Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This first appeared June 20, 2009

Che Guevara, the Counterinsurgent
By Humberto Fontova
....One of these Cuban redneck wives refused to be relocated. After her husband, sons, and a few nephews were murdered by the Gallant Che and his minions, she grabbed a tommy gun herself, rammed in a clip and took to the hills. She became a rebel herself. Cubans know her as La Niña Del Escambray.

For a year she ran rings around the Communist armies sweeping the hills in her pursuit. Finally she ran out of ammo and supplies and the reds rounded her up. Amazingly, she wasn't executed (Che must have taken that day off.) For years La Niña suffered horribly in Castro's dungeons, but she lingers in a Miami nursing home today, mentally shattered.

Seems to me her tragic story makes ideal fodder for Oprah, for all those women's magazines, for all those butch professorettes of "Women's Studies," for a Susan Sarandon role, for a little whooping up by Gloria Steinem, Nancy Pelosi and Hillary herself. If Sonia Sotomayor's is a Cinderella story La Nina's is Joan of Arc's.

Think about it: here's that favored theme for Hollywood producers and New York publishers - "the feisty woman." Well, they don't come much feistier than Zoila Aguila, her real name. Had she been fighting, say, Somoza or Pinochet or Batista you can bet your last penny Hollywood and New York would be all over her story. Instead she fought the Left's premier pin-up boys. So, naturally, nobody's heard of her.


###

Observations From the Back Row

By Rich Kozlovich 

Attacking Paul Ryan, But Not the National Debt-  By Alan Caruba - The White House and Democrats have been attacking Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Chairman of the House Budget Committee, for having the audacity to put forth budget plans, something the Democrats in the Senate have failed to pass for well over a thousand days at this point.

The first words out of Rep. Steve Israel’s mouth, a Democrat from New York, were the pathetic blather about “billionaires.” Most Americans aren’t billionaires or even millionaires and are more concerned about the rising costs of gasoline, food, and everything else than whether the rich pay more taxes. In point of fact, the rich pay the vast bulk of the income taxes and some forty percent of workers pay none at all. If you earn more than $250,000 a year, Democrats think you’re rich.

My Take - My friends and I are in complete harmony with President Obama. Everyone should pay their fair share. So let's get these forty five plus percent who are paying no federal income taxes at all paying into the system and then we can talk about what's fair for everyone else.

Henry Lamb: Who’s right about Agenda 21? - More and more local communities are rising up to oppose local comprehensive land use plans and local ordinances because they claim the policies contained in the documents reflect the recommendations found in the U.N.‘s Agenda 21, which result in the loss of property rights and individual freedom.

A LETTER FROM A PROCTER AND GAMBLE EXECUTIVE TO THE PRESIDENT* THE LAST SENTENCE IS THE MOST CHILLING - Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management.. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years; made corporate history.

Protesters successfully shut down California Monsanto office - A recent two-day protest in Northern California against genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) led to the complete shutdown of a Monsanto corporate office for an entire day, according to reports. On Friday, March 16, 2012, activists affiliated with the Global Days of Action to Shut Down Monsanto began rallying in front of the Davis, Calif., office of Monsanto, where they held up banners, gave speeches, and set up tents in front of the Monsanto building on Fifth Street, which caused the biotech giant to shutter its operations. 

 

"In the course of the two-day event, activists held up signs, gave speeches to inform and inspire each other and solidify the movement, drafted a resolution about Monsanto with many proposed solutions to be presented to the California legislature, celebrated each other and went "freeway blogging" - displaying a large hand made banner that said, "Shut Down Monsanto" on the Pole Line Road overpass over I-80," writes Mark Graham of Food Freedom. "Thousands of drivers were shown this message."

My Take - I have a statement and a question. Below I have listed the names of four people.  I want you to pick the two that would most likely appear on a T-Shirt of one of these greenies. 

Barack Obama
George W. Bush
Che Guevara
Dwight D. Eisenhower

Which of these four do you think would be one and two? Which two do you think might not be on any T-Shirt at all? 

African-American Lynch Mob - Is anybody else out there as sick and tired as I am of lynch mob racists like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (vide: Tawana Brawley, the Duke Lacrosse kids) who don the mantel of the “civil rights” movement to indict non-blacks in advance of the facts, and incite racial rage against them? Yet that is exactly what they – and scores of black leaders — are doing to an Hispanic individual named George Zimmerman. Along with a cast of thousands, they are holding him guilty of racism before the fact, justifying a hatred, as inflammatory as the hatred once spewed by southern crackers against blacks.

UNRWA: The Palestinians' Worst Enemy - by Mudar Zahran - UNRWA is not there to settle the refugees, it is there not to settle the refugees. The UN now counts as "refugees" entire generations, furious that their ancestors started a war that they then lost, and are now asking to be rewarded diplomatically with what they were unable to seize militarily. Since its establishment, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency [UNRWA] has received billions in international aid, including more than $4 billion dollars of US taxpayers' money. 

 

While UNRWA's mission is to "relieve" and "support" the Palestinians, it has been doing exactly the opposite. It has been keeping Palestinians in pens as refugees and obstructing them from integrating and from normalizing their lives, all while UNRWA seems to be funneling international aid money to whitewashing the terrorist organization Hamas, promoting the illegal Turkish flotilla which included members of Turkey's terrorist group the IHH, and which tried to break Israel's protection of its borders from having more weapons brought in that would be turned against it; to misrepresenting and politicizing the situation in Gaza, and to supporting the terrorist group, Hamas. One has to wonder if UNRWA is not actually an obstacle to peace in the Middle East

Federalist Number 11

Many times it is difficult to understand what they mean and why they are saying these things because we may not understand the context, so I have added an explanation link is at the end. My sources for this are the Library of Congress and Wikipedia. RK

Federalist No. 11

The Utility of the Union in Respect to Commercial Relations and a Navy
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:

THE importance of the Union, in a commercial light, is one of those points about which there is least room to entertain a difference of opinion, and which has, in fact, commanded the most general assent of men who have any acquaintance with the subject. This applies as well to our intercourse with foreign countries as with each other.

There are appearances to authorize a supposition that the adventurous spirit, which distinguishes the commercial character of America, has already excited uneasy sensations in several of the maritime powers of Europe. They seem to be apprehensive of our too great interference in that carrying trade, which is the support of their navigation and the foundation of their naval strength. Those of them which have colonies in America look forward to what this country is capable of becoming, with painful solicitude. They foresee the dangers that may threaten their American dominions from the neighborhood of States, which have all the dispositions, and would possess all the means, requisite to the creation of a powerful marine. Impressions of this kind will naturally indicate the policy of fostering divisions among us, and of depriving us, as far as possible, of an ACTIVE COMMERCE in our own bottoms. This would answer the threefold purpose of preventing our interference in their navigation, of monopolizing the profits of our trade, and of clipping the wings by which we might soar to a dangerous greatness. Did not prudence forbid the detail, it would not be difficult to trace, by facts, the workings of this policy to the cabinets of ministers.

If we continue united, we may counteract a policy so unfriendly to our prosperity in a variety of ways. By prohibitory regulations, extending, at the same time, throughout the States, we may oblige foreign countries to bid against each other, for the privileges of our markets. This assertion will not appear chimerical to those who are able to appreciate the importance of the markets of three millions of people--increasing in rapid progression, for the most part exclusively addicted to agriculture, and likely from local circumstances to remain so--to any manufacturing nation; and the immense difference there would be to the trade and navigation of such a nation, between a direct communication in its own ships, and an indirect conveyance of its products and returns, to and from America, in the ships of another country. Suppose, for instance, we had a government in America, capable of excluding Great Britain (with whom we have at present no treaty of commerce) from all our ports; what would be the probable operation of this step upon her politics? Would it not enable us to negotiate, with the fairest prospect of success, for commercial privileges of the most valuable and extensive kind, in the dominions of that kingdom? When these questions have been asked, upon other occasions, they have received a plausible, but not a solid or satisfactory answer. It has been said that prohibitions on our part would produce no change in the system of Britain, because she could prosecute her trade with us through the medium of the Dutch, who would be her immediate customers and paymasters for those articles which were wanted for the supply of our markets. But would not her navigation be materially injured by the loss of the important advantage of being her own carrier in that trade? Would not the principal part of its profits be intercepted by the Dutch, as a compensation for their agency and risk? Would not the mere circumstance of freight occasion a considerable deduction? Would not so circuitous an intercourse facilitate the competitions of other nations, by enhancing the price of British commodities in our markets, and by transferring to other hands the management of this interesting branch of the British commerce?

A mature consideration of the objects suggested by these questions will justify a belief that the real disadvantages to Britain from such a state of things, conspiring with the pre-possessions of a great part of the nation in favor of the American trade, and with the importunities of the West India islands, would produce a relaxation in her present system, and would let us into the enjoyment of privileges in the markets of those islands elsewhere, from which our trade would derive the most substantial benefits. Such a point gained from the British government, and which could not be expected without an equivalent in exemptions and immunities in our markets, would be likely to have a correspondent effect on the conduct of other nations, who would not be inclined to see themselves altogether supplanted in our trade.

A further resource for influencing the conduct of European nations toward us, in this respect, would arise from the establishment of a federal navy. There can be no doubt that the continuance of the Union under an efficient government would put it in our power, at a period not very distant, to create a navy which, if it could not vie with those of the great maritime powers, would at least be of respectable weight if thrown into the scale of either of two contending parties. This would be more peculiarly the case in relation to operations in the West Indies. A few ships of the line, sent opportunely to the reinforcement of either side, would often be sufficient to decide the fate of a campaign, on the event of which interests of the greatest magnitude were suspended. Our position is, in this respect, a most commanding one. And if to this consideration we add that of the usefulness of supplies from this country, in the prosecution of military operations in the West Indies, it will readily be perceived that a situation so favorable would enable us to bargain with great advantage for commercial privileges. A price would be set not only upon our friendship, but upon our neutrality. By a steady adherence to the Union we may hope, erelong, to become the arbiter of Europe in America, and to be able to incline the balance of European competitions in this part of the world as our interest may dictate.

But in the reverse of this eligible situation, we shall discover that the rivalships of the parts would make them checks upon each other, and would frustrate all the tempting advantages which nature has kindly placed within our reach. In a state so insignificant our commerce would be a prey to the wanton intermeddlings of all nations at war with each other; who, having nothing to fear from us, would with little scruple or remorse, supply their wants by depredations on our property as often as it fell in their way. The rights of neutrality will only be respected when they are defended by an adequate power. A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral.

Under a vigorous national government, the natural strength and resources of the country, directed to a common interest, would baffle all the combinations of European jealousy to restrain our growth. This situation would even take away the motive to such combinations, by inducing an impracticability of success. An active commerce, an extensive navigation, and a flourishing marine would then be the offspring of moral and physical necessity. We might defy the little arts of the little politicians to control or vary the irresistible and unchangeable course of nature.

But in a state of disunion, these combinations might exist and might operate with success. It would be in the power of the maritime nations, availing themselves of our universal impotence, to prescribe the conditions of our political existence; and as they have a common interest in being our carriers, and still more in preventing our becoming theirs, they would in all probability combine to embarrass our navigation in such a manner as would in effect destroy it, and confine us to a PASSIVE COMMERCE. We should then be compelled to content ourselves with the first price of our commodities, and to see the profits of our trade snatched from us to enrich our enemies and p rsecutors. That unequaled spirit of enterprise, which signalizes the genius of the American merchants and navigators, and which is in itself an inexhaustible mine of national wealth, would be stifled and lost, and poverty and disgrace would overspread a country which, with wisdom, might make herself the admiration and envy of the world.

There are rights of great moment to the trade of America which are rights of the Union--I allude to the fisheries, to the navigation of the Western lakes, and to that of the Mississippi. The dissolution of the Confederacy would give room for delicate questions concerning the future existence of these rights; which the interest of more powerful partners would hardly fail to solve to our disadvantage. The disposition of Spain with regard to the Mississippi needs no comment. France and Britain are concerned with us in the fisheries, and view them as of the utmost moment to their navigation. They, of course, would hardly remain long indifferent to that decided mastery, of which experience has shown us to be possessed in this valuable branch of traffic, and by which we are able to undersell those nations in their own markets. What more natural than that they should be disposed to exclude from the lists such dangerous competitors?

This branch of trade ought not to be considered as a partial benefit. All the navigating States may, in different degrees, advantageously participate in it, and under circumstances of a greater extension of mercantile capital, would not be unlikely to do it. As a nursery of seamen, it now is, or when time shall have more nearly assimilated the principles of navigation in the several States, will become, a universal resource. To the establishment of a navy, it must be indispensable.

To this great national object, a NAVY, union will contribute in various ways. Every institution will grow and flourish in proportion to the quantity and extent of the means concentred towards its formation and support. A navy of the United States, as it would embrace the resources of all, is an object far less remote than a navy of any single State or partial confederacy, which would only embrace the resources of a single part. It happens, indeed, that different portions of confederated America possess each some peculiar advantage for this essential establishment. The more southern States furnish in greater abundance certain kinds of naval stores--tar, pitch, and turpentine. Their wood for the construction of ships is also of a more solid and lasting texture. The difference in the duration of the ships of which the navy might be composed, if chiefly constructed of Southern wood, would be of signal importance, either in the view of naval strength or of national economy. Some of the Southern and of the Middle States yield a greater plenty of iron, and of better quality. Seamen must chiefly be drawn from the Northern hive. The necessity of naval protection to external or maritime commerce does not require a particular elucidation, no more than the conduciveness of that species of commerce to the prosperity of a navy.

An unrestrained intercourse between the States themselves will advance the trade of each by an interchange of their respective productions, not only for the supply of reciprocal wants at home, but for exportation to foreign markets. The veins of commerce in every part will be replenished, and will acquire additional motion and vigor from a free circulation of the commodities of every part. Commercial enterprise will have much greater scope, from the diversity in the productions of different States. When the staple of one fails from a bad harvest or unproductive crop, it can call to its aid the staple of another. The variety, not less than the value, of products for exportation contributes to the activity of foreign commerce. It can be conducted upon much better terms with a large number of materials of a given value than with a small number of materials of the same value; arising from the competitions of trade and from the fluctations of markets. Particular articles may be in great demand at certain periods, and unsalable at others; but if there be a variety of articles, it can scarcely happen that they should all be at one time in the latter predicament, and on this account the operations of the merchant would be less liable to any considerable obstruction or stagnation. The speculative trader will at once perceive the force of these observations, and will acknowledge that the aggregate balance of the commerce of the United States would bid fair to be much more favorable than that of the thirteen States without union or with partial unions.

It may perhaps be replied to this, that whether the States are united or disunited, there would still be an intimate intercourse between them which would answer the same ends; this intercourse would be fettered, interrupted, and narrowed by a multiplicity of causes, which in the course of these papers have been amply detailed. A unity of commercial, as well as political, interests, can only result from a unity of government.
There are other points of view in which this subject might be placed, of a striking and animating kind. But they would lead us too far into the regions of futurity, and would involve topics not proper for a newspaper discussion. I shall briefly observe, that our situation invites and our interests prompt us to aim at an ascendant in the system of American affairs. The world may politically, as well as geographically, be divided into four parts, each having a distinct set of interests. Unhappily for the other three, Europe, by her arms and by her negotiations, by force and by fraud, has, in different degrees, extended her dominion over them all. Africa, Asia, and America, have successively felt her domination. The superiority she has long maintained has tempted her to plume herself as the Mistress of the World, and to consider the rest of mankind as created for her benefit. Men admired as profound philosophers have, in direct terms, attributed to her inhabitants a physical superiority, and have gravely asserted that all animals, and with them the human species, degenerate in America--that even dogs cease to bark after having breathed awhile in our atmosphere.[1] Facts have too long supported these arrogant pretensions of the Europeans. It belongs to us to vindicate the honor of the human race, and to teach that assuming brother, moderation. Union will enable us to do it. Disunion will add another victim to his triumphs. Let Americans disdain to be the instruments of European greatness! Let the thirteen States, bound together in a strict and indissoluble Union, concur in erecting one great American system, superior to the control of all transatlantic force or influence, and able to dictate the terms of the connection between the old and the new world!

1. "Recherches philosophiques sur les Americains.''

Explanation

###

Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This first appeared on July 13, 2009

Anniversary of a Castroite Massacre
By Humberto Fontova

In the predawn darkness of July 13, 1994, 72 desperate Cubans - old and young, male and female - sneaked aboard a decrepit but seaworthy tugboat in Havana harbor and set off for the U.S. and the prospect of freedom.

Let Jack Nicholson label their captive homeland "a paradise!" Let Bonnie Raitt rasp out her ditty calling it a "Happy Little Island!" Let Ted Turner hail their slave master as a "Helluva guy!" Let Democratic party honcho Frank Mankiewics proclaim Castro "one of the most charming men I've ever met!" Let Michael Moore hail the glories of Cuba's healthcare in Sicko. Let Barbara Walters add gravitas while soft-soaping Castro during an "interview": "you have brought great health to your country."

The people boarding that tug knew better. And for a simple reason: the cruel hand of fate had slated them to live under his handiwork…..

So what's the alternative if you can't flee Cuba? Well, in 1986 Cuba's suicide rate reached 24 per thousand - making it double Latin America's average, making it triple Cuba's rate during the unspeakable Batista era, making Cuban women the most suicidal in the world, and making death by suicide the primary cause of death for Cubans aged 15-48.

At that point the Cuban government ceased publishing the statistics on the self-slaughter, disguising them as "violent deaths," etc. The implications horrified even Cuba's Stalinist rulers.

Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This first appeared on May 11, 2009

Why Does Hollywood Love Fidel Castro?
By Humberto Fontova

"Fidel Castro is a genius!" gushed Jack Nicholson after a visit with the Cuban Führer in 1998. "We spoke about everything," the actor rhapsodized further. "Castro is a humanist like President Clinton. Cuba is simply a paradise!" Jack Nicholson has been saying such things for years now. Many of his Hollywood cohorts follow suit.

"Socialism works. I think Cuba might prove that" (Chevy Chase).

"Castro is very selfless and moral, one of the world's wisest men" (Oliver Stone).

"If you believe in freedom, if you believe in justice, if you believe in democracy, you have no choice but to support Fidel Castro!" (Harry Belafonte).

"It was an experience of a lifetime to sit only a few feet away from him (Castro)" Kevin Costner.

"The eight most important hours of my life," Stephen Spielberg describing his dinner with Castro.

While holding up the book "Fidel: Hollywood's Favorite Tyrant" on his TV show, Bill O'Reilly called these celebs "Hollywood pinheads."

But there might be more to these celebrity plugs for a tyrant who jailed more of his subjects than did Hitler or Stalin than the usual celebrity vacuity upstairs.

"My job was to bug their hotel rooms," says high-ranking Cuban intelligence defector Delfin Fernandez. "With both cameras and listening devices. Most people have no idea they are being watched while they are in Cuba. But their personal activities are filmed under orders from Castro himself."

###

Let's End This Week With This!

By Rich Kozlovich

I have been away for a couple of days and so I haven't been able to do my searches, read the information, organize it or post it. I should be back in form this coming week. The most highly important event to take place this week was the Sackett victory over the EPA; with a unanimous decision coming from the Supreme Court.  This has, in my opinion, large long term ramifications.

 I am working on an article dealing with this, and I have been told that there is more behind this story than is commonly known involving the state of Idaho; but I haven’t been able to verify the information. I have sent an e-mail to a local blogger in Idaho to see if what I have been told is true and asked them to contact the Sacketts. I haven't heard back yet. At any rate, this video is from 2008! That is the beauty of truth. It stays truth forever. As a result…that's how it becomes traditional wisdom.

George Will Attacks Environmentalists

 

Observations From the Back Row

...

“De Omnibus Dubitandum”

Everything we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!

Video with John Stossel and Richard Tren regarding DDT

A complete list of things caused by global warming

ABORTION

Analyst Infanticide argument shouldn't surprise
Common idea in philosophy seeking to maximize pleasure and minimize pain - A recent report in a medical ethics journal arguing the benefits of infanticide is simply a rehash of what members of the Obama administration have advocated regarding how Obamacare should be implemented, according to the head of a group that defends the unborn.

The recent paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics, titled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” argued that infanticide “should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled” because the authors do not believe a newborn is a person.

BIG GOVERNMENT

TSA thugs threaten media outlets
"Jonathan Corbett is suing the TSA for its unconstitutional body scanners and pat-down methods. He's also demonstrating that the TSA simply doesn't work. ... the pornoscanners actually put passengers at GREATER RISK -- and the TSA knows it! Even worse, the TSA issued threats against mainstream media outlets that wanted to interview Corbett!

How We Can Keep From Going Broke
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other social insurance programs are bankrupting America. They will produce ever-escalating deficits for as far as the eye can see. So what can we do about it? All we hear out of Washington are "eat-your-spinach" solutions — both from Democrats and Republicans. These involve cutting benefits, forcing doctors to ration health care, etc. Naturally, the beneficiaries resist such change. My colleagues and I at the National Center for Policy Analysis have been thinking about a different approach. Reform of entitlement programs should be a win-win proposition. That is, it should be good for the individual who agrees to accept fewer government benefits as well as for the taxpayers. Here is part of the idea....

What does the money-printing binge of the Obama administration portend for the future?
The monetary base had changed slowly and steadily before the current crisis, and the Fed’s actions that caused its explosion during the past three years have no precedents in nature or magnitude. Indeed, if a monetary economist had been given (by divine miracle) a preview of the chart above in, say, 2007, he would probably have concluded that the Fed’s managers were destined to go mad in the near future. I daresay no economist expected such an action (or set of actions). Now that it has occurred, however, it places the Fed in an unprecedented—and extremely dangerous—situation.

Obama Discovers a Problem With Marxism
In an interview with WFTV, President Obama suddenly discovered what it is that has troubled Americans about Marxism for well over a century. The crucial exchange occurred when Obama was asked about gas prices. “Well, as long as gas prices are going up, people are going to feel like I’m not doing enough, and I understand that,” Obama observed. “Ultimately, though, there’s no silver bullet.”

Crony capitalism comes with big government
"Economic policy issues often divide on 'pro-business' and 'pro-government' arguments, with the pro-government side arguing that we need big government to correct the failures of the market, regulate business activity, and stand up to crony capitalism. The problem with this pro-government view is that crony capitalism inevitably comes with big government."… When government is limited, both in its budget and its regulatory powers, businesses seek profits through innovation and productive activity. Big government inevitably influences business profitability because taxes lower profitability, subsidies can raise it, government expenditures can aid business projects, and regulations can provide both benefits to firms and erect barriers for their competitors. So, with big government, businesses have to turn their attention toward those activities of government that influence their profits.

CHINA

China: New Red Dawn thwarted
"The charismatic Communist Party chief who had led a Maoist revival in the central Chinese city of Chongqing, complete with red flag-waving song contests, was removed from his post Thursday in what is being applauded as a victory for the political reform faction. Bo Xilai’s ouster comes in the midst of a scandal that has riveted Chinese who are unaccustomed to seeing political intrigues played out in a public [sic]." My Take - Nothing is as it appears in China. RK

CIVIL RIGHTS

Property rights are human rights
"One of the left's most effective canards has been its alleged distinction between property rights and human rights. The fact is that property rights are human rights. My right to my computer -- my property -- is not my computer's right to itself. It's my right, and I'm human. So when I see someone who is on record as being a defender of human rights and that someone defends, however haltingly, her property right as a human right, that's progress."

Imaginary due process
"According to the Attorney General of the United States, the United States Constitution Bill of Rights, specifically the due process requirements, no longer applies to some American citizens if the president arbitrarily chooses to suspend them. In short, the president can have you assassinated if he thinks it’s a good idea." …. How in the name of reason and justice does Attorney General Holder’s “criteria” apply to them? Where is the “collateral damage” criterion? If it can happen to them, it can happen to you, and the Constitution of the United States of America is no longer a barrier. It’s new; it’s scary; it’s imaginary due process.

Americans have just suffered a dangerous loss of liberties
The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 (PDF) may sound like a landscaping measure, but it is also being called the Trespass Bill, the Anti-Occupy Bill, and the First Amendment Rights Eradication Act. Under this bill, it is a felony to protest at or in the vicinity of a venue or event that is attended by anyone who has Secret Service protection. H.R. 347 passed the House on February 27th by a vote of 388–3. The Senate version (S. 1794) passed unanimously. With President Obama's signature, the Act became law on March 8…..The left-leaning Daily Kos states, “Protesting will be a felony — where is the outrage?” Meanwhile, the bill is being ignored by the mainstream media as uncontroversial. Supporters of the act dismiss its critics as hysterical or ill-informed. Michael Mahassey, the communications director for Rep. Thomas J. Rooney, who sponsored H.R. 347, called the backlash, "a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing. This doesn’t affect anyone’s right to protest anywhere at any time. Ever.” Who is correct? And why is there such a deep schism on H.R. 347?

Compliant Americans
Last month, at a Raeford, N.C., elementary school, a teacher confiscated the lunch of a 5-year-old girl because it didn't meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines and therefore was deemed nonnutritious. She replaced it with school cafeteria chicken nuggets. The girl's home-prepared lunch was nutritious; it consisted of a turkey and cheese sandwich, potato chips, a banana and apple juice. But whether her lunch was nutritious or not is not the issue. The issue is governmental usurpation of parental authority…..Because Americans are so compliant and willing to suffer silently at the gasoline pump, the Obama administration is willing to press on as handmaidens of environmental extremists who want to halt the exploration of our country's vast oil supplies, which are estimated to be triple those of Saudi Arabia. The Obama administration would rather pour more taxpayer dollars into risky alternative crony energy suppliers and electric cars. The OPEC nations have to be laughing at us, and I wouldn't be surprised if it were revealed that they are making under-the-table payments to environmental wackos.

COMMON SENSE - WHERE IS IT?

MS: Remaining five inmates in pardons controversy freed
"All five remaining inmates held in the Mississippi pardons controversy have now been released from prison. Mississippi's Supreme Court last week upheld the controversial pardons of more than 200 convicts that former Gov. Haley Barbour granted on his way out of office, rejecting a challenge by the state's attorney general."

EU

France: Sarkozy defies Europe with protectionist push
"President Nicolas Sarkozy, recasting himself as France's saviour from low-cost competition and high immigration, threatened to disregard European limitations on protectionism as he sought to give his re-election campaign a second wind on Sunday. Going out on a limb that risks angering France's European partners, Sarkozy said it was time to support local companies and stop the uncontrolled influx of immigrants and cheap imports that demonstrate Europe's lack of protectionist controls."

ISLAM

Israel, Islamic Jihad agree to Gaza truce
"Israel and militants in Gaza agreed to cease hostilities Tuesday after Egypt brokered a 'mutual truce' following four days of bloodletting which left 25 Gazans dead. Under the agreement, which came into force at 1:00am (2300 GMT on Monday), both Israel and militants from Islamic Jihad -- responsible for the lion's share of rockets targeting southern Israel -- agreed to hold their fire, an Egyptian intelligence official told AFP. Israeli officials and Islamic Jihad both confirmed that a deal was in place."

JOBS

Gallup Calls BS on BLS Unemployment Data
The latest BLS jobs report and the latest Gallup survey on jobs and unemployment are so out of line, that Gallup has commented on it in followup article Unemployment Numbers Suggest U.S. Economic Boom, or Not A careful look at the government's unadjusted household unemployment data shows a stunning 740,000 jobs added to the economy in February -- three times the 227,000 reported based on the establishment payroll survey. If this is economic reality, then the underlying economy must be growing much faster than most Americans currently believe. If the U.S. economy is surging, and jobs increased at the rate of three-quarters of a million last month, why haven't we heard a lot more about it? And, given a rapidly expanding economy, how can Gallup's nearly 30,000 random interviews with Americans across the nation show a significant increase in the unemployment rate?

JUST A THOUGHT

Is There a Conservative Majority?
As we get closer to the upcoming elections, the question of how to best advance the conservative cause presents itself. Some would argue that elections present an opportunity to reach out to more people with the conservative message, while others insist that ideological considerations take a back seat to actually getting sympathetic politicians elected. Sometimes we come across indications that these two objectives are not mutually exclusive pursuits. In a recent American Thinker article by Bruce Walker, such a case is presented. Walker makes the argument that there is a self identified conservative majority out there ready to be mobilized. He draws that conclusion by looking at a series of five Gallup Polls taken over three years, which broke down ideological self-identification by state. According to Walker:

MEDIA

The Media Endorse Barack Obama
Writing in this space two months ago, I laid out the media advantage that President Obama has in his quest for reelection. According to a study done by the Pew Research Center, 32 percent of journalists say they are liberal, 53 percent moderate and just 8 percent conservative. Ask John McCain how the press treated him in 2008 if you want specifics on the tilt toward Obama. A great illustration of media bias is the recent dustup over Sandra Fluke. She is the liberal activist trotted out by the Democratic Party to deflect the contraception issue away from the "church-state" controversy the White House was losing and into the more emotional "women's health" arena.

More propaganda masquerading as entertainment
One of the last things America needs is a rehash of the 2008 campaign, but the truth demands constant vigilance. The lies of today easily evolve into the common misperceptions of tomorrow…Recently, this space discussed the marketing of Game Change, HBO’s account of Campaign 2008… The producers are selling it as a serious examination of our political selection process. But this writer missed the trees for the forest. The devil is in the details. It is not the smug, self-satisfied tone of the filmmakers and stars that justify the disgust of every American who esteems truth as the gold standard of political discourse. Simply, the film is a blatant piece of anti-conservative propaganda… Some Hollywood producers are more insidious than politicians — the cover of “art” offers a much broader framework for spreading liberal propaganda than a mere stump speech or daily news sound bite. …. McCain laments the media’s negative treatment of him. “I thought they liked me.” No, Senator, they like you only as long as you are an impediment to the conservative movement. Any threat to liberal preponderance will be savaged by the media, including the entertainment media. Ultimately, the outrage of Game Change is not just that it demeans Sarah Palin but that it insults conservatives and the intelligence of its viewers. Not everyone is gullible enough to believe such over-the-top fiction, but its makers are sure banking for success on the ones who are

The Afghanistan Murders and the follies of Altruism
Two articles were published almost immediately after news of the crime broke, Ralph Peters’s angry article on Family Security Matters (FSM, March 13), Soldiers Murders Afghans – Generals Murder Solders: It was Only a Matter of Time Before One of Our Men Broke Down,” and Daniel Greenfield’s bitter and sardonic Sultan Knish article of March 12, “The Blood Price of Afghanistan.” By contrast, the MSM reported the killings with an almost palpable tone of glee… CNN decided to quote the dismay of one of the head savages in Afghanistan….But no condolences offered for the numerous Americans, Canadians, British, and Australians killed in cold blood by Afghans?...."The Afghan people can withstand a lot of pain," Prince Ali Seraj, the head of the National Coalition for Dialogue with the Tribes of Afghanistan - "They can withstand collateral damage. They can withstand night raids. But murder is something that they totally abhor, and when that happens, they really want justice." Really? The Taliban and other Afghans “abhor” murder? But not honor killings, rape, torture, beheadings, ritual disfigurements, beatings, and whippings, all prescribed or sanctioned by the Koran? ….everyday practice in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Syria, Libya…. No, no POTUS, no MSM anchor or pundit, no Charlie Rose or “Washington Week” host will raise those issues. After all, self-sacrifice demands that our soldiers expose themselves to the whim and malice of their enemies. Isn’t that what soldiering is all about? So, please, don’t bore our liberal/left elite with such stories….

What’s the Matter with Soledad O’Brian?
CNN's Soledad O'Brien isn't used to criticism. In the world of media elites, she's a beloved figure and an award-winning news anchor. But last week, she revealed her true, decidedly non-neutral colors. And she's not happy about the hoi polloi questioning her hallowed journalistic objectivity. On Thursday, O'Brien interviewed Joel Pollak, editor-in-chief of the late Andrew Breitbart's online empire. Breitbart's BigGovernment.com released a 1991 video of Barack Obama (then a 30-year-old law student) at a Harvard rally embracing radical racialist Derrick Bell and his push for more aggressive race-based hiring at Harvard. Bell is a proponent of critical race theory (CRT), which posits that America remains a hopelessly racist country dominated by Jews and white supremacists.

Just another media liar
Some weeks ago, Chris Matthews mentioned me in passing as one of those who wants to attack Iran militarily. So I wrote to his producer, pointed out that I had long opposed military attacks on Iran, had written three books and scads of articles and blogs saying that, and would therefore be grateful if Mr Matthews would take a few seconds to correct the record on air. After all, that’s where he uttered the false statement to begin with…[after some unsatisfactory communications he writes] That’s about it. I don’t suppose it’s surprising. I just want to state the facts: I am opposed to military attacks against Iran, I think we should be supporting the opposition there, and I think I’ve shown that Chris Matthews isn’t much interested in getting it right. He got it wrong, and stayed with it. Par for the course, n’est-ce pas? Another reason not to watch television. Stick with PJ Media. We try harder to get it right, and if we get it wrong, we try to correct it pronto.

MEDICINE

CBO report says healthcare law could cause as many as 20M to lose coverage
"As many as 20 million Americans could lose their employer-provided coverage because of President Obama's healthcare reform law, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a new report Thursday. The figure represents the worst-case scenario, CBO says, and the law could just as well increase the number of people with employer-based coverage by 3 million in 2019. The best estimate, subject to a "tremendous amount of uncertainty," is that about 3 million to 5 million fewer people will obtain coverage through their employer each year from 2019 through 2022.

Another foundation of Obamacare crumbles
Electronic health records have long been touted by Democrats and Republicans alike as a sure-fire way to lower health spending. When doctors have easy electronic access to a patient's records, advocates argue, they are less likely to order the duplicative and unnecessary tests that drive up the cost of health care in America. But that assertion is not necessarily proving to be true. Doctors who use EHRs may actually order more diagnostic testing, and therefore make health care even more expensive, according to a study published in the the journal Health Affairs.

Obamacare Costs More Than Twice As Much As Obama Claimed; Stimulus Creates Debt, Not Jobs
Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law’s core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion. That’s because we now have estimates for Obamacare’s first nine years of full implementation, rather than the mere six when it was signed into law. Only next year will we get a true ten-year cost estimate, if the law isn’t overturned by the Supreme Court or repealed by then. Given that in 2022, the last year available, the gross cost of the coverage expansions are $265 billion, we’re likely looking at about $2 trillion over the first decade, or more than double what Obama advertised.” Obamacare will harm the health care system and reduce employment….Bloomberg News features an interesting column by Ramesh Ponnuru, “Obama’s Stimulus Helped Grow Debt, Not Economy,”

RACISM

Voter ID Laws: Racist or Reasonable?
There’s been much said lately about election integrity and voter identification laws. Both sides of the American political spectrum have raised concerns over polls and potential abuses in the American voting process. In fact, due to the serious voter registration irregularities identified by groups like True the Vote in Texas, along with the numerous voter fraud convictions across the nation involving workers from politically motivated groups like the failed organization ACORN, many states are pursuing photo identification as a means of addressing such assaults on election integrity. Texas, South Carolina and Florida have all taken steps to mandate photo identification as a requirement for voting. ...The group found the seven congressional districts had four that were predominantly Republican and three that were predominantly Democratic. The four predominantly Republican districts had a range from 1,973 to 3,300 addresses with six or more people registered to them. The three predominantly Democratic districts had much higher numbers. …. The group visited addresses and scoured property tax records. The group found many of the addresses were vacant lots or business addresses. Thirty-nine were registered at businesses and 97 of the addresses were nonexistent. One hundred six of the registrations revealed the same registrant registered more than once, and 207 of the addresses turned out to be vacant lots. Meanwhile, 595 registrations had registrants with driver’s license addresses not matching the registration, and many were voting in a district they did not live in.,…Engelbrecht believes could result in an erosion of election integrity.

Our New Vichy-Like Intellectuals
Bruce Bawer, the American cultural critic who lives in Norway, just came out with a new book titled “The New Quislings”. It’s a devastating blow against the witch hunt and hysteria which poisoned Europe after the Oslo youth camp carnage last year. Norway is the nation that gave the world the word “Quisling” - after the politician who encouraged a Nazi invasion of his country. Despite it’s mainly dealing with Norway, Bawer’s splendid book sheds new light into a much deeper phenomenon: the night of Europe and its Vichy-like intellectuals. Throughout Europe, there’s a river of oily, bloody money that feeds those who incite for anti-Jewish boycotts, all the while spreading anti-Israel lies under guise of “objective journalism” and “academic research”. There are careers to be made through the betrayal of intellectual standards by making the Jewish State the object of an unremitting demonology. There are almost no Jews today in Oslo, however the Norwegian capital is one of the global centers of new anti-Semitism.

(The French government that "collaborated" with the Nazis during WWII was headquartered at Vichy, a French spa town)

Racial Quota Fallout
Many years ago, I learned of an episode in the life of a promising young black man that is relevant to things happening now. He had been educated at a good school, and went on to receive degrees at good colleges and universities. Then he went for a Ph.D. in mathematics at one of the leading departments in that field. When he encountered difficulties, his professors essentially wrote his doctoral thesis for him. No doubt they felt good about doing something to help a promising young black man, and perhaps took pride in doing so. But what about his pride? .....Derrick Bell's options were to be a nobody, living in the shadow of more accomplished legal scholars -- or to go off on some wild tangent of his own, and appeal to a radical racial constituency on campus and beyond.

His writings showed clearly that the latter was the path he chose… Bell even said that he took it as his mission to say things to annoy white people. Perhaps he thought that was better than being insignificant in his academic setting. But it was in fact far worse, because the real damage was to impressionable young blacks who took him seriously, including one who went on to become President of the United States.

REGULATIONS

Red Ink on the Rise
When it comes to regulations, President Obama’s message to his conservative critics seems to be: Message received. Early last year, he vowed to crack down on over-zealous rule-making, noting that the “rules have gotten out of balance” and “have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs.” He’s right -- they have. But actions speak louder than words, don’t they? For regardless of how tough the president may talk on regulation, his administration has enacted far more major regulations -- and significantly more expensive ones -- over the first three years of his presidency than the Bush administration enacted during its first three years. This runs counter to what we’ve heard from the president’s apologists. Over the last several months, they’ve been bragging about his rule-making record. As the president himself said during his most recent State of the Union address: “I’ve approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his.” But a new report from The Heritage Foundation, “Red Tape Rising,” shows just the opposite is true. This administration has been on a rule-making tear.

Complex societies need simple laws
"If you have 10,000 regulations,' Winston Churchill said, 'you destroy all respect for law.' He was right. But Churchill never imagined a government that would add 10,000 year after year. That's what we have in America. We have 160,000 pages of rules from the feds alone. States and localities have probably doubled that. ... So what do the politicians and bureaucrats of the permanent government do? They pass more rules."

RELIGION IN GOVERNMENT

Not the messiah
"I caught about 30 seconds of some Republican forum last night and heard someone ask Newt Gingrich about what he was going to do to lead the nation back to God. I am a religious person. I think Godliness is a good thing. But the right answer to that question should be to say that it is not the job of the President of the United States or in in the skill set of the President of the United States to lead the nation back to or toward God."

###

Media and Environmentalism

____________________

ABC Journalist Wendy Carlisle: Hatchet Job Exposed
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) repeatedly misrepresents the facts relating to important environmental issues and puts much effort into smearing those it disagrees with. Here is yet another example





###

Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This appeared on August 10, 2009

Cuba's Healthcare a model for the U.S. says CNN
By Humberto Fontova

Good thing for us that Rich Noyes of The Media Research Center keeps on eye on CNN. Good thing for CNN too. Given the latest Nielsen ratings (that finds them 17th during prime time) Ted "Fidel Castro is one helluva guy!" Turner's brainchild should be grateful for any and all viewers, whatever their motivation.

Last week, according to Noyes expose',

"CNN aired a piece of Communist Party propaganda about how Cuba could serve as 'a model for health care reform in the United States' "

The CNN report included clips from Michael Moore's Sicko as CNN's Morgan Neill, on location in a Potemkin Havana hospital, gushed about Cuban healthcare's "impressive statistics." "Cuba's infant mortality rates" he reported, "are the lowest in the hemisphere, in line with those of Canada!"

###

The Birth Certificate Saga, Part 3

_________

This is a copy of an e-mail sent to Jon Ray, publisher of Dissecting Leftism and Greenie Watch, from Lord Monckton. RK

Lord Monckton on Obama's computer-generated "Birth certificate"

I have watched Sheriff Arpaio's press conference in AZ and have examined some of the evidence directly. It is clear - as Alex Jones rightly said on the day when Obama first put up his faked "long-form birth certificate" on the White House website - that a fraud has been committed, and that, absent a valid official record of Obama's birth or a very good explanation of the anomalies in the published version, he is not qualified to stand for re-election as President.

The main point of the fraudulent "birth certificate" is that it is layered in such a way that all four of the rubber stamps (three dates and one recording officer's certification) are on separate layers, allowing them to be moved about on the document at will. A scanned document could not behave this way, and there is no way this could have happened accidentally. However, Sheriff Arpaio has some reason to fear that the Hawaiian authorities are in Obama's pocket.

There are two other pieces of impressive testimony. First, when the Sheriff's office asked the National Archives to produce the immigration records of flights into the US, and specifically into Hawaii, for five years either side of Obama's alleged birth date (4 August 1961), the one week in 1961 in which the records were unavailable was the week of -- you guessed it - 1-7 August. This is beginning to look like a widespread, high-level fraud.

Secondly, the White House had previously told enquirers from the media that no long-form birth certificate existed: all they had was a certification from Hawaii that there was a birth certificate on file.

The Sheriff plainly has enough evidence to warrant further investigation by the appropriate authorities (presumably the FBI), but he seems to be genuinely terrified of how far the corruption might have spread, and does not seem to know where to go or what to do next. A lawyer whom I have consulted says that no public authority or court will move against a sitting president who has been elected, but it seems to me that the evidence of malfeasance is now strong enough to overcome this objection.

###

Ah, Spring! Oh-Oh, Pests!

By Alan Caruba

I would like to thank Alan for sending this to me. I have been reading his work - and with his permission - republished many of his articles. I am also happy to say we have become friends over the years. Alan posts daily on his blog, Warning Signs. You may wish to view some of his older works at Caruba's Corner: Green Myths and Other Lies, which you will find in the right hand column of this blog. RK



  Yikes! Termites!

Poets never seem to run out of words to describe spring. Alfred Lord Tennyson said a young man's thoughts turn to love when spring arrives. Gardeners especially welcome it to put their little part of the world in perfect order, and many thrill to the sound of "Play ball!"

Spring, for me, is an annual reminder of the sheer power of nature to regenerate itself. Wherever you live, the trees burst into bloom along with the fecund life cycles of every species. In a world shaking loose the icy grip of winter, spring is full of the promise of warmer days, blue skies, and the real greening that nature provides.

Along with other species, spring signals the emergence of insect and rodent pests. America has been suffering a plague of bed bugs these days because there is only one pesticide registered to kill them and the Environmental Protection Agency has been notoriously slow to permit its use. All manner of other non-chemical techniques are used, but the bed bugs survive and thrive.

I know a lot about pests because in the 1980s I began to provide public relations services for my home state's pest control association. These days both the national and state associations have renamed themselves “pest management” groups, but the only thing you want to “manage “ with insect and rodent pests is to kill them as fast as possible.

So, yes, when spring arrives, I know that a lot of pest control professionals are gearing up to do battle with cockroaches, termites, ants, spiders, ticks, bed bugs, wasps, and the many permutations of their various species. The profession had its beginnings in the Middle Ages when men called “ratcatchers” plied their trade. Even English royalty employed them to keep their castles rat-free.

At the time, few made any connection between rats, fleas, and the Bubonic plague that raged through Europe from 1347 for the next five years, but that didn’t stop the plague from killing off a quarter of the population of Europe, some 25 million! Try to imagine what life would be like without pest control professionals today?

Spring, for example, marks the arrival of Lyme disease in many parts of the nation where there are large deer populations. The northeast is particularly vulnerable to this disease that is spread by the black-legged deer tick.

For homeowners and others with property, spring signals the presence of termites when their winged alates show up on window panes, attracted by the sunlight. What most do not know is that their home has likely been infested for several years until the colony reaches a point of sending the alates out to establish new colonies. Annually termites do more damage to homes throughout the United States than the combined effects of storms, fires, and earthquakes. Termite damage is frequently not covered by homeowner’s insurance. It is estimated they cause $5 billion in damage every year.

Termites aren't the only insect that can inflict property damage, a colony of Carpenter ants, often several thousands in numbers, can enter a home overnight and begin to dine on its wooden elements.

Pest management professionals always urge consumers to have their homes and workplaces regularly inspected for signs of insect or rodent pests. The tendency, however, is to wait until there are signs of an infestation before people call for help. I’d rather know my home or business was pest-free.

For example, there are a variety of cockroach species indigenous to the United States. They include the American, German, and Oriental cockroach. A cockroach infestation can number in the hundreds of thousands. A single, female German cockroach can, statistically, produce more than 400,000 descendents in a single year. The young of German cockroaches mature in 36 days, while American cockroaches take up to 160 days. If you see one, particularly in a restaurant, it means there are thousands you can’t see.

Rodents, mice and rats, breed prodigiously as well. Rats have a life span of approximately nine months and are ready to breed within three months. Their gestation period is 22 days and they have an average litter of eight. A female rat can produce 20 offspring. Statistically, a single pair of rats has the potential, mathematically, of producing 359 million descendents in three year’s time.

I hope this hasn’t reduced all those warm, fuzzy feelings you have about the return of spring to those of dread, but in truth Mother Nature doesn’t care how you feel about spring or bed bugs or any of the many other creatures who are too busy reproducing to be concerned about your welfare and health.

Remember that the next time the EPA bans another pesticide or some environmentalist tells you that the biggest threat to your life is carbon dioxide, a gas you exhale all the time.

Mark Twain put these words in Tom Sawyer’s mouth: It's spring fever. That is what the name of it is. And when you've got it, you want -- oh, you don't quite know what it is you do want, but it just fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so!

© Alan Caruba, 2012

###

We Really Do Need Clarity!

By Rich Kozlovich

Recently there was an article called, Analyst Infanticide argument shouldn't surprise, discussing a position being propounded in the Journal of Medical Ethics, titled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” Shocked yet? If not…give this a little time…more is coming.

In this article he outlines their views by say:

“They claim the child is not a person until they are capable of understanding they are a sentient being and until then “the interests of actual people over-ride the interest of merely potential people.”

“Gualberto Garcia Jones, of Personhood USA, said the statements in the article should not shock to anybody, as they have been the same views advocated by Peter Singer, a bioethics professor at Princeton who also has argued for the right to kill infants.”

“Jones pointed out that Singer is a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne, where Minerva teaches.”

“Last year appearing on “Up with Chris Hayes” Singer said. “A person is a being with some awareness of who they are, existing beyond simply the physical organism.”

“When asked if that would exclude a four month old baby, he said, “Possibly. I don’t think that’s problematic to say a four month old baby is not actually a person, that’s simply true.

This isn’t some new and startling view just now being adopted because our consciences have been seared by millions of abortions in America. He notes that;

“Singer wrote as long ago as 1979:“Human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons.” In 1993, he stated that newborns should not be considered a person until after at least 30 days after birth and doctors should kill some disabled babies immediately.” The slippery slope everyone warned of years ago was already foundational to their thinking. It is also more wide spread than we might think. He goes on to say; Peter Breen, founder of the Thomas More Society, says the problem with the premise is there is no way to have a firm definition of when one should qualify for legal protection. “The logical conclusion of saying that someone’s life is worth less at one month after birth rather than later is where do you draw the line. You either have the right to life or you don’t.”

Now note this:

“He went on to say that the authors were simply following the logical progression that began when abortion was legalized in the 1970s”

This author goes on to say:

“In the beginning abortion advocates said the child was simply a lump of cells. Then with ultrasound technology it became obvious that wasn’t so,” Breen said. “Then the argument moved to suggesting that it was acceptable to abort a child out of the womb such as partial birth abortion, to finally refusing medical care for a child who survives a ‘botched’ abortion.”

"While some in the pro-abortion community would deny it, a key element in the movement to move personhood beyond birth is a lack of belief that human beings are unique creatures made in the image of God."

The terms Pro-life and Pro-Choice are misnomers adopted by the media. Pro-Life people are not pro-life. They are anti-abortion. The media and the left are so fond of pointing out how as a group seem to support the death penalty, claiming hypocrisy. They are opposed to the murder of innocent life. Those who face the death penalty are being executed for heinous crimes. They are not innocent and they will not be murdered.

Those who support abortion are not Pro-Choice, they are pro-abortion. They support the murder of innocent life while emotionally and dramatically opposing the death penalty for those who lack every vestige of innocence due to their actions. Who are the hypocrites? Which group sounds insane to you?

Let’s not have any mistakes over this:

There is only one reason to be in support of abortion; you don’t believe it is murder.
There is only one reason to be against abortion; you believe it is murder!
There is only one reason to believe that abortion is murder; you believe in God!
There is only one reason to believe that abortion isn’t murder; you don’t believe in God!

Of course it really depends on who your God is! In ancient times it was common practice to sacrifice infants to the various Baal gods of the ancient Canaanites, and this was even common practice in first century BCE when the Carthaginians fought the Romans. It is believed that Hannibal had an older brother sacrificed in such a manner. Why? Because they believed this would guarantee good harvests and good fortune for their people. It was an economic issue.

Why is society presumably doing this today? Because if may impact the lives of the women economically or emotionally if the child is born. We moderns with our scientific rhetoric and psycho babble are as guilty of murder as were the ignorant ancients. They did it in the name of their gods and we do to prove we have no God.

###

Observations From the Back Row

__________

Cartoon Round Up .

Pravda asks: What happened to American media?
Accuses U.S. press of 'deliberately hiding evidence' of Obama's 'fraud' - It’s a twist of irony: The Russian news website Pravda has published an accusation that the American media is “tame,” afraid to publish news and is “deliberately hiding the evidence published on the internet about [President Obama's] defrauding of the American public and the deliberate evisceration of the Constitution of the United States.”  In a March 7 Pravda column, “Arizona sheriff finds Obama presidential qualifications forged,” Dianna Cotter, a senior at American Military University, blasts America’s mainstream media for their virtual silence about Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s six-month investigation into the controversy surrounding Obama’s birth certificate and his constitutional eligibility for office.

Why we are a nation divided
By Patrice Lewis
Patrice Lewis says both left and right have turned gov't into an invasive cancer - Patrice Lewis is a freelance writer whose latest book is "The Simplicity Primer: 365 Ideas for Making Life more Livable." She is co-founder (with her husband) of a home woodcraft business. The Lewises live on 20 acres in north Idaho with their two homeschooled children, assorted livestock, and a shop that overflows into the house with depressing regularity. Visit her blog at http://www.rural-revolution.com./With the presidential elections coming up this year, I’ve been giving a great deal of thought to why we are so divided as a nation. I know division has always been endemic in our country – in any country, really – but lately it seems that things are getting worse. Why is that, do you suppose?

A scholar who saved many lives
James Q. Wilson saved lives because his penetrating analyses of crime, and the effect of the criminal law, debunked the theories of other intellectuals, which had led judges and legislators

Too Close to Call
It often seems to me that Americans are as divided today as they were in the run-up to the Civil War. In those days the issues were states rights and slavery. These days, we are moving ever closer to the concept of nullification in which states refuse to enforce Obamacare and other federal mandates such as No Child Left Behind.  The most obvious example of the divide among voters are the elections in which a handful of votes decide the outcome. Try to imagine if Al Gore had won the 2000 election.

Heating Up a War of Words
On Sunday, March 4, President Obama addressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington, D.C. As February concluded on a Leap Year day, I opined that Israel and Iran were largely engaged in a war of words, noting briefly the military difficulties involved should Israel launch an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and other targets

Utah on verge of passing bill demanding Feds relinquish public land
Lawmakers who want to seize control of federal lands are pushing a legal battle they insist is winnable despite multiple warnings their effort is highly unconstitutional and almost sure to fail in court. Utah is poised to become the first state to pass a package of bills that demand the federal government relinquish claims to huge sections of public land. A proposal that advanced Wednesday demands that by 2014 the federal government cede control of nearly 30 million acres -- nearly 50 percent of the entire state.

Analyst Infanticide argument shouldn't surprise
A recent report in a medical ethics journal arguing the benefits of infanticide is simply a rehash of what members of the Obama administration have advocated regarding how Obamacare should be implemented, according to the head of a group that defends the unborn. The recent paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics, titled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” argued that infanticide “should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled” because the authors do not believe a newborn is a person.

Lawmaker calls Kinsey's research 'fraudulent'
Report cited that calls sex researcher's work no more than 'junk science'  - Controversial biologist Alfred Kinsey’s sex research again is coming under fire from lawmakers and social analysts. As usual, the mainstream press all but ignores the attacks. Some of the attacks on Kinsey recently came from Minnesota State Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen. He says his comments were made in a couple of places.  “Kinsey came up, somebody asked a question. It was about education at a forum or something. I responded that I have strong reservations about Kinsey’s research,” Gruenhagen said. “I also have brought up the fraudulent basis for Kinsey’s research at some House committee meetings,” Gruenhagen said.

###

Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This first appeared on June 20, 2009.

Che Guevara, the Counterinsurgent
By Humberto Fontova

Last Saturday marked the day 81 years ago when Ernesto Guevara de la Serna y Lynch entered the world. As luck would have it, a PBS special titled "The 60's Experience" featuring former Animals' singer, Eric Burdon, sporting a humongous (as befits the quite rotund Burdon nowadays) Che Guevara T-shirt is recently making the rounds. Eric's tent-like covering shames both Carlos Santana's and Johnny Depp's Che shirts. It features an elegant collar, and a huge image of the gallant Che's face on both front and back. Naturally, Eric was belting out the Animals' classics, which featured his incomparable, "We Gotta Get Out of This Place."

EXACTLY, Eric!" I blurted at the TV. "That was the exact and desperate refrain from 6.3 million Cubans (Cuba's population in 1959) when your t-shirt icon imposed his liberation!" (Pre-Castro Cuba, by the way, took in more immigrants as a percentage of population than the U.S., mostly from Europe. People used to be almost as desperate to "get into that place" as they later became to quote Burdon's song.)

###

Ignoring Islamo-Fascism at our Peril

By Alan Caruba

I would like to thank Alan for allowing be to republish is works. Alan publishes daily at Warning Signs. RK

In early November 2009 Americans were shocked to learn that an Army psychiatrist, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, had shot and killed twelve soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, and wounded thirty-one others. Because of the unrelenting political correctness prevailing in the Army and other services, all the signs that Hasan was a ticking time bomb were ignored.

Hasan was known to be a Muslim, had exhibited signs of a growing fanaticism, occasionally showed up in the post exchange dressed in Arab garb, and as it turned out later, was being mentored by Yemen’s al Qaeda leader, Anwar al-Awlaki , an American citizen who was later killed by a drone strike. As Hasan stood before the soldiers, firing at them, he yelled “Allah Akbar.”

This and other attacks, planned, failed, and thwarted occurred before and since 9/11; an attack that stunned Americans, all contribute to the worldwide terrorism intended to bring about the domination of Islam. Not only has the memory faded, but in 2009 the Obama administration did away with the earlier description of “a war on terrorism”, it ordered the Pentagon to replace it with “overseas contingency operations.”

The administration’s magical thinking about the Islamo-fascist threat makes one wonder why it has a Department of Homeland Security.

When it became known that the New York City Police Department was training its force to be especially watchful for any signs of terrorist attacks and was paying close attention to the mosques in the city and across the river in New Jersey, there was an outcry that totally ignored the threat. Initially they were rebuked by the Governor of New Jersey, a state where the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers was planned. One of the conspirators arrested lived in my hometown!

A report by the NYPD notes that Newark police officers worked closely “at all times” with their New York City counterparts. Much of the criticism of the NYPD’s program has been due to its success!

In a new book by Peter Feaman, “The Next Nightmare: How Political Correctness Will Destroy America” ($14.99, Dunham Books, softcover), a trial lawyer with thirty years’ experience, warns against the way Americans are leaving themselves vulnerable to future attacks. “Intolerance of Christianity and Judaism, and violence against infidels, is preached weekly in mosques across the United States.”

A great deal of the problem is that Americans believe that Islam is a "religion." Historically, it has been a cult of conquest that merges its belief system with a political agenda in which Sharia law is intended to be imposed throughout the world. Its early, swift spread was based on terror and warfare.

No other “religion” preaches death to believers of other faiths. No other “religion” demands that apostates who convert be sentenced to death. No other “religion” resorts to intimidation on the scale of Islam. It is fascism masquerading as religion.

“At the end of World War II,” notes Feaman, “there were about fifty mosques located in the United States. Today there are more than 1,300—and the number grows monthly.” Much of the funding comes from Saudi Arabia for Sunni mosques and Iran for Shiite mosques.

There are moderate Muslims seeking reform within Islam and there are Muslims who are loyal Americans. They are, however, vastly outnumbered by those with very bad intentions.

The NYPD program aimed at monitoring mosques is critical to thwart future attacks. “The six men of the al Qaeda sleeper cell in Lackawanna, New York—who were arrested by the FBI in 2001 for attending an al Qaeda terrorist training camp in Afghanistan—all belonged to the same Lackawanna mosque.”

“In Florida’s Dade and Broward Counties, an imam and his two sons were arrested on May 14, 2011, charged with funneling money to the Pakistani Taliban…”

“A Sunni mosque in suburban Beaverton, Oregon was the meeting ground for six members indicted by federal authorities in 2002 for conspiring to provide aid to the Taliban and al Qaeda terrorists.”

The Al-Farooq mosque in Brooklyn has been in the public spotlight for more than ten years as a hotbed of Islamic radicalism, sedition, and treason. The imam there, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, was convicted in 1995 of conspiracy to bomb New York City landmarks.”

Islamo-fascism is spreading everywhere, but especially in Europe where many acts of terrorism have occurred. By 2050, Muslims will be in control of most European nations by sheer weight of numbers. The “Arab spring” is rapidly becoming the means by which Islamists are gaining control throughout those nations that overthrew their mostly secular dictators.

If we don’t want a repeat of the Fort Hood murders—labeled “workplace violence” by the Obama administration—if we don’t want another Times Square car bomb that mercifully was disarmed, if we want to be protected against future attacks, we must rid ourselves of the political correctness that will get us killed.

The notion that the New York City Police Department would come under fire for acting preemptively to prevent further attacks in the city is beyond absurd. It is suicidal.

###

Federalist Number 10

Many times it is difficult to understand what they mean and why they are saying these things because we may not understand the context, so I have added an explanation link is at the end. My sources for this are the Library of Congress and Wikipedia. RK


Federalist No. 10

The Same Subject Continued: The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection

Author: James Madison
To the People of the State of New York:

AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.

By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government. From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties.

The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.

No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time; yet what are many of the most important acts of legislation, but so many judicial determinations, not indeed concerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of large bodies of citizens? And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts? It is a question to which the creditors are parties on one side and the debtors on the other. Justice ought to hold the balance between them. Yet the parties are, and must be, themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures? are questions which would be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing classes, and probably by neither with a sole regard to justice and the public good. The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every shilling with which they overburden the inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own pockets.

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.

By what means is this object attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression. If the impulse and the opportunity be suffered to coincide, we well know that neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on as an adequate control. They are not found to be such on the injustice and violence of individuals, and lose their efficacy in proportion to the number combined together, that is, in proportion as their efficacy becomes needful.

From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.

A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.

The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.

The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people. The question resulting is, whether small or extensive republics are more favorable to the election of proper guardians of the public weal; and it is clearly decided in favor of the latter by two obvious considerations:

In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives in the two cases not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the proportion of fit characters be not less in the large than in the small republic, the former will present a greater option, and consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.

In the next place, as each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in the large than in the small republic, it will be more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts by which elections are too often carried; and the suffrages of the people being more free, will be more likely to centre in men who possess the most attractive merit and the most diffusive and established characters.

It must be confessed that in this, as in most other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of which inconveniences will be found to lie. By enlarging too much the number of electors, you render the representatives too little acquainted with all their local circumstances and lesser interests; as by reducing it too much, you render him unduly attached to these, and too little fit to comprehend and pursue great and national objects. The federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.

The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.

Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.

The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.

In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.

Explanation


###