Premiere of GBTV and the Rewriting of History

I watched the premiere of GBTV last night, while I’m not sure I like the format, I agree with Glenn’s comments about the rewriting of history.

I vaguely remember learning that the Statue of Liberty had a hole in it and that is was caused by a rocket. I don’t remember when or how I learned this. If I ever knew more details I forgot them. The fact that I don’t remember more of the story makes Glenn’s point. Why is this not common knowledge?

I think Glenn has it right; the left focuses on names and dates so they can rewrite history as they want people to learn it. The emphasis on the names and dates keeps it so boring that kids don’t want to dig deeper. They just memorize what they need to pass the test. All the while in the background the left is creating a new version of history that fits their agenda. All they need to do is wait 20 years for everyone’s memory to fuzzy then role out the new “history”. Since that is all the next generation will ever know they will never question it.

You can see this in the book or movie 1984 by George Orwell. Despite all the governments attempts to control the thoughts of the adults a few still remember what it used to be like. The kids, however, have never known anything different so they don’t question it – they are proud to help Big Brother.

If you think it can’t happen – open your eyes! It is already happening. True to Orwellian form we are watching as President Obama and the left redefines our relationship with Israel. When did Israel become the terrorists and Hamas the peace loving people that just want a homeland? Do you remember or has it always been that way?

I don’t want to live in the revisionist history world. More importantly, I don’t want my kids to have to live in that world. I will be one of the 10% that will help bring about change.

Ten perplexing questions about Libya for the left

I wish I could take credit for this title and list of questions but I cannot.  I am only re-posting them here because I have asked nearly all these questions myself in one form or another.  The original location of these questions is http://www.glennbeck.com/content/blog/stu/ten-perplexing-questions-about-libya-for-the-left/.  I hope by posting them here that those who feel it would be better to be caught surfing the Playboy site than the Glenn Beck site will see them.  If anyone has an answer to these questions, please post a comment.

1. When we had a vote to authorize military action on Iraq, it was wrong.   But when we don’t have a vote on it?  Or even a real debate on a war in Libya—it’s okay?
2. Is this purely a war fought on humanitarian grounds?
3. If no, what are the interests of the United States in Libya?
4. If our interests are oil, okay…but are you suddenly okay with war for oil?
5. If humanitarian reasons are enough by themselves, will you promise to never bring up WMD’s in Iraq again?
6. Do you disagree with this quote:   “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”/ Or is Libya an “imminent threat” to us?  [By the way, that quote was from:  Barack Obama December 20, 2007]
7. If things go badly, and Gadhafi holds power for a while, do we escalate things?  Or are we allowing in our war plan for the real possibility of failure?
8. If the idea is to stop the brutalization of civilians—why not Sudan? Congo? Syria? Fill in awful situation around the world…
9. Is it okay for Gadhafi to remain in power as the administration has hinted?  And if so, and Gadhafi goes back to killing a few months after we leave—are we going back in?
10. How does it feel to have elected a president who is now managing 50% more wars than George W. Bush?  A president who has launched a new war with a coalition half the size?

 

Hypocrisy

It takes a very arrogant person to publicly demonstrate hypocrisy and not even blink.  Unfortunately for us, President Obama has done just that.

President Obama was quick to speak out on behalf of the protestors in Egypt, calling on (some would say demanding) President Mubarak to withdraw the military and restore access to social networking sites saying that it is their right to peacefully protest their government.

Before I go any further I want to say that I don’t support either side because I don’t know enough about the situation.  I’m sure each side has legitimate arguments to support their position.  I’m not going to comment on who is right or who is wrong in Egypt.  I want to focus on our President’s response.

Let’s consider his use of the word “peacefully”.  When the Tea Party here in the U.S. held a rally in Washington D.C. the President and his party have called them dangerous, violent, un-American, and crazy.  Yet, when the Egyptian protesters attack the police, storm building, and set some on fire our President says they have the right to “peacefully protest” and the Egyptian government should withdraw the military.  Tell me President Obama, if 50,000 Tea Party members stormed the Capitol and set it on fire would you use ever resource available, including the military, to stop them?  I think so.  Here is our first case of hypocrisy – truly peaceful demonstrations in D.C. where people chant “Read the Bill” are called dangerous and violent but actual dangerous and violent demonstrations in Cairo where people chant “Martyr” and burn buildings are called peaceful.

Now consider who President Obama supports and who he doesn’t.  Back in 2009 when the Iranian people protested an obviously rigged election President Obama didn’t say a word.  In 2009 we had the best chance to support a change in Iran since the Islamic Revolution 30 years prior in 1979. It was during that protest turned revolution that our people were held hostage for 444 days.  Some say that Iran’s current President, Ahmadinejad, was one of the hostage takers.  Not a word from our President.  Here is our second case of hypocrisy – Egypt is an ally and a stabilizing force in the region and our President sides with the protesters while Iran is openly hostile towards us, is actively seeking nuclear weapons, has vowed to wipe Israel off the map (remember they consider Israel the Little Satan and the U.S. the Great Satan, if they want to wipe Israel off the map; how do you think they feel about us?) and our President, by not saying anything, sides with the Iranian government.

Lastly, consider President Obama’s call for Egypt to restore access to social networking sites while he and his administration support a bill (Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act – PCNAA) that would give the President the authority to shutdown down parts of the Internet (i.e. access providers, search engines, social networking sites) here in the U.S. in the event of a “cyber-emergency”.  Here is our third case of hypocrisy – we are telling Egypt’s President to allow his citizens access to the Internet that could be(and has been) used to organize their protests while our President supports a bill that would give him the power to deny our citizens access to the Internet during a vaguely defined cyber-emergency.

I wonder if the government would block access to websites used by “dangerous” and “violent” groups such as the Tea Party during a terrorist attack, a national disaster, or a just a close election to prevent misinformation and panic under the guise of a cyber-emergency.  I’m sure not; that is what countries like China do (for fun – go to Google.com and Baidu.com and search for “Tiananmen Square”, on each and compare the results).  Then again President Obama and his administration seem enamored with China…

State of the Union – Debt

During tonight’s State of the Union speech, President Obama plans to focus on an agenda to create jobs, or so I’ve heard.  We will likely hear him use the word “invest” a lot tonight.  In the past we have heard how we need to “invest” in green energy, “invest” in education, “invest” in economic growth, “invest” in jobs.  Invest is a liberal code word for “spend”.

Investing is when you use your money to purchase something you believe will return more money than the original purchase price through interest, dividends and the final sale price.  Investing should only be done after carefully considering the risks and alternatives and understanding the expected return.

Spending, on the other hand, is when you use your money to purchase something you need or want without considering the future value.  For example, if you want a new car you SPEND money on it, you don’t INVEST money into it because we all know that the car will decline in value over time.

Both investing and spending are normal activities; there is nothing wrong with either.  The problem comes in when the Government knows the people aren’t open to spending more money, so they need to change the terminology.  We aren’t spending money on yet another stimulus or bailout, no; we are investing money in a jobs program.

Mr. President, before you “invest” any more of our money I would like to see a prospectus and return on investment (ROI) study that shows us what the payoff is going to be.  Your last investment didn’t produce the returns you promised.  Remember the stimulus bill we needed to pass to prevent unemployment from reaching 8%?  It didn’t work.  We are over $14,000,000,000,000 in debt and the official unemployment is at 9.4% (down from a high of 10.1% in October of 2009).  The U6 unemployment rate (or “real” rate) is 16.7% (down from a high of 17.1% in September of 2010) – see http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp.

That $14 trillion dollar debt works out to about $45,000 per U.S. citizen.  The median household income in the U.S. according to the 2005 census was $44,389.  Think about that – $45,000 of debt per CITIZEN but only $44,389 of income per HOUSEHOLD.  At the current spending rates our debt jumps to $22 trillion / $68,000 per U.S. citizen in just four years (see http://www.usdebtclock.org).  That is a bad investment.

If you really want to invest in our future we need to reduce our debt by slashing, not cutting, our spending.  That was the message the voters sent you last November Mr. President.  Are you with us?

Enough with the Nazi references

If you need to vilify your opponent there is nothing better than comparing them to the Nazis.  President Bush and the Republican Party were liken to Hilter and the Nazis throughout his two terms in office.  It continues today.  The Republicans held to their promise to bring a vote on repealing the health care bill passed last year.  During the debate Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen chose to take the low road and compare the Republicans to Nazis, quoting Rep. Cohen

They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels.  You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it.

The Germans said enough about the Jews and the people believed it and you had the Holocaust.

In case you don’t understand the Goebbels reference, Joseph Goebbels was the Reich Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany and one of Hilter’s closest confidants.  Many believe Goebbels was the mastermind behind the Kristallnacht (Night of Broken Glass) that ultimately lead to the “Final Solution” and the Holocaust.

So, what Rep. Cohen is suggesting is that Republicans are engaging in a massive propaganda effort to discredit the health care bill and if successful they will bring something about so devastating that it could and should be compared to the genocide of over six million people.  Rep. Cohen, with all due respect for your office, that is monumentally stupid.  By invoking the Nazi references you are engaging in the propaganda you accuse the Republicans of.

Let’s have a little bit of history here.  The term Nazi is short for the German word Nationalsozialist.  The full name of the Nazi Party is the National Socialist German Worker’s Party.  The Nazis were socialists who felt that Germans (Aryans to be precise) were superior to all others.  In particular, they hated the Jewish people, considering them a subclass of humanity that could and should be exterminated by systematic genocide.

I’m tired of people using the terms Nazi and the Holocaust as an easy way to score points.  I think it is shameful and disrespectful to those that experienced the true Holocaust.  Unless you have evidence that your opponent believes they are racially, ethnical, and religiously superior to another group of people AND has plans to commit genocide against that group drop the Nazi and Holocaust terminology.  The only group that deserves to be called Nazis today are the clerics and leaders in Iran who want to “wipe Israel of the map”.  Bonus trivia, did you know that Iran is Farsi for Aryan?

So, Rep. Cohen, maybe you missed the memo but we are supposed to be scaling back the rhetoric now.  Why don’t you and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who said “this is killing Americans if we take this away, if we repeal this bill”, attend a civility training class together.  After all, your language might frighten your minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, as she said “This kind of rhetoric [is] very frightening… it create[s] a climate in which violence [takes] place”.  You should ask her about it, she saw it herself “in the late seventies in San Francisco”.

China’s rise, our demise?

Some personal matters have kept me away from the keyboard recently.  Hopefully those are all behind me now because there is still much to say.

China’s President is over here for a visit with President Obama.  I heard on the news that they plan to discuss human rights and currency manipulation concerns.  Really?  Don’t expect anything to come of these discussions.  We owe China more than any other country.  We need to stay on friendly terms so they will keep lending us money.  In case you haven’t noticed drunken sailors are started to get concerned about how much Obama and previous Congress spent and are planning to spend.

We can’t afford to offend our biggest lender any more than the average person can afford to offend their employer.  And China knows it.  Why else would they schedule the demonstration of their new stealth fighter while our Secretary of Defense was in China?  They were sending us a message – China calls the shots now.

We have been slowly sending our wealth to China with all the stuff “Made in China”.  It was great arrangement, companies get access to a low cost workforce and a billion plus person market while the consumer gets low cost goods.  They are also low quality but that is another topic.  What has China done with that money?  Among other things, they have invested heavily in rare earth metals production.

Don’t know what rare earth metals (or rare earth elements) are?  They are essential to all technology today.  The batteries in your Prius use rare earth elements (REE).  Hard drives in computers use REE.  Flat screen high def TVs use, you guessed it, REE.  Cell phones, medical devices, and advanced electronics used by the military all rely on REE now.

China controls about 97% of all REE production now and in October of last year slashed exports of REE over 70%.  Look it up yourself, just Google for “china rare earth metals”.  Here are a few links I found:

• http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article23769.html
• http://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-has-just-started-ban-of-rare-earth-metal-exports-to-the-us-2010-10
• http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/news.newsmain/article/1/0/1751178/WXXI.Local.Stories/Schumer.Urges.Action.on.China%27s.Lock.on.Rare.Earth.Elements
• http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/business/global/20rare.html

If China controls the REE market they control the technology market.  If you control the technology market you control everything.  What made America a superpower after WWII – technology and capital.  China already has the capital and they are rapidly gaining the technology.  Unless we act quickly to reduce our dependence on China and start developing a long term strategy like China has we are going to find ourselves on the decline as China rises.

Free speech has a price…

I wrote yesterday about the importance of free speech.  I wrote about how using the shooting in Arizona to restrict our rights was dangerous and wrong.  Now I read that the Westboro Baptist Church is planning to protest the funeral of the 9 year old girl killed in Arizona.  Here’s a test – do I side with free speech or against it?

Before I answer that question, I need to say something.  The Westboro Baptist Church gives a bad name to “Westboro”, “Baptist”, and “Church”.  These people are nothing more than hate-filled, loud-mouthed, poison tongued, liars and hypocrites.  They hide behind the guise of religion when in fact they are completely ignorant of the Bible they claim to preach.  How can you carry a sign that reads “God Hates You” while preaching “For God so loved the world…”?   I’m guessing they skip that verse.  It’s John 3:16 in case you need to look it up WBC. This posting isn’t about religion, maybe someday, but not today.  I only point it out to show that Fred Phelps and his followers are frauds.

As I said yesterday, even frauds have a right to say and do things that we find offensive.  It is the price we pay for the freedom we enjoy.  I want to the freedom to denounce WBC so I have to support their right to give me something to denounce them for.  That being said, I once heard our rights described as “your right to throw your fist ends and the tip of my nose”.  So, Westboro Baptist Church, your right to spew your hatred and inflict pain ends at the funeral home, funeral route, and cemetery.

If you feel the need to demonstrate before the world your complete lack of tact, decorum, kindness, and basic human decency that is your right.  The family has rights too.  They have a right privacy.  Respect it.

Instead of spreading hatred, try praying for the family.  It might just open your eyes and you might realize this isn’t about you and your agenda.  It’s about a grieving family and a little girl whose life was far too short.

Outlawing perceived threats

Yesterday I wrote about my fear that lawmakers would use the tragedy in Arizona to push an anti-second amendment agenda.  I still think that is coming but apparently, some are going after the first amendment as well.

Robert Brady, D-PA, intends to propose a new bill outlawing “language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a member of Congress” saying “You can’t put bulls eyes or crosshairs on a United States Congressman or a federal official” referring to a web page used by Sarah Palin during the 2010 mid-term elections.  Representative Brady, with all due respect, I don’t think you were paying attention when the Constitution was read the other day.  I quote the first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise therefore, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Unless you plan to violate our first amendment rights you cannot outlaw “language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a member of Congress”.  The word perceived is the key word in that sentence.  We are not talking about a real threat, just a perceived threat.  Who gets to decide if the language or symbols were a threat or not?  There was a reason the Founding Fathers wrote “Congress shall make no law…”.  They knew it was a slippery slope to go down to define what is and isn’t allowed.  They opted for maximum freedom, knowing that would allow people to say and do things others, including they themselves, would disagree with.

Are we really prepared to lose this freedom; especially when it won’t really protect anyone?  More details are coming out about Jared Loughner that suggest he was fixated on Congresswomen Giffords since least 2007 when he first met her.  For those keeping track, 2007 is before anyone ever heard of the Tea Party so I think it is out of line to blame his actions on the alleged hate and vitriol on the right.  In Jared Loughner’s own words he “planned ahead”, he saved a thank you note from Giffords’ office from a similar event in 2007, he but was upset over her answer to his question regarding grammar.  It wasn’t language or symbols that incited him to act violently; it was his sad mental state.

What happened in Arizona was a tragedy, however, using it to score political points and push your agenda is a travesty and does nothing to honor those injured or killed.

Tragedy in Arizona and how it may impact gun control laws

Sadly a very disturbed individual ended at least six lives, severely injured several more, and shattered the lives of dozens if not hundreds more in Arizona yesterday.  I send my heartfelt condolences to the families that lost loved ones and hope for a speedy and full recovery for those injured.  You are and will be in my prayers.

This was a horrific act but I’m afraid the results of it will be worse.  We have seen that our current President and many in Congress are not shy about using a crisis to further their agendas.  I’m afraid our lawmakers and President will use this tragic event to enact more gun control laws.  I’m afraid the people will ask the lawmakers and President to enact more gun control laws.  I’m afraid we are about to lose freedoms.

Gun control laws are not the answer.  This person was determined to commit this crime.  Restricting the rights of law abiding citizens to own and/or carry a firearm will not stop people who are determined to commit a crime.  Remember the quote from Benjamin Franklin on my first post…

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Our best defense against this type of crime is not chipping away at, or taking away, our second amendment rights.  Rather it is getting back the basics our founding principles; respect and protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  We need to get back to teaching the concepts of the Ten Commandments.  After yesterday who can argue with teaching “Thou shall not kill”.  Instead we are teaching it is OK to kill – abortion.  Like it or not, abortion ends a life; modern medicine has proven that with videos of heartbeats very early in pregnancy.  I’ll need to write another posting on abortion since it off topic for this posting; until then just consider if as a society we have convinced ourselves that it OK to end the life of the most innocent of humans why would we have any qualms about ending the life of someone we disagree with or has wronged us in some way?

The media has already tied to spin this as violence on the right and from the Tea Party (just like the Times Square Bomber).  Certain lawmakers will use this to enact their big government, anti-freedom agendas.  They have been preparing us for this for some time, warning the Tea Party is dangerous, that the current situation reminds them of violence during the Civil Rights movement, etc.  Watch them closely.  Because of an economic crisis we spend over one trillion dollars we didn’t have.  What will they do if there is a perceived safety crisis?

I won’t be silent any longer

Welcome to 2011.

I’ve been doing some thinking lately and I came to a conclusion.  I’m tired of political correctness, I’m tired of hearing that because I don’t agree with President Obama I’m a racist, I’m tired of other people trying to make feel guilty or ashamed about what I believe.  I’m not big into the whole blogging scene.  I’m not a writer, I have a full time job and a family, and I don’t have much time to spend on writing a blog.  I tried it back in 2008 but didn’t stay with it (I’ll be honest; I don’t understand the attraction of blogging and social networking).  So why am I coming back to it?  As I said, I’m tired of one side controlling the conversation.  I don’t expect to change anything with this blog; I may not even stay with it.  It doesn’t matter to me how many people read this blog.  I’m doing because I feel I need to say a few things, even if nobody is listening.

The people talking the loudest and longest right now see the government as the solution to all our problems.  Sadly, too many people are willing to turn to government solutions because they feel they are getting something for nothing.  In many cases they are, nearly half the country receives more in tax refunds than they pay in taxes.  Too many have forgotten the concepts that made this country great.  That needs to change.  Until my next posting, consider these two quotes – apply them to your life.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety – Benjamin Franklin

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have – Gerald Ford (often wrongly attributed to Thomas Jefferson).