How Will President Obama Respond?

CNN.com reports that Iraqi President Nuri al-Maliki may request that the deadline to withdraw combat troops be extended if the security situation in Iraq is questionable.

The current US administration highly touted the deadlines as both a sign of progress in Iraq as well as one delivering on one of the campaign promises that President Obama made as a candidate for the US presidency.

This is a significant change of President al-Maliki's stand on this issue. He had frequently stated previously that he was inflexible on the U.S. withdrawal deadline. Many believed that this position was necessary to convince the Iraqi people that he was neither a puppet of the U.S. or that U.S. troops in Iraq were an occupying force.

Clearly, al-Maliki is concerned about the apparent inability the of Iraqi military and police forces to step up to the challenge of keeping the peace in a nation and region that has been historically plagued by sectarianism. Only the strong, repressive regime of Saddam Hussein had managed to quell it, through the use of swift and violent retribution against those trying to rebel against his regime or committing violent actions.

President Obama will be put into something of a bind should the Iraqi president make this request. If he refuses then he shows the Iraqi government that the U.S. will not stand by its allies over the long term. If he commits to keeping combat troops in Iraq longer then he will be seen as betraying many of the voters who helped elect him to the U.S. presidency because of his promise to get U.S. combat troops out of Iraq by the end of summer this year.

Democrat Candidate *May* be Trying to Steal "Tea Party" Label

On the Rush Limbaugh show yesterday a caller stated that the State of Nevada had authorized a new political party, the "Tea Party", to participate in the 2010 Senatorial election.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is fighting an uphill battle in his own state. President Obama has not been helping his Majority Leader by frequently stating that businesses shouldn't be blowing money on expensive conferences in "Sin City".

The national "Tea Party" movement, sparked by CNBC's Rick Santorelli's rant last year and then coalescing around Glenn Beck's 9/12 project, focuses on reducing federal government size, federal spending and the return of much of current federal functions to the states.

Interestingly, the secretary for the Nevada Tea Party is lawyer Barry Levinson, who is a registered Democrat. Their candidate for Senate is John Scott Ashjian. It has been noticed that he has only given e-mail interviews and barely returns phone calls. That does not sound like the response of an active campaigner fighting for an important Senate seat in a national election.

It is important to note that it is certainly possible that some fiscally conservative Democrats might find the Tea Party movement's mantra of responsible federal spending to be attractive to them. But I think it is very important that Nevada voters ask really hard questions about the legitimacy of Barry Levinson's Nevada "Tea Party" and the true intent of John Scott Ashjian.

Something else to consider is the effect a real third party candidate, especially a conservative candidate, could have on the election. If Harry Reid is in a standup fight against a the GOP candidate and a handful of other party candidates (Libertarian, Green, John-Birchers, etc.) then if the election were held today, he would lose by over 10 points. But you throw in a viable third party conservative, then you split the conservative vote and Harry Reid loses by only 1 point or possibly even wins it.

You Nevadans who oppose the progressive agenda, if you don't want 6 more years of Harry Reid then you better throw all of your electoral weight behind the GOP candidate or the "Tea Party" candidate (if he's proven to be a legit conservative), but not both.

John Murtha (D) 1932-2010

John Murtha, the Democrat Representative from Pennsylvania, passed away today (Jan 8 2010) at the age of 77 from complications arising from a gall-bladder surgery.

He was a Marine officer who served in the Vietnam War. As a Democratic representative he often steered funds not only to his home state and home town. He was an advocate for a strong national defense. This often brought him into conflict with his own party, which at times during the Bush administration tried to stop all military spending in an effort to shut down the Iraq war.

He gained notoriety for vehemently opposing the war in Iraq. Considering his strong pro-military position, this caught many in the political establishment by surprise.

He also gained a reputation for having never met a Congressional budget earmark that he didn't like and was under Congressional Ethics Committee investigation at the time of his death for certain earmarks he'd won for Pennsylvania firms.

Murtha's 2008 political opponent, William Russell, made this statement today: "Regardless of your political position, you always knew Jack had an immense love and loyalty to his family and the residents of the 12th Congressional District,'' Mr. Russell said."

Faith, Hope and Charity -- Glenn Beck Talks About These Virtues

Today on the Glenn Beck radio program at the beginning of his third hour, he talked about how he had spent the previous week closing the case on all the arguments that he had raised in 2009, but that he now wanted to look forward to 2010.

So imagine my surprise when he stated that going forward, he was going to be talking to America about "Faith, Hope and Charity". He specifically said during the second hour of his show "Faith, hope and charity is the direction we're going. Remember who you are and faith, hope and charity. And when you hear the way I define through the founders, how I define faith, hope and charity, everything's going to lock into place and you'll remember who we are and who you are and what you have to do."

I have no idea where Glenn Beck is going with this, but since he has obviously long studied the "Founders" of our government, I would not be surprised if he found these particular three words tied together through the Fraternity known as "Freemasonry" or that many of the "Founders" were proud members of the "Craft".

"Faith, Hope and Charity" are taught to every initiate who receives the 1st Degree of Freemasonry, also known as the "Entered Apprentice" Degree. They are considered by the Fraternity to be three of the most important virtues that a man can possess.

Faith gives us the ability to believe in the unseen. It is the basis of trust. Trust in our fellow man's word. More importantly, Faith is a necessary virtue for those who are obedient of God for without Faith it is impossible to believe in the Divine. And for those of us who are faithful we earnestly believe that the divine attributes of God beautifies man and gives us a worthy goal for good living by putting into execution those "divine" attributes.

Hope gives us the ability to believe that mankind can progress to a better condition than those that exist today. As a single class of people, Christians believe that God has restored to mankind the promise of eternal life through the sacrifice of his only begotten son. But notwithstanding, hope is what gives all men the ability to continue to try and be good even in the face of overwhelming evil and inequity in the world.

Charity, for Freemasons, is the greatest of the three. For charity is not more or less than the sacrifice by a man for the benefit of others. It is the embodiment of benevolence. The charitable man is the most like the divine because like the divine, he gives time, resources, or money to relieve the sorrowing or to benefit the disadvantaged. And charity will endure forever, unlike faith and hope. Faith ends when man is confronted with the truth of his belief. Hope ends when a man's goal is achieved. But charity uplifts mankind and the effects of charity and it's positive effect will outlive the charitable man.

Chris Matthews' Characterizes West Point Academy as "Enemy Camp" to President Obama.

Follow the weblink to a video of the relevant excerpt of Chris Matthews' commentary after President Obama's Afghanistan strategy speech of December 1, 2009:



Now... I'm a former Marine. My son is currently serving in the U.S. Marine Corps. I have a fair number of friends who either are serving or who have served in the U.S. armed forces. And I don't think it's news that these people are generally not friends of members of the Democratic party or persons who lean towards liberal/progressive ideology.

However, I think it is safe to say that neither the regular military establishment, or the military academies such as West Point (Army), Annapolis (Navy) or Colorado Springs (Air Force) have ever taken any action that would make it fair to label them as "enemies" of any President of the Unite States.

Just as the rhetoric against George Bush during his administration was way over the top, we still continue to see extreme partisan invective from both sides in this administration. Chris Matthews' rhetoric will continue to reinforce in the minds of his devotees that the military is openly antagonistic of the President and his policies, which is patently untrue.

If we look at recent American history, we can see that the U.S. Military establishment has reasons for being suspicious of Democratic presidents. President Carter canceled more military programs than any U.S. President since Harry Truman. While President Lyndon Johnson increased our commitment of troops in Vietnam, he purposefully did not try to build public support for the conflict because of his fear that support for our Vietnam commitments would take support from his "Great Society" social programs. Because of this, service personnel returning from duty in Vietnam were literally spit upon by anti-war protesters that Johnson did very little to control (although when he did, such as at Kent State, the result was disastrous). President Clinton, exulting in the Reagan-caused collapse of the Soviet Union, tried to leverage the so-called "peace dividend". The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the fall of the Shah of Iran and rise of militant fundamentalist Islam in Iran and elsewhere, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the 1998 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen all occurred during Democratic administrations. Many in the military believe that these relatively unpunished acts encouraged the greatest act of terrorism ever experienced, which were the September 11, 2001 assaults on the World Trade Center, Pentagon and possibly the Capitol building or the White House.

Only during the American Civil War did large elements of the regular military establishment openly defy the President of the United States. Otherwise, the U.S. military has been a devoted and faithful servant of the American people, directed by the legal orders of their President. To characterize West Point or any other military establishment as the camp of the enemy is absurd and an unwarranted accusation against the honorable men and women who learn the trade of war in order to preserve the peace and security of our people.

Politicians Should Really Look at David Letterman Today.

Last night (October 1, 2009), comedian/talk show host David Letterman admitted that he had a number of sexual relationships with female members of his production staff. He admitted this because of allegations that "48 Hours" producer Robert "Joe" Halderman last month gave a package to Letterman that contained threats that if he did not pony up $2 million dollars in "hush" money that Halderman would go public with that information. The prosecutor said that Mr. Halderman's package "contained clear, explicit and actual threats that indicate this defendant (wanted to) destroy the reputation of Mr. Letterman and to submit him and his family to humiliation and ridicule."

Mr. Letterman's admission on national TV last night created an end run around Mr. Halderman's alleged threat by making the information public before Mr. Halderman could. By executing his "pre-emptive first strike" Letterman also controlled the way in which the information was presented to the public in order to control the damage it would do.

Make no mistake that this episode is not over. Mr. Halderman will have to defend himself against an extortion charge. There will be inquiries as to whether Letterman used his position of authority on his production staff/crew to induce these women to submit to his sexual advances.

It should be noted that Letterman has only recently married and that he married one of the members of his production staff. It is reasonable to assume that these "incidents" occurred while he was still single so infidelity is not an issue. Of course, sex out of wedlock is still "adultery" but we don't really care about that anymore, do we?

Politicians take note!
Mr. Letterman ought not to be "sleeping" around with his staff. However, when it became clear that it was going to get into the public domain he diminished it's damage potential by admitting it and not hiding it from the public. Contrast this to the behavior of people like Larry Craig, John Edwards or Bill Clinton.

Goodbye Chrysler. It was nice doing business with you.

Today, CNN Money reports that Italian auto manufacturer Fiat, which bought ailing Chrysler this year, believes that the situation at Chrysler is "more dire than first thought". The bringer of gloom was Mr. Sergio Marchionne, Fiat's CEO.

"We were surprised by how little had been done in the past 24 months."

Industry insiders, such as Todd Turner of Car Concepts Automotive Research found Mr. Marchionne's comment surprising. "I'm a little surprised that he was surprised."

Let's lay it out.

In 1998, Chrysler Corporation was the new U.S. automotive manufacturing prodigy which had joined with Daimler-Benz. Chrysler had an impressive stable of trucks, Jeeps and minivans. Innovative designs like the PT Cruiser, the Chrysler 300c and the 3rd generation Dodge Ram trucks were selling and keeping their customers happy.

But the merger turned into something of a bad marriage. The disciplined and formal German business structure meshed badly with Chrysler's more innovative and somewhat random business approach. Additionally, the movement of technology from Daimler to Chrysler was very slow in getting implemented. An example: The innovative Chrysler Crossfire was designed upon the 1998-2003 mechanicals (chassis, drivetrain and suspension) of the Mercedes-Benz SLK230K. This decision was reportedly made by Stuttgart because the Benz car was being dramatically redesigned for 2004.

For some reason which I do not understand the quality of Chrysler products plummeted drastically during this same period. Cars that looked innovative and interesting on the outside were found to have bland or just plain odd interiors. And customers caught on as more and more Chrysler products found their way quickly into repair shops. A simple comparison of first year vs. subsequent year sales for same models show an average 60% drop in sales.

Innovation disappeared on mechanicals. The Chrysler 300, the Dodge Charger, the Dodge Magnum and yes, even the new Dodge Challenger are all based on the same chassis and suspension systems.

Why these decisions were made will be for the history writers to chronicle, but my guess will be that to keep the stockholders happy Chrysler was forced to trim manufacturing costs such as research and development while trying (vainly) to leave the auto union and retirees pensions alone.

In my lifetime, I have owned vehicles from Chrysler than any other maker. These include the 1993 Dodge Dynasty, 1996 Dodge Ram 1500 pickup, 2001 Dodge Ram 3500 dually pickup and finally a 2006 Chrysler Crossfire (vroom! vroom!).

As Shakespeare so eloquently put it, "All good things must come to an end."

Putin is Russia's Most Powerful Man. Any Questions?

Financial Times today reported that Russian Prime Minister may run for President in 2012. Wow. Who could of seen this coming? I'm just saying?

President Dmitriy Medvedev has attempted to carve out a political image that is distinguishable from Putin's, his predecessor. He recently has indicated that Russia's government would be more open and accessible under his administration than under Putin's. As has been widely reported, Putin is a former KGB man and although he does not desire a resurgence of the old Communist Party he clearly desires a more authoritarian, centralized government than Mr. Medvedev.

Like many of the nations of the Middle-east, Russia is a nation whose population does not know how to take advantage of a true republican or democratic form of government. Russians are more comfortable under a stronger government that takes more responsibility for the basic needs of it's citizens. Many Russians, especially older ones, are unhappy with the rampant crime and runaway mega-capitalism and perceived lost of national prestige that existed during Boris Yeltsin's administration. They are therefore happier with Putin and Medvedev in charge, where Russia is once again flexing it's muscles abroad as well as nationalizing some of it's private industry.

My prediction: While he will not claim the title, I believe that Mr. Putin will do everything he can in order to garner the same level of power that the Czars ("Kings") had in order to create, in his eyes, an orderly, powerful and peaceful united Russia.

ACORN Contradictions in Tax-Evasion/Prostitution Advice Scandal.

Jim O'Keefe released a video through www.biggovernment.com that shows himself and a young, attractive woman disguised as a pimp and prostitute trying to get advice from a pair of ACORN "community organizers" on how to buy a house in order to lodge over a dozen young females from El Salvador. During the conversation, the undercover couple let the following "facts" be known to the ACORN workers:

1. Their business was prostitution.
   
2. They would be housing 13 young women from El Salvador.
3. They weren't paying income taxes.
4. If they were to start paying taxes, what should they claim in terms of income, occupation and dependents.

The response from the ACORN representatives is truly stunning. They tell the undercover couple that they can file under the classification of "Performing Arts". They tell them that since the 13 young girls don't have Social Security numbers, don't worry about them. They completely ignore the implication that the girls are probably illegal aliens, that they are underage, and that they will be working in their "business". The advice received concerning how to avoid paying taxes given is "Don't file." Even though the undercover couple indicate that their annual income would be about $96,000, they are told to declare $9,600 in income since they are probably doing mostly a cash business.

If it weren't as grotesque as I've just described it, this would be hilarious. But it gets better.

On Wednesday, ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson said "The portrayal is false and defamatory and an attempt at 'gotcha' journalism." The national headquarters also stated that there would be no further comment until they saw the "entire" video. This notwithstanding the "entire" video is currently available for download at www.biggovernment.com right now and has been since September 5th.

On Friday it was reported by ACORN Maryland chapter leader Stuart Katzenberg that the two employees were fired because "they did not meet ACORN's standard of professionalism." Whoa. I though ACORNs position was that the video was misleading, "false and defamatory". Yet two employees were fired? Seems contradictory to me.

Oh wait, it get's even better! (Or sicker, depending on your point of view.) Fox News is now reporting that in addition to the Baltimore office being "stung" by Jim O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, they managed to pull the same stunt off at an ACORN office in Washington, D.C. as well. In this NEW tape Lavernia Boone, an ACORN "mortgage consultant" and Sherana Boone, an ACORN "housing employee" (are they related?) allegedly give the undercover couple similar advice as the Baltimore office did.

So... I think we've got some contradictions here.
ACORN believes the videotape is "false and defamatory" and yet two "community organizers" lost their jobs because of their "unprofessional standards". ACORN would also have you believe that the Baltimore employees were part-time temporary help and that no senior staffers were in the office at the time. This is clearly intended to get people to believe that the situation was unique to "Tonya" and "Shira" at the Baltimore office and that they were acting beyond ACORN rules and regulations. And yet... here comes the DC video! And what advice does the DC office give? The exact same advice as in Baltimore. To wit; lie on your taxes, tell the kids to shutup, keep your prostitution business low-key or somebody will get nosey and call "Fox".

Update to Baltimore ACORN Faux pas.

Oh yeah, one more thing...

Where the hell is the main-stream media on this? At 6:19 PM Eastern today (September 10th, 2009), the following news organizations were NOT reporting this story, even though it actually broke on www.biggovernment.com last Saturday:

1) www.msnbc.msn.com
2) www.abcnews.go.com
3) www.cbsnews.com
4) www.nytimes.com
5) www.latimes.com

Only Fox News is running with this story, largely through the efforts of the Glenn Beck show (5PM Eastern), who in turn got this information from Andrew Breitbart's new website www.biggovernment.com. That's one heckuva scoop, Mr. Breitbart.

Other than that, most of the other news outlets that had picked up on the story were blogs and smaller local news sites (Phoenix, Baltimore, both were Fox affiliates).

And the politicians and left elites are wondering why those of us who are either moderate or conservative have only the radio and Fox News to inform us about very serious issues like this one.

More about ObamaCare: August 27, 2009

ITEM 1:
According to a Fox News report, both ABC and NBC news are refusing to run a national ad critical of Pres. Obama's health care reform plan. The ad was created by the League of American Voters, which describes themselves as a "national non-partisan and 501(c)4 non-profit organization created to keep our elected officials in Washington and across the nation accountable." The ad features a neurosurgeon who admonishes that the current health care reform plan will affect the U.S. industry much like the rapidly failing public single-payer systems in both the United Kingdom and Canada. Quotes from important newspapers scroll across the screen, proclaiming dire consequences if the current plan is enacted into law.

An ABC News spokesperson responded to criticism for this decision by stating that "The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue."

Really? So when ABC essentially gave an entire day to discuss the plan with Preisdent Obama back in June, when did ABC plan on giving the same amount of time to the loyal opposition to provide their views on this complex legislation. This is an example of where the "Fairness Doctrine" could certainly be applied to broadcast TV as opposed to just AM talk radio. 33 seconds vs. most of primetime for a day. To me, it still seems that ABC is in President Obama's hip pocket.

ITEM 2
I read on Breitbart.com that Representative Pete Stark (D-CA), head of the Health subcommittee on the House Ways and Means committee has declared that the "Blue Dogs" (a fiscally conservative faction of roughly 50 Democratic representatives) are "brain dead" and "just want to make trouble" with their opposition to President Obama's health care reform plan. He went on to essentially accuse the Blue Dogs of siding with big-money insurance companies and health care providers in order to "raise money". The political discourse in this country has absolutely gone to the dogs (pun intended). Why can't either side of this debate admit that the other side believes what they want is the best without slandering their character or intentions? Sure... the constituency for the Blue Dogs has nothing better to do than send representatives to Congress who just want to make trouble. I find it interesting that the Blue Dogs are fiscal conservatives. Maybe they have not yet been convinced that ObamaCare won't actually cause our federal budget deficit to skyrocket to the point where we might actually owe more money in debt than our gross national domestic product. And this at a time when foreign countries are actively considering dumping U.S. dollars in favor of a new "world currency" or a fund made up of several currencies, not just U.S. dollars.

ITEM 3
TimesOnline.co.uk: Apparently the Democrats, realizing that the August recess has only shown a weakening of public support for Pres. Obama's health care reforms, are trying to capitalize on the recent passing of Senator Edward "Ted" M. Kennedy (D-MA). Senator Robert Byrd suggested the health care reform plan (currently the United States Nationalized Health Care Act) should "bear his name", while Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) opined "Ted Kennedy’s dream of quality healthcare for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration.” While there is no question that the Chappaquiddick... er ... Massachusetts senator made public health care a major policy priority during his tenure as a elected servant, isn't this getting just a bit operatic?

ITEM 4
This is from CBSnews.com. ObamaCare would require that the IRS (yes, THOSE guys) would be required to divulge taxpayer identity information to include filing status, modified adjusted gross income, number of dependents and "other information as is prescribed by" regulation. This information will then be used by the Health Choices Commissioner (a new position mandated by USNHC (ObamaCare)) to determine if someone qualifies for "affordability credits". Don't believe, go to Section 431(a) of the bill. I'd give you the page number, but this thing keeps getting rewritten so the section keeps moving. This is also restated in Section 245(b)(2)(A). Uh, wait a minute... I think I remember reading that the Privacy Act requires that agencies get their information directly from individual, not from other agencies. This would mean that thousands upon thousands of government employees would suddenly have very easy access to some of your most important information, namely, your income. What's to prevent those agencies from using this information in other ways?

Well, that's enough for today... oh yeah, and still no addition of Tort reform in USNHC. Which absurdly brings me to DNC Chairman Howard Dean's opinion on that subject.

ITEM 5
From SFExaminer.com: SFExaminer reporter Mark Tapscott accurately described this slip as "incredibly candid" when he reported on the following. At a townhall meeting hosted by Jim Moran (D-VA), an audience member asked why the legislation does nothing to cap medical malpractice class-action lawsuits against doctors and medical institutions (Tort reform). DNC Chairman Howard Dean, himself a former physician, responded by saying "The reason tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on. And that's the plain and simple truth." Well, great. So it's ok to take on doctors, hospitals, clinics, pharamceutical companies, but those trial lawyers just FIGHT TOO HARD so we'll not take them on, and incidentally, cut U.S. national spending on healthcare by possibly as much as two-hundred million dollars as the result of smaller malpractice insurance premiums and outrageous settlement amounts. Incidentally, you WERE aware that the most common prior occupation for a member of the U.S. House of Representatives is "lawyer", right?

"Grassroots" vs. "Astroturf"

April 15th, 2009: During an interview on KTUV news in San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) who is the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives declared "This [tea party] initiative is funded by the high end — we call call it astroturf, it’s not really a grassroots movement. It’s astroturf by some of the wealthiest people in America to keep the focus on tax cuts for the rich instead of for the great middle class."

Again on August 6th, 2009 she restated to a reported who asked if the angry town hall meetings were "Astroturf" she responded by saying that she thought they were, "You be the judge."

Today (August 25th, 2009), the Politico.com reports that Democratic National Committee through it's organizing arm "Organizing for America" are going to push through 500+ "events" between Wednesday and September 8th when Congress returns from the Break. “In these last few weeks of recess we want to demonstrate the energy, passion and commitment that the American people have to health care reform so that when members return after Labor Day they know that they can turn their attention to getting this done because they have the backing of the American people,” said DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse.

Is this "astroturf", Mrs. Speaker?

Healthcare reform: Case Study #1

Mitchell Wiener was the first person in New York City to succumb to the H1N1 virus, popularly called the "Swine Flue". Mr. Wiener was a principal for I.S. 238.

His family has now filed a lawsuit against New York City and associated Health and Education departments. The complaint stipulates that the defendants directly caused Mr. Wiener's death by failing to close the school when H1N1 was first detected in New York City.

The amount? $40 million dollars.

Now I will leave it to the New York City justice system to determine whether or not NYC and it's departments are guilty of this accusation. But $40 MILLION dollars? With all due respect to the family of Mr. Wiener, can we really say that for the duration of the remainder of his expected life-span that he would have produced $40 million dollars in income? These exorbitant settlements contribute significantly to the cost of health care in the United States because doctors, nurses, hospitals, clinics, and pharmaceutical companies must purchase high cost malpractice and errors and omissions insurance to protect themselves against these kinds of lawsuits.

Why is it in all of the health care debate that class-action lawsuits, tort reform and frivolous lawsuit reform is not even mentioned, much less debated and discussed? There are some that say that as much as 1 in every 6 dollars spent on health care in the U.S. goes to some form of insurance or legal defense. Considering that Americans pay more money on health care than any other single category of expense, that is a LOT of money.

I will not even consider supporting health care reform that does not include tort reform or place some kind of limit (based on a formula) on the amount of compensation that can be sought in a lawsuit.

Cash For Clunkers a Preview of Things to Come.

There are a whole lot of things about "Cash for Clunkers" that I don't like.

One thing I don't like about it is that they are basically taking $3,500 or $4,500 from the average American taxpayer and basically GIVE IT to somebody else. That is redistribution of wealth, period. That's socialism.

However, what I hate even more is the fact that this program, which was estimated to run through November 1 of this year, is already being cancelled because it's running out of money.

What I hate even more is that this morning, Congress indicated that they will add 2 billion to the program. That's more socialism.

What I hate the most... Our government couldn't even manage this relatively simple little program predictably or competently. Yet that same government thinks that they can somehow rush into law a seriously complicated health care reform that is arguably flawed and definitely not fully understood by anybody, and expect us to believe that they can manage this program any better than Cash for Clunkers.

Let's just see. Congress originally estimated that the Cash for Clunkers would run from August to November at a cost of $1 billion. One week into the program (1/12th of the total program period), they had to add $2 billion more to meet the demand.

Let's extrapolate that to the health care overhaul...

Retired Navy Pilot Highlights Danger of Old Age.

Read this: Article.

Virginian pilot John Pendergrast, a retired U.S. Naval Aviator, created havoc in the controlled airspace of John F. Kennedy airport when he wandered into the landing approach for runway 22L while trying to figure out where the heck he was.

He was trying to find Republic Airport in Long Island, while flying an home-built experimental Ryan RV-7A.

It is clear from maps provided of the blundering pilot's aerial escapades that he must have been flying under visual flight rules and mistook Long Island for Captree Bridge island, where he then intended to turn north.

Just like when a lost person drives a car, when that person finally realizes that they are lost, they often do crazy and unsafe things while driving that can create havoc for the others that are sharing the roadways.

What is extremely surprising is that as a former naval aviator (we don't know the type of aircraft he flew, could be anything from propeller cargo aircraft to high-speed jet fighters) he should be highly experienced with the use of navigational aids as well as communication protocols when flying through controlled airspace.

Could it be that Mr. Pendergrast is simply too old to be permitted to fly? How else do you explain the amateurish mistakes made by a man who likely has thousands of hours of flight time in highly controlled environments. To compound his error he circled through the approach lanes for JFK airport in an attempt to get his bearings. In doing so he forced controllers with whom he was NOT in communication to divert several aircraft and an Eva Boeing 747 had to abort a landing approach.

Fortunately, the NY police department sent a helicopter to guide him down to Republic Airport, where he was able to land his aircraft safely without further incident. What is likely to be much less fortunate is that I would expect that his pilot's license will be either revoked or he will be cited and heavily fined for essentially putting the lives of hundreds of people in serious jeopardy.

If you look at national statistics with regards to who causes car crashes, we find that the most common offenders are teenagers with very little time behind the wheel of a car. This is followed by elder citizens, who have lost the motor skills or eye-hand coordination to safely operate a car. It has been my opinion for a long time that anybody above 59 years of age should be required to take a driving test every two years. Remember: Driving a car or piloting an aircraft is a privilege, not a right. Unsafe drivers need to be taken off the streets or out of the air. The consequences are simply too tragic to ignore these statistics.

President Obama Oversteps His Bounds.

President Obama's background, like most U.S. politicians, is law. Prior to his political career he was a lawyer. A Constitutional lawyer if you read his own bios.

So why would a highly-regarded lawyer inject himself into a situation that has not yet even resolved itself yet?

The situation is between Professor Gates of Harvard university, an African-American (how I hate hyphenation) who was arrested just outside his own home for disorderly conduct. The arresting officer was James Crowley. Officer Crowley was responding to a report of a crime in progress. Apparently, Prof. Gates may have locked himself out of his own house (whom among us haven't done that once or three times in our lives?) and was trying to force his way in. This gave the appearance of a break-in, which some concerned neighbor responded to by reporting the activity.

When Officer Crowley showed up, Prof. Gates had managed to get into his home. According to Officer Crowley Prof. Gates initially refused to show his identification and immediately started yelling imprecations at the officers.

We don't really know the facts of the case. But what I do know, as a WHITE man, is that when a police officer asks for your ID, you hand it to them. And you do so in a non-threatening manner. Prof. Gates' behavior, if it is as documented in the police report, would only heighten suspicion amongst the officers on the scene.

Nonetheless, President Obama has now stated from the bully pulpit of the White House that this officer "acted stupidly". I seriously doubt that our Fearless Leader has all the facts of this case. And considering his long law experience, I find it fascinating that he would make such a perjorative statement prior to the initiation, much less conclusion of any investigation that the authorities might conduct.

Is there racism in America? You bet. There is much intolerance on both sides of this debate and it may never be fully solved. But I still say that we can't be doing too badly when we have persons of color currently sitting in the White House, the Attorney General's office and other high positions of government.

And as for Prof. Gates. A lesson in how to respond when stopped by a police officer might be in order.

The World is Different Without Michael Jackson

As I've been working on my computer today I had tuned in my favorite talk radio channel and listened, not entirely willingly, to the memorial service held at the Los Angeles Staples Arena for Michael Jackson.

I was entirely surprised by the nature of the event, for it was an event to be sure.

It was in good taste. It was a who's who of R&B stars present and past who performed brilliant, soulful and touching pieces of music in honor of their deceased compatriot. There were a number of speakers who shared their memories, declared their love, or attested to Michael's universalist nature and his ability to break down barriers and unite all peoples with his music. I was reminded that Michael gave more to philanthrophy than any other popular recording artist in history. He made HIV aids and starving children in Africa his own concerns.

I was surprised.

I was moved.

I was saddened. Saddened that this great entertainer went down a path that troubled many of us. Who can come away from Michael's scandalous behaviour amongst children visiting his Neverland Ranch? Or the tremendously wierd transfiguration of his facial appearance from a appealing and handsome young man to a semi-robotic visage, repleat with painted lips and misproportioned nose and chin?

And yet... I wonder. Because we expect people to grow up we gave his Neverland Ranch and his interaction with children on their level as bizarre, wierd or just plain dangerous.

But if you look at Michael Jackson's philanthropies, the lives he improved with his music and his message, the children that he uplifted at his Neverland Ranch and in countless countries in Africa, maybe the "Man in the Mirror" that Michael always saw was the innocent child trying to get along in a caustic and suspicious adult world.

So for once, I will set aside my evil neo-con self and I will make an effort to try and see Michael Jackson in the eyes of the children and fans that loved him. What would the world be like if more people looked at the world through the eyes of Peter Pan? I suspect that I would like that place very much.

Palin Quits.

Governor Sarah Palin announced on July 3 that she will step down as Alaska's governor. She claimed she wanted to spare her family from continuing media-spawned attacks on her and her family's character as well as her state from more "pain and expense"as ongoing ethics investigations continue to shadow her administration.

The "chatting classes" speculated all weekend on what this might mean. Is this her opening gambit for a 2012 Presidential election run? Is she seeking to hide from an FBI investigation?

Well, for me, it simply means that she is a quitter. I say this very sadly because I thought she was the only true conservative voice in the McCain campaign. But politics in America is pain. Politicians and regrettably, their families are targets of malicious lies and super focused scrutiny that practically no household could endure. She knew this when she was Mayor of Wasilla, and she knew it when she took the Governor's Oath of Office.

When she accepted the nomination and later the actual vote of the people of Alaska she made a contract with them that she would see this through. She has now welched on that contract.

I cannot in good conscience vote for a candidate who has proven that they will not see it through to the bitter end. George Bush, for all of his perceived faults, stuck to his principles right to the last day of his administration.

Good bye, Sarah Palin. Don't count on my vote in 2012.

What's Wrong with our Arizona Schools?

The Goldwater Institute, a prestigious political think-tank organization centered in Arizona conducted an interesting test. They culled 10 questions from the 100 question citizenship test (USCIS) that all immigrants must take and pass with at least a 60% in order to qualify for U.S. citizenship. According to the Institue, the average immigrant passes this test with a 92.4% score. That means they only miss, on average, 8 of the 100 questions on the test.

Through a private research firm, they then administered this test to three groups of high-school age students in Arizona by telephone. They had 1,134 participants. The questions were not multiple choice. The participant had to provide the correct answer from memory.

Here are the questions:
1) What is the supreme law of the land?
2) What do we call the first ten amendment to the (U.S) Constitution?
3) What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress?
4) How many Justices are on the (U.S.) Supreme Court?
5) Who wrote the Declaration of Independence?
6) What ocean is on the East Coast of the United States? <== I'm not convinced this is a civics question.
7) What are the two major political parties in the United States?
8) We elect a U.S. Senator for how many years?
9) Who was the first (U.S.) President?
10) Who is in charge of the executive branch?

I blew question 8. I got the other 9 correct. But Arizona high-school students. Not one student answered correctly more than 7 of 10. Here's how Arizona students did:
Question 1: Only 30% could answer this question correctly.
Question 2: Only 25% could answer this question correctly.
Question 3: 23% got this one right.
Question 4: 9% knew this answer. You've gotta be kidding me!
Question 5: Just over 25% knew the correct answer to this one. Again, you've gotta be kidding me!
Question 6: Surprisingly, over 40% of the students interviewed still got this one wrong.
Question 7: Slightly less than half of the students could not identify the two major political parties in the United States.
Question 8: I fall into the 85% who got this one wrong.
Question 9: Only 27% got this one right. Can you believe that 1.6% actually said that "Barack Obama" was the first president of the United States?
Question 10: 74% of those interviewed do not know who is in charge of the Executive branch of the Federal government.

Only 3.5% of Arizona high-school students that took this telelphone survey scored 60% or better on this test, which was only a subset of the 100 questions that must be correctly answered by an immigrant applying for U.S. Citizenship. And I suspect that the other questions are probably harder and more specific than the slow-ball 10 questions listed above.

Civics are not being taught in our schools. Period. End of story. How can young people be expected to think and act like Americans when they are not being taught how?

Yet I bet if you would ask 100 people on the street what Michael Jackson's most popular and best selling album was, I bet over 90% would answer "Thriller" (which would be correct.)

Our forefather's correctly identified that public schools were absolutely necessary in order to preserve the precious freedoms that we have been gifted with, by the brilliance of extraordinary men and the priceless sacrifice of American blood on numerous battlegrounds of freedom. Ben Franklin, in answering the question "What sort of government has been created?" answered "A Republic, if you can keep it.".

A primary objective of our public schools has been, until recently, the teaching of American civics. It appears that this objective has either been entirely suborned from the American public school system, or it is considered of no great worth by those responsible for administering our public schools. In either case, the result will be the same. An uneducated and untutored electorate, being ignorant of their rights as granted to them by the U.S. Constitution, will be unable to prevent those rights from being eroded away by those who wish for power to gravitate from us, the people to the professional ruling class and the elites (money, industrialists, or progressives makes no difference).

In conclusion, I will quote from the executive summary of this study which was entitled "Freedom From Responsibility: A Survey of Civic Knowledge Among Arizona High School Students".

"In the end more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished was freedom was from responsiblity, then Athens ceased to be free."

Paid Vacation Act of 2009!

Representative Alan Grayson of Flordia (district 8) today is going to introduce legislation on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

What do you think it is?

Cap in Trade? Funding to fix our crumbling infrastructure? Tort reform to reduce the cost of health care? Legislation to deal with the problem of the Guantanamo Bay Camp Delta detainees?

Nope.

He is introducing the "Paid Vacation Act", which will require companies that employ more than a certain number of employees to provide those employees with one or two weeks of mandatory paid vacation.

Grayson's district includes Orlando, Florida. This happens to be the location of Walt Disney World, the "Happiest Place on Earth". Hmmm. Nobody thinks that this has anything to do with the legislation, does it?

Let me get this straight. Companies are going bankrupt in record numbers, the ranks of the unemployed have swollen to OVER three million (9.2% as of May 15), margins between loss and profit are shrinking faster than the American dollar, and Mr. Grayson wants to FORCE employers to PAY for one or two week vacations for their entire workforce.

Do you want to guess which political party this guy is affiliated with?