Joel's Rant

Tomorrow the nation will be treated once again to the display of our president bringing his yearly “State of the Union” message to Congress and the American people, as required by the Constitution of the United States.  Yes, it’s actually mandatory that the president do this. 

This constitutional requirement might come as a surprise to some in our political class, like John Conyers, Democrat Congressman for 40 years, and until recently Chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, who when asked defended ObamaCare’s constitutionality by sighting the “good and welfare clause”.  Note to Congressman Conyers; there is no “good and welfare clause.”  Does Conyers even understand the Constitution?  Don’t ask long time veteran Democrat Congressman John L. Lewis, who apparently believes the Constitution justifies Obamacare’s mandate that people must buy health insurance because of the “pursuit of happiness clause”.  Note to Congressman Lewis; there is no “pursuit of happiness clause” and besides, the famous phrase “pursuit of happiness” appears in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.  This spectacle would be downright laughable if the men making complete fools of themselves weren’t so powerful and disdainful of the laws that make our country the only indispensable nation on Earth.

One may think these are merely minor misstatements, but are they?  These people are among those making decisions that affect the lives of you and your family and the security of our nation.  Do they know where their authority to govern us comes from?  Do they know that the Constitution protects individual liberty, not the public good, whatever that is?

It’s interesting that just a few weeks ago the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted to begin their first session, as the majority, with a reading of the Constitution of the United States.  As you’ll recall Democrats of all stripes, liberals and progressive pundits and mainstream media sycophants called the action stupid and mindless and even implied that the most important political document ever written in the history of man had become irrelevant.   Did they forget that they took an oath to protect and defend the concepts written in this very document?  I find it pretty ironic that recently shot Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords, was one of those who agreed to read some of the Constitution, as the Republican caucus requested, and in fact read from the First Amendment, the one guaranteeing the right to free speech. 

No sooner had the smoke cleared than Democrats and their media minions began to promulgate a scurrilous lie, filled with wishful hate, a blood libel, that somehow rhetoric from the political right had spawned this tragic carnage.  No sooner had the smoke cleared than leftist pundits and reporters clamored for more “civility” (code word for “conservative political censorship”) from those on the right.

(You might want to click on http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/ if you want an astonishing and detestable review of the rhetoric that came from the political left over the past 10 years.  It’s really quite contemptible.)

I for one believe the vitriolic rhetoric, in fact, is not high enough.  Our voices, the voices of the conservative right, need to be heard.  Those who occupy the highest political offices in our country repeatedly lie to us, yet the president will appear tomorrow to talk about his agenda, going forward, as if the past two years had never happened; as if he became president only yesterday.  Yes, the new branding of Barack Obama is in full swing by the vampires in the mainstream media.  Yes, Barack’s a centrist, he’s concerned about the nation’s debt, he’s concerned about America being competitive, he’s very concerned.

Well, it just so happens that the truth has no agenda.  As the president gives his speech, let’s remember what he has done to our country.

Let’s remember ObamaCare.  Just for a moment, leave the issue of this law’s constitutionality aside; leave the CBO’s scoring of this law using corrupt and purposely fraudulent figures aside; leave aside the fact that ObamaCare will change forever the relationship every citizen of this country has with the government.  Did you know that come 2013, that 3.8% of the profit you realize from selling your home will go to pay for ObamaCare?  Did you know illegal immigrants are covered?  Did you know the government will have electronic access to all of your bank accounts and can transfer funds out without you even being advised?  Did you know that doctors will not be allowed to build new hospitals, even if they’re ready, willing and able to, and that hospital expansion will be prohibited?  When ObamaCare goes into full swing in 2014 all doctors will be paid the same regardless of specialty and all fees will be set by the government?  Did you know doctors will be penalized for requiring more medical tests, even if they believe they’re necessary?

What do you suppose just that very small sampling of what’s contained in that 2700 page law means to the medical care you can expect for you and your family?  Imagine what else is contained in ObamaCare’s language that has not yet seen the light of day?  You can draw your own conclusions.

How about the unelected bureaucrats of the EPA setting carbon limits that raises the costs of everything manufactured in “smoke-stack industries like autos, steel, energy and the like?  The Congress already refused to raise these limits but the president’s political appointee is doing it anyway in an end-around move to force manufacturing into a central planning Politburo situation.

How about the Dodd-Frank financial industries law that raises the cost of capital, does nothing to halt the potential for bailing out institutions deemed too-big-too-fail, never mentions to words Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac even one single time, and in fact leaves all the details of this law to the completely subjective discretion of nameless and unelected bureaucrats.  How about the government taking over GM and Chrysler and effectively giving those companies over to the United Auto Workers union and refusing to uphold previous and lawful contracts with primary lenders?

How about official 10% unemployment, climbing to almost 20% unofficial unemployment when part-time workers and those who’ve dropped out of the labor market are counted?  How about record foreclosures continuing without end?  How about more people living in poverty than ever before?  How about 50 million people using Food Stamps?  How about America borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent by the government, amounting to over $1 Trillion in additional debt each year for the next 10 years?  How can the economy be improving when more net jobs are lost each and every month than those that are gained?

This all happened over the past two years and is continuing.

How about Obama literally changing the mission of NASA from developing technology and creating miracles to teaching Muslim nations that they should be proud of inventing algebra (which, by the way, the Chinese did, not the Muslims)?  How about the Justice Department attacking Arizona?  How about the Justice Department dropping the voter intimidation prosecution of the New Black Panther party? 

How about Barack Obama’s FCC Chairman attempting to gain control over the internet with this new Net Neutrality regulation plan?  How about the government pulling the plug on all Gulf oil drilling, costing 20,000 gulf-area jobs, devastating local economies and driving the cost of gasoline to over $3.20 with no end in cost escalation in sight?

I can go on and on.  It’s unending what’s happened in just two years.  And none of that even includes anything beyond the shores of our country.  There’s Iran, Syria, North Korea, Russia, missile defense, new START, cancelling the F-22 fighter, Venezuela, China, Hezbollah and more.  And how about the new policy to allow romance and sexual tension onto the battlefield over the objections of battlefield commanders?

Barack Obama and his minions truly believe the people of this country are idiots, and unfortunately many people are.  But not all of us, not you and me.  We know what’s been going on.  This guy has a two year record, for crying out loud.

And then, out of nowhere, last week the Democrat governor of Hawaii inexplicably raises the issue of Barack Obama’s birth and citizenship.  He comes out in public and purposely states that he’s going to release Barack Obama’s long sought after “long-form” birth certificate so that this “Birther” issue can finally be put to rest.  Had he consulted with the White House before making this statement?  Who knows?

Here’s what we do know.  There ain’t no “long-form” birth certificate.  He inexplicably can’t find it.  What a goof this guy Neil Abercrombie is.  What he does have are some notes, whatever that means.

So here’s the truth, as I see it, and I’m not embarrassed by saying this.  Barack Obama was born in Kenya, to a very unstable and troubled woman.  This woman’s parents, while practicing Communists themselves, and realizing their daughter might be a nut, were not themselves idiots, and quickly realized that their newly born grandson would have a better chance at life and survival if he were an American citizen rather than a Kenyan.  So they trotted down to the local Hawaii BVS and made a statement that their grandson had been born in Hawaii.  They even gave their address as Barack’s address.  According to the regulations at the time, no proof of that statement needed to be offered.  That’s why the document the White House long ago produced was a “Certificate of Live Birth” (COLB), not a birth certificate.  The Hawaii authorities presently state that the COLB is not proof of birth in Hawaii.  They say that now!

So the grandparents get their COLB, and for good measure, they place a notice of birth in the local newspaper.  Remember, they’re not idiots; in fact they’re only trying to protect their grandson. That notice probably cost them maybe $5 in 1961 money.  Maybe it even cost them less than that.

And that’s why there’s no “long-form” birth certificate.  And that’s why Barack Obama is not a citizen of the United States.  But it doesn’t matter because not enough people really care about this, or because they’re afraid of being called irrational, when in fact to think he’s not a citizen is extremely rational.

 And that’s all here is to it.

A few years ago I decided I wouldn’t take my shoes off while going through the airport metal detector because I knew there was no metal either in my shoes or anything of the sort holding them together.  They were pure leather and stitching.  There was no possibility they would set off the TSA’s metal detector.  As I approached the detector the TSA agent asked me to remove my shoes, at which point I confidently told him I’d take my chances that the alarm would not go off. 

Unexplainably enough (yeah, right!) the alarm did go off, supposedly because of my shoes, and I was told to wait for an agent to wand me.  And there I waited for about 45 minutes, for a one-minute wanding, almost missing my plane.

Clearly I was being punished for not following the ridiculous dictate that I remove my shoes that had no metal in them.  And isn’t that what’s happening today?  Either submit to a full body x-ray, that essentially renders you completely naked and in surprisingly humiliating detail, or endure the punishment of some TSA agent feeling your genitals and buttocks, and anything else within touching, groping and grabbing range.

And it’s the entire commercial flying population of the United States that must submit.  Not just terrorists or people suspected of being a terrorist, or people meeting the profile of a terrorist.  No, it’s everyone.  It’s as if the potential for terrorism exists exactly equally and randomly throughout the entire population of the United States.  Small children, grandmothers, old men in wheel chairs or using walkers, nuns, young mothers with pre-school children in tow, uniformed military and on and on.  It’s our neighbors, and friends, and coworkers and you and me.  Yet there’s not a snowball’s chance that 99.9% of them could even remotely be a terrorist, yet they’re considered equally as suspicious as a 20-something Islamic male in Arabian robes wearing a bandolier.  Is that crazy, or stupid, or incompetent or is something far more nefarious afoot? 

And why are “government officials” specifically exempted from complying with naked x-rays or sexual assault pat-downs when they board commercial flights?  Yes, they really are!  (For the same reasons members of Congress, the president and others are exempted from ObamaCare.  You see a pattern here, right?)

This isn’t just a trivial matter of submitting to a sexual assault so we can all be secure.  Security has nothing to do with this kind of out of control and lawless government behavior.  While we submit to degrading and invasive screening measures, our enemies, virtually all young Islamic men, will calmly shift bombs from their shoes and underwear to minimally screened cargo, or checked luggage, or carry PETN explosives onto planes in body cavities, or disguise them as allowable materials.  Terrorists adapt, no?

Anyone paying attention has already learned that the Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) will not detect non-metal materials.  It will not detect plastics or powders and it will not detect anything shoved up someone’s nether-hole.  And right then and there the supposed safety, proudly provided to you by your federal government, vanishes to complete zero, and the government knows it; how could they not if you and I know it?  And what about trains, busses, subways, non-commercial air travel, sports stadiums, and all the other places where large numbers of anonymous people gather?  No, there’s no safety anywhere and the government knows it yet they continue to force people into a naked search or a sexual assault before getting on a plane.  What’s wrong with this picture?

Imagine if the Bush administration gave us this Faustian choice of either a taking naked x-ray or endure a sexual assault before we could board a commercial airline?  The ACLU would be screaming that Bush was violating the 4^th Amendment to the Constitution, barring unreasonable searches and seizures, and calls for his impeachment would be heard throughout the Democrat controlled Congress and their minions in the liberal media.  Yet that’s not what’s happening.  The ACLU has not even made an appearance and the Democrats are nowhere to be seen.

So what’s really going on here?

I submit to you that what’s happening is very dangerous government behavior.  I submit that evil has an initial first step, a seemingly benign initial action, a beginning, in which a process is put into effect that is purposely meant to control a population, to condition that population to submit to “uniformed government authority” without question, to submit to a set of ironclad rules mandated not by Congress or elected officials, but by an unelected bureaucrat like the TSA Director, John Pistole.  Why does this unelected and unaccountable political appointee and protégé of that idiot Janet Napolitano get to make such draconian rules that cannot be challenged?  I submit this TSA behavior is that “first step” and this has got to stop.

In the wrong hands, the very word “safety” is a dangerous thing.  Throughout history, but particularly in the 20^th century, the word “safety” has allowed dictators and villains to do whatever they want.  In order to be safe, we’re too often told, we need to give up some of our freedoms and liberties.  And that begins a rollercoaster ride to tyranny and worse.

In our country, actions to lessen liberties in exchange for safety have historically been tempered by third-party arbiters in the form of the judiciary and the courts.  There’s redress for grievances.  For example, supposed violations of the Patriot Act are played out in federal court and well founded grievances, if any, are alleviated.  But there is no third-party arbiter here in this TSA controlled world of commercial air-travel safety.  If you don’t submit, you don’t fly.  It’s as simple as that and you don’t get a lot of time to make that decision. So who’s not going to submit?

And then what exactly are you going to submit to?  Clearly the government is invested in the entire flying population going through the AIT and checking out your naked body.  That’s why the only available alternative, or punishment, for not going through the AIT is to undergo a sexual assault by a nameless uniformed bureaucrat. 

But at what cost is a full body x-ray to you?  The government claims it’s safe.  Do you believe that?  I, for one, absolutely do not believe the government’s pronouncements about the safety level of a full body x-ray that can see through your clothes with exacting detail yet will do you physically no harm.  How can that be?  And has the government ever lied before?  Draw your own conclusions.

By the way, did you know that there’s AIT technology that, rather than providing a detailed view of you naked, instead represents your body literally as a “stick-figure” that would only highlight your entire naked body if contraband were actually detected.  That’s true, yet it was rejected by the TSA.  Why do you suppose they rejected that plan? 

Maybe because nothing controls a person faster, and gets them to submit obediently without question, then by exposing them naked.  That’s a fact.  That’s why interrogators get their captors naked.  That’s why the CIA and other intelligence services use nudity on their captives; it makes them very obedient, very compliant.  And getting you to appear naked instead of as a stick figure will get you to be more obedient and compliant too.  And that’s why this TSA thing is so good for the government, because it begins a process, slowly at first, of getting people used to being obedient and compliant.  Am I wrong?  If I am wrong, then why don’t they use the stick figure AIT?

The TSA has been screening over 2 million passengers each year since 9/11.  That’s approaching 20 million people handled in some fashion by TSA agents.  How many terrorists have been captured, or stopped, or arrested, or identified?  If I’m not mistaken, I believe the answer to that question is zero.  None.  Nada.  Yet we continue this charade of safety.  Isn’t there a better way that does not treat every passenger in the country like a terrorist, and a naked terrorist at that?

I know most people will read this and assume I’m a nut.  But try thinking about this for just a few minutes before dismissing my argument here.  How can the government be so completely stupid and incompetent?  Is that possible?  I think not.  But I do believe in the government’s capacity to be evil, threatening and tyrannical.  By crafting aggressive TSA screening as a “safety situation” they can pretty much do whatever they want and most people will agreeably comply.  That’s how tyranny works.

Now here’s the really tough part.  Once you know the truth, the truth at least as I see it, then you have to decide how you’ll react when asked to step up for your full body x-ray.  How will you respond?  Once you know the truth, denial is no longer an option.

Remember this; when you trade freedom for safety you get neither.

And that’s all there is to it.

There’s a famous laboratory test that psychologists use to measure things like “fairness” and “altruism” called “The Ultimatum Game.”  There are 2 people that are anonymous to each other.  One person, person A, is given $20.  Person A is told that she must offer Person B a portion of that money.  If Person B accepts the offer they both get to keep the money they have been given.  If Person B rejects the offer, they both go home penniless.

According to the world of economics, if Person A offers $1 to Person B, Person B should accept the offer.  Even though Person A gets to keep $19, at least Person B gets something out of the deal.  If Person B rejects Person A’s offer of only $1, both Persons A and B get nothing.

To me, this is how those on the political left view the Bush tax cut policies of 2001 and 2003, which are presently set to expire on January 1, 2011, thereby instituting the largest single tax increase in American history.  As long as they perceive, incorrectly I might add, that someone is getting more of a tax cut then they are, they don’t want anyone to get the tax cut.  It’s as simple as that.

I have liberal friends tell me all the time that they can’t wait for those tax cuts to expire because they only favored the “rich” or only provided tax cuts to “millionaires.”  They also want “rich” people to finally pay their “fair share” of income taxes.  Never, of course, does anyone provide any data to back up those claims nor do any of them want to actually know the truth.  That would include state-run media people as well.

Don’t you hate that, when the truth gets in the way of making your point?

In fact, the truth is quite the opposite.  But first let’s stipulate a few facts.

1. Poor people do not create jobs.  Unfortunately, that’s a fact.  People without the financial means to hire workers, who expect to be paid for their efforts, are not going to create jobs.  They’re not going to create industries or businesses or provide any of the instrumentalities an economy requires in order to be prosperous.  Generally speaking, only “rich” people can do that and having those people available to provide that kind of support is necessary in a free-market, capitalist society.  Again, that’s a fact.
2. In 2008, the last year in which complete IRS data is so far available, the top 1% of taxpayers paid 40.4% of all the income taxes collected that year.  In fact, under George W. Bush (GWB), the tax liability of this top group grew faster than their share of the income.  Now, I don’t happen to be rich, and I’m certainly not feeling sorry for anyone who is rich, but what part of 40.4% is not a “fair share?”  If 40.4% of the taxes being paid, by only 1% of the payers mind you, is not absolutely amazingly fair, can we at least stipulate it comes very close to being fair?  By the way, the top 5% of taxpayers paid 60% of the income taxes and the top 10% paid 75% of the nation’s income taxes.  Oh, and the bottom 50% paid only 3% of the taxes and 47% of the nation paid zero income taxes.  So much for the argument that so-called rich people are not already paying their fair share.
3. Despite the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, the same amount of money was deposited in the U.S Treasury as there was before the cuts.  That’s a fact.  The conventional wisdom that receipts to the Treasury suffered because of the tax cuts is completely bogus.  The average Treasury collection from federal personal income taxes averaged 18% of GDP from 1953 through 2006.  The Bush Treasury averaged that same 18% from 2001 through 2006.  Even with the cuts, the same amount of tax money was collected. 

However, there were 2 differences from the averages of the past.  First, 6 million new jobs were created during the GWB years, from 2001 through the end of 2006.  That’s a fact, as inconvenient as that is for some to grasp.   Second, while Treasury revenues remained the same even after the tax cuts, spending increased to historical heights, at least historical before Barack Obama. 

An interesting factoid regarding that level of spending is that never one time, not once, not one single time, not for even one moment, did the Democrats in Congress during the GWB years offer a lower budget, filibuster for decreasing spending, or in any way, shape or form recommend cutting spending in any program except for one….the Defense Department.  In fact, the only response to any of the budgets submitted by GWB was that he wasn’t spending enough.  Every GWB budget eventually ended up being raised because of Democrats’ higher spending requirements.  That’s a fact.  And every single higher spending requirement was fully endorsed and approved by…….Barack Obama.  Go figure!

The facts I’ve indicated above are not meant to absolve the GWB presidency of mistakes they made, because they made many.  Every president makes mistakes.  Even the hero of the political left, FDR, took a recession in 1930 and created a Great Depression that did not officially end until 1947.  FDR’s economic policies and his social engineering initiatives were a complete and utter disaster, and breached the fire walls of the Constitution, thereby creating the mechanism of big government that extends into every facet of our life and society that we experience today.  But he was an excellent, politically conservative, and America loving, wartime president.

But the conventional wisdom that the economy under GWB was a disaster is bullcrap. 

I don’t believe GWB ever nationalized an industry, business, company or corporation.  He also recognized potential economic disaster and tried twice to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but was repulsed by the Democrats in Congress (unlike the filibuster proof Congress enjoyed by Barack Obama, GWB has to cater to Democrats’ to get any legislation passed).  With unemployment around 5%, with home values doubled, with low inflation, with a record high stock market, with over 6 million new jobs created through 2006, the GWB economy was something that should be envied today given our current state of distress and danger to the health of the very Republic itself.  Let’s also try to remember that in addition to the recent financial crisis wrought, in large part, by government regulation like the Community Reinvestment Act and the criminality of government agencies like the aforementioned Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, that the Congress was taken over by Democrats in January 2007, a Congress which included, as one of its most vocal and strident members, one Barack Obama.

So, what are those GWB tax cuts that favor only the rich?

In the chart below you’ll see the tax years 2002 and 2003.  The tax year 2003 shows the rates with the GWB tax cuts, the rates we presently pay. If the tax cuts are allowed to expire by Barack Obama, the tax rates in 2011 will revert essentially to those shown below in tax year 2002.  Got it?

You might want to pay particular attention to how earnings from $46,700 to $56,800, the proverbial middle of the “middle class”, will have their marginal tax rate raised from 15% (2003 chart) to 27% (2002 chart), a rate increase of 12%.  That doesn’t sound too bad, right?  Actually someone paying 15%, and having their tax rate raised to 27%, has just suffered an 80% increase in their income tax!

So it turns out that GWB tax cuts actually helped middle class tax payers the most, with the biggest reductions going to those that needed it the most.  In fact, the GWB tax cuts were targeted to the middle class.  Those are the facts.  Any of that other rhetoric is bullcrap.

Tax Year 2002                                                 Tax Year 2003
 
up to $12,000 10%                              up to $14,000 10%
$12,000 – $46,700 15%                       $14,000 – $56,800 15%
$46,700 – $112,850 27%                     $56,800 – $114,650 25%
$112,850 – $171,950 30%                   $114,650 – $174,700 28%
$171,950 – $307,050 35%                   $174,700 – $311,950 33%
over $307,050 38.6%                          over $311,950 35%

But wait, that’s not all that’s going to change when the GWB rates expire on January 1^st.  In addition to the higher tax rates above, this is what’s going to also change so strap yourself in for the bumpy, and painful, ride:

The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income.  The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child.  The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level.  The dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut.  For you liberals, pretty good, no?

This year, there is no death tax.  For those dying on or after January 1, 2011, there is a 55% top death tax rate on estates over $1 million.  Actually, $1 million’s not that much.  A person leaving behind two homes, or one home on Long Island, and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones.

The capital gains tax will rise from 15% this year to 20% in 2011, a 33% increase.  The dividends tax will rise from 15% this year to 39.6% in 2011, a 164% increase.  These rates will rise another 3.8% in 2013.  These are the kinds of taxes that affect people with retirement savings, pensions, and others who might want to sell assets and take a profit.  That means it includes most people, including you liberals, in the middle class.  (And don’t forget the VAT tax that’s coming as well as the often discussed “wealth tax” on yearly assets owned.)

Here’s a real good one.  You liberals will really like this too.  Congresses failure to index the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will lead to an explosion of AMT taxpaying families—rising from 4 million last year to 28.5 million in 2011.  These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level. 

And there are all sorts of higher business taxes that will guarantee higher unemployment and more failed businesses.  The recently passed financial overhaul bill, often referred to as Dodd-Frank, has virtually guaranteed that small banks and small financial organizations will go out of business leaving fewer options for consumers seeking loans and mortgages, thereby tightening credit even more than it is right now.

Oh, and don’t forget the first ObamaCare taxes go into effect on January 1^st as well.

Here’s the important thing for my friends on the political left to remember.  The rich can pay taxes.  They’ll either always be able to pay taxes or they can fashion their income so they appear to have no income.  The truly rich can do that.  That’s the beauty in being truly rich.  Got it?

That’s not the same for the rest of us.  That’s not the same for people like you.  Even if you confiscate every dime of every rich person there won’t be enough.  That won’t nearly be enough because there are not nearly enough rich people.   

But the people on the left don’t care.  It’s the Ultimatum Game for them.

But at least you now know the truth.

And that’s all there is to it.

When was the last time all the countries in the world got together to condemn one single country.  Yes, there have been times when the United Nations, that well known cesspool of dictators, thugs, killers, and other assorted miscreants, was able to pass a resolution with the majority of the voting states condemning some nation for something or other.  Usually that denunciation meant bullcrap, and the world went on as usual, the condemned generally not stopping to even take a breath or giving a damn.

But I’m talking here about the entire freaking world voting as a block, even including those genius inventors of socialism, communism, Nazism and fascism, the Europeans, whom we can’t wait to emulate.  Even the United States of America agrees to condemn this one single country.

Maybe that one single country was North Korea.  They certainly deserve to be condemned.  Didn’t they just recently attack another country by deliberately and wantonly destroying a capital warship without any warning, killing 46 sailors and injuring many others, in what was actually an act of war?  And didn’t they secretly try to build a nuclear weapons production plant in Syria?  No, that’s not the one.

Or maybe it was Iran.  They also deserve to be condemned.  Aren’t they in the process of building a nuclear weapon that they will likely use to blackmail the rest of the world and aren’t they, along with North Korea, the most aggressive and transparent supporters of world-wide terrorism, including the proactive killing of American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan?  And haven’t they stated flat out that their goal is the destruction of a specific western democracy and member of the United Nations?  No, that’s not the one.

Could it be Sudan?  Talk about deserving to be condemned.  Isn’t their leadership responsible for the deliberate killing, starving and actually selling into slavery of about a million of its own citizens in Darfur over the past 20 years and have not yet stopped even to eat a sandwich?  No, not them either?

What about Cuba or Venezuela, subjugating their own people and exporting Communism and supporting terrorism in Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil and other Latin American nations and otherwise attempting to create instability everywhere?  They deserve to be condemned too.  But no, neither of them are “the one.”

Or what about Burma or Belarus or Zimbabwe or any number of other countries led by disgusting and degenerate leaders?  Nope, don’t be a fool, fool!

No, “the one” could only be tiny Israel, the land of the Jews.  So here’s a country of 7.5 million souls, not all of them Jews by the way, that occupies land about the size of perhaps New Jersey, surrounded by 1.5 billion (that’s billion with a “b”) Arabs and Muslims occupying land stretching from the banks of Western Africa to Indonesia, and all those latter people’s fondest wish is to see all the Jews dead.  And with all the malice that can be mustered, now it seems that the rest of the world feels the same way.

How else can the events of the past two weeks be explained?  How is it that Israel is not universally viewed as the victim here?  Any rational and thoughtful person should normally see it that way, no?  Why is it that Hamas, the Palestinians or the Turks are not being condemned? 

The killers in Hamas and Hezbollah, both proxy armies of Iran, have been engaged in war against the civilian Israeli population for the past several decades.  A summary of the atrocities perpetuated against Israel could literally fill a book, but one need not concentrate on that to get the full flavor of the injustice here.  Hamas and Hezbollah have been firing rockets indiscriminately into Israeli population centers for years with the intent of killing as many innocent civilian men, women and children as possible.  Over 10,000 rockets have been fired by Hamas alone, which makes perverse sense since the Hamas charter calls for the elimination of Israel no matter how long it takes.  It actually says that.  It’s like part of their depraved constitution.

To put that into some perspective, what do you suppose the response of the United States would be if a terrorist army in Tijuana began lobbing hundreds of mortar shells into downtown San Diego?   What is it you would expect the leaders of the United States would do?  Would you expect no action, maybe just talk and negotiation with the bad guys?  I personally would expect, assuming Barack Obama were not president, an American military response, directed by a conservative American Commander-in-Chief that would be immediate and adjudicated with ferocity and maximum prejudice.  That would seem about right to me, and hopefully to you too.

Then why does the world expect Israel to act differently, to not act in self-defense, to not protect their population and sovereignty?   Why is it that Israel must compromise while their enemies do not and, in fact, never have?  Why must Israel unilaterally return land, taken in war to provide a buffer for protection, to those that then immediately use that territory to assault their civilian populations?  Why does the world make excuses for the terrorists and condemns Israel for “atrocities?”   Why isn’t Russia ever held to account for their treatment of the people of Chechnya, or China for the people of Tibet?

The reason is simple.  It’s because the all the world hates the Jews.

Even here in the United States, our leaders and mainstream liberal media condemned Israel with the smartest woman in the world, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, saying our government supports the UN resolution calling for condemnation and investigations into Israel’s untoward actions, as if we would allow the UN to investigate our actions in Afghanistan, for instance.  In her statement on the subject Clinton asked absolutely nothing of the Turks or their radical Islamist leader.  She only asked Israel to account.  And what I found to be particularly insidious was Clinton’s repeated uses of the phrases “peace activists” and “humanitarian aid” to describe what was supposedly being delivered to the Palestinians.  That was a total fraud.  Only stupid people, or willfully blind people, or those that hate Jews would continue to use those deceitful and duplicitous descriptions since the flotilla represented absolutely nothing of the kind.   

So why would our government buy into this hateful effort to hurt a trusted and long-standing ally?

My guess is the Obama regime has no use for allies or friends or western coalitions.  He’s just simply more comfortable with socialists and Marxists.  Obama’s apology tour of the world, ending with his Cairo speech in which he denounced America, reveals his contempt for the United Sates and its exceptionalism and allows him to seek friendships with enemies and antagonism toward friends.  It’s the Chicago way, or maybe it’s worse.

Maybe that’s why Obama double-crossed the Poles and Czechs by embracing instead Russia’s attitude toward missile defense, for which he received absolutely nothing in return.  Maybe that’s why Obama chose to directly align himself with the dictators Hugo Chavez and the Castro brothers and against the lawful actions of the democratic Honduras Supreme Court when they ousted their communist leader.   Maybe that’s why Obama had no problem siding with the Argentines, and against the UK, in the recent trouble over the Falkland Islands, and also humiliating Nickolas Sarkozy of France by continually blowing him off instead of meeting with the French as Sarkozy requested.    

And how could anyone forget the humiliation foisted on Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who among other acts of arrogance and disdain for Israel, was left by Obama, alone in a White House anteroom, while Obama went to dinner with his family with instructions that Netanyahu think over his own stubbornness, as if he were a petulant child.  How Netanyahu, a no-nonsense former Israeli commando who has actually faced death straight-out, had the presence of mind not to reach over and smack some sense and manners into Obama is beyond me.

But what we’re seeing here is the serious weakening of the United States, with dangerous implications and consequences for the future.  Brazil and Turkey make a deal to help Iran constitute uranium and neither country doesn’t care a whit what the United States thinks. That would have been unthinkable under either of the Bushes or Reagan or possibly even Bill Clinton.  But our enemies are watching this spectacle unfold; they’re taking notes, they sense weakness of Obama and blood in the water, they know the United States is afraid to act, even in its own self-interest.  Our allies meanwhile sense a lack of trust and commitment and discipline of purpose, and are justifiably very worried.

And that American weakness is what leads to efforts by the forces of evil to send flotillas to arm Hamas right out in the open, or sink ally warships, or kill American soldiers, because the entire world knows the United States has become a paper tiger under Barack Obama.  The entire world knows we will do absolutely nothing.

Does the world believe the United States would retaliate or come to the aid of Israel if it’s attacked with nuclear weapons by Iran?  The answer would have to be no, no?  Does anyone actually believe Obama would lift a finger to save the Jewish State from total destruction (or for that matter, save Taiwan from a Chinese invasion)?

And that’s what the bad guys think too.  And that’s what makes Iran becoming a nuclear power so dangerous.  And don’t the Jews really deserve universal and world-wide condemnation anyway?

So what Hitler ultimately failed to do, the Iranians might actually get away with.  All the green lights point that way.  The runway is being cleared.  No one will try to stop them.   The world has reconciled their hatred of the Jews.  The Final Solution is only moments away.

And that’s all there is to it.

Where exactly is someone supposed to begin to tell the story of the history we are presently living through as we speak? 

Should I start with the 14-busses loaded with mob thugs from the SEIU, estimated by police to number about 700 individuals, which essentially attacked the private residence of Greg Baer, deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America (BOA), outside of Washington DC on Sunday, May 16^th?  With only Baer’s 14-year old son home at the time, the mob stomped the residence lawn and ran up the front stairs and through the front yard screaming and yelling with bull horns and waving signs allegedly protesting BOA’s role in the nation’s financial crisis.  The pictures of this event are quite extraordinary; Google it yourself. 

Who were these people and where did they come from, and who exactly called them into action, in the same fashion as when SEIU shows up at Tea Party rally’s and other events, often starting fights and committing violence?  Isn’t it interesting that Andy Stern, SEIU’s president and chief union organizer has been the single most frequent visitor to the White House since January 20, 2009, having visited on average about once every 3 weeks?

In retrospect, is this left wing SEIU attack any different than a mob of Klansmen storming Skokie, Illinois circa 1964?  If they were wearing hoods instead of red T-shirts, wouldn’t it be exactly the same as a Klan mob, except without the lynching of course?  Is it any different than the tactics used by Third World dictators when they call out their henchmen to create fear and intimidate people?  And all of this coincidentally occurs just before the finance bill is scheduled to go before Congress?  Is this how our society now operates?

Or maybe I should discuss how John Morton, assistant secretary of homeland security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has decided that because he doesn’t personally agree with the Arizona illegal immigration law that his organization is not going to enforce it.  Oh, I get it, in the Obama regime, when an official with responsibility to uphold and enforce federal laws has a problem with that law, he can merely ignore it.  Is that right?  Is this how our society now operates?

Now here’s an interesting aside.  What if the hordes of illegal Hispanic immigrants crashing over the border were instead actually going to, as a block, vote Republican instead of Democrat; would Obama and his regime be calling the Arizona law illegal?  Would Obama be calling the people of Arizona racists?  Would he be standing alongside the leader of Mexico denouncing Americans as racists?  Would the Democrats in Congress rise from their seats and give the Mexican leader standing ovations?  Would John Morton threaten not to enforce the law he swore to uphold?  Isn’t this all about politics and potential Democrat votes and has not a whit to do with racism and rights?  Is this how our society now operates?

But wait.  What about the North Korean torpedo that sunk the South Korean warship, killing 46 sailors and injuring many others.  Here’s a country run by a minor maniac, which has no resources, no wealth, no industry, with nothing but nuclear weapons and technology to offer the world, a country with a median caloric intake so low that the height of every citizen averages about 2 inches shorter than their relatives in the South.  Yet no action from the United States to respond to what is, with certainty, an act of war will be taken.  None.  Zero. Nada.

We have become totally impotent and fearful and weak.  In the face of outright capital aggression by a country that can barely lift its head off the floor, we stand naked and worried and all we can muster is our Secretary of State uttering for the zillionth time something about sanctions and other silly and embarrassing remarks of absolutely no impact or importance.

And that’s just North Korea.  What will happen in the world when, not if, Iran gets nuclear weapons?  What kind of blackmail will we have to endure?  What kind of threats and terror will go unpunished by us and our allies?  What acts of Iranian aggression will we have to tolerate, and what twisted and intellectually duplicitous rationalizations will we have to invent so as to not provoke a reaction?  What will be the cost of attempting to cooperate with a country that cannot be negotiated with under any and all circumstances?  At what point will nuclear war be necessary, and how many millions of Americans will be killed?  Is this how our country now operates?

How about an ecological disaster that makes Katrina look like a stroll around a lake?  Obviously I’m not blaming Obama for the Gulf accident that has caused this disaster.  And I’m not blaming him for the fact that the well has remained uncapped for these many weeks. 

But what about Obama and his people attempting to blame George W. Bush for this disaster, as if Obama hasn’t been in charge of the federal government for the last year and a half and the Democrats haven’t controlled Congress for the last 4 years?  And what about Obama, upon learning that the well might be capped with this new “Top Kill” process BP is using, coming out and stating that in fact, for about the past year, he and his Interior guy Ken Salazar were planning on overhauling the entire oil industry licensing process and that it was almost going to be implemented and that would have prevented accidents like this, even though absolutely no evidence of that exists.  And Obama stating that the federal government has been calling all the shots and making all the decisions from Day One, while taking no blame, but blaming BP for not making better decisions or taking necessary actions?  Huh, what?

Did he actually make that up on the fly or what? 

And Obama essentially stopping or curtailing every new oil drilling project in America?

Everybody knows gasoline comes from oil, right?  And that less oil means higher gasoline prices, and higher gasoline prices means less driving, and less driving means fewer people buying stuff at the mall, and less business at the mall means more people laid off and on the public dole, and more debt and less productivity and more welfare and more entitlements all that.  Everyone knows that, right?  Just checking.

For Obama it’s all politics all the time and disasters are times to point to others to blame and to take whatever credit is available for himself.  Is this how our society now operates?

But the best was yesterday, Friday, the day before a 3-day Memorial Day weekend when the media would be asleep at the switch, for Obama to drop his “Sestak-job offer” explanation bomb.  Does the phrase “unmitigated incredulity” mean anything?

For the past 12 months Joe Sestak (PA, D) has been claiming he was offered a high profile Administration job by a high profile White House official in return for Sestak’s dropping out of the Senate primary against Arlen Specter.  Sestak never offered any details, but the picture he drew was pretty clear.  Many thought the job offer was that of Secretary of the Navy.  If not that job, then something of equally high value and profile, high enough and valuable enough to cause Sestak to want to drop out of a once in a life time run for the Senate.

Now here’s the amazing part.  After finally getting some media pressure, the Obama regime claims the job offer was to be an unpaid adviser on some presidential commission studying something or other.  And the messenger bringing that offer was the former president, Bill Clinton.  Huh, What?

Except for the most ideologically vacuous, naïve or willfully blind, this story is completely ridiculous and assumes the American public to be made up of dullards, idiots and stupid people.  Everyone should be insulted by this spectacle.  Who believes this crap?

Either Joe Sestak is a complete liar, on a par with the messenger Bill Clinton, or the President and/or his people have committed a real live felony and have now exacerbated that with a cover-up reminiscent of Watergate.  It’s either one or the other, or maybe both.  But it’s definitely not neither, that’s for sure.

And when you start to think about this Sestak thing you realize that there’s related history that needs to be analyzed a bit closer.  What about the case of State Rep. Andrew Romanoff (CO, D) whom the Obama regime may have tried to buy off with a White House job instead of having him run in the primary  against Senator Mike Bennett.  Or what about the allegations surrounding former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich vis a vis his “selling” Obama’s Senate seat.  Did in fact Obama have anything to do with that?  What about Rham Emmanuel or David Axelrod, both along with Obama from Chicago?

I think what we have here are the makings of a full blown Congressional investigation, where people under oath get to state what they knew and when they knew it.  That rings familiar, no?

And so the process of impeachment begins.

And that’s all there is to it.