Write Your Congresscritter

I just sent the letter below to my Congressman, John Campbell:

Dear Congressman Campbell;

I am writing you to express my opposition to the US attacking Syria in any form during this latest round of arm flexing and chest thumping.

While I’m not convinced that it was Assad who used chemical weapons against Syrian civilians, it is really immaterial who did so at this point. The real reason for my opposition is that I fail to understand what our national interests are that would precipitate attacking Syria when they have made no overt threats towards the US that I am aware.

I certainly agree that using WMDs against civilians is abhorrent. But after suffering some 100,000 causalities in the Syrian civil war so far, an additional 500-1,000 causalities shouldn’t be a game changer, resulting in the US engaging its military might against a two-bit dictator (who, I remind you, has been feted by none other than Mr. Kerry, Ms. Pelosi and Ms. H. Clinton).

I follow the news fairly closely and don’t depend on the NYT or ABC to keep me updated. It has been pretty clear that the rebel forces in Syria have been taken over by Islamist radicals. Should Assad fall, Israel, Jordan and others will be in much greater danger that they have ever been. If we attack Syria, we may help bring about just such disaster.

I implore you Congressman … do not support an attack against Syria and bring even more unrest to a region ready to explode all on its own.

Thank you!

Syria – The Case For and Against Attack

John Kerry, Chuck Hagel and General Dempsey have completed their testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and it appears they have relatively strong backing, at least from the majority of the committee members. The most compelling arguments Kerry could raise for a military attack on Syria seem to be:

  • The US cannot allow chemical weapons to be used on civilians,
  • If the US allows Assad to get away with using chemical weapons this time, it is 100% certain Assad will use them again,
  • Iran will see we didn’t make Assad pay a price and they will be free to continue building nukes, and
  • a bunch of other things are absolutely certain to happen but I can’t tell you what because… top secrets and other stuff!

Hagel was his usual ineffective self and said nothing worth quoting, and General Dempsey was about as non-committal as anyone can get without causing the Surgeon General to rush out and check his pulse (though he did inject the only humor into the hearing).

For anyone to use chemical weapons against a civilian population requires unmitigated contempt of human life. But then where in the Middle East does one find anyone who values the life of all humans? Oh, right! Israel. Elsewhere, if you aren’t a member of the local tribe/family, your loss, regardless of method, is nothing more than another flea falling off Mahamood’s camel. In fact, much of the rest of the world has little regard for what we Westerners refer to as human rights (which BTW, is a Western concept).

So only the West cares if 1,400 men, women and children were snuffed with some weapon Russia sells to all it’s client states because, cash money.  Besides, they only added another 1% to the numbers killed by other, more conventional weapons in Syria’s civil war so far. Were their lives not as important as the first 100,000 Syrians that were killed in the old fashioned way with a bullet in the head, blown to smithereens, or just crushed beneath a tank?

We haven’t even raised the possibility that the chemical weapons were in fact used not by Assad or his troops, but by the “rebels” who very well could have obtained CW during one of their successful battles against Assad’s troops. The “rebels” have much more to gain from the US attacking Assad’s forces than Assad does.

Another possibility is that it wasn’t in fact sarin gas that was used, but some other agent. Witnesses claimed to have smelled a very strong odor around the site of the attacks. Sarin gas is odorless and colorless. Read this for a creditable discussion of the “rebels” being the source of the CW attack.

So let’s go back to Kerry’s claims that he can 100% guarantee Assad, or Iran, or Kim Jung Un, will do something that Maude in Dubuque, Iowa or Gladys in Decatur, Mississippi will not approve of. Wasn’t the current Secretary of State, John Forbes Kerry, the same guy who testified before a Senate hearing a long ago about US troops routinely cutting off the heads and genitals of men, women and children in some far-away foreign land? And wasn’t he also the recipient of one or two Purple Heart Medals for wounds received in battle that have subsequently been questioned by his former fellow service members? Now that I think about it, he was the same guy who voted for the war in Iraq … before he voted against it. Yeah! That’s the same guy.

If John Kerry told me that the date today was Sept 3rd, 2013 I would want to look it up myself. There are untrustworthy politicians, then there’s John Kerry. He’s not just untrustworthy, he isn’t very smart either. Know one could know with any degree of certainty what Assad will or won’t do if the US ultimately decides not to conduct whatever  sort of attack against Syria. Yet Klairvoyant Kerry knows.

What was equally sad was that so few Senators pushed back against Kerry’s certainty, from either side of the aisle. Yet few of them seem concerned about Assad actually loosing to the the “rebels.” I continue to use “rebels” in “scare quotes” because no one … not even the all-knowing Senator John McCain, knows who makes up the rebel forces or what kind of civil war would result from Assad falling.

The current civil war is deadly enough, but if Assad actually looses, we will see atrocities like or worse than those going on in Central Africa under the terror group Boko Haram. Assad is a really bad actor, but he didn’t line people up and shoot them in the head because they were Christians or Shia Muslim. That’s what is going to happen if Assad looses. For months on end.

Obama has authored the worst foreign policy disaster possibly in US history, and that even counts Jimmah Carter’s disastrous Iran fiasco. Obama’s lack of a rational Middle East policy led to what is going on now in Syria and his off-the-cuff threats of red lines is what put us where we are today. Chances are fairly high that Obama feels he has to attack Syria so he isn’t mocked by all sides in Syria and elsewhere.

But then, Libya has worked out so well for us, why not a repeat in Syria? There’s always golf this weekend.

Oh… also Benghazi! ooooh and IRS! and NSA! … and who can forget Fast & Furious!!!!!

Alive … Again

Finally! During a routine WordPress update last spring something blew up and not only did this blog disappear, I couldn’t even access the back-end to try and fix it. While digging through help pages and support forums, work suddenly needed more attention than the blog, so it has been down now for the last two months.

I had a break today and was able to discover how to disable all the plugins on the site (which is usually where the problems originate). Viola!! Back on line, but sans ALL the plugins. I’ll figure out how to find and remove the offending/conflicting plugin(s) later.

Just nice to be able to write again!

UPDATE 20130831 12:50: Think I’ve isolated the problem to a couple of plugins, so most of the rest (Twitter stuff, commenting stuff, plus a lot of back-end tools you never see) are now available. Just hope they stay that way!

Messaging, Semessaging … Find a Leader

I have not been able to bring myself to write anything of substance on the Romney/GOP loss last November, but reading and listening to some of the “messaging” from right-leaning “leaders” and media is changing that.

Hearing the British Airways flight attendant announce the winner of the US Presidential race that early morning just prior to landing in London was heartrending for me. Not because I was such a staunch Romney supporter (while I did come around to getting behind him, I was not in favor of him as the GOP candidate as I wrote here, herehere and elsewhere), but because I was sure that if Obama won reelection he would continue his destructive policies that would lead to the eventual abolition (literally) of our Constitutional Republic. These fears are being born out.

This past weekend I listened to several speakers at the National Review Summit. While a couple of them gave me a glimmer of hope that the GOP and the conservatives/tea party could start to come together, most either didn’t speak of a base reconciliation or gave hints that what was really needed was to rid the GOP of “those far-right wackos who can’t see the absolute requirement that the GOP move further to the ‘Center’ (read Democrat-Lite).”

However, the one bell many kept ringing was “we need to get better at ‘messaging’ … at learning how to reach out to those that we weren’t able to reach prior to last election.” Another was the need for improving technology tools and better use of social media. While it’s true that Obama won partly because of his campaign’s mastery of database technology, it is also true that many traditional GOP voters stayed home rather than vote for a technocrat without a unifying message. 100,000 voters in key states would have made the difference.

Romney is likely one of the most decent men to have run for the office of the President. I am sure he would have been a very capable President. But he was a manager; he knew how to manage people and things and finances. He also changed his positions on important issues, depending on who’s vote he was courting. Lastly, he didn’t inspire … he wasn’t a leader.

And without an ability to inspire voters who were on the fence or just not sure he could (would?) deliver on so many of his campaign promises, many voters just stayed home. And thereby giving the small victory to Obama.

The GOP doesn’t need new messages, new technology, nor new ways to benefit from social media in order to win. Would any of that help? Sure, any little bit helps, but don’t get distracted by shiny new things. What the GOP really needs is three important things: 1) LEADERSHIP and someone with a positive vision for the future of America to LEAD, 2) stop with bashing the conservative base of the party, and 3) stop trying to emulate the Democrats (Move Left Young Man, Move Left!).

A leader doesn’t have to know the details of every mundane policy fact, every minute geopolitical issue, or have every statistic on the American economy at his fingertip. But a leader does have to set an inclusive vision for the country which will raise the aspirations of the average citizen … at least those who actually want real liberty to regain a foothold, grow and thrive. I’m not implying that a leader doesn’t have to be competent; were that so … Obama!

Until 2008, America had never had a president as divisive as Obama. By his words and action he demonstrates that he is not president for all Americans (he isn’t my president … my president would never refer to the opposition as “the enemy“) and doesn’t demonstrate the qualities of leader of the American people. The GOP is either going to choose a real leader come 2016 or fade into the dustbin of history.

The second thing the GOP is going to have to do is quit tearing down people and groups in their base and those within the party who they disagree with (think Sarah Palin). It is amazing that many of those who participated in the Tea Party movement haven’t thrown up their hands in frustration and began a new conservative party. However, most are intelligent enough to recognize that such a move would be like cutting off their nose to spite their face. Just look at the Libertarian Party for goodness sake!

Regardless, if the GOP intelligentsia continues ripping their base they will soon become the Whig Party and what’s left of the conservative base will have to start a new party. Before we get that far, I am holding out hope that some of the rising stars recently sent to Washington … Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ron Johnson, Tim Scott, Mike Lee, Rand Paul … all in the Senate, and in the House there are too many to list here, but Trey Gowdy of South Carolina and Jason Chaffetz of Utah jump to my mind as representative of what’s available … are beginning to impact the old elephants trying to inhibit change.

And that brings us to my last point … why does the old GOP guard think the way to attract voters to the Right is to act more like the Left? Sunday Sen Corker (RINO-TN) gushed all over Hillary Clinton and her testimony before the Senate last week. McCain and his fellow RINO henchman Lindsey Graham are just buddy-buddies with Chuck Schumer over something McCain has panted over for years … Comprehensive Immigration Reform (#Shamnesty).

If the old guard wants to move further Left … let them all go join the Democrats! Good riddance!!!

Thinking Tactically about Twitter Followers – UPDATED

@ToddKincannon has done us conservatives on Twitter a world class service with his idea around the hashtag #TGDN (Twitter Gulag Defense Network). If you want to know the background on what #TGDN is all about, you can read Foolish Reporter’s excellent piece.

The strength behind this network is thousands of old and new Twitter users creating new links by following each other en mass. Fine as far as it goes, but Twitter has a few (okay, a bunch!) of rules that sometimes stand in the way of getting all the followers one wants. In addition to following to many to fast as mentioned in Foolish Reporter’s piece linked above, one must have at least (or around) 1,900 followers in order to follow more than 2,000 people.

Yesterday I began noticing tweets from many well wishers, pleading for more followers on behalf of people stuck at the 2,000 following level because of having only 1,200 or 1,300 followers. I also began to get direct messages from some I had followed a day or so before, letting me know that they were stuck at 2,000 following and would follow me back as soon as they broke through the barrier.

I myself was just over 1,600 followers and was following around 1,800. I also had over 200 not following back, some who I recently followed and just hadn’t yet followed me back and others who I’ve followed for a long time who will never follow back; mostly politicians, columnists, talk radio hosts or other personalities with tens of thousands of followers.

I began to realize if I didn’t start approaching the challenge of more followers tactically, I could get caught in what looks to becoming a Twitter gridlock (a twitlock?). So here’s what I came up with:

  • do not immediately start following as many people as you’re “allowed” each day until you’ve hit the magic 2k. I’m not sure what is a good ratio of followings to followers, but I’d guess keep them within 100 to 150 of each other.
  • once you are at 1,500/1,600 followers, be careful of who you follow from that point. Don’t follow someone who is at or close to the 2K limit if they only have 1,100 followers; they may not be able to follow back very soon. You can go back and follow them after you’re well past the 2K barrier.
  • think twice about following someone who has thousands of followers but only hundreds they are following; they might not follow you back.
  • I have had to unfollow some of the politicians/columnists/personalities to free up some head room for following people who will follow back. I can go back and follow them again later.
  • use one of the free Twitter support apps, such at Tweepi or  who unfollowed me to find out who’s unfollowed you lately (and routinely). I’ve had several people who I followed and they returned the follow only to later unfollow.

If anyone has any other ideas or tips, just leave them in the comments section or send me a tweet!

Updated 20130112 15:30:  The last couple of days has revealed a couple more tactics that should help get you past Twitlock (though while I’m well past 2400 following and 2200 followers, I still get put into a modified form which I’ll discuss later).

  • there seems to be quite a few folks that appear more interested in gaining followers than participating in a gulag defense network. Don’t follow anyone with a follow/follower ratio of less than 50%. (I’ve adopted a 25% standard unless the numbers are low [say 50/130]. Figure I can always come back later and see if they’ve gotten with the program.)
  • If I see someone has been tweeting within the last couple of hours and they haven’t followed back 300-400 followers, I pass on following.
  • once I passed my magic numbers (which BTW seen to be somewhere in the 1850-1865 range), I made a point to follow everyone on the TGDN 2K limit Help list created by @BatteredCitizen (thanks!). The sooner these people are past Twitlock, the sooner they can add their strength to our numbers.

Again, if anyone has any other ideas, add a comment below or Tweet me.

One last thought; don’t get intimidated by the seemingly millions of tweets streaming on your timeline. Start using lists to identify those people you may want to keep closer tabs on, and then focus more on those lists.

Random thought: if someone started reading this post and had no idea what Twitter was … they would leave thinking “what the he…. heck is this idiot talking about?”

Updated 20130123 07:55: Having had a number of people ask specifically about “what do I do if I’m already stuck at 2000 and only have 1400 followers.” here’s my best advice:

  • go to one of the Twitter apps mentioned above or sign up on JustUnfollow (I like this app because it shows you everyone’s total followers and follows) and click on “Non Followers” on the left menu. Sort the list by “oldest first” and start looking for those you followed who are not following you back … and aren’t also locked at 2000 themselves.
  • If someone has 500 followers and are following 300 (or any such combination of follows to followers), unfollow them! Chances are slim they will ever follow you back.
  • If you followed someone three weeks ago and they haven’t followed you back (and they aren’t stuck at 2000 following), they aren’t active tweeters; unfollow them. You can always go back later and follow anyone you unfollowed if you want.
  • Be more selective of those you follow after you’ve cleaned up your tarty follows. Only follow someone who has tweeted in the last couple of days. At this point, don’t follow anyone who follows 75% or less of his followers.

After you’ve reached around 1850 followers you’ll be able to begin following more (read a tweet that the actual number is 1821 but I have not confirmed). At that point, you now are locked by the 10% rule! You may only follow 10% more than follows you … are you glad?

Happy Tweeting!!!

Horror at Sandy Hook

The killing of all those children at Sandy Hook Elementary School last Friday elicited a level of horror and outrage beyond anything seen in decades. The age of most of the victims was the one thing that made this particular tragedy so much more horrific than the shootings at Fort Hood, Tuscon, VTech, Aurora and other recent mass shootings, even though there were children shot/killed in some of those instances.

Someone specifically targeting six and seven year old’s conveys an extraordinary level of evil. And that is exactly what the act was … evil. Acts of evil can only be preformed by a being with free will … a human. Animals cannot do evil, inanimate objects cannot do evil … only humans and it was one human that is responsible for the death and destruction in Newtown, Connecticut.

So what is the first thing our “Leaders” propose as a “solution?” Gun control! (scare quotes used on purpose)

Never mind those who inhabit the Fourth Estate have turned past killers into an apotheosis for those striving to make themselves even more renown. Never mind the thousands of people looking for help for their loved-ones suffering from mental illness who are told the only help is if their child/sibling/parent break the law.

And for heaven’s (read Washington DC) sake we shouldn’t discuss how removing religion from our schools, village squares and all other public places contributes to a coarsening of our society. No … gun control is what’s needed.

Connecticut has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, next to California and New York. However, not one of these laws were broken by the killer in order to arm himself for his evil deed. And there can be no law tough enough to have stopped him, because those who would do evil are not going to be deterred by a simple law.

Watch the video below for one of the most cogent arguments ever made as to why Americans should fight against those who would take our guns away. (h/t to David Breece)

This woman has captured in five minutes the entire argument against more gun control. Those who demand more gun control are only interested in the “control” part of the equation, as the woman’s ending statement so clearly articulates.

Our Scolder-in-Chief  told us on Sunday evening that we can only raise our children “with the help of a nation.” The nation hasn’t helped anyone raise their children … ever! An example of a nation that helps raise its children is Yugoslavia. Our children are raised by families and by neighbors and by teachers.

He also blamed us for not “doing something to stop the violence.” In case you don’t speak Obamaese, that means more gun control.

Stop it! Don’t let the elites who are doing everything in their substantial power to control every aspect of our lives (ever hear of something called “Obamacare?”).

Benghazi, Elections and Priorities

Fox News has done yeoman’s work on uncovering what little facts are available to the public on what transpired beginning the night of September 11, 2012 in Benghazi, Libya. However, I am positive much more will be revealed which will ultimately confute the story President Obama and his administration have tried to peddle since the disaster.

I say disaster and not tragedy as the cause of the deaths of an American Ambassador and three other Americans were not the result of some natural calamity over which no one had control. The real and circumstantial evidence accumulated so far, coupled with statements from experts who know how such actions go down … from having been there and done that … point to a failed Administration.

It is doubtful that anything of earth-shattering substance will emerge before America “goes to the polls” on November 6. This means that many of those middle-of-the-road voters will not include Benghazigate into their deliberative process when selecting which candidate to vote for. That is a shame, because this single issue informs anyone able to view Obama with a modicum of objectivity that he is not capable of leading a horse, never mind the greatest nation the world has ever known.

News of the Obama administration’s failures with Benghazi will continue to dribble out, a few more people not already disgusted will become so, and then Obama will be tossed from the Presidency onto his ear next Tuesday evening. Unfortunately, he won’t be tossed resoundingly enough so a message is sent clearly that we American’s don’t abide cowards, scallywags and unprincipled hucksters.

I have much more to say on this, but unfortunately I’m under some tight deadlines on a project I’m on, so deeper thoughts will have to wait.

Romney by a Head

Over the last 90 days or so I have proclaimed in comments I’ve made to articles and blog posts that Mitt Romney would succeed in his quest for the President by at least six points and possibly more. In other similar pontifications I have said Romney will win over 330 electoral votes.

Replies to many of those comments were derisive or outright abusive, calling me deranged to think Romney could succeed by such a resounding degree in such a close race. It has been my belief all Spring and Summer that talk of such a close race has been based on the election fantasies of the Liberal Media and their polls were nothing but a reflection of those wet dreams.

I’ll stand by my protections by confirming them here. Further, I’ve included a projected electoral map showing which states I believe Romney will carry (red) vs. those who will stay with Obama (blue).

So I am now “on the record” for all to see.

Unfortunately I will be somewhere over the Atlantic when the results are announced sometime on the evening of Nov 6, so most of you will know before I do how close I actually come.

A New Entry in the October Surprise Category UPDATED

One of the ways I keep current on military issues besides reading military blogs like Danger Room and articles from folks like Michael Yon, Frank Gaffney, Max Boot and others. Our local high-power AM radio station is KFI-640 and they have a weekly program called “Dark Secret Place.” The program is hosted by Bryan Suits, an Army reservist with combat chops (and a Purple Heart to prove it) in Iraq (both wars) and a “Peace-Keeping” stint in Bosnia.

During last night’s program Bryan mentioned, without revealing sources or specifics, that there is a high-level highly secret operation, on the order of the Bin Laden raid, that has been called up and then postponed numerous times over the past year or so. He said the operation has a similar profile as the Bin Laden mission but with a different goal and would result in a “very happy ending.”

The frightening part of the story is that the mission is now being planned for late October, right before the November election. I would not put anything outside the realm of possibility when it comes to the Obama regime’s ability and willingness to do anything … ANYTHING … to get reelected, including using our military (anyone recall Wag the Dog?).

With the debacle currently unfolding in Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world, it is especially important for Obama to regain his foreign policy bona fides, à la “I killed Osama Bin Laden.”

I have let my mind wander, trying to come up with some type of special forces operation that would result in a “very happy ending” (assuming one doesn’t perceive an operation resulting in the death of Bin Laden as having a happy ending!). The only thing I’ve come up with is the recovery of Private Bowe Bergdahl, the only US serviceman being held captive by the Taliban, but I doubt there are many people in the US that even know he’s being held.

Regardless, would Bergdahl’s recovery generate sufficient excitement and esprit de corps’ among the undecided electorate to enhance Obama’s sorry excuse as a Commander-in-Chief? Anybody have any other ideas?

The podcast of Bryan’s show is available here (show date is 9/22). The segment I’m referring to starts at around 31:00 minutes.

UPDATED 21020924 05:45 – A friend suggested I put up the audio of Bryan Suits’ podcast where he discusses this issue, so here it is!




[Note: I haven’t been able to get the MP3 player plugin working, so for the time being, right click on the file name above and choose “Open Link in a New Tab” or “New Window” to launch the default player in your browser. Sorry!]

UPDATED 20121012 14:30 – Keep an ear and eye open on either late the 14th or first thing the 15th of Oct … Sunday evening or Monday morning for this event, whatever it is, to be announced. This is when moon will be at its lowest luminance (New Moon – October 15, 12:02 AM) prior to Nov 6.

This is the time that Special Forces prefer to execute their missions, as they have the technological advantage on everyone else to be able to “see” in the dark. The Bin Laden raid was done under the New Moon in May, 2011.

Romney’s Losing … No , He’s Winning … No, He’s Losing

I can understand why it is that people who depend on ABC or NBC or CBS or such wonder what is going on with the bouncing presidential race polling, if they’re even into wondering anything about presidential politics yet. But to have folks that are Republicans or professed conservatives and get their news from talk radio, right-leaning webs sites or Fox News, what are you doing?

A good deal of the political polling being passed off today as scientific is anything but. Publishing a poll that over-samples Democrats (the most prevalent type of polling perversion) by 13% isn’t seriously attempting to inform the voters of where American sentiment lies at any point in time; it’s purpose is propaganda. Such a poll has no purpose other than to discourage the opposition’s voters from voting … period.

Another polling issue informed voters must be aware of is who exactly is being counted in these “scientific” polls. The most common form of polling is to ask questions of anyone who answers the phone and is willing to be questioned. Such polls result in the least informed output, as the respondent isn’t qualified (in terms of what experience they base their responses on) by the pollster.

People answering political polls are then further qualified as adults, registered to vote (or not) and the poll providing the highest quality of results, likely voters. So, when looking at a poll, note who it is that is being polled.

Polling firms have different methodologies of determining the likelihood a respondent is to qualify as a likely voter. Regardless, at this point we’re picking fly poop of of the pepper by trying to determine the best method for choosing “likely” voters.

So don’t let a pollster be the source of your discouragement.

There is one further issue about polling that has confounded even the most honest pollster for a few decades. That is something referred to as either the Bradley Effect or the Wilder Effect, describing wild swings in actual election results from the polling immediately preceding the election. Both Bradley and Wilder were running for Governor (California and Virginia, respectively) and the theory was postulated that the large difference between the final polling and actual results was because some voters wanted to be seen as hip by telling pollsters they were “voting for the black guy” and then in the privacy of the voting booth, voted the other way.

Many “experts” have declared the Bradley Effect dead, partly as a result of society becoming more sophisticated about race and most recently, as a result of Barack Obama’s election to the presidency.

I say bunk! The Democrats and their media partners have so over-pushed the notion that anyone who doesn’t agree with Obama has to be a racist that a great many regular, every-day Americans are fearful to even casually mention to fellow workers that they are thinking of not voting for Obama.

As no one I work with has any doubt as to my political bent, I’ve even had people confide to me that they haven’t even let their fellow workers know they didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 for fear of being tagged a racist. Chris Matthews, Rachael Maddow, and their cohorts carp night after night that anyone who won’t vote for Obama has to be a racist … clearly there is no other reasonable answer.

Even Obama plays along with this canard, never correcting anyone espousing such notions.

So how do you think many people are going to respond to a pollster when asked who they support for president? “I’m not going to be saddled as a racist, by golly!” This even applies to those polled through automated polling. “Who really believes that in today’s technology world that my responses will remain anonymous?

So we are going to continue to see polls showing Obama and Romney neck and neck, both because of skewered polling and people being cagy with pollsters … until the final week. Then we should start to see Romney gaining a slight lead, as the polling firms know that the only polls that count for the record (and their livelihood come next election season) are the polls right before the election.

Nothing has changed since the 2010 elections to dissuade conservatives, Republicans, Tea Party adherents, and all those independents who are against Obamacare from wanting to change leadership in Washington. If anything, those same sentiments have only grown stronger as a result of the Walker wins in Wisconsin and the Supreme Court ruling against liberty on Obamacare.

So why in the world would we expect Obama to be doing so well now? Even more so with the economy still in the dumps and now the Middle East in flames and Obama fiddles.

Oh … and the last thing to watch for is the exit polling results. Do you really think someone who was cautious when answering an automated poll is going to tell an actual human pollster that “he didn’t vote for the black guy?”

Remember that on election night when both of Chris Matthews legs begin wildly twitching before the actual results of Romney’s six point win are announced.

Foreign Policy Clusterf…

This past week has been a clusterf**k for our Most Intelligent President Ever. It began with the mobs in Cairo over-running our embassy, destroying the US flag and replacing it with a black Al Qaeda emblem, followed by the attack and sacking of the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya and the killing of a US Ambassador and three others.

… and things went downhill from there.

The US Embassy’s insistence on apologizing for some US citizen having the audacity to exercise his 1st Amendment rights is un-American to say the least … and their first apology occurred before anyone even approached the embassy. However, this sort of behavior is nothing we’ve not experienced before from a Foreign Service officer in the US State Department. The events that occurred in Benghazi however, are a different matter.

The killing of Ambassador Chris Stevens in what appears to be a coordinated attack raises the entire week’s events to a far more serious level, setting aside President Obama’s campaign and fund raising trip to Las Vegas before Stevens body is even cold. Where is the US headed now?

Our foreign policy fate was pretty much sealed last year following the “Arab Spring” uprisings in Tunis, Egypt and other Arab countries. The starry-eyed novices running our State Department and a great deal of our national security apparatus conflate “democracy” with “good.” Germany in 1933 was a democracy and the citizens of that fine country democratically elected Adolf Hitler as their leader.

If you have a country full of crazies, what are the chances they will choose a crazy to lead them? Egypt, besides being the most populated Arab country, has been trending more and more Islamist over the last few decades. During that time the US has blithe-fully ignored the “religious nutcases” and acted as if that ever-so western-acting Anwar Sadat were still running things. Now Egypt’s President is Mohammad Morsi … you know … Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood …. yea, THAT Morsi.

President Obama was quick to invite Morsi to the US following his election. However, Morsi first had to make calls on Beijing and then Tehran; priorities, don’t you know! Were you also aware that not only do we sell Egypt much of our latest military hardware and weapons systems, they have been the greatest offenders of our rules against allowing those same weapons systems to fall into the hands of our enemies (read China/Russia). This has been going on for years, so Morsi isn’t to blame for this slap in the face.

Also last week Obama refused a meeting request from Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister. Israel is likely to initiate a strike against Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and possibly before the November 6th US Presidential elections. Obama has expressed his concern over Israel’s lack of tolerance (he’s against such a strike at any time), but he especially doesn’t want any type of hostility prior to the election.

All of these events are very serious and the response from our “leaders” has truly been Carteresque. We have lost Egypt as an ally. The Muslim Brotherhood has effectively taken control of the country and is in the process of converting it into the primary building block of their long wished-for Caliphate. 70 of the top generals who controlled the Egyptian military left, retiring to plush villas in Europe and elsewhere (Field Marshal Mohammed Tantawi happens to own a house in Southern California).

So where does this leave Israel? In all likelihood, Israel will launch an attack against Iran’s nuclear weapons program soon. The United States’ lackluster sanctions against Iran have proven ineffective at best, which has allowed Iran to continue their refining of nuclear weapons-grade uranium.

Sure, the Iranians were slowed down by the Stux-net virus, but while they may be crazy … they aren’t stupid. They’ve hardened their security and have made significant progress. Where they are in the process is what matters, and due to the ineptitude of the CIA and others in our intelligence services, we have no idea of how far along they are. But I bet the Israelis know, or have a very good idea.

When Israel does attack, they are going to be under a great deal of pressure from the rest of the world, but their biggest concern is Hezbollah to the north and Hamas to the south. Both have been stockpiling weapons, primarily rockets, for the moment Israel strikes Iran. Now however, they have 1,110 A1M1 Abrams tanks and over 500 airplanes (of which 70 plus are F-16 Fighters) from Egypt to worry about.

Egypt’s Morsi told his followers during his presidential campaign he would make Al-Quds (the name Islamist use for Jerusalem) the capital of Egypt. He of course only said this in Arabic, not wishing to upset the sensibilities of his Western “friends.” Most adult military analysts believe that since the Muslim Brotherhood has assumed control of Egypt, the treaty between Israel and Egypt signed by Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin in 1979 isn’t worth the paper it was written on.

So sometime in the next few weeks or months, we are likely to have an all-out war in the middle east … again. Only this time the stakes will be much higher and if it happens before the election, what will Obama do?

Punt (act as if nothing is happening and continue as the Campaigner-in-Chief)?

Become Rambo (try to prove that his killing of Bin-Laden wasn’t just a fluke [no pun about Sandra intended])?

We shall see, but if Obama doesn’t handle it any better than he has during the past week, heaven help us. Oh, by the way, we may want to rethink that $1 Trillion military budget cut … just sayin’

Blame it on Bush

Just ran across this video and couldn’t let it go by without posting it! It not only rocks … it ROCKS!

J. U. S. T.   W .O. W!

Euro is Toast

Speigle Online posted an article yesterday titled Investors Prepare for Euro Collapse. The article summary states:

Banks, companies and investors are preparing themselves for a collapse of the euro. Cross-border bank lending is falling, asset managers are shunning Europe and money is flowing into German real estate and bonds. The euro remains stable against the dollar because America has debt problems too. But unlike the euro, the dollar’s structure isn’t in doubt.

The article goes on to describe growing resentment in both borrowing (PIIGS – Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain) and lender (pretty much Germany) nations. Further, it seems someone in Germany has challenged the authority of Germany’s constitution to accommodate the European Stability Mechanism (EMS), a new agreement that is meant to try yet again to stave off the collapse of the Euro.

Anyone who has even the most minimal understanding of what has been happening within the European financial markets over the past year and a basic understanding of human nature could tell you the Euro doesn’t have a chance of succeeding.

Germans are renown for, and proud of, their reputation as an efficient, hard working society, frugal but not cheapskates. They are the epitome of the ant in Aesop’s fable, the Ant and the Grasshopper. Greece plays the role of the Grasshopper, except they haven’t yet learned the lesson of the tale (but then the fable doesn’t say what ultimately happened to the grasshopper).

The German populace are becoming more and more resistant of their leaders loaning their hard-earned money to what they perceive as a bunch of sloths. Furthermore, Germany is about the only European Union member with an economy capable of lending out the amounts needed to keep the PIIGS afloat … for a while.

Side note: should France, the only other European Union country with a sizable enough economy, continue down the path they seem to have chosen, we’ll need a new acronym for the countries that prefer to keep their head in the sand rather than address their prolific socialist spending.

Borrowing is not the solution to the PIIGS’ problem, no more than it’s the solution to the economic fiasco we have allowed Washington to foist on us here in the United States. One of the reasons the PIIGS cannot continue to borrow is they are unwilling to adopt the measures necessary for them to actually repay the loans. They remain in denial of their profligate spending and therefore resentful of requirements that they adopt “austerity measures” (code for STOP SPENDING!).

Borrowers don’t really like those they owe money to. When did you last say “… oh look, a new bill from those nice folks at Master Card!?” And this isn’t a feeling that arrived with the advent of credit cards. (See Proverbs 22:7 – “The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender.”)

Based on the circumstances in Europe now and into the foreseeable future, there is very little chance the Euro will survive. Germans will not continue laboring to give their Euros to people who believe they are entitled to good paying government jobs, four weeks vacation a year and retirement at age 52. Greeks, Italians and Spaniards don’t believe they should give up their lifestyles just because they and their governments have spent themselves into poverty.

I’ve heard for years that our markets build into their price events such as what is going on in Europe. Let’s just say I’m skeptical of this conventional wisdom. The market is still made up of people, and they still have a tendency to act all to human.

Exit question: what will the failure of the Euro do to the US economy? The United States is teetering on the brink of another recession. Would the Euro’s collapse push it over? If we do enter into another recession we won’t know it until after the November elections.

All sorts of scenarios begin swirling in the mind!

VP Ryan

As everyone knows by now, Mitt Romney chose Congressman Paul Ryan as his running-mate this morning. Comments have been positive to ecstatic from both the GOP and Tea Party sides. Democrats, on the other hand have espoused tried and true slams on Ryan, with nothing really new for the undecideds to chew on.

Up until the announcement this morning, there were many on the Right saying they hoped Romney wouldn’t pick Ryan as he (Ryan) was too important in the House leadership. There have been some comments of that nature, but overall Romney’s selection has met with excitement, enthusiasm and well wishes.

I believe Romney served his campaign and the voters on the right and center well. Ryan was an important asset in the House, but this new position allows him to have even more influence which will help us all rid this country of the socialists and communists who’ve taken over.

Below is a great video of Paul Ryan at his best (h/t thelittlelephant).

Now THAT is how a real leader talks (and I loved the side glance Ryan gives DWS in the beginning of the clip).

Exit question: will Ryan give up his house seat and allow a new rising star the chance to help us turn this ship, America, around? Or will he stay on the WI ticket and allow a special election for his district seat should (when!) he takes his new seat at the head of the Senate?

What July 4th is Really About

This is a repost of something I posted on July 4, 2008.

Scott Johnson over at Powerline writes this morning on a July 4th, 1926 speech by President Calvin Coolidge on the 150th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. I had not heard or read this speech (in fact, I’ve not read that much on Coolidge) before, but the paragraph Scott cites really grabbed me:

About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.

The concept that there can be no progress beyond the ideals defined in the Declaration of Independence is at once extremely simple yet very profound … and correct! If we are equal, how can we become more equal? If we are endowed with inalienable rights, those rights can’t become more inalienable or be worth more today than they were 232 years ago.

In today’s world, Liberals don’t like to be referred to as liberals. They refer to themselves as “progressive.” Coolidge’s words put the “progressives’ rants in perspective; the ideas and ideals they propose can’t move us forward to more equality. Their agenda only takes away from our equality and freedoms, because they want equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. You can’t have both.

To insure everyone ends up in the same place requires you to deny those with ambition, drive, vision … whatever it it that sets those who accomplish apart from those who just get by … the opportunity to become more . This insures that those who are not driven end up in the same place as those who would normally become leaders, rich, accomplished, etc. How can this be called progressive?

The Founders who created the Declaration of Independence, followed by the Constitution, were far more wise and visionary than the so called leaders we endure today.

Read Coolidge’s entire speech.It’s certainly woth your time. In the meanwhile, here’s what today is really about.

Jake the Cub Scout