As anticipated, the Obama Administration is making noise about dismantling the military "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy toward gays. His press secretary confirmed that he wants to go to Congress to repeal the policy, but won't do so until late 2009 or 2010.
Ultimately, it won't work.
I think it will actually drive more gays out of the military and lead President Obama to hastily restore the policy--in it's current form. There are many who wouldn't mind seeing this happen.
President Clinton beat a hasty retreat on this issue and never returned to it. I think history will repeat itself with President Obama once he takes a measure of how the military feels about this issue, and how the public feels about it. In fact, he's already delayed looking at this issue until 2010.
I'm not sure that the Democrats in Congress will want to risk alienating their constituents, who have shown that they may vote their own way on issues related to gay rights, regardless of party label. Look at California and their Proposal 8 controversy. I knew that proposal would pass; voters don't like being told what to do and having the power of their votes taken away by activist judges.
Even though the Democrats control the government, I think this will be an uphill battle for them, should they choose to try. And at this stage, I'm not sure they want to go on record with their vote.
And even if they do succeed, how long will it last?
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Contrary to Popular Groupthink, Now is NOT the Time for National Unity: Now's the Time to FIGHT
The press has been going after Rush Limbaugh for saying that as a conservative, he wants "Obama to fail."
I heard CNN blasting him last night for saying this, saying it's not helpful to "national unity" behind the Obama Administration. Excuse me, but has CNN forgotten that not everyone voted for THEIR candidate?
Now is not the time for national unity; now is the time to FIGHT LIKE CATS AND DOGS to stop the Venezuelan-ization of our country. The government has no need to nationalize banks and private businesses, as Chavez has in Venezuela.
We are NOT Venezuela II or Cuba II.
Limbaugh is absolutely right. And for all these news organizations to gang up on Limbaugh in this fashion for defending the conservative position shows how far and how deep the socialist groupthink extends.
No more bailouts; the economy needs to be allowed to right itself. The accuracy of this position will be made clear when the companies that have already been bailed out start going under down the road, and taxpayers will be left with nothing but the debt to show for it.
I heard CNN blasting him last night for saying this, saying it's not helpful to "national unity" behind the Obama Administration. Excuse me, but has CNN forgotten that not everyone voted for THEIR candidate?
Now is not the time for national unity; now is the time to FIGHT LIKE CATS AND DOGS to stop the Venezuelan-ization of our country. The government has no need to nationalize banks and private businesses, as Chavez has in Venezuela.
We are NOT Venezuela II or Cuba II.
Limbaugh is absolutely right. And for all these news organizations to gang up on Limbaugh in this fashion for defending the conservative position shows how far and how deep the socialist groupthink extends.
No more bailouts; the economy needs to be allowed to right itself. The accuracy of this position will be made clear when the companies that have already been bailed out start going under down the road, and taxpayers will be left with nothing but the debt to show for it.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Current Air Force One to be Replaced: 747-200 Upgrades Becoming More Expensive as Time Goes By
The Air Force is looking to replace the current Air Force One with a newer aircraft.
An exhaustive study found that the VC-25 (which is based on the 747-200 airframe) is due for extensive air control upgrades, air defense and communication upgrades, as well as increased maintenance costs. They're having problems identifying suppliers for needed parts to keep the aircraft ready to take off at a moment's notice. As the design gets older, the problems will get worse.
Boeing and Airbus are already working on designs for a new Air Force One that will be equipped for midair refueling, will have all the communication equipment, technology, room and defensive systems that will allow the President to run the country while he or she is airborne.
The plan calls for the first aircraft to be delivered in 2017; the second Air Force One sometime in 2019 and another in 2021 (the military currently has two Air Force Ones).
The two most likely contenders (the winner gets to build all three aircraft): the Boeing 747-8I and the Airbus A380. There's also speculation that the Boeing 777-300ER might be a contender.
It'll be interesting to see who builds the next Air Force One.
An exhaustive study found that the VC-25 (which is based on the 747-200 airframe) is due for extensive air control upgrades, air defense and communication upgrades, as well as increased maintenance costs. They're having problems identifying suppliers for needed parts to keep the aircraft ready to take off at a moment's notice. As the design gets older, the problems will get worse.
Boeing and Airbus are already working on designs for a new Air Force One that will be equipped for midair refueling, will have all the communication equipment, technology, room and defensive systems that will allow the President to run the country while he or she is airborne.
The plan calls for the first aircraft to be delivered in 2017; the second Air Force One sometime in 2019 and another in 2021 (the military currently has two Air Force Ones).
The two most likely contenders (the winner gets to build all three aircraft): the Boeing 747-8I and the Airbus A380. There's also speculation that the Boeing 777-300ER might be a contender.
The Boeing 747-8I:
The Airbus A380:
The Boeing 777-300ER:
It'll be interesting to see who builds the next Air Force One.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Circuit City Reorganization Fails: Entire Chain Will Close
Circuit City had been hoping to reorganize under the auspices of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, but were unable to find a buyer for all or part of the chain. As a result, the entire chain will close, sending another 30,000 of it's employees into unemployment. All 566 stores will be liquidated.
That's too bad. They were no match for Best Buy or Walmart, which knocked the stuffing out of Circuit City to the point that it's suppliers wouldn't do business with them until their past debts were settled.
And in doing so, the suppliers will get paid off what they're owed, with no opportunity for repeat business, which will affect their own bottom line further down the road. Where does it end?
That's too bad. They were no match for Best Buy or Walmart, which knocked the stuffing out of Circuit City to the point that it's suppliers wouldn't do business with them until their past debts were settled.
And in doing so, the suppliers will get paid off what they're owed, with no opportunity for repeat business, which will affect their own bottom line further down the road. Where does it end?
Friday, January 16, 2009
2008 Retail Bankruptcies: Some Familiar Names Go Away
2008 was a very bad year for retailers and business in general, and some big companies went under, including some that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy the week after Christmas.
The 2008 list:
You will not see the following things in 2009 as their companies have cut them:
Companies in Danger--2009
The following list of companies is listed as being in grave danger of disappearing in 2009, according to AOL Money & Finance's web site:
2008 was a very rough year, and 2009 isn't looking too healthy right now either.
The 2008 list:
- Circuit City
- Boscov's
- Sharper Image
- Mervyns
- Linens 'n Things
- Whitehall Jewelers
- Steve & Barry's
- Bennigan's
- Tribune Company
- Tweeter Opco
- Shoe Pavilion
- Waterford Wedgwood
- Advantage Rent-a-Car
- Bally's Sports Club
- Pilgrim Pride
- Aloha Airlines
- DayJet
- SkyBus
- ATA Airlines
- Mrs. Fields Famous Brands LLC
- Progressive Auto Parts
- Goody's
- Ziff Davis
- Buffets Holdings (Old Country Buffet, Ryan's Grill Buffet and HomeTown Buffet)
- KB Toys
- Polaroid
- Arena Football League
- Olsson's Books and Records
You will not see the following things in 2009 as their companies have cut them:
- Polaroid Traditional Instant Film (discontinued before Polaroid filed for bankruptcy)
- Zima (popular clear malt) (Coors Brewing Co.)
- CD sales at Starbucks
- FedEx Kinko's is dropping the Kinko's name and renaming itself FedEx Office.
- Diet Cherry Chocolate Dr. Pepper (Dr. Pepper Snapple Group) (YUCK!!)
- Volcano Taco (Taco Bell) (Company says the popular taco was a limited-run menu item)
- Crown Pilot Crackers (Nabisco)
- Smoky Chipotle Crispy Fried Chicken (Kentucky Fried Chicken)
- DHL Shipping in the United States (DHL) (They're going back to Europe)
- Hundreds of other changes as businesses try to save themselves.
Companies in Danger--2009
The following list of companies is listed as being in grave danger of disappearing in 2009, according to AOL Money & Finance's web site:
- Chrysler (Despite the government bailout)
- XM Sirius
- AIG (Despite the government bailout)
- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (They may be folded into one government agency)
- Rite-Aid
- New York Times (has to pay off a $400 million debt in the first few months of 2009)
- Nortel (already filed for bankruptcy)
- Pier 1 Imports
- Charter Communications ($20 billion in debt, stock was trading at $.12 a share today, expenses>income, just missed a $74 million payment)
2008 was a very rough year, and 2009 isn't looking too healthy right now either.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Has Anyone Seen Chicken Little Lately? He's Strangely Quiet About Global Warming
Has anyone seen "Chicken Little" Al Gore lately?
He's been strangely quiet. Must be crunching the numbers so that he can predict triple-digit temperatures for July and August to support his faltering global warming hubris.
See you around, Al.
He's been strangely quiet. Must be crunching the numbers so that he can predict triple-digit temperatures for July and August to support his faltering global warming hubris.
See you around, Al.
Monday, January 12, 2009
World Media Needs to Give Prince Harry a Break: His Remarks Are Outweighed By His Military Service
Prince Harry is apologizing for a three-year-old video of him using racist terms and poking fun at his grandma.
The media needs to cool it and leave him alone. This is a huge non-issue that they're blowing way out of proportion; how this video made it into the media's hands should be investigated, not Prince Harry. This video was obviously not meant for public consumption and should have remained that way; the media should have ignored it.
How is he supposed to react when militants in the combat zones threaten to capture him, cut off his ears and send them to his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II? "Oh, that's nice?" Or something along the lines of "go %^@ off??!" Harry chose the latter and he's being criticized for it.
The media has it in for Prince Harry and for the royal family, and don't care about the damage that they cause in their reporting. That's more scandalous than the Prince's remarks. He did an outstanding job during his time in the war zone, but the media screwed that up for him too, didn't they?
He's apologized, which was the correct thing for him to do, now LET IT BE, media!
The media needs to cool it and leave him alone. This is a huge non-issue that they're blowing way out of proportion; how this video made it into the media's hands should be investigated, not Prince Harry. This video was obviously not meant for public consumption and should have remained that way; the media should have ignored it.
How is he supposed to react when militants in the combat zones threaten to capture him, cut off his ears and send them to his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II? "Oh, that's nice?" Or something along the lines of "go %^@ off??!" Harry chose the latter and he's being criticized for it.
The media has it in for Prince Harry and for the royal family, and don't care about the damage that they cause in their reporting. That's more scandalous than the Prince's remarks. He did an outstanding job during his time in the war zone, but the media screwed that up for him too, didn't they?
He's apologized, which was the correct thing for him to do, now LET IT BE, media!
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Plea from School District for Toilet Paper and Light Bulbs is Utterly RIDICULOUS: Administration Should Be Ashamed of Itself
I'm about ready to rip hair out of my head over this one.
A Michigan school has asked it's parents to donate toilet paper, light bulbs and trash bags to the school as there isn't money in the budget for purchasing said supplies.
Which administrator or group made this decision needs to lose their job(s) over this sad state of affairs?
There are other places to cut the budget! Something that has this large of an impact on the students and staff is inexcusable and requires immediate action.
These kinds of supplies need to be untouched on the balance sheet; they can reduce it ONLY if a school is closed, or the student population of that school drops by more than 10%. But not to the point that the school has to BEG for its parents to buy stuff that should already be provided for.
Shame!
A Michigan school has asked it's parents to donate toilet paper, light bulbs and trash bags to the school as there isn't money in the budget for purchasing said supplies.
Which administrator or group made this decision needs to lose their job(s) over this sad state of affairs?
There are other places to cut the budget! Something that has this large of an impact on the students and staff is inexcusable and requires immediate action.
These kinds of supplies need to be untouched on the balance sheet; they can reduce it ONLY if a school is closed, or the student population of that school drops by more than 10%. But not to the point that the school has to BEG for its parents to buy stuff that should already be provided for.
Shame!
Russians Turn Off Gas Lines Going Through Ukraine: It's Another Step Toward a Russian/Ukrainian Military Confrontation
The Russians are using energy as a weapon against Ukraine again in a move that will ultimately lead to a war between Russia and Ukraine.
What other conclusion can there be?
Russia found a reason to invade Georgia, which it doesn't like very much. The Russians don't like the Ukrainians very much either because of Ukraine's decision to nationalize a joint Russo/Ukrainian naval base on the Black Sea. Russia is itching to kick the Ukrainians out of the Crimean Peninsula and seize the entire Black Sea Fleet for itself. The two countries divided the Soviet Black Sea Fleet between themselves after the USSR collapsed in 1991.
Their agreement over joint use of the Sevastopol base expires in 2017, and Ukraine has signaled that the agreement will not be extended. This did not go over well in Moscow.
Nor has Ukraine's attempts to join NATO or the European Union. Ukraine has the second biggest military in Europe behind Russia, a situation that Russia doesn't like very much.
During the Russo/Georgian War last year, Russia deployed it's fleet from Sevastopol to blockade Georgia's ports, and Ukraine insisted that deployed Russian naval units needed it's permission to cross back over into Ukrainian waters, which Russia ignored.
Whether the gas gets turned back on or not, Russia's using energy to influence Ukraine is a cause of major concern. Russia wants Ukraine under it's control as a buffer between itself and NATO, which it also doesn't like. And Ukraine feels the same way about Russian interference in their internal and external affairs.
No good will come of this current crisis.
What other conclusion can there be?
Russia found a reason to invade Georgia, which it doesn't like very much. The Russians don't like the Ukrainians very much either because of Ukraine's decision to nationalize a joint Russo/Ukrainian naval base on the Black Sea. Russia is itching to kick the Ukrainians out of the Crimean Peninsula and seize the entire Black Sea Fleet for itself. The two countries divided the Soviet Black Sea Fleet between themselves after the USSR collapsed in 1991.
Their agreement over joint use of the Sevastopol base expires in 2017, and Ukraine has signaled that the agreement will not be extended. This did not go over well in Moscow.
Nor has Ukraine's attempts to join NATO or the European Union. Ukraine has the second biggest military in Europe behind Russia, a situation that Russia doesn't like very much.
During the Russo/Georgian War last year, Russia deployed it's fleet from Sevastopol to blockade Georgia's ports, and Ukraine insisted that deployed Russian naval units needed it's permission to cross back over into Ukrainian waters, which Russia ignored.
Whether the gas gets turned back on or not, Russia's using energy to influence Ukraine is a cause of major concern. Russia wants Ukraine under it's control as a buffer between itself and NATO, which it also doesn't like. And Ukraine feels the same way about Russian interference in their internal and external affairs.
No good will come of this current crisis.
Blagojevich Impeached: Saga of His Appointee to Obama's Senate Seat Goes On
Governor Rod Blagojevich was impeached by the Illinois House of Representatives on Friday; and his choice to fill President-elect Obama's Senate seat, Roland Burris, was denied permission to join the Senate.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in Burris' favor, saying that the appointment was completely legal. I saw that one coming. But the only question now is whether the Senate will delay the appointment, or approve him tomorrow. All the appropriate paperwork has been filed with the Secretary of the U.S. Senate and everything appears to be in order.
What now?
The Senate might well seat Burris without further comment, or delay the appointment until the impeachment of Blagojevich is complete and an outcome is decided. I hope the Senate buries this issue and gets the story out of the news. It's getting really old fast!
Unless there's a specific reason to deny Burris the seat, they should seat him and move on. His nomination by Blagojevich IS in bad taste, but Blagojevich had a right to do so. He wasn't impeached at the time of the nomination nor was he convicted of any crimes. I'm not sure if he's stripped of any powers while the impeachment is in progress in any case.
The Senate needs to settle this; it's a HUGE distraction, which is probably what Blagojevich intended in the first place.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in Burris' favor, saying that the appointment was completely legal. I saw that one coming. But the only question now is whether the Senate will delay the appointment, or approve him tomorrow. All the appropriate paperwork has been filed with the Secretary of the U.S. Senate and everything appears to be in order.
What now?
The Senate might well seat Burris without further comment, or delay the appointment until the impeachment of Blagojevich is complete and an outcome is decided. I hope the Senate buries this issue and gets the story out of the news. It's getting really old fast!
Unless there's a specific reason to deny Burris the seat, they should seat him and move on. His nomination by Blagojevich IS in bad taste, but Blagojevich had a right to do so. He wasn't impeached at the time of the nomination nor was he convicted of any crimes. I'm not sure if he's stripped of any powers while the impeachment is in progress in any case.
The Senate needs to settle this; it's a HUGE distraction, which is probably what Blagojevich intended in the first place.
Bush Presidency Should Not Be Judged By Historians of Today: They're Just As Polarized As the Electorate
Historians have been gathering to discuss how the Bush Presidency should be written into the history books, and already there have been dramatic announcements that Bush is the "worst President in history" by some of the "delegates" to this convention.
With all due respect to this gathering of academics and writers, I find myself questioning whether they should even be talking about this subject yet. History is written best by those who have some years of separation between the subject and themselves. Historians of today should be documenting what happens and leave the judgments to those who come after them.
The historians of today are just as polarized by the politics of today as anyone else in the American public, and so are susceptible to making judgments without the benefit of knowing what happened after President Bush left office on January 20th. Historians of today only have a partial picture; it's like calling a football game at halftime with the score tied. They can't do that. The story is still unfolding!
I doubt they can take a neutral stance on President Bush. I know I couldn't; the difference between them and me is that I can admit that I can't be neutral. And more, I WON'T. But I'm not the one who's going to be writing the history books either.
Treat whatever you hear coming from historians of today with a grain of salt. They're no different than you or me with regards to how much people like or dislike President Bush and his decisions as President.
These historians shouldn't insult us by pretending to have neutral opinions. "President Bush is the worst President in history" proves it.
With all due respect to this gathering of academics and writers, I find myself questioning whether they should even be talking about this subject yet. History is written best by those who have some years of separation between the subject and themselves. Historians of today should be documenting what happens and leave the judgments to those who come after them.
The historians of today are just as polarized by the politics of today as anyone else in the American public, and so are susceptible to making judgments without the benefit of knowing what happened after President Bush left office on January 20th. Historians of today only have a partial picture; it's like calling a football game at halftime with the score tied. They can't do that. The story is still unfolding!
I doubt they can take a neutral stance on President Bush. I know I couldn't; the difference between them and me is that I can admit that I can't be neutral. And more, I WON'T. But I'm not the one who's going to be writing the history books either.
Treat whatever you hear coming from historians of today with a grain of salt. They're no different than you or me with regards to how much people like or dislike President Bush and his decisions as President.
These historians shouldn't insult us by pretending to have neutral opinions. "President Bush is the worst President in history" proves it.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Governor Blagojevich Had Every Right to Appoint Obama Successor to Senate Seat: He's Not Been Removed From Office or Convicted of ANYTHING Yet
Embattled Illinois Governor Blagojevich made headlines around the world when he defied public opinion and the opinions of both his state government and the U.S. Senate itself when he appointed someone to the Senate seat that he was accused of trying to sell for profit.
And yet, he had every right to do so, and it will more than likely be upheld by the courts.
Blagojevich has not been stood up in front of a jury and been pronounced guilty; nor has the Illinois legislature voted on any measure to impeach the governor. If they wanted to prevent this end, they should have impeached Blagojevich immediately so as to strip him of the power to appoint a successor. They didn't do that, so the Illinois secretary of state is obligated to certify the appointment and issue the appropriate credentials for the new junior Senator from Illinois.
I don't have an opinion on the nominee; he's not been accused of anything wrong and he is qualified under Constitutional guidelines.
It's troubling to see the government trying to circumvent the Constitution and ignoring the fact that this governor is innocent until found guilty. And as much as I'm enjoying the spectacle, I hope it doesn't drag on. The Constitution has already been shot full of holes; we don't need one of the fundamental aspects of Constitutional protections on due process to be weakened any further.
And yet, he had every right to do so, and it will more than likely be upheld by the courts.
Blagojevich has not been stood up in front of a jury and been pronounced guilty; nor has the Illinois legislature voted on any measure to impeach the governor. If they wanted to prevent this end, they should have impeached Blagojevich immediately so as to strip him of the power to appoint a successor. They didn't do that, so the Illinois secretary of state is obligated to certify the appointment and issue the appropriate credentials for the new junior Senator from Illinois.
I don't have an opinion on the nominee; he's not been accused of anything wrong and he is qualified under Constitutional guidelines.
It's troubling to see the government trying to circumvent the Constitution and ignoring the fact that this governor is innocent until found guilty. And as much as I'm enjoying the spectacle, I hope it doesn't drag on. The Constitution has already been shot full of holes; we don't need one of the fundamental aspects of Constitutional protections on due process to be weakened any further.
Leon Panetta for CIA Director? Someone on Obama's Team is Smoking Something to Come Up With This Idea
It looks like former Chief of Staff Leon Panetta (under the Clinton Administration) is being nominated to head the Central Intelligence Agency.
The CIA??!
Why on earth would they want this? Panetta doesn't have the right type of experience for this posting. The Obama Adminstration already has a super-spy working for it: Robert Gates. Why don't they ask him to do it instead? Gates is untainted by the causes of the Iraq War, and the subsequent questions about extraordinary rendition and interrogation techniques. Obama could ask McCain to take over the Defense Department.
It appears that this nomination took a lot of Washington by surprise. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out, if it's true. Panetta has a lot of experience, but not in this department. Surely there's a posting that's a better fit.
The CIA??!
Why on earth would they want this? Panetta doesn't have the right type of experience for this posting. The Obama Adminstration already has a super-spy working for it: Robert Gates. Why don't they ask him to do it instead? Gates is untainted by the causes of the Iraq War, and the subsequent questions about extraordinary rendition and interrogation techniques. Obama could ask McCain to take over the Defense Department.
It appears that this nomination took a lot of Washington by surprise. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out, if it's true. Panetta has a lot of experience, but not in this department. Surely there's a posting that's a better fit.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
More Proof That Man's Contribution to Global Warming is Overhyped: Fewest Solar Spots on Sun Corresponds to Drop in Average Temps Across Planet
2008 is a year that global warming nuts would like to forget; it saw their ice-thin facade of science collapse in the face of decreased solar activity, which corresponded to a planet-wide drop in average temperatures.
The sun is a larger factor in global warming and global cooling than the nuts would like to acknowledge. Sunspot activity has been decreasing since 2000, and average temperatures have been falling since 1998. In addition, their global warming models did not predict the cool-down of 2007-2008. According to their model, the temperature should have increased.
Global warming alarmists should get their facts correct before trying to scare people into buying into their belief that man alone is responsible for the rise in global temperatures, which aren't rising at all. So much for the much-hyped "proven science" which other (ignored) science has DISPROVEN.
Now, I do think that we should be looking at alternative cleaner fuels and changing the types of emissions that come out of our factories and industry. It's good for the air we breathe, and for the environment, but without all the global warming hype surrounding it. That's something I'm willing to work for.
But enough of the global warming hype, already. Put it in it's proper context, global warming people!
The sun is a larger factor in global warming and global cooling than the nuts would like to acknowledge. Sunspot activity has been decreasing since 2000, and average temperatures have been falling since 1998. In addition, their global warming models did not predict the cool-down of 2007-2008. According to their model, the temperature should have increased.
Global warming alarmists should get their facts correct before trying to scare people into buying into their belief that man alone is responsible for the rise in global temperatures, which aren't rising at all. So much for the much-hyped "proven science" which other (ignored) science has DISPROVEN.
Now, I do think that we should be looking at alternative cleaner fuels and changing the types of emissions that come out of our factories and industry. It's good for the air we breathe, and for the environment, but without all the global warming hype surrounding it. That's something I'm willing to work for.
But enough of the global warming hype, already. Put it in it's proper context, global warming people!
Monday, December 29, 2008
Russian Professor Predicts U.S. Will Collapse and Break Apart in 2010: Russian Media Loves His Predictions
A Russian professor has predicted a 45%-55% chance that the United States will collapse under the economic strain that it's under, a second American Civil War will break out and several new nations will emerge from the wreckage.
Yeah, right.
But his wild predictions have found an audience in the Russian media, which has been interviewing him like crazy. Despite his reputation as a KGB analyst, he couldn't predict the breakup of his own country in 1991, yet he's prognosticating an American collapse in 2009-2010. His anti-Americanism has found support in Russia and in the Kremlin, who blame Washington for everything.
His description of the six new American nations to emerge from the article: California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.
Thhhhp!
My prediction: 2009 will come and go. So will 2010. America will emerge from it's economic woes sometime in 2010, with a new focus on paying off the sizable debt that is currently being accumulated.
This guy has read too much Harry Turtledove (an alternate history author). Too many of his ideas look like they've been plagiarized from Turtledove and other "what if" authors that I've read.
Yeah, right.
But his wild predictions have found an audience in the Russian media, which has been interviewing him like crazy. Despite his reputation as a KGB analyst, he couldn't predict the breakup of his own country in 1991, yet he's prognosticating an American collapse in 2009-2010. His anti-Americanism has found support in Russia and in the Kremlin, who blame Washington for everything.
His description of the six new American nations to emerge from the article: California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.
Thhhhp!
My prediction: 2009 will come and go. So will 2010. America will emerge from it's economic woes sometime in 2010, with a new focus on paying off the sizable debt that is currently being accumulated.
This guy has read too much Harry Turtledove (an alternate history author). Too many of his ideas look like they've been plagiarized from Turtledove and other "what if" authors that I've read.
Hamas Has Been a Disaster for the Palestinian People; Israel Has No Choice But to Put Hamas Into Its Place
Governments around the world have been quick to issue statements condemning the latest fighting between Israel and Hamas and called for a cease-fire between the two sides.
A CEASE-FIRE??!
Hamas is responsible for most of the civilian casualties. They're positioning their military hardware next to schools, apartment buildings and houses, and not allowing the residents to flee for their lives when they know that Israel is destroying Hamas hardware whenever and wherever they find it. Hamas knows full well what will happen when their hardware is hit by Israeli bombs while sitting next to an occupied building: noncombatants die.
Israel was content to leave Gaza alone, until Hamas broke the cease-fire and began firing rockets into southern Israel, which provoked the Israelis to fire back.
As far as this talk of a cease-fire goes, it would be like asking the United States to negotiate a cease-fire with al-Qaeda. Why should Israel be made to agree to a cease-fire with a terror group bent on it's destruction?
Hamas has proven it can't run a picnic, let alone the Palestinian government. Yet the Palestinian people voted for Hamas and got exactly the type of government that they wanted. All that Hamas has brought is death and destruction to the Palestinian people. I wonder if the majority of Palestinians will be thinking about that the next time they have an election.
A CEASE-FIRE??!
Hamas is responsible for most of the civilian casualties. They're positioning their military hardware next to schools, apartment buildings and houses, and not allowing the residents to flee for their lives when they know that Israel is destroying Hamas hardware whenever and wherever they find it. Hamas knows full well what will happen when their hardware is hit by Israeli bombs while sitting next to an occupied building: noncombatants die.
Israel was content to leave Gaza alone, until Hamas broke the cease-fire and began firing rockets into southern Israel, which provoked the Israelis to fire back.
As far as this talk of a cease-fire goes, it would be like asking the United States to negotiate a cease-fire with al-Qaeda. Why should Israel be made to agree to a cease-fire with a terror group bent on it's destruction?
Hamas has proven it can't run a picnic, let alone the Palestinian government. Yet the Palestinian people voted for Hamas and got exactly the type of government that they wanted. All that Hamas has brought is death and destruction to the Palestinian people. I wonder if the majority of Palestinians will be thinking about that the next time they have an election.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
So How Many Banks Have Restored Lines of Credit Since the Government Bailed Their Bankrupt Hineys Out?
The $850 billion question being asked of the major banks who took the government bailout is this: what did you do with the money, and why aren't you loaning money to your customers that the money was intended for?
Of the 210 banks who took the bailouts, how many have restored lines of credit to their customers?
Not many. They aren't answering questions as to where the money went, have reduced or eliminated lines of credit to their customers, and have paid out "golden parachutes" (bonuses) to their executives, despite claiming that they wouldn't do so.
If the banks aren't more forthcoming in what they've done with the money, then those loans should be revoked and the banks seized.
They cannot do what they've done and then pretend that they owe the taxpayers nothing. That won't fly.
This is just more proof that the sheer size of the bailout was a huge mistake, isn't working and is in desperate need of fixing.
Of the 210 banks who took the bailouts, how many have restored lines of credit to their customers?
Not many. They aren't answering questions as to where the money went, have reduced or eliminated lines of credit to their customers, and have paid out "golden parachutes" (bonuses) to their executives, despite claiming that they wouldn't do so.
If the banks aren't more forthcoming in what they've done with the money, then those loans should be revoked and the banks seized.
They cannot do what they've done and then pretend that they owe the taxpayers nothing. That won't fly.
This is just more proof that the sheer size of the bailout was a huge mistake, isn't working and is in desperate need of fixing.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Biden Talks of ANOTHER $700 Billion Stimulus: This is a BAD Idea
VP-elect Biden said during an interview today that the "...economy is in danger of absolutely tanking" and would take another stimulus (in the range of $600-700 billion) to get things back on track.
I would like to know if this will involve borrowing more money from China.
Because if it does, then I am absolutely opposed to this move. We CANNOT afford more debt. They should be doing these stimuli from money they already have in the bank from taxes. They need to be PAYING DOWN the debt, not increasing it.
The cumulative effect of all this debt will lead to the end that Biden is currently predicting, and the bill WILL come due eventually.
I would like to know if this will involve borrowing more money from China.
Because if it does, then I am absolutely opposed to this move. We CANNOT afford more debt. They should be doing these stimuli from money they already have in the bank from taxes. They need to be PAYING DOWN the debt, not increasing it.
The cumulative effect of all this debt will lead to the end that Biden is currently predicting, and the bill WILL come due eventually.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Kennedy Considering Asking Governor of New York to be Appointed to Clinton's Seat: Why This is a VERY Bad Idea
Now that Senator Sniper-Fire has been nominated to be President-elect Obama's Secretary of State, the race is on to fill her seat. Caroline Kennedy, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and Representatives Maloney and Millibrand, along with Bill Clinton, are currently the favorite picks of the talking heads on the news shows.
I don't like the attention that the media is giving to Kennedy, merely because of her last name. She should probably pick up some political experience and hold some other offices before asking the Governor of New York to appoint her to fill the remainder of Clinton's seat. And I'm talking about elected positions, not appointments due to her family connections.
She's an excellent fundraiser, having raised over $65 million for the New York public schools. But being an effective fundraiser does not necessarily translate into being an effective politician who responds to the needs of her constituents. The only track record that we have are position statements that she's made when her liberal media friends ask her for her opinions on the issues of the day.
She's already said that she supports gay marriage, abortion rights and supports gun control. If she ever ran for President, I would not vote for her based on those principles alone.
Her support for gay marriage and abortion rights is also contrary to her beliefs as a Catholic, and that's another serious issue for many people. You can't be pro-choice and be a Catholic; those positions are mutually exclusive from one another. Being Catholic is about being part of a pro-life religion. She's either a Catholic, or she's not. There is no such thing as a liberal Catholic. But it seems like many Catholic politicians from out East abandon their church's most sacred laws in the name of their politics.
Religious beliefs aside, the interests of New York would be better served by picking someone who has experienced going through a campaign and has at least held public office.
Name recognition alone isn't enough to hang one's hat on. We've all eyewitnessed the truth of this statement recently, when a virtually unknown politician named Obama beat a political star with the name-draw that Hillary Clinton has and went on to become the first African-American President. Name recognition is but one piece of the puzzle.
Governor Paterson would do his state a favor by looking elsewhere for a suitable and more seasoned replacement.
I don't like the attention that the media is giving to Kennedy, merely because of her last name. She should probably pick up some political experience and hold some other offices before asking the Governor of New York to appoint her to fill the remainder of Clinton's seat. And I'm talking about elected positions, not appointments due to her family connections.
She's an excellent fundraiser, having raised over $65 million for the New York public schools. But being an effective fundraiser does not necessarily translate into being an effective politician who responds to the needs of her constituents. The only track record that we have are position statements that she's made when her liberal media friends ask her for her opinions on the issues of the day.
She's already said that she supports gay marriage, abortion rights and supports gun control. If she ever ran for President, I would not vote for her based on those principles alone.
Her support for gay marriage and abortion rights is also contrary to her beliefs as a Catholic, and that's another serious issue for many people. You can't be pro-choice and be a Catholic; those positions are mutually exclusive from one another. Being Catholic is about being part of a pro-life religion. She's either a Catholic, or she's not. There is no such thing as a liberal Catholic. But it seems like many Catholic politicians from out East abandon their church's most sacred laws in the name of their politics.
Religious beliefs aside, the interests of New York would be better served by picking someone who has experienced going through a campaign and has at least held public office.
Name recognition alone isn't enough to hang one's hat on. We've all eyewitnessed the truth of this statement recently, when a virtually unknown politician named Obama beat a political star with the name-draw that Hillary Clinton has and went on to become the first African-American President. Name recognition is but one piece of the puzzle.
Governor Paterson would do his state a favor by looking elsewhere for a suitable and more seasoned replacement.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Bill Clinton Doesn't Need to be Involved in Senator Sniper-Fire's Confirmation Hearings: Obama's Calling the Shots, Not Bill's Charities
There's been a story circulating around that former President Clinton may be called into Senator Hillary Clinton's confirmation hearings to testify about possible conflicts of interests with regards to her nomination as Secretary of State.
He's already agreed not to accept foreign government donations to his charities. But more than that, Hillary's not taking orders from her husband on foreign policy matters; her boss is President-elect Obama.
Former President Clinton doesn't need to testify. It's a side-show that Congress doesn't have time for, and can handle privately with the Clintons and AWAY from the hearings. This hearing is about Senator Sniper-Fire, not President Clinton.
Oops, did I say that out loud?
He's already agreed not to accept foreign government donations to his charities. But more than that, Hillary's not taking orders from her husband on foreign policy matters; her boss is President-elect Obama.
Former President Clinton doesn't need to testify. It's a side-show that Congress doesn't have time for, and can handle privately with the Clintons and AWAY from the hearings. This hearing is about Senator Sniper-Fire, not President Clinton.
Oops, did I say that out loud?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)