Saturday, March 31, 2012

"Earth Hour's" Global Propaganda Campaign ... Alan Caruba

"Earth Hour's" Global Propaganda Campaign

By Alan Caruba

 On Saturday, 8:30 PM local time, everyone will be invited to turn off all their electrical devices and presumably sit in the dark. According to the World Wildlife Fund, Earth Hour is intended to “encourage American cities to prepare for the costly impacts of climate-related extreme weather and reduce their carbon footprint.”

Earth Hour is an example of the enormous funding available to the Greens and of their continued assault on the world’s population to encourage and maintain its message that the Earth is imperiled by mankind’s activities, i.e., the use of energy. Earth Hour is a huge piece of international propaganda. Millions of dollars and man-hours have been expended to get the lights turned off from the Eiffel Tower to the Empire State Building, the Leaning Tower of Pisa to Australia’s Opera House.

You may have noticed there is no longer any reference to “global warming.” That’s because a growing percentage of Americans have concluded that global warming is a hoax. The same charlatans behind Earth Hour and the forthcoming Earth Day on April 22nd have mostly abandoned any reference to global warming and are now lying to you about “climate change” and, soon enough, will shift their message to “sustainability.”

On December 21, 2012, you will find the same people who have drunk deeply of the global warming Kool-Aid sitting on mountaintops waiting for the end of the world as predicted by a Mayan calendar. You will not find any Mayans there because that civilization is long gone.

More recently, Pastor Harold Camping predicted the end of the world in 1994 and then revised his prediction to May 21, 2011. People have been predicting the end of the world for a very long time. They have all been wrong.

Earth Hour fits into this pattern, but its insidious purpose to maintain the same levels of anxiety and fear that has driven the environmental movement since it began in earnest back in the 1970s when it was predicting an ice age would arrive. A decade later they switched gears and began predicting global warming, projecting the end over periods of time from a decade to fifty years or so.

Global warming—a dramatic rise in the Earth’s temperatures—did not occur for two reasons; (1) it was a hoax based on computer models created by charlatans and, (2) largely due to a natural cooling cycle that set in around 1998 as the Sun’s sunspot activity began its own natural cycle in which fewer such magnetic storms occurred. Scientists have long known that a reduction of sunspots has always been accompanied by cooling on Earth.

The Green’s claim that a build-up of carbon dioxide (CO2) would plunge the Earth into a period of warming is the greatest lie of the modern era. The Earth has had periods in which the level of CO2 was much higher. Vital to all life on Earth, CO2 is to all vegetation what oxygen is to all animal life.

The notion that “man made” CO2 portends disaster is false and is directed at forcing the reduction of the use of all “fossil fuels” for industrial and all other uses. It is the greatest scam ever perpetrated because the Greens use it to sell “carbon credits”, worthless pieces of paper that could be sold or traded in the same way as the “indulgences” that were sold as a way to buy a ticket into heaven.

I recommend that you read a short book that explains how and why the environmental movement is a huge scam and a hideous attack on mankind. “Roosters of the Apocalypse” by Rael Jean Isaac ($8.95) is published by The Heartland Institute and can be purchased from its website. In less time than it takes to watch “Dancing with the Stars”, you will learn everything you need to know about the global warming scam and all the ways you and everyone else are being robbed by the schemes tied to it, to “climate change”, and to “sustainability.”

Ms. Isaac tells the story of how, in today’s South Africa, the Xhosa tribe destroyed its economy in 1856. Based on a prophecy of a 15-year-old orphan girl, they killed an estimated half-million of their own cattle, ceased planting crops, and destroyed their grain stores. “By the end of 1857 between thirty and fifty thousand of them had starved to death—a third to a half of their population.”

Turning off all electricity during Earth Hour is no different from what the Xhosa tribe did and refusing to allow the drilling for oil and natural gas, or mining coal, all of which the United States has in sufficient abundance to make us energy independent and exporters of these energy reserves, is an act of national suicide; one that this international symbolism portends for any nation that abandons the energy that sustains economic growth and the welfare of millions.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Human activity, mostly in the past five thousand years that we call civilization, has not had a thing to do with its existence, but some humans are foolish creatures, easily spooked by prophecies that do not come true or claims that they are responsible for its existence and future. Some of them will turn off their electricity on Saturday.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Friday, March 30, 2012

Abolish The EPA

Abolish The EPA
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

The EPA's recent move toward strangling the coal-fired electricity generating plants in America is another power grab by the "greenies" in the US government.  If not stopped by the Congress these new regulations will close and shutter dozens of coal-fired plants around the country and thousands upon thousands of workers in the electricity generating business, and businesses associated with them, will be out of a job. 

We are looking at a shortage of electricity in America if Congress does not vacate these regulations.  Rolling blackouts will be common here (in America) as they already are in developing countries.

I reside in Hurricane Alley so I know a thing or two about having no electricity for days and weeks on end. You are not going to like it, America.  But you'd better prepare yourself because it is coming as surely as a Martin flies to its gourd.

Look.  You may not like it.  You may not want to hear it -- but -- the plain fact is: Windmills and solar panels cannot produce the quantity of electric power a vibrant economy like America MUST HAVE to thrive.  It is simply impossible.  On the other hand, it might work if we bought Europe and covered it will windmills and solar panels.  But, frankly, I suspect even that would not be enough. 

Solar panels are great for powering driveway lights and small weather stations and such.  But to power a single city, like New York or Los Angles, you'd need an area larger than the size of Nebraska with nothing but solar panels twinkling at the sky.  It is a DUMB idea!

Windmills are a joke.  Unfortunately they are a lethal joke to the thousands of birds slaughtered by those whirling blades every year.  And they are butt-ugly!  Have you seen them?  Forget the little Dutch windmills on greeting cards and such.  They are tiny compared to today’s modern wind machines. 

Today's windmills stand as much as two hundred to three hundred feet tall and their blades span as much as three hundred feet across.  They are monsters.  Did I mention they are ugly, to boot?

Oh, and did I mention the secret bout windmills?  No?  well, you see -- they don't work when the wind is not blowing.  Now, when we say the wind is blowing, we don't mean the breeze we mortals thing of as "the wind."  No we are talking about the kind of winds you find on mountain slopes and along the shorelines.  Strong winds.  So, what happens when the wind isn't blowing and the windmills aren't producing electricity?  Well, power plants fueled by coal, nuclear power, and natural gas have to be fired-up to generate enough electricity to keep pumping power out onto the national power grid.  

When the sun's not shining -- solar panels produce zero electricity.

When the wind's not blowing-- Windmills produce zero electricity.

If you call the popular play and movie "Man of La Mancha," you will recall that he only TILTED at windmills (and he was as mad as a hatter).  Our dreamy-eyed President has embraced the cussed things.  (Did I mention they are ugly, too?)

The only practical electric car I have ever seen was a toy.  It actually did what it was supposed to do and that was to create fun for a child -- and NOTHING more.

While I am on electric cars -- I don't recall anyone saying what it would cost the owner of one of those battery powered cars when, and if, they had to replace the batteries!  I suspect one could buy a fairly good used car for what one would have to pay to replace those batteries.

Generally speaking, Americans are not dumb -- even though the Obama Administration gives every indication they believe we are.  Americans are not going to purchase electric cars for many decades into the future -- if ever.  Like the bullet trains the President is so fond off, so far as battery powered cars are concerned -- we don't need them, we don't like them, and we sure as heck, don't want them.

The EPA is the point of the spear for the green/socialist agenda in the United States.  I did not like it when President Richard Nixon created the EPA some forty years ago.  I feared, even then, the EPA would become and would do exactly what it has become and is doing.  Any agency with that kind of power -- and unanswerable to the American people -- can always be expected to go rogue.

A dark side of the human condition, human nature, if you will, is a thirst for power over one's fellow human beings.  Given an opportunity, sad to say, those who tend toward slacking their thirst for power will do so.

The EPA has become so powerful it defies the Congress of the United States.  In a free country a government agency gone rogue must be put down.    

In my lifetime there have been three, count 'em, THREE organizations that have wrought unspeakable damage on their respective countries -- the Gestapo in Nazi Germany, the KGB in the Soviet Union, and the EPA in the United States.

The Environmental Protection Agency has become a rogue agency.  It is power hungry and it has an agenda.  That agenda is based on a lie and a hoax, but it makes little difference because the EPA has the power to FORCE Americans to abide by the will of the EPA or be destroyed.  There is another agenda, akin to a "back story" to the pubic agenda of the EPA and that is the furtherance of socialism in America.

Make no mistake about it.  The green agenda and the socialist agenda are one and the same.  While environmentalism, much like a watermelon, is green on the outside, inside it is communist red.    If communism had an official religion, it would be environmentalism.

Again, we call upon the US Congress to abolish the EPA.  Funding should be cut off, entirely, until the dismantling of the agency is complete.

In an article entitled "The EPA Wrecking Ball," my friend Alan Caruba said:  "We are witnessing the destruction of the nation by the environmental movement and the EPA has just provided you with the most dramatic example of that plan." (SOURCE)

I could not agree more with Alan.  Sometimes it feels as if we conservative writers suffer from much the same curse as that with which Apollo hobbled Cassandra of Greek mythology. 

You may recall that Apollo gave Cassandra the gift of prophecy, but when she failed to return his love -- he added the curse that no one would ever believe her predictions.    

In the face of all our predictions over the past four decades nothing has been done to put a stop to this government agency that is off the reservation.  Now it has grown so powerful it tells the US Congress what it (The EPA) will do and dares the Congress to stop it.

The EPA has gone beyond the pale. As an agency of the US government, which is constitutionally answerable to the American people, the EPA is now outside the limits of acceptable behavior.  Its actions are now objectionable and certainly improper in a free country.

Abolish the EPA -- NOW.

J. D. Longstreet

Thursday, March 29, 2012

I'll Tell Vlad, Mr. President

I'll Tell Vlad, Mr. President
ALL Microphones ARE HOT!
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet 

I was in the broadcasting business for thirty years.  One of the first things you learn is that one must always consider a microphone, ANY and EVERY microphone to be HOT  -- in other words,  switched on and transmitting with the "pot" set at 80 decibels, or more.

I recall a number of times two or more broadcasters would be having a discussion in a control room, or studio, when a mike would be turned on.  The room would go deathly silent --instantly.  Some speaking would halt in mid-word as if an unseen laser had suddenly severed their vocal cords.  Broadcasters become so sensitive around microphones that it becomes something of a sixth sense.  Even with that extra sense we still manage to have our moments of embarrassment before a mike. 

A broadcaster learns never to have a conversation -- anywhere near a mike -- that he doesn't mind the entire world hearing.   Forget distance from a mike.  Microphones are so sensitive today, there IS no "safe" distance from a mike that your conversation cannot be picked up electronically.

I have a digital recorder, smaller than a pack of cigarettes that will record conversations twenty to thirty feet away in a meeting room -- clearly.   And that is not even considered high tech, anymore.

The lesson I am attempting to impart is simply this:  If you are tempted to have a private conversation anywhere -- where you know there is a microphone -- DON'T!

When the small lavalier mikes first came on the market, entertainers and ministers gobbled them up.  Those tiny mikes would clip onto your tie or lapel and a small wire ran from the mike to a battery pack and transmitter located someplace on one's person out of sight of the audience or congregation.   The lavalier mikes would transmit to the main transmitter in the studio or church and be broadcast or sent through the public address system in the church.

Now, entertainers, as a rule, are "mike smart."  They know not to do something, or say something, stupid -- after you have been "miked." 

Early on, however, ministers were not that mike savvy.  The men of the cloth soon learned a hard and embarrassing lesson when a few,  after being "miked," decided to visit the restroom, one last time, before entering the pulpit.  You can guess what happened.  Once that mike is clipped on you and turned on -- you have no secrets.

You would think the folks who handle Presidents, especially the unit that handles Presidential electronic communications, would make a point of instructing our Presidents and Vice-Presidents in such basic mike etiquette.  Who knows?  Perhaps they do and our illustrious leaders fluff them off -- until they say something stupid, confidential, or even secret, in the presence of a live microphone. 

Once a microphone has been tested and the "level" set, as a rule, that mike is left on (hot) until the performer or speaker takes the stage, lectern, or pulpit.  Yes, there IS a reason for that.  Should the mike show signs of a problem while it is set and waiting for the speaker, it allows the sound engineers time to solve the problem or replace the mike -- BEFORE the speaker begins.

It is all basic stuff.

Knowledge of mike basics is not enough.  One must practice the proper etiquette or one will suffer the consequences.

Had President Obama had the self restraint to remain mute, with a mike so close, and not engage in a private conversation with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev he might not have frightened roughly half the people of earth with his comments about his "flexibility" after his reelection.  What he actually said was: “This is my last election,” Obama said. “After my election, I have more flexibility.”

OK.  Before my liberal friends get all bent out of shape, I DO recall President Reagan's on-mike remarks paraphrased here:  "Let the bombing begin."  That, too, was in front of a hot mike.  The difference was this:  Reagan was doing a mike test to allow the engineers to set the "level" of the microphone. 

People's voices modulate differently.  For a good quality sound and to properly sense, or "pick up," a speaker's voice, a test is run and the levels are set before a speaker is ready to speak on the air or for a recording. (You may recall that occasionally "voice prints" are used in court.  Each person's voiceprint is different)

A mike test is supposed to be private.  All sorts of things are said -- jokingly -- during a mike test.  Reagan's joke was not meant for public consumption.  He was an actor and very familiar with testing mikes on the set.  I would imagine someone was dressed-down, shall we say -- energetically -- (if not fired) after that mike test was released to the public.

Obama's gaffe has the world wondering what, exactly, he meant by his remarks that Medvedev promised he would repeat to Vladimir Putin, the President-Elect of Russia. Was he referring to the missile shield proposed for Poland and other eastern European countries?  If so -- what did he mean?  Was he referring to his breath-taking endeavor to cut America's nuclear stockpile by a humongous eighty percent?

(Obama's should be advised that Putin is about as flexible as four-inch steel rebar.)   

We conservatives feel it is just a sample of what we have been warning about if Obama wins a second term.  He has been restrained during his first term because he wants to be reelected.  In a second term there are no such restraints and, frankly, we expect Mr. Obama, the socialist ideologue that he is, to basically go wild and really push his socialist agenda on the people of the US. It is NOT a chance we want to take.

So, all in all, maybe Obama's faux paux has given Americans a realistic look into his plans -- if granted a second term.  At least Mr. Obama's second term intention toward "flexibility" is no longer something the American voter has to guess about.  We are, however, worried about what he will be more flexible on:  gun control, illegal immigration, gay rights, socialized medicine, and the biggest of all -- interpretation of the US Constitution.

The American electorate has now had a "heads-up."  There is no excuse remaining for reelecting Obama.  Conservatives would be well advised to redouble their efforts to deny Obama an extension of his lease on the Oval Office.

J. D. Longstreet

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

The EPA Wrecking Ball ... J. D. Longstreet

The EPA Wrecking Ball

By Alan Caruba

The Environmental Protection Agency is using its power to advance the objective of the environmental movement to deny Americans access to the energy that sustains the nation’s economy and is using the greatest hoax ever perpetrated, global warming—now called “climate change”—to achieve that goal.

“This standard isn’t the once-and-for-all solution to our environmental challenge,” said Lisa Jackson, the EPA administrator, “but it is an important commonsense step toward tackling the ongoing and very real threat of climate change and protecting the future for generations to come. It will enhance the lives of our children and our children’s children.”

This is a boldfaced lie. Its newest rule is based on the debasement of science that is characterized and embodied in the global warming hoax. It will deprive America of the energy it requires to function.

Since the 1980s the Greens have been telling everyone that carbon dioxide was causing global warming—now called climate change—and warning that CO2 emissions were going to kill everyone in the world if they weren’t dramatically reduced. The ball was put in motion with the United Nations 1997 Kyoto Protocols when many nations agreed to this absurd idea and carried forward by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ever since.

The Environmental Protection Agency was created to clean the nation’s air and water where it was deemed that a hazard existed. Like most noble ideas and most Congressional mandates, the initial language was vague enough to be interpreted to mean anything those in charge wanted it to mean. Add in the global warming hoax and you have the means to destroy the nation.

Now it means that the source of fifty percent of all the electricity generated in the United States is being systematically put out of business and please do not act surprised; that’s exactly what Barack Obama said he intended to do if elected President.

This is evil writ large.

Shutting down utilities that use coal, an energy source the U.S. has in such abundance that it could provide electricity for the next hundreds of years, and ensuring that no new ones are built fits in perfectly with all the Green pipedreams about "renewable" energy. Solar and wind presently provide about two percent of the nation’s electricity and, without government subsidies and mandates requiring their use, they would not exist at all.

How stupid is it to not build more nuclear power plants when this form of power doesn’t emit anything but energy?

How stupid is it not to use coal when the U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal?

How stupid is it to begin to find reasons to regulate and thwart fracking, the technology to access trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that has been in use for decades?

How stupid is it to cover miles of land, far from any urban center, with hundreds of solar panels or huge, ugly wind turbines that kill thousands of birds every year?

The sun does not shine all the time, nor does the wind blow all the time. In the event of overcast skies or a day without wind, traditional plants—those using coal, gas, nuclear or generating hydroelectric power—have to be maintained as a backup. Take away the coal-fired plants and there were be huge gap in the national grid.

Darkness will descend and Americans will begin to live with blackouts and brownouts that will undermine every aspect of our lives. It’s bad enough when a town or even a city briefly loses power because of a storm, but imagine that occurring on a regular basis because there just aren’t enough utilities generating power!

What kind of people stand by idly while its own government conspires to take away the primary source of energy that everything else depends upon? The answer? You. The answer is the many elected politicians that have done little to rein in a rogue government agency intent on undermining the nation by denying it the ability to generate power with the least expensive source of electricity, coal.

The EPA, an unelected bureaucracy, has just ensured that all Americans, industries, small businesses, and individuals will begin pay far more for electrical power.

Richard J. Trzupek, the author of “Regulators Run Wild” and an environment policy advisor for The Heartland Institute, said of the new rule, “With around 50,000 megawatts of coal-fired power set to be forcibly retired in the next few years—thanks to the draconian policies of Obama’s EPA—this rule ensures that no new modern, efficient coal fired power plants will be built to fill the gap.”

In a triumph of crony capitalism, Trzupek notes that “The big winner will be Obama’s good friend, GE Chairman Jeff Immelt. Since solar and wind cannot fill a 50,000 megawatt baseload gap, the only way to ensure continued reliability of the grid is to build a lot of natural gas-fired plants quickly. And who is the biggest supplier of natural gas-fired combustion engines? GE of course.”

If you think that environmental organizations like the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth, among many others, are seeking to “protect” the Earth, you are seriously mistaken. They have been among the leading opponents of coal and they have had allies in Congress such as the Majority Leader of the Senate, Harry Reid, (D-NV) who has said “Coal makes us sick. Oil makes us sick.”

NO! Coal provides the engine of our nation’s electrical power and oil provides the energy that fuels our transportation and is the basis for countless products that enhance and improve our lives every day.

We are witnessing the destruction of the nation by the environmental movement and the EPA has just provided you with the most dramatic example of that plan.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Alan Caruba's commentaries are posted daily at "Warning Signs" his popular blog and thereafter on dozens of other websites and blogs. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. To visit his Facebook page, click here For information on his professional skills, is the place to visit.

Violent Death in America is an Equal Opportunity Crime ... Alan Caruba

Violent Death in America is an Equal Opportunity Crime

By Alan Caruba

I have had an interest in demography, the study of populations and trends within populations, for a long time. Racial animosities in America have been a factor from the moment white colonists stepped off the boat and were greeted by Native Americans and, not that long after, when the first blacks arrived from Africa where slavery had flourished for centuries.

I lived in the South when Jim Crow laws were on the books and public facilities were segregated. I was a young reporter during the Civil Rights era of the 1960s and even met Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on one occasion. I have seen the best and worst of what race represents in America.

I would count the initial reporting on the killing of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, as among the worst media coverage in a while because, as the facts begin to emerge after a month, it turns out that there was an eye witness to the incident in which George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, suffered a broken nose and injuries to the back of his head consistent with an attack.

The Black Panther Party issued a reward for Zimmerman’s “capture.” In the meantime, Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson, have been out doing what they always do, stirring up black anger and blaming all whites for what occurred.

Let’s look at the demographic facts. In 2007 the Associated Press reported that “Nearly half of the nation’s murder victims were black and the number of black men who were slain is on the rise.” The other half were murdered white victims.

Murder in America is an equal opportunity crime.

The article went on to note that black people represented an estimated 13 percent of the U.S. population in 2005, the latest data then available, but were the victims of 49 percent of all murders and 15 percent of rapes, assaults and other nonfatal violent crimes nationwide.”

The U.S. Justice Department study found that “Most of the black murder victims—93 percent—were killed by other black people.”

The study also found that 85 percent of white victims were slain by other white people. Of the black victims, 51 percent were in their late teens and twenties.

More recent statistics from 2009, posted on the website of the U.S. Department of Justice show pretty much the same trend. That year, 2,604 blacks were killed by blacks, along with 454 whites, but whites managed to kill each other to the tune of 2,963 victims, while killing 209 black victims.

Nationally by 2010, homicide was the leading cause of death for black young men ages 10-24 and the second leading cause of death for black women ages 15-24.

Overall, between 1974 and 2004, 52 percent of murderers were black, 48 percent were white, while 51 percent of the victims were white and 47 percent were black. If one can spin these statistics to suggest that the killing of Trayvon Martin was racial, be my guest.

Appearing on the Sean Hannity program Monday evening, Zimmerman’s friend, Joe Oliver, calmly defended him saying “he is not a racist.” Oliver is black.

Why Barack Obama felt it necessary to insert himself into the situation before the facts are established was a reminder of an earlier situation in 2009 when he took issue with an incident between Cambridge, Massachusetts police and a black professor who was hauled off to jail for failing to cooperate with them. Always assuming the police are to blame or inferring that Trayvon Martin was killed because he could have looked like Obama’s son, if he had one, is a serious breach of judgment. To say it out loud is even worse.

Finally, lost in all the hasty assumptions and accusations is the fact that Zimmerman was, as previously noted, a neighborhood watch volunteer and this suggests the Sanford, Florida neighborhood had crime problems. Trayvon, we’re learning, had some earlier experiences with the local police, so he was on that evening a subject of concern to Zimmerman who reported his presence to the police and was returning to his car when the shooting occurred.

No one takes any pleasure in the death of Trayvon Martin or any other young black man. It is a tragedy, but it is also one that is repeated far too many times in too many American cities for reasons that cannot be passed off as racism. His death reflects the pathologies that plague too many of America’s black population.

We should be celebrating the black men and women that escape their cultural bondage, embrace middle class values, and ennoble their lives through their personal achievements.

Exploiting his death is a disservice to both America’s black and white population.

© Alan Caruba, 2012
Alan Caruba's commentaries are posted daily at "Warning Signs" his popular blog and thereafter on dozens of other websites and blogs. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. To visit his Facebook page, click here For information on his professional skills, is the place to visit.

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Left's New Attack On 1st Amendment

Left's New Attack On 1st Amendment
A Call For Censorship in America
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

In the unlikely event you have not heard -- the Left HATES Rush Limbaugh.  So, what does the left do when it disagrees with someone?  Well, of course, they make an attempt to shut him/her up.   Wallah!  Hush Rush!  

The intolerance of the tolerant left is exceeded only by their love of Marxism. 

There is this belief (it seems to me) on the left that the First Amendment is meant only for those in America spouting socialist, Marxist, progressive, liberal nonsense.  But woe be unto him/her who dares, DARES, I say, to actually confront the left with their own shortcomings, their own intolerance, their own lies and distortions, and, their assumption of the ignorance of the American people.

Now they are stooping to intimidation.

The hypocrisy of the left is off the scale.  Their fake indignation over Mr. Limbaugh's remarks referencing a female college student testifying before a democratic committee recently is truly awesome.   All one has to do to see that the left's respect for women is less than they claim is listen to their music, watch one of their movies, or TV shows, or one of their TV talk shows.  The language they use when referencing women, especially women who's politics happens to be that of the conservative persuasion, is straight out of the gutter.

They are, indeed, two-faced. They say one thing but do another. They find blame with others who do the very same things they do.  I believe the shrinks call it "projection."

There has got to be a mental illness, a mass mental illness, on the political left in America.  How else are we to explain their total disconnect with reality? 

The REAL problem the Left has with Limbaugh is simple.  He has listeners.  That means his message of the left's hypocrisy is getting out to an America already saturated with leftist propaganda! 

We have seen it time and again.  The Left pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that are either nonexistent, or, are so completely outside the realm of decent society that the majority of Americans  do not recognize them, or, are embarrassed or revolted by them.

It is as if the political left in America views the citizens of America as a "Proletariat."  Proletariat, is a word with its roots in Latin.  It was often used Marxist government in the Kremlin to describe the masses of the Soviet Union's citizens.  Defined it means: a lower social class, usually the working class.  It would seem the American left views the American political left as their own proletariat -- And it is insulting and, frankly, disgusting.

There seems to be this powerful urge to silence dissenting opinion for fear the truth might spur that despicable  proletariat, the left looks down on, into some sort of action that might clear the smoke and mirrors the left  often uses to disguise their Marxist/Socialist agenda.
So, Limbaugh MUST BE SILENCED.  No matter that the 1st Amendment says Limbaugh has the right, as do all Americans, to express his opinion.  I mean, hey!  Its only the constitution.  You know, THE constitution, that outdated document this country was built on and thrived on, 'til the progressive movement decided it was no longer relevant and was, in fact, an impediment to their socialist/Marxist agenda for the America.

Limbaugh does not need me to defend him.  He can do that quite well, thank you.

What troubles me about this whole thing is not so much  Limbaugh himself, but the attack on the 1st Amendment. That is an assault on the freedom of every American, left and right.  You may not think this argument between left and right over speaking one's mind is anything more than a political game, but believe me, far more than that is at stake here than one-upmanship in a game..

Intimidation is a tool the left uses to bludgeon out of exitance anyone who disagrees with them.  Now, they have turned it on Limbaugh.  If they get away with it, it will embolden them to go after others.  Eventually, they will get to you -- and me, as well.

They know they can't get at Limbaugh directly, so they are going after his sponsors.  We will soon see which sponsors have the intestinal fortitude, the guts, the gumption, the steadfastness to ward off the left's attacks and continue to showcase their products to the millions of Americans who listen to Limbaugh's program every single day.  Those millions of listeners control millions of dollars of disposable income.  I suspect that when they learn of specific sponsors who fall away from Limbaugh's program, they will certainly hesitate, or even refuse, to spend their money on that sponsor's products.

In an article at Politco entitled: "The left's war on Rush's advertisers," Keith Appell, the Senior VP for CRC Public Relations, told POLITICO:  “It’s not enough to get an apology out of Rush Limbaugh. They want him off the air. He was still exercising his First Amendment rights, Trying to get someone off the air sounds like something out of the old Soviet Union."

Mr. Appel continued “Conservatives disagree, but we don’t try to silence people."  You may read the entire article HERE.

It is also reported that a list of sponsors remaining with Limbaugh will be published online.  I wonder if the list of the sponsors who left Limbaugh ought to published online, as well.  Seems to me THAT would be fair.  I mean, the left is always spouting about "fairness." Publication of such a list would allow listeners an opportunity to boycott their products, if they chose to do so.

David Limbaugh, Rush's brother tweeted the following: "
“[Liberals] have no concept of fairness and decency.  We would never seek to suppress their speech…. Libs seek a return of the glory days when the ‘unbiased’ MSM had monolithic control of the airwaves.”

Suzanne Terrell, a co-founder of ShePAC,  a new political action committee set up a month ago by two female activists and a former Palin advisor, (ShePac's Home Page) is reported to have said in a recent written rebuttal,  “The right should raise hell,  And we, every one of our elected officials and every one of our activists should call them out on this."  (SOURCE)

This is not a "tempest in a teapot," this is as important an issue as the Second Amendment's guarantee that American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms.  This is about the First Amendment's guarantee that American citizens have the right to free speech -- whether anyone, including the American political left,  agrees with what they say, or not.

J. D. Longstreet

Monday, March 26, 2012

Rush To Judgment Over Florida Teen Slaying

Rush To Judgment Over Florida Teen Slaying
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

I want to head something off – right now.  Florida is NOT the DEEP South!  Southerners in the true Deep South joke of Florida as a “Yankee” colony, not so much a southern state, as the result of the influx of people from the northern states over the past five or six decades.  It is a bit of uncomfortable humor that hews too close to truth -- especially for those in the coastal municipalities of that beautiful state.

Another thing, the shooting of the Florida black teen by a Hispanic man is not representative of black and white relations in the south anymore than it is in the northern states, the eastern states, the Midwest, or the West.

I don’t know what happened there when those two people met on that Florida street.  Only two people know what happened -- and one of them is dead. There are now reports that police have an eyewitness to the incident.  A TV station in Orlando, Florida located and interviewed the witness. You can read that story HERE.

Other than the death of another human being there are two more things that trouble me.

One -- is the rush to judgment by both the black and white communities and the trial of the shooter in the media.  It is reminiscent of those lynch mobs of days gone by.  In my opinion, there is no place in America for this sort of emotional outburst.  

I have actually SEEN a lynch mob. As a young reporter, I was reporting on a rape when the lynch mob formed and marched to the county jail to drag the accused out and hang him. 

I was there and I saw it, experienced it, and reported on it. 

I even managed to get inside the jail where deputies were holed-up. State troopers were finally called in to quell the mob before someone was hurt.  It was a tense and extremely dangerous incident. 

You cannot imagine the rage in a mob of that kind.  You can read about it, you can see it depicted on TV and in the movies, but until you have experienced it -- believe me  --- you do not understand the power of unbridled rage.  It is palpable and it is mindless, in and of itself, easily led by a single person willing to take on the responsibility of directing the rage of the mob. 

Mob mentality is a sort of madness – insanity.  At the core, a mob forces its will on others. That never ends well.

Since that event, I have distrusted mobs, demonstrations, displays of so-called “civil disobedience, or whatever the term in vogue at the time. 

The action of a mob, or a demonstration (take your pick), never changes the hearts, minds, and attitudes of the people toward whom the mob’s rage is directed.  The mob may force them into some sort of compliant behavior, but it only creates or intensifies the “target’s” distrust, distaste, disgust, and, perhaps, at a later time – defiance.

In the Florida situation, calm is called for.  However, I doubt that will happen when the Mainstream Media is whipping up such a wave of emotion. 

And Two – Florida’s gun laws.  It is my understanding that the “Castle Doctrine” and the “Stand Your Ground Law” are two different things, although, it is possible that circumstances could bring both to bear on a single incident.

Seems to me that Stand Your Ground covers a defensive situation.   The citizen under attack has the right, under law, not to retreat from his attacker -- and he may use the force necessary to protect himself.  The Castle Doctrine is pretty much the same except that it applies if your home (your castle) is being attacked/invaded.

North Carolina has some derivation of that law in place now.

In my opinion, both laws are good laws.  Most southern states have those laws in place.  Giving up those laws only moves us closer to a “police state.”  To give up the God-given right to protect yourself, your family, and your possessions only hands (even) more power to the government and, unfortunately, leaves the citizen at the mercy of criminals.

I am very afraid the end result of all the demonstrations and such, in Florida will end with the citizens of that state -- while in a state of high emotion – giving up more of their freedom and liberty, by repealing the Castle Doctrine or the Stand Your Ground Law – or both.  That would be a mistake, in my estimation, one that will be paid for in the blood of Florida citizens for years to come.

Florida needs calm and clear thinking -- not overruled by emotion -- to investigate the incident completely and try to ascertain the truth the best they are able.

Today’s Mainstream Media’s instant communications has turned a local incident into a national incident and fanned the flames of raw emotion until reason is being drowned in a tidal wave of anger.  Soon it will become political, in fact, I dare say, it already has. 

The drum majors of “victimhood” are already taking advantage of that community’s grief. They have pointed a national spotlight on it, and they are fast making it an integral part of the political campaign of the candidate most reliant upon support from America’s black community in November.

If the charges are brought against the shooter – can he possibly get a “fair” trial?   If I were his attorney, I would argue there is no way an impartial jury can be found.  I would argue, as well, that the case has already been tried in the media and the so-called “court of public opinion” and his/her client has been found guilty of – well, SOMETHING.

Finally:  I suspect this incident will add fuel to the gungrabbers/gun control advocates coming campaign to disarm Americans.  As I mentioned above, as much as we may find it distasteful and disgusting, this incident has already become political. 

The whole incident has now become a part of our national politics and I believe it will be used -- and abused -- to the extent possible to propel political endeavors toward their respective goals.

I am afraid we will soon forget a young man’s life was cut short and another man’s life destroyed that night on a Florida street.  We will be too caught up in the tsunami of emotion and politics whipped up by those who excel at the manipulation of their fellowman to remember our own humanity. 

J. D. Longstreet

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Hunting for scapegoats won’t lower pump prices ... Paul Driessen

Hunting for scapegoats won’t lower pump prices

Exporting gasoline and diesel fuel creates jobs and prosperity

Paul Driessen

When President Obama took office, regular gasoline cost $1.85 a gallon. Now it’s hit $4.00 per gallon in many cities, and some analysts predict it could reach $5.00 or more this summer. Filling your tank could soon slam you for $75-$90.

Winter was warm. Our economy remains weak. People are driving less, in cars that get better mileage, even with mandatory 10% low-mileage ethanol. Gasoline is plentiful.

Misinformed politicians and pundits say prices should be falling. Our pain at the pump is due to greedy speculators, they claim, and greedier oil companies that are exporting oil and refined products.

Their explanation is superficially plausible – but wrong.

Energy Information Administration (EIA) data show that 76% of what we pay for gasoline is determined by world crude oil prices; 12% is federal and state taxes; 6% is refining; and 6% is marketing and distribution. The price that refiners pay for crude is set by global markets.

World prices are driven by supply and demand, and unstable global politics. That means today’s prices are significantly affected by expectations and fears about tomorrow.

A major factor is Asia’s growing appetite for oil – coupled with America’s refusal to produce more of its own petroleum. Prices are also whipsawed by uncertainty over potential supply disruptions, due to drilling accidents and warfare in Nigeria; disputes over Syria, Yemen and Israeli-Palestinian territories; erroneous reports of a pipeline explosion in Saudi Arabia; concern about attacks on Middle East oil pipelines and processing centers; and new Western sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program and the mullahs’ threats to close the Straits of Hormuz.

Moreover, oil is priced in US dollars, and the Federal Reserve’s easy money, low interest policies – combined with massive US indebtedness – have weakened the dollar’s value. It now costs refineries more dollars to buy a barrel of crude than it did three years ago.

Amid this uncertainty and unrest, speculators try to forecast future prices and price shocks, pay less today for crude oil that could cost more four weeks hence, and get the best possible price for clients who need reliable supplies. When they’re wrong, speculators end up buying high, selling low and losing money.

Oil speculators play a vital role, just as they do in corn and other commodities futures markets.

Basic chemistry dictates that a barrel of crude (42 gallons) cannot be converted entirely into gasoline. Depending on the type of crude, some 140 refineries across the USA transform each barrel into gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, heating oil, asphalt, waxes, petrochemicals and other essential products.

This manufacturing process leaves them with excess diesel fuel, because American vehicles consume less diesel than refineries produce – due to air pollution laws that limit diesel use. US refineries export that excess diesel to Europe, which uses more diesel than gasoline, and Europeans ship their surplus gasoline to mostly East Coast consumers. US refineries also sell excess inventories of other manufactured products to overseas markets, but diesel is by far their principal export.

America exports $180 billion in finished products every month – $2.2 trillion annually in corn, wheat, cars, tractors, appliances, airplanes, pharmaceuticals and much more.

Last year, for the first time since 1949, America was a net exporter of fuel and other petroleum products. Those exports injected $107 billion into our economy and sustained thousands of refinery and other jobs that otherwise might have been lost, as refineries also struggled in our stagnant economy.

Farm and factory jobs would evaporate if we made exporting their products illegal. Prohibiting fuel exports, and demanding that refineries manufacture only what we need here in the States, would have the same effects on our employment, economy and living standards.

The USA has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable conventional oil, the EIA and other experts estimate, and enormous additional supplies in shale and tight sand deposits.  The best way to keep prices down is to produce more of this American oil, and import more from secure, friendly, nearby suppliers like Canada.

However, our government prohibits leasing and drilling on nearly 95% of the onshore and offshore lands it controls. It is dragging its feet on leases and permits for the remaining 5% and over-regulating production on private lands. It vetoed the Canada-to-US Keystone XL pipeline. It is imposing layers of costly and unnecessary new regulations on every aspect of energy production it does not simply reject.

We are losing billions of dollars in bonus, rent, royalty and tax receipts, killing countless jobs, and impairing Americans’ living standards, health and welfare.

“More exports mean more jobs,” President Obama said recently. “We need to strengthen American manufacturing. We need to invest in American-made energy and new skills for American workers.”

His words ring hollow. Above all, President Obama and his environmentalist and congressional allies want to end our “addiction” to oil, “fundamentally transform” America, and “invest” billions of dollars (borrowed from us and our children and grandchildren) subsidizing efforts to turn corn, switchgrass, algae and pond scum into fuel.

Generating billions of dollars and millions of real jobs by producing American oil and manufacturing American oil products doesn’t fit this agenda. Even though one of every ten jobs created in the last three years has been in oil and gas, when it comes to petroleum, Team Obama wants to punish success, and reward failures like Solyndra, Fisker and the Chevy Volt.

To paraphrase a recent White House jab at Republicans who want more drilling and fewer obstructionist regulations: Every time prices start to go up, President Obama heads down to the local pond or cornfield, makes sure a few cameras are following him, and starts acting like he can wave a magic wand, throw a few more billions around, and have cheap, eco-friendly biofuels forever.

Meanwhile, Energy Secretary Steven Chu has made it abundantly clear that he wants to “boost gasoline prices to European levels” – $8 to $10 per gallon! He’s already half way to his goal.

Those prices would certainly force Americans to drive less, and “hope” the hype about “changing” to algae-gas becomes reality in less than twenty or thirty years.

Meanwhile, skyrocketing fuel prices will certainly “boost” the cost of transporting people, raw materials, food and products by wheels, wings and waterways; manufacturing anything still made in America; and preserving jobs, family and business budgets, and dreams that depend on affordable energy.

Hunting for scapegoats won’t lower pump prices. Reality-based energy policies will.

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Congress of Racial Equality, and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death.

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Closing Ranks, Winning the Election ... Alan Caruba

Closing Ranks, Winning the Election

By Alan Caruba

I am surely not breaking any new ground by suggesting it is time for Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich to end their primary campaigns and to urge that the Republican Party close ranks behind Mitt Romney.

This needs to be said by anyone and everyone who wants to see Obama defeated in November.

It would be an act of patriotism for both men, Santorum and Gingrich, to end their campaigns. I make no mention of Ron Paul because he was always a sideshow.

In this week’s column, Ann Coulter spells out why Santorum is hardly worthy of support.

“Meanwhile, when he was in Congress, Santorum wouldn't even vote to eliminate federal funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. Santorum supported all sorts of big-government spending plans -- No Child Left Behind, prescription drug coverage for seniors and the "bridge to nowhere."

But you'd think we would at least have Santorum's vote against federal funding for pornographers and deviants. Alas, no.

The NEA, you will recall, uses federal taxpayer money to subsidize crucifixes submerged in urine, photos of bullwhips up a man's derriere, poems celebrating the Central Park jogger's rapists, photos of amputated human genitalia, vomit, mutilated corpses and dead fetuses. (And that was just the children's wing of the museum!)

But Rick Santorum voted against cutting funding for the NEA every time a vote was taken both as a representative and a senator -- in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1997 and 1998. These weren't accidental votes. Each one was deemed a key conservative vote on which members of Congress would be graded by the American Conservative Union.”

I have long been on record in my support of Mitt Romney and my view that Newt is unqualified for as long a list of reasons as Coulter offers regarding Santorum.

Because they failed to receive the support of voters and secure funding, Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry, and Tim Pawlenty dropped out of the race what seems like an age ago.

Santorum continues and, in doing so, is saying things that make no sense even to those barely paying any attention to him at this point. He has never been in serious contention even in the few states where he has been credited with a win. The 2012 election will be won on the basis of economic, not social issues.

Newt’s percentages have been dismal, but Newt continues because he loves the spotlight and has a single deep-pockets financial backer that allows him to fly around recommending Moon colonies and other fanciful notions.

It is March 2012 and Republicans need to coalesce behind a single candidate, donate to him and the Party, volunteer, and do all the things necessary to defeat Obama. Otherwise, four years from now, if Obama is still President, he will be presiding over a nation whose exceptionalism, economy, and world power status will be a thing of the past.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Alan Caruba's commentaries are posted daily at "Warning Signs" his popular blog and thereafter on dozens of other websites and blogs. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. To visit his Facebook page, click here For information on his professional skills, is the place to visit.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Corruptio Optimi Est Pessima

Corruptio Optimi Est Pessima

(The best things become, when corrupted, the worst.)
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

The title of this commentary is a Latin phrase.  It is loaded with meaning for America today.  Liberally translated, it means:  When the best things become corrupt, it is then that they become the worst things.

As I survey our country, America, it is clear we have a government that has deteriorated from the best to the worst.  Well, not THE worst ... yet.  But unless some correction is made to it this November, there can be no doubt it will become the worst Americans have ever experienced.

The American government was constructed by our forefathers to be a representative republic based on the Constitution. That constitution was intended to be the law of the land.  But, just as the men who actually created our government warned us, it would remain a republic only so long as we could keep (or maintain) it as a republic.

Many decades ago, I had great admiration for a German auto company.  They built the Volkswagen "Beetle."  They sold millions of them all over the world.  I bought a brand new one, right off the showroom floor, in 1971.   It was the perfect car.  Mine even had air conditioning, which I had added at the dealership before I picked it up.  I actually bought the Beetle, sight unseen, on the phone.  I did not actually see, or drive, the car until I went to the dealership to sign the papers and pick it up.

In the seven years I owned the car, it required no repairs due to breakdowns or malfunctions ... none.  I replaced the muffler once, or twice, and gave it the standard tune-ups at the proper times  -- and that was it. 

Why in the world would a man feel comfortable purchasing an automobile on the phone, sight unseen? Volkswagen had it RIGHT.  No pun intended, but by 1971, Volkswagen had the "bugs out of the Beetle."  They had the body design down cold.  That little air-cooled engine was geared to never reach a point at which it was performing under stress.  As a result, the longevity of those little engines was, and is, legendary. 

For a long time, new Volkswagen Beetles of the  designed cherished by the public disappeared from US highways though they continued to be built in a few countries south of the United States.

Now the Beetle is, again, a familiar sight on American roadways. It has been redesigned both for aesthetics and to meet our federal government guidelines/laws.  But, as a former owner of a 1971 Beetle, they are not the same car ... not by a long shot.  I am sure the new Beetle is a fine and even wonderful automobile, but it is NOT the legendary Beetle.  Just to be clear ... this is my opinion as the former owner of one of those legendary little cars.

Perfection cannot be improved upon.

The US government has been tinkered with almost from the moment of its conception.  Wise men, or those who think themselves wise (and have become fools in so doing) have continuously sought to improve upon the work of America's forefathers.  Since the Bill of Rights was ratified, the constitution has been amended 17 times.

The point I'm attempting to make is this:  When you "mess" with perfection, you get imperfection.

Allow me to point out the obvious.  Our physical government has become bloated and unmanageable, overbearing, over reaching, intrusive, power hungry, aloof, and cut off from the people it is supposed to govern.   Legions of "wise men" continue to demand changes in the American government that have not only bestowed more and more power on government bureaucrats, but has actually turned our system of government on it's head. 

Originally, the federal government was designed to be an agent of the states, to act at the behest of the states, with the states having ultimate -- and complete -- authority over the federal government.

Today, all 50 states answer to the federal government and cower in the shadow of the ever-present intimidation cast by the enormous power the omnipotence of that vastly too powerful central government.

That which was the best is quickly becoming the worst, or as some would argue -- HAS BECOME the worst.

Yes, there was a time in America when the states told the federal government how things would be run.  Not so today.  Today America's strong central government can FORCE states to do it’s bidding even though the US Constitution plainly says that particular power was left to the states.

Example:  The states of Texas and South Carolina BOTH have recently been told by the federal government that they cannot require a photo ID to vote in their states.  Another is the order from the federal government that the people of the states must, by law, purchase health Insurance.  It is not a suggestion; it is an order -- the defiance of which will bring a fine on the individual citizens who refuse to comply.

The two examples above are just a tiny, infinitesimal, example of the thousands of such commands, edicts, LAWS that yoke American citizens today.  Thousands upon thousands of such laws weighing down America today never, ever, underwent scrutiny by the people's Congress.  They were never debated in the House of Representatives or the Senate.  They were simply issued by agencies of the federal government whose rules and regulations have the "power of law."

The myriad of federal agencies was the work of men who sought to improve the federal government at the expense of the freedom of the people of America.  Ultimately, they did not improve America but changed America's government into a sort Frankenstein beast, of which -- the people are afraid.

 Corruptio optimi est pessima.  The best things become, when corrupted, the worst.

Contrary to what we hear so much today -- "the government is broken" -- I'd reply that it is NOT broken.  It is alive, huge -- and GROWING.
In my opinion, it cannot be "fixed."  A Constitutional Convention is required to, at the very least, tap the "undo" key -- or "reboot" -- America to its default condition.  But that will never happen. 

Modern Americans are incapable of selecting a group of citizens charged with purging our government of the freedom killing agencies that have all but enslaved a once free America.

America's collapse is a certainty.  When it happens, may God help those who will struggle to make the original America rise from the ashes of its last grotesque iteration.

J. D. Longstreet

Thursday, March 22, 2012

There Can Be Only One

There Can Be Only One
The Russian Bear Loosed ... Again
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

Nature abhors a vacuum.  When the current leadership of the United States decided the US would no longer maintain its leadership position in the world, a momentary vacuum was created.  As of March 4th, that vacuum was filled.  Vladimir Putin has returned to the Kremlin.  (Geez.  Even the word "Kremlin" causes my heart to go cold and my skin to crawl.) 

The Russian bear, under the leadership of Vladimir Putin, is more than ready to take over the world leadership role from the United States.  That will mean that Mr. Obama can have the back seat he seems to crave so much.

If you are old enough to remember the Cold War, you certainly must be asking yourself if Putin's election as President of Russia means the kick-off of Cold War II.  The return to a bi-polar world could be just around the corner.

Putin has remarked that he sees the United States as a parasite on the world.  Now, that's not a very friendly thing to say, right?  Nevertheless, he said it, and, frankly, I believe he meant it.

Relations with Putin's Russia is going to get very complicated very fast.  Putin is known to long for the old Mother Russia and the gone -- but certainly not forgotten -- Soviet Union.  He'd like, very much, to reconstitute the old USSR.  And I expect he will attempt to, at least, recreate as much of it as he can.
Vladimir Putin

Dealing with Putin is going to be tough -- very tough.  However, America is blessed with a President who is a "word man" and not an "action man."  I truly suspect Obama believes he can just overwhelm Putin with his soaring oratory and overcome him with just the weight of his WORDS.   As my British friends would say:  "Not Bloody Likely!"

Putin TALKS tough, and goes to great lengths to make sure he ACTS tough -- and is SEEN acting tough.  

Obama plays basketball and golf. 

See how perception can have such a tremendous effect on foreign policy and practically everything else a country does outside its own borders. 

Putin can, and will, make Obama's life much more complicated that it was before March 4th. 

Right at, or near, the top of the list of problems Obama is going to have with Putin is the U.S. plans for the missile defense system deployment in Europe.  Even before Putin walks into his old/new office, that missile defense problem is deadlocked.  At least it is deadlocked as long as Obama remains President of the United States. 

That may change in November -- if the US voters show Obama the door and place a stronger President in the Oval Office.  A new President may just say the heck with Russia and deploy the missile defense system and let the Russians howl all they want.

I suspect that, right off the bat, Putin will want to show off his Russian military might to the rest of the world.  Once again those Bear bombers will be bumping into US airspace off Alaska and they will most certainly be skirting our airspace along the eastern seaboard just as they did for decades during Cold War One. 

Look for Putin to scrape together another Russian Navy from the scrap heap of a navy he now has.  If he is able to keep his nuclear submarines from exploding, he might even be able to get one or two out to blue water -- before they sink or blow up. 

Never fear.  The Russians can be an industrious people.  It will not take long for them to rebuild their military and with the cash pouring in from their oil sales they will be able to afford it. 

Just think about it.  While the US is cutting back on the size of our military the Russians will be working like crazy to build their military UP --  bigger and better than that of the old Soviet Union.  That ought to make for some sweet dreams tonight -- especially for us old codgers who remember what it was like facing down the Russians/Soviets at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin about fifty years ago.   Americans and Soviets were eyeball to eyeball, toe to toe, both sides leaning forward ... waiting, just waiting -- for the Third World War to begin.   Believe me when I tell you -- I do not long for the return of those days and that kind of international stress and strife.

Putin is a man of few words ... far fewer than Obama.  And, unlike Obama, he does not employ nuance.  Nosiree.  He can say Nyet! (NO!) quite clearly and forcefully, thank you!   Putin is famous (or infamous) for being intractable.  When he DOES say "nyet" ... the negotiations are ended, period.

The US can certainly expect to have problems with Putin's government in the Middle East.  That is already clear.  We've learned, just this week, that Russian troops have been deployed to Syria.  The Russian Navy was been represented in Syrian waters for a while now.

What we are about to see, I believe, is a rebuilding of the Russian superpower under Putin.  There is simply no way that can be good for America.

What will be even worse for America is to have Obama reelected and have to watch as Putin chews him up and spits him out.

J. D. Longstreet

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

The Fear of Martial Law ... Alan Caruba

The Fear of Martial Law

By Alan Caruba

The President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, has generated so much fear that the most common theme of posted comments and private communications is that he will refuse to relinquish power if defeated in November or that, under some pretext, he will declare a state of martial law.

Many, myself included, did not like the Patriot Act that was enacted following 9/11 but there is little evidence that this law has been abused to deprive Americans of their fundamental rights and freedom, though surely some suspected of being terrorists were detained.

An Executive Order posted on the White House website on Friday, March 16, 2012, has generated a wave of fear. It is officially about “National Defense Resources Preparedness” and its stated policy addresses “national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950.”

Its stated policy is that “The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency.”  (Emphasis added)

In 1950 the nation was entering a new phase of history following World War II. It would be called the Cold War led by the then-Soviet Union, but 1950 is also important because on October 1, 1949, Mao Zedung had proclaimed the birth of the People’s Republic of China, instituting a Communist regime that continues to this day. With German and Japanese totalitarian threats vanquished, new ones were emerging.

The new EO evokes fear because it is occurring in peacetime and, more specifically, when the United States remains the strongest military power on Earth. There is no indication that an attack by any other nation is anticipated, so the implementation of the EO raises concerns that its purpose is not what it says.

In effect, the EO allows the federal government, directed by the President, to commandeer and control all aspects of the economy and the lives of all Americans. It centralizes control to an astonishing and frightening degree.

As just one example, it parcels out control to “ the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer” and thereafter to:

The Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

The Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

The Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

The Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

The Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

The obvious question is why is this EO necessary in the absence of any threat of an invasion or even an attack?

The obvious question is why should the President of the United States, in the run-up to a national election, feel that this is the time to issue such an EO?

I have frankly been dismissive of widely expressed fears that Obama would or could carry off a coup d’etat to establish himself as an American dictator. The problem, however, is that Obama has surrounded himself with Cabinet Secretaries and a shadow government of “czars” that would likely support him if he were to attempt such an audacious move.

The “legality” of such a move would be rubber-stamped by the Attorney General whose regard for the Constitution and laws of the nation is dubious at best, elastic at worst. The President’s views about the Constitution are well known and he resents the limits it puts on his powers.

Would Congress stand by and allow its powers be usurped? Imagine yourself a Senator or Representative fearful of arrest and detention. Rounding up all 435 members would not be a difficult task.

The nation’s media, with exceptions, has “covered” for this President regarding the legitimacy of his right to hold office, his absurd energy policies, and his takeover of various segments of the nation’s economic base; the auto industry, the insurance industry, and Obamacare’s attempt to takeover the healthcare sector.

That is why this EO has evoked such fear and concern and that is why Congress has to assert its Constitutional powers before this President is permitted to overthrow the legislative branch of government and seize control through an EO that is so broad that it is a breathtaking seizure of power that could only be considered if the nation was, in fact, under attack.

This EO is about “preparedness”, but for whom?

© Alan Caruba, 2012