. Aviv says this is a deadly mistake.
Aviv recently created/executed a security test for our Congress, by placing an empty briefcase in five well-traveled spots in five major cities. The results? Not one person called 911 or sought a policeman to check it out. In fact, in Chicago, someone tried to steal the briefcase!
In comparison, Aviv says that citizens of Israel are so well 'trained that an unattended bag or package would be reported in seconds by citizen(s) who know to publicly shout, 'Unattended Bag.' The area would be quickly & calmly cleared by the citizens themselves.. But, unfortunately, America hasn't been yet 'hurt enough' by terrorism for their government to fully understand the need to educate its citizens or for the government to understand that it's their citizens who are, inevitably, the best first-line of defense against terrorism.
Aviv also was concerned about the high number of children here in America who were in preschool and kindergarten after 9/ 11, who were 'lost' without parents being able to pick them up, and about our schools that had no plan in place to best care for the students until parents could get there. (In New York City, this was days, in some cases!)
He stresses the importance of having a plan, that's agreed upon within your family, to respond to in the event of a terroristic emergency. He urges parents to contact their children's schools and demand that the schools, too, develop plans of actions, as they do in Israel .
Does your family know what to do if you can't contact one another by phone? Where would you gather in an emergency? He says we should all have a plan that is easy enough for even our youngest children to remember and follow.
Aviv says that the U S. government has in force a plan that, in the event of another terrorist attack, will immediately cut-off EVERYONE's ability to use cell phones, blackberries, etc., as this is the preferred communication source used by terrorists and is often the way that their bombs are detonated. How will you communicate with your loved ones in the event you cannot speak? You need to have a plan.
Aviv's Bio as follows:
He holds an M. A. in Business from Tel Aviv University and is President and CEO of Interfor, Inc., an international corporate intelligence and investigations firm. Interfor, Inc. is now based in New York , with offices around the world. It was founded in 1979 and provides foreign and domestic intelligence services to legal, corporate, and financial communities around the world. Interfor, Inc. also conducts investigations into terrorism, and Mr. Aviv now serves as a special consultant to the U.S. Congress, and other policy makers, here within the U. S. on issues of terrorism, fraud, and money laundering. Interfor's services encompass white-collar crime investigations, asset search and recovery, corporate due diligence, litigation support, fraud investigations, internal compliance investigations, and security and vulnerability assessments.
Since its inception, Interfor's asset investigation services have recovered over $2 billion worldwide for its clients.
A leading authority on terrorist networks, Mr. Aviv served as lead investigator for Pan Am Airways into the Pan Am 103-Lockerbie terrorist bombing. He wa s featured in the recent film, Munich, as the leader of the Israeli team that tracked down the terrorists who kidnapped the Israeli Olympic team. Before founding Interfor, Mr. Aviv served as an officer in the Israel Defense Force (Major, retired) leading an elite Commando/Intelligence Unit, and was later selected by the Israeli Secret Service (Mossad) to participate in a number of intelligence special operations, serving in many countries in the late 1960s and 1970s.
While working as a consultant with El Al, Mr. Aviv surveyed the existing security measures in place and updated El Al's security program, making El Al the safest airline in business today. Most recently, Mr. Aviv wrote a book entit led, 'Staying Safe: The Complete Guide to Protecting Yourself, Your Family, and Your Business.' (2004, Harper Resource)
He has been a featured guest on ABC Nightline, FOX News, CNN , BBC Newsnight, ZDF (German Nat ional Television), and RAI (Italian National Television)-and has been featured in numerous articles in major magazines and newspapers worldwide.
Emanuel Pushed Blagojevich to Appoint Obama Loyalists
Emanuel Pushed Blagojevich to Appoint Obama Loyalists
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 12:48 PM
By: David A. Patten Article Font Size
Incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel pushed Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to appoint longtime Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett to fill Barack Obama’s Senate seat, and even gave Blagojevich’s staff a deadline by which an appointment was expected, according to a report in today’s Chicago Sun-Times.
Citing sources “with the Obama camp,” the Sun-Times report says Emanuel began to push for Jarrett to fill Obama’s seat “just days” after the Nov. 4 election.
That story also cites a source close to Emanuel admitting it is “possible” Emanuel discussed the appointment with Blagojevich chief of staff John Harris, and that a specific date for the appointment was given.
The Sun-Times’ revelations suggest that Emanuel was more deeply involved in discussions with Blagojevich and his staff than previously reported, and was more assertive in promoting a specific candidate.
Those conversations could have contributed to Blagojevich’s apparent belief that the Senate appointment held great political value.
“I’ve got this thing and it’s f**king golden,” Blagojevich told one of his advisers, according to the federal-wiretap transcripts. “I’m not just giving it up for f**king nothing.”
On Monday, Obama said that an internal review showed that his aides “did nothing inappropriate” concerning the search for his Senate replacement, but added that at the request of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald details of the review will not be released until next week.
Blagojevich and Harris were arrested Dec. 9 after Fitzgerald released a 76-page criminal complaint alleging they conspired to sell Obama’s vacant Senate seat, and pressured the Chicago Tribune to fire editorial writers who had been critical of Blagojevich.
Shortly after the complaint was released, speculation began regarding the possible involvement of Emanuel, who filled the Fifth District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives that Blagojevich vacated in 2002 when he decided to run for governor.
Although Obama has generally avoided commenting on the investigation, sources close to Emanuel appear to be preparing the media for further revelations. The Chicago Tribune has cited sources who say Emanuel called Harris’ cell phone on Nov. 1, and presented a list of Senate replacements acceptable to Obama. Jarrett’s name was reportedly on that list.
Jarrett initially expressed an interest in serving in the Senate, but withdrew her name after accepting a position as a White House senior adviser.
According to the Tribune, Emanuel subsequently spoke with Harris and added another name to the Obama-approved list: Lisa Madigan, the Democratic state attorney general who has taken the lead in trying to push Blagojevich from office since his arrest.
Fitzgerald’s criminal complaint states that many conversations recorded by the listening devices have not yet been made public. There have been many reports that conversations involving Emanuel were recorded.
MyFoxChicago.com reporter Craig Wall, for example, has cited “a reliable source familiar with the investigation” that Emanuel and Blagojevich had direct discussions about the Senate seat, and that those conversations may have been caught on federal wiretaps.
At one point, according to the wiretap transcripts, Blagojevich issues a profanity-laced tirade because he states the Obama administration is refusing to give him anything other than its “appreciation” in return for the Senate appointment.
On Wednesday, Obama senior adviser David Axelrod offered a staunch defense of Emanuel on MSNBC.
“I’ve known Rahm ... for a very long time. I've worked with him closely. He is someone who I think has enormous integrity and unparalleled skill. And I think we're lucky to have him.
"I have no concerns about Rahm. He is an enormous asset to us and will be an enormous asset to the country, as he has been in the Congress," Axelrod said.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 12:48 PM
By: David A. Patten Article Font Size
Incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel pushed Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to appoint longtime Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett to fill Barack Obama’s Senate seat, and even gave Blagojevich’s staff a deadline by which an appointment was expected, according to a report in today’s Chicago Sun-Times.
Citing sources “with the Obama camp,” the Sun-Times report says Emanuel began to push for Jarrett to fill Obama’s seat “just days” after the Nov. 4 election.
That story also cites a source close to Emanuel admitting it is “possible” Emanuel discussed the appointment with Blagojevich chief of staff John Harris, and that a specific date for the appointment was given.
The Sun-Times’ revelations suggest that Emanuel was more deeply involved in discussions with Blagojevich and his staff than previously reported, and was more assertive in promoting a specific candidate.
Those conversations could have contributed to Blagojevich’s apparent belief that the Senate appointment held great political value.
“I’ve got this thing and it’s f**king golden,” Blagojevich told one of his advisers, according to the federal-wiretap transcripts. “I’m not just giving it up for f**king nothing.”
On Monday, Obama said that an internal review showed that his aides “did nothing inappropriate” concerning the search for his Senate replacement, but added that at the request of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald details of the review will not be released until next week.
Blagojevich and Harris were arrested Dec. 9 after Fitzgerald released a 76-page criminal complaint alleging they conspired to sell Obama’s vacant Senate seat, and pressured the Chicago Tribune to fire editorial writers who had been critical of Blagojevich.
Shortly after the complaint was released, speculation began regarding the possible involvement of Emanuel, who filled the Fifth District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives that Blagojevich vacated in 2002 when he decided to run for governor.
Although Obama has generally avoided commenting on the investigation, sources close to Emanuel appear to be preparing the media for further revelations. The Chicago Tribune has cited sources who say Emanuel called Harris’ cell phone on Nov. 1, and presented a list of Senate replacements acceptable to Obama. Jarrett’s name was reportedly on that list.
Jarrett initially expressed an interest in serving in the Senate, but withdrew her name after accepting a position as a White House senior adviser.
According to the Tribune, Emanuel subsequently spoke with Harris and added another name to the Obama-approved list: Lisa Madigan, the Democratic state attorney general who has taken the lead in trying to push Blagojevich from office since his arrest.
Fitzgerald’s criminal complaint states that many conversations recorded by the listening devices have not yet been made public. There have been many reports that conversations involving Emanuel were recorded.
MyFoxChicago.com reporter Craig Wall, for example, has cited “a reliable source familiar with the investigation” that Emanuel and Blagojevich had direct discussions about the Senate seat, and that those conversations may have been caught on federal wiretaps.
At one point, according to the wiretap transcripts, Blagojevich issues a profanity-laced tirade because he states the Obama administration is refusing to give him anything other than its “appreciation” in return for the Senate appointment.
On Wednesday, Obama senior adviser David Axelrod offered a staunch defense of Emanuel on MSNBC.
“I’ve known Rahm ... for a very long time. I've worked with him closely. He is someone who I think has enormous integrity and unparalleled skill. And I think we're lucky to have him.
"I have no concerns about Rahm. He is an enormous asset to us and will be an enormous asset to the country, as he has been in the Congress," Axelrod said.
Auto Bail Out
Fw: Auto Bail Out, Abridged letter from Troy Clarke, President of General Motors
I can't believe the feedback I have gotten on it – I have customers asking if they can send it to everyone they know – I really just meant it to be a 2 line response, but found my spleen just flowing…Please do spread the word. Gregg
`````````````````````````````````````````
Abridged letter from Troy Clarke, President of General Motors - followed by a response from our son, Gregory Knox:
Dear Employee,
Next week, Congress and the current Administration will determine whether to provide immediate support to the domestic auto industry to help it through one of the most difficult economic times in our nation's history. Your elected officials must hear from all of us now on why this support is critical to our continuing the progress we began prior to the global financial crisis.......................As an employee, you have a lot at stake and continue to be one of our most effective and passionate voices. I know GM can count on you to have your voice heard.
Thank you for your urgent action and ongoing support.
Troy Clarke
President
General Motors North America
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Gregory Knox,
In response to your request to call legislators and ask for a bailout for the United States automakers please consider the following, and please also pass this onto Troy Clark, the president of General Motors North America for me..
You are both infected with the same entitlement mentality that has bred like cancerous germs in UAW halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping the nation, awaiting our new "messiah" to wave his magical wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time allowing our once great nation to keep "living the dream"…
The dream is over!
The dream that we can ignore the consumer for years while management myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time that our factories have been filled with the worlds most overpaid, arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded "laborers" without paying the price for these atrocities…and that still the masses will line up to buy our products
Don't tell me I'm wrong. Don't accuse me of not knowing of what I speak. I have called on Ford,GM ,Chrysler,TRW,Delphi,Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive OEM's and Tier ones for 3 decades now throughout the Midwest and what I've seen over the years in these union shops can only be described as disgusting.
Mr Clark, the president of General Motors, states:
There is widespread sentiment in this country, our government and especially in the media that the current crisis is completely the result of bad management. It is not…
You're right – it's not JUST management…how about the electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times, making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag ass…so they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time…for a job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour week
How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of scare tactics…for putting out too many parts on a shift…and for being too productive (mustn't expose the lazy bums who have been getting overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we?!?) Do you really not know about this stuff?!?
How about this great sentiment abridged from Mr. Clarke's sad plea:
over the last few years …we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors.
What the hell has Detroit been doing for the last 40 years?!?
Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and efficiency between us and them?
The K car vs. the Accord?
The Pinto vs. the Civic?!?
Do I need to go on?
We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the United States auto industry for decades.
Time to pay for your sins, Detroit.
I attended an economic summit last week where a brilliant economist, Alan Beaulieu surprised the crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of "bailout money". Yes, he said, this would cause short term problems, but despite what people like Troy Clark and the democratic house would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next day… and something else would happen…where there had been greedy and sloppy banks new efficient ones would pop up…that is how a free market system works…it does work…if we would let it work…
But for some reason we are now deciding that the rest of the world is right that capitalism doesn't work – that we need the government to step in and "save us"…save us, hell – we're nationalizing…and unfortunately too many of this once fine nations citizens don't even have a clue that this is what's really happening…but they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite sports teams…yeah – THAT'S important…
Does it occur to ANYONE that the "competition" has been producing vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades now in this country?...
How can that be ???
Let's see…
Fuel efficient…
Listening to customers…
Investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul…
Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr W Edwards Deming 4 decades ago
Ever increased productivity through quality, lean and six sigma plans…
Treating vendors like strategic partners, rather than like "the enemy"…
Efficient front and back offices…
Non union environment…
Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn't be telling anyone anything they really don't already know in their hearts
I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten yourself into – my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis, as I did at their age. I do for them what my parents did for me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) – I make them stand on their own two feet and accept the consequences of their actions and work them through.
Radical concept, huh…
Am I there for them in the wings? Of course – but only until such time as they need to be fully on their own as adults
I don't want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting and government.
Detroit and the United States need to pay for their sins.
Bad news people – it's coming whether we like it or not
The newly elected Messiah really doesn't have a magic wand big enough to "make it all go away" I laughed as I heard Obama "reeling it back in" almost immediately after the vote count was tallied…"we might not do it in a year…or in four…" where was that kind of talk when he was RUNNING for the office
Stop trying to put off the inevitable …
That house in Florida really isn't worth $750,000…
People who jump across a border really don't deserve free health care benefits…
That job driving that forklift for the big 3 really isn't worth $85,000 a year…
We really shouldn't allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe…
That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really shouldn't be living in that $485,000 home…
Let the market correct itself people – it will. Yes it will be painful, but it's gonna be painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the other side of it is a nation that appreciates what is has…and doesn't live beyond its means…and gets back to basics…and redevelops the work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the history of the world…and probably turns back to God.
Sorry – don't cut my head off, I'm just the messenger sharing with you the "bad news"
Gregory J Knox
President
Knox Machinery, Inc.
Franklin, Ohio 45005
I can't believe the feedback I have gotten on it – I have customers asking if they can send it to everyone they know – I really just meant it to be a 2 line response, but found my spleen just flowing…Please do spread the word. Gregg
`````````````````````````````````````````
Abridged letter from Troy Clarke, President of General Motors - followed by a response from our son, Gregory Knox:
Dear Employee,
Next week, Congress and the current Administration will determine whether to provide immediate support to the domestic auto industry to help it through one of the most difficult economic times in our nation's history. Your elected officials must hear from all of us now on why this support is critical to our continuing the progress we began prior to the global financial crisis.......................As an employee, you have a lot at stake and continue to be one of our most effective and passionate voices. I know GM can count on you to have your voice heard.
Thank you for your urgent action and ongoing support.
Troy Clarke
President
General Motors North America
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Gregory Knox,
In response to your request to call legislators and ask for a bailout for the United States automakers please consider the following, and please also pass this onto Troy Clark, the president of General Motors North America for me..
You are both infected with the same entitlement mentality that has bred like cancerous germs in UAW halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping the nation, awaiting our new "messiah" to wave his magical wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time allowing our once great nation to keep "living the dream"…
The dream is over!
The dream that we can ignore the consumer for years while management myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time that our factories have been filled with the worlds most overpaid, arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded "laborers" without paying the price for these atrocities…and that still the masses will line up to buy our products
Don't tell me I'm wrong. Don't accuse me of not knowing of what I speak. I have called on Ford,GM ,Chrysler,TRW,Delphi,Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive OEM's and Tier ones for 3 decades now throughout the Midwest and what I've seen over the years in these union shops can only be described as disgusting.
Mr Clark, the president of General Motors, states:
There is widespread sentiment in this country, our government and especially in the media that the current crisis is completely the result of bad management. It is not…
You're right – it's not JUST management…how about the electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times, making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag ass…so they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time…for a job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour week
How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of scare tactics…for putting out too many parts on a shift…and for being too productive (mustn't expose the lazy bums who have been getting overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we?!?) Do you really not know about this stuff?!?
How about this great sentiment abridged from Mr. Clarke's sad plea:
over the last few years …we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors.
What the hell has Detroit been doing for the last 40 years?!?
Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and efficiency between us and them?
The K car vs. the Accord?
The Pinto vs. the Civic?!?
Do I need to go on?
We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the United States auto industry for decades.
Time to pay for your sins, Detroit.
I attended an economic summit last week where a brilliant economist, Alan Beaulieu surprised the crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of "bailout money". Yes, he said, this would cause short term problems, but despite what people like Troy Clark and the democratic house would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next day… and something else would happen…where there had been greedy and sloppy banks new efficient ones would pop up…that is how a free market system works…it does work…if we would let it work…
But for some reason we are now deciding that the rest of the world is right that capitalism doesn't work – that we need the government to step in and "save us"…save us, hell – we're nationalizing…and unfortunately too many of this once fine nations citizens don't even have a clue that this is what's really happening…but they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite sports teams…yeah – THAT'S important…
Does it occur to ANYONE that the "competition" has been producing vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades now in this country?...
How can that be ???
Let's see…
Fuel efficient…
Listening to customers…
Investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul…
Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr W Edwards Deming 4 decades ago
Ever increased productivity through quality, lean and six sigma plans…
Treating vendors like strategic partners, rather than like "the enemy"…
Efficient front and back offices…
Non union environment…
Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn't be telling anyone anything they really don't already know in their hearts
I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten yourself into – my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis, as I did at their age. I do for them what my parents did for me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) – I make them stand on their own two feet and accept the consequences of their actions and work them through.
Radical concept, huh…
Am I there for them in the wings? Of course – but only until such time as they need to be fully on their own as adults
I don't want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting and government.
Detroit and the United States need to pay for their sins.
Bad news people – it's coming whether we like it or not
The newly elected Messiah really doesn't have a magic wand big enough to "make it all go away" I laughed as I heard Obama "reeling it back in" almost immediately after the vote count was tallied…"we might not do it in a year…or in four…" where was that kind of talk when he was RUNNING for the office
Stop trying to put off the inevitable …
That house in Florida really isn't worth $750,000…
People who jump across a border really don't deserve free health care benefits…
That job driving that forklift for the big 3 really isn't worth $85,000 a year…
We really shouldn't allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe…
That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really shouldn't be living in that $485,000 home…
Let the market correct itself people – it will. Yes it will be painful, but it's gonna be painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the other side of it is a nation that appreciates what is has…and doesn't live beyond its means…and gets back to basics…and redevelops the work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the history of the world…and probably turns back to God.
Sorry – don't cut my head off, I'm just the messenger sharing with you the "bad news"
Gregory J Knox
President
Knox Machinery, Inc.
Franklin, Ohio 45005
Rush Strikes Back at 'Turncoat' Colin Powell
On a Handheld Device? Visit mobile.newsmax.com Web Newsmax.com
Kessler:
Hispanic Leader: GOP Is in State of Emergency
Hirsen:
Paris Hilton's Blonde Spot
Jokes Links Advertise Cartoons Contact Shop Archives RSS
SIGN UP FOR FREE NEWS ALERTS
Home Newsmax.tv Money Inside Cover Newsfront U.S. Politics International Pundits Health Science & Technology Entertainment Election 2008
Latest: Over 5000 Troops In Iraq Get Calling Cards for Christmas — Read More Here
Rush Strikes Back at 'Turncoat' Colin Powell
Tuesday, December 16, 2008 12:07 PM
By: Phil Brennan
Talk show legend Rush Limbaugh wasted no time in answering Colin Powell after the former secretary of state said on CNN that the Republican Party should stop listening to the radio host.
On Monday, Limbaugh told his 20 million listeners that what Powell was doing was telling the GOP to throw them under the bus.
"I think Powell's premise is all wrong," Limbaugh said. "The Republican Party needs to stop listening to me. Basically, what that means is the Republican Party's gotta throw you overboard. The Republican Party can't win as long as it is defined by people like you and me, those of you in this audience."
Powell is a bit late in telling his party to stop listening to him, Limbaugh said, noting that the party had already stopped listening to him.
"The simple fact of the matter is, folks, what makes this funny to me is that the Republican Party's not listened to me in the last two years," he explained. "And you might even say in matters of policy and so forth, the Republican Party hasn't been listening to me for the last six years.
"And you might even say that the Republican Party is in the situation it's in precisely because of the people like Colin Powell and John McCain and others who have devised this new definition and identity of the party which is responsible for electing Democrats all over this country."
After recalling that Powell voted for Barack Obama, Limbaugh charged that the Bush administration's first secretary of state was upset because he said that Powell's endorsement of Obama was about race. "These things are supposed to go unsaid," Limbaugh said.
Limbaugh also took aim at GOP presidential candidate McCain.
"The Republican Party nominated Powell's perfect candidate. The guy's going after moderates, independents, Democrats, a guy who is not conservative at all, McCain, didn't stand up for much conservative [principles], and he's out there now saying he won't support Palin if she seeks the presidency again, or he might not."
Turning back to Powell, Limbaugh said Powell "insists that conservatives and Republicans support candidates who will appeal to minorities like I guess McCain who led the effort for amnesty. He insists that conservatives and Republicans move to the center like McCain, who calls himself a maverick for doing so.
"General Powell insists that conservatives and Republicans provide an open tent to different ideas and views, like I guess McCain, who repeatedly trashed Republicans and made nice with Democrats. I mean, their tent's big, they just don't want us in it."
Having been what Limbaugh described as Powell's ideal candidate, after McCain won the GOP at the last moment, Powell switched sides.
"Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries, Colin Powell waited 'til the last minute, when it would do the most damage to McCain and the Republicans, and endorsed Obama. And when I said it was largely about race, that's what set 'em all off. You're not supposed to say these kinds of things. This is supposed to go unspoken.
"Let me get this straight," Limbaugh said. "The guy who has supported the Republican candidate for president should be thrown out of the party. That would be me. But the guy who bolted and sabotaged the Republican nominee by endorsing the Democrat candidate should stay in and be part of the team that determines what the Republican Party is going to be. The turncoat, General Powell, is the one who the party is gonna listen to? McCain's a moderate. I supported McCain. Powell, who wants a moderate, did not support McCain."
Kessler:
Hispanic Leader: GOP Is in State of Emergency
Hirsen:
Paris Hilton's Blonde Spot
Jokes Links Advertise Cartoons Contact Shop Archives RSS
SIGN UP FOR FREE NEWS ALERTS
Home Newsmax.tv Money Inside Cover Newsfront U.S. Politics International Pundits Health Science & Technology Entertainment Election 2008
Latest: Over 5000 Troops In Iraq Get Calling Cards for Christmas — Read More Here
Rush Strikes Back at 'Turncoat' Colin Powell
Tuesday, December 16, 2008 12:07 PM
By: Phil Brennan
Talk show legend Rush Limbaugh wasted no time in answering Colin Powell after the former secretary of state said on CNN that the Republican Party should stop listening to the radio host.
On Monday, Limbaugh told his 20 million listeners that what Powell was doing was telling the GOP to throw them under the bus.
"I think Powell's premise is all wrong," Limbaugh said. "The Republican Party needs to stop listening to me. Basically, what that means is the Republican Party's gotta throw you overboard. The Republican Party can't win as long as it is defined by people like you and me, those of you in this audience."
Powell is a bit late in telling his party to stop listening to him, Limbaugh said, noting that the party had already stopped listening to him.
"The simple fact of the matter is, folks, what makes this funny to me is that the Republican Party's not listened to me in the last two years," he explained. "And you might even say in matters of policy and so forth, the Republican Party hasn't been listening to me for the last six years.
"And you might even say that the Republican Party is in the situation it's in precisely because of the people like Colin Powell and John McCain and others who have devised this new definition and identity of the party which is responsible for electing Democrats all over this country."
After recalling that Powell voted for Barack Obama, Limbaugh charged that the Bush administration's first secretary of state was upset because he said that Powell's endorsement of Obama was about race. "These things are supposed to go unsaid," Limbaugh said.
Limbaugh also took aim at GOP presidential candidate McCain.
"The Republican Party nominated Powell's perfect candidate. The guy's going after moderates, independents, Democrats, a guy who is not conservative at all, McCain, didn't stand up for much conservative [principles], and he's out there now saying he won't support Palin if she seeks the presidency again, or he might not."
Turning back to Powell, Limbaugh said Powell "insists that conservatives and Republicans support candidates who will appeal to minorities like I guess McCain who led the effort for amnesty. He insists that conservatives and Republicans move to the center like McCain, who calls himself a maverick for doing so.
"General Powell insists that conservatives and Republicans provide an open tent to different ideas and views, like I guess McCain, who repeatedly trashed Republicans and made nice with Democrats. I mean, their tent's big, they just don't want us in it."
Having been what Limbaugh described as Powell's ideal candidate, after McCain won the GOP at the last moment, Powell switched sides.
"Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries, Colin Powell waited 'til the last minute, when it would do the most damage to McCain and the Republicans, and endorsed Obama. And when I said it was largely about race, that's what set 'em all off. You're not supposed to say these kinds of things. This is supposed to go unspoken.
"Let me get this straight," Limbaugh said. "The guy who has supported the Republican candidate for president should be thrown out of the party. That would be me. But the guy who bolted and sabotaged the Republican nominee by endorsing the Democrat candidate should stay in and be part of the team that determines what the Republican Party is going to be. The turncoat, General Powell, is the one who the party is gonna listen to? McCain's a moderate. I supported McCain. Powell, who wants a moderate, did not support McCain."
Homosexual High School for Chicago
ONE MORE OF OBAMA'S CABINET MEMBERS WERE IS MY COUNTRY GOING????
CNSNews.com
Obama’s Choice for Education Secretary Approved Homosexual High School for Chicago
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
By Matt Hadro
(Courtesy of Chicago Public Schools)(CNSNews.com) - Chicago Public Schools CEO Arne Duncan, who President-elect Barack Obama announced yesterday as his choice to be Secretary of Education, supported and approved plans for a special public high school for homosexuals.
Social Justice High School, Pride Campus was one of a number of projected public schools that Duncan approved for Chicago. The school was planned to open its doors to all students while offering support for homosexual and lesbian students and including notable gay and lesbian figures in its curriculum.
Duncan’s opinion of the planned school appeared in a Sept. 11 article in the Chicago Tribune.
“Given how large and diverse we are, I think there’s a niche there,” he said. “I think there will be more gay students in the school than other schools, but I wouldn’t be surprised if less than half the students are gay.”
Duncan approved the school in October and then said that he would ask the Chicago Board of Education to approve it as well.
“We want to create great new options for communities that have been traditionally underserved,” the Chicago Tribune quoted Duncan as saying in an Oct 9 article. “If you look at national studies, you can see gay and lesbian students with high dropout rates . . . I think there is a niche there we need to fill.”
Laurie Higgins, a spokeswoman for the conservative Illinois Family Institute, expressed concern over the selection of Duncan to be the future Secretary of Education.
“Our concern, of course, is that he’s going to take these values -- these arguable, unproven theories about homosexuality and how public schools should treat it -- and using his power and position, affirm that in some kind of more nationwide proposals, or policies,” Higgins told CNSNews.com.
“Nowhere in there did Arne Duncan express anything other than approval for this school,” Higgins said of the discussions that preceded the city school board’s vote on the school proposal.
This means, Higgins said, that “he necessarily has taken a position on what homosexuality is -- the nature of it, and its morality. In order to have curricula that affirm homosexuality, you have to have come to these prior conclusions.”
Cindy Crane, executive director of the Gay-Straight-Alliance for Safe Schools, was highly supportive of Obama’s choice of Duncan for the position.
“We very much support these sort of efforts,” Crane told CNSNews.com, “so from that perspective, we’re very happy that he has been offered this position.”
“We’re pleased that someone who established himself as understanding the special challenges of LGBTs (Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgendered) or sexual minorities within his own state is now in a federal position and will be able to influence legislation and budgets on a federal level,” she continued.
While the school’s design team eventually removed the plan from consideration by the school board, Duncan reportedly thought the original plan for the high school was “absolutely interesting and intriguing,” according to the Tribune.
Duncan reportedly hasn’t given up on the homosexual high school.
“The design team will take time to reconsider those ideas and come back with a stronger proposal,” Duncan told the Tribune. “This is a very healthy part of the process. There’s plenty of time. It’s more important to get it right.”
The high school, which is known officially as “Social Justice High School -- Pride Campus,” would be an offshoot of an existing school in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago, called Social Justice High School.
Duncan also supported that school, as well as the communal efforts to bring the school about.
In 2001, 14 members of the Little Village community went on a hunger strike, after plans for a new school in Little Village were put on hold once again, reportedly because of budget constraints in the district.
Duncan rose to the position of CEO of Chicago Public Schools shortly after the 19-day hunger strike ended. Soon, $5 million was promised for the school’s design and preparation.
“I support them,” Duncan said of the hunger strikers. “I solved the thing. I actually have a hell of a lot of respect for them.”
Four small schools comprising Little Village High School opened in 2005 --one of which was Social Justice High School.
“These schools reflect one of the central goals of our new school creation strategy,” he reportedly remarked after the opening of Little Village High School. “We want to create the kind of schools that our community wants and needs
CNSNews.com
Obama’s Choice for Education Secretary Approved Homosexual High School for Chicago
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
By Matt Hadro
(Courtesy of Chicago Public Schools)(CNSNews.com) - Chicago Public Schools CEO Arne Duncan, who President-elect Barack Obama announced yesterday as his choice to be Secretary of Education, supported and approved plans for a special public high school for homosexuals.
Social Justice High School, Pride Campus was one of a number of projected public schools that Duncan approved for Chicago. The school was planned to open its doors to all students while offering support for homosexual and lesbian students and including notable gay and lesbian figures in its curriculum.
Duncan’s opinion of the planned school appeared in a Sept. 11 article in the Chicago Tribune.
“Given how large and diverse we are, I think there’s a niche there,” he said. “I think there will be more gay students in the school than other schools, but I wouldn’t be surprised if less than half the students are gay.”
Duncan approved the school in October and then said that he would ask the Chicago Board of Education to approve it as well.
“We want to create great new options for communities that have been traditionally underserved,” the Chicago Tribune quoted Duncan as saying in an Oct 9 article. “If you look at national studies, you can see gay and lesbian students with high dropout rates . . . I think there is a niche there we need to fill.”
Laurie Higgins, a spokeswoman for the conservative Illinois Family Institute, expressed concern over the selection of Duncan to be the future Secretary of Education.
“Our concern, of course, is that he’s going to take these values -- these arguable, unproven theories about homosexuality and how public schools should treat it -- and using his power and position, affirm that in some kind of more nationwide proposals, or policies,” Higgins told CNSNews.com.
“Nowhere in there did Arne Duncan express anything other than approval for this school,” Higgins said of the discussions that preceded the city school board’s vote on the school proposal.
This means, Higgins said, that “he necessarily has taken a position on what homosexuality is -- the nature of it, and its morality. In order to have curricula that affirm homosexuality, you have to have come to these prior conclusions.”
Cindy Crane, executive director of the Gay-Straight-Alliance for Safe Schools, was highly supportive of Obama’s choice of Duncan for the position.
“We very much support these sort of efforts,” Crane told CNSNews.com, “so from that perspective, we’re very happy that he has been offered this position.”
“We’re pleased that someone who established himself as understanding the special challenges of LGBTs (Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgendered) or sexual minorities within his own state is now in a federal position and will be able to influence legislation and budgets on a federal level,” she continued.
While the school’s design team eventually removed the plan from consideration by the school board, Duncan reportedly thought the original plan for the high school was “absolutely interesting and intriguing,” according to the Tribune.
Duncan reportedly hasn’t given up on the homosexual high school.
“The design team will take time to reconsider those ideas and come back with a stronger proposal,” Duncan told the Tribune. “This is a very healthy part of the process. There’s plenty of time. It’s more important to get it right.”
The high school, which is known officially as “Social Justice High School -- Pride Campus,” would be an offshoot of an existing school in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago, called Social Justice High School.
Duncan also supported that school, as well as the communal efforts to bring the school about.
In 2001, 14 members of the Little Village community went on a hunger strike, after plans for a new school in Little Village were put on hold once again, reportedly because of budget constraints in the district.
Duncan rose to the position of CEO of Chicago Public Schools shortly after the 19-day hunger strike ended. Soon, $5 million was promised for the school’s design and preparation.
“I support them,” Duncan said of the hunger strikers. “I solved the thing. I actually have a hell of a lot of respect for them.”
Four small schools comprising Little Village High School opened in 2005 --one of which was Social Justice High School.
“These schools reflect one of the central goals of our new school creation strategy,” he reportedly remarked after the opening of Little Village High School. “We want to create the kind of schools that our community wants and needs
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)