“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.” –James Madison, Federalist No. 46
Fascist groups are now capitalizing on European concerns over precisely these types of issues because their own governments have refused to act. Politicians continue to stick their head in the nearest sandbox, perhaps aware that a problem created by a generation could not be solved overnight. Rather than beginning to rethink the policies that have resulted in so many Europeans turning to extremist groups, they seem to have reconciled themselves to the idea that they govern a continent of several million closet racists. If this attitude persists, we are in deeper trouble than we previously thought.
Seventy years ago, Europe had statesmen who achieved greatness by facing down fascism. It is time for this generation to take up the mantle. Islamism needs to be defeated. European politicians also need to face up to issues important to the majority, rather than cowardly elites or grudge-laden minorities. Do that — even try to do that — and support for white extremist groups will drain. Ignore it, and it is hard to be optimistic about Europe’s future.
Caldwell wonders if Europe can be the same with different people in it. The answer he clearly comes to is “No.” The question now is how long it takes Europeans to reach the same conclusion. And what they will do when they come to it.
Harkin, chairman of the Senate health committee, followed Baucus to the floor to explain why he added the provision that would help Iowa (and “a few other states”). “I don’t see anything wrong with that,” Harkin said. “I make no bones about having put that in there.”
Dodd, at a news conference, offered the dubious argument that the hospital provision he offered is “competitive” and could be won by another state, “although my state is very interested.”
But what about those who wouldn’t get the goodies? Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) walked away with little to show for her politically difficult vote.
“That’s what legislation is all about: It’s the art of compromise,” Reid said when asked about the fairness of it all. “So this legislation is no different than the defense bill we just spent $600 billion on.” That would be the bill with more than 1,700 pet-project earmarks. “It’s no different than other pieces of legislation,” Reid continued.
The real entitlements are never mentioned. The “defense” budget is an entitlement for the military-security complex about which President Eisenhower warned us 50 years ago. A person has to be crazy to believe that the United States, “the world’s only superpower,” protected by oceans on its East and West and by puppet states on its North and South, needs a “defense” budget larger than the military spending of the rest of the world combined.
The military budget is nothing but an entitlement for the military-security complex. To hide this fact, the entitlement is disguised as protection against “enemies” and passed through the Pentagon.
I say cut out the middleman and simply allocate a percentage of the federal budget to the military-security complex. This way we won’t have to concoct reasons for invading other countries and go to war in order for the military-security complex to get its entitlement. It would be a lot cheaper just to give them the money outright, and it would save a lot of lives and grief at home and abroad.
The U.S. invasion of Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with American national interests. It had to do with armaments profits and with eliminating an obstacle to Israeli territorial expansion. The cost of the war, aside from the $3 trillion, was over 4,000 dead Americans, over 30,000 wounded and maimed Americans, tens of thousands of broken American marriages and lost careers, 1 million dead Iraqis, 4 million displaced Iraqis and a destroyed country.
All of this was done for the profits of the military-security complex and to make paranoid Israel, armed with 200 nuclear weapons, feel “secure.”
My proposal would make the military-security complex even more wealthym as the companies would get the money without having to produce the weapons. Instead, all the money could go for multimillion dollar bonuses and dividend payouts to shareholders. No one, at home or abroad, would have to be killed, and the taxpayer would be better off.
Some of the protestors invoked Ron Paul’s non-interventionist approach in explaining their foreign policy stances. “At heart, I’m increasingly a Ron Paul guy on foreign policy. We can’t be the world’s policeman… Iraq and Afghanistan could be too much for us to handle. The people there have to stand up. It’s their country,” said John Tidwell of Bristol, Virginia.
As the tea party movement takes steps to translate their policy aspirations into political outcomes, conservatives should watch out for a new wave of Buchanan-esque isolationism………. support for the spreading of democracy in the world and even for free trade may wane as Tea Partiers either become more active in the GOP or start their own party.
Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers “at the expense of hardworking Americans.” Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it's not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.
Then he got elected.
Liberals are a useless lot. They talk about peace and do nothing to challenge our permanent war economy. They claim to support the working class, and vote for candidates that glibly defend the North American Free Trade Agreement. They insist they believe in welfare, the right to organize, universal health care and a host of other socially progressive causes, and will not risk stepping out of the mainstream to fight for them. The only talent they seem to possess is the ability to write abject, cloying letters to Barack Obama—as if he reads them—asking the president to come back to his “true” self. This sterile moral posturing, which is not only useless but humiliating, has made America’s liberal class an object of public derision.
It is difficult to write about Jewish traitors, but I have the obligation to do so. My life as an American and a Jew is rooted in one miracle: individual liberty and freedom of speech and conscience. We are living in dangerous times, times when men of good will are afraid to speak out. There are some things you cannot say in America today.
I will say them anyway.
For years, I have noticed something curious about religion in America, Israel, and elsewhere. When I go into an establishment to pray, I notice how thick the carpet is. The gold and silver on doors and paneling’s. The “honorees” abounding with their plaques and pictures adorning walls and halls. I have prayed in many different shuls (synagogues) throughout the world, and I admit a proclivity toward those humbler, more “hamish” (homey) environs, with the simple wood benches and plain floors.
For me, it is in a place surrounded by holy books, next to the Torah, with those dust-coated windows, that I find solace with the Creator of Heaven and Earth. No games here, no power trips — and you are only as good as your cleaving and yearning to be a part of His world. I reckon there’s lots of folks out there who feel the same, regardless of their beliefs.
Our history as a people has been divided, roughly, into two camps.
There is one camp that stood at Mt. Sinai, witnessed great miracles, received an awesome legacy, and despite the most horrific of human travails — pogroms, inquisitions, crusades, and more — decided to hand down that legacy from generation to generation.
It is because of that meritorious Jewish tradition that I am here today and am able to write these words.
There is a second camp — a more sinister group, that has done more damage to the Jews and caused more murder and destruction than all of Israel’s enemies combined. To this troika belong Jews and non-Jews, and our Jewish heritage has been irrevocably altered by this movement.
This second camp is about control of human beings. It holds a vision of a One World Order, together with Marx, Trotsky, and Lenin — an evil that, to date, has claimed nearly two hundred million souls.
With these international bandits and mind-control wizards stands the ADL (Anti-Defamation League). Now, if anyone else would say this, that person would be labeled an anti-Semite. But as anyone that knows me will tell you, I am a Jew who strives always to do good, give to charity, and am diligent in study and prayer. Of my many shortcomings, anti-Semitism is not one of them.
There are things that for a Jew, there is no excuse. One aspect is the unrelenting war waged by radical Islam against the Jewish people (they say they’re not anti-Semitic, just anti-Zionist).
But far worse are those who aid and abet this satanic force. For the leftist control-freaks of the ADL, there cannot be a Land of Israel! That would mean they’d be out of a job! They thirst on dissention and division — anything that will drive up their stock. Their support from the outset of a two-state solution means the destruction of the Jewish homeland.
Period.
* * *
As I’ve written before, the ultimate goal of the PE is a World Socialist Government, and in that regard many conditioning devices have been developed. I’ve written previous columns about conditioning via music and remember, regarding the popular song “If I Had A Hammer,” that the famous Fabian Socialist window shows a hammer striking the world upon an anvil with the slogan “Remould it nearer to the hearts desire.” Also remember that the artist Bertold Brecht commented that “Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it.” And concerning conditioning via television and movies, reflect upon the fact that Dr. David Hubel (mentioned by New Ager Marilyn Ferguson in her The Aquarian Conspiracy) has described his research regarding the brain and vision, and how a line projected on a screen and tilted a certain way can cause the firing of a particular brain cell. Hubel then related this knowledge to a newborn child’s learning process.
Relevant to the PE’s ultimate goal, Lord Christopher Monckton (former science advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher) on October 14, 2009 at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota warned that signing the new climate change treaty in Copenhagen in early December will impose a “world government.” And that the Obama administration has Socialist leanings in terms of government can be inferred from National Economic Council director Larry Summers’ White House blog referring extensively and positively to John Maynard Keynes, a leading Socialist of the 20th century (see online Wall Street Journal article by Phil Izzo, September 22, 2009).
The self-proclaimed “world citizen” President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 on October 9, in part because the Nobel Committee said “his diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.” Concerning this, one might reflect upon the fact that the majority of the world’s population lives in Socialist countries.
One might also reflect upon the fact that in his April 5, 2009 speech in Prague, Czech Republic, President Obama used the phrase “we could reach the point where the center cannot hold.” Regarding this, note that in William Butler Yeats’ “The Second Coming” (January 1919) one reads that,
“Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world;
…Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand….”In his speech in the Czech Republic, President Obama also said “the United States will take concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons.” What this would mean is that the world would return to the bloodbaths resulting from conventional wars prior to nuclear weapons. China with its huge conventional army, for example, would no longer be deterred militarily from conducting warfare.
I believe that liberals are wrong about black people. Liberals are also wrong about white people, brown people, yellow people and red people. If NASA announced tomorrow that it had discovered a distant planet inhabited by purple people, anything that liberals believed about purple people would be wrong, too. Liberals are not only wrong about race, but they are also wrong about economics, crime, poverty, religion, science, war, marriage and foreign policy. In fact, as evidenced by their global-warming hysteria, liberals are wrong about the weather. Insofar as there is a “liberal consensus” on any particular subject — including movies and sports — then the truth is likely to be the exact opposite of whatever liberals say.
When Rupert Murdoch first bought The Wall Street Journal, one of the few major newspapers charging readers for access, he suggested that he would soon remove the tollbooth in order to promote bigger readership and more ad views. Now, just a couple of years later, he is realizing that The Journal had it right, and ultimately protected the integrity of itself as a publication by keeping itself intact.
And it’s not as if Google is in this merely for the public good. Google makes its money by keeping everyone else’s content open to its searches and the ads that are stacked up alongside them. A world of open content is a world that is open to Google.
Sure, it’s hard to argue against the openness of a Google universe without coming off as dark, begrudging, and conservative as someone like, well, Rupert Murdoch. And as a professional journalist who nonetheless champions a “people’s” Internet, I am happy to compete against the thousands of amateur bloggers out there reporting and commenting on the same stories I do. But the competitive advantage professional journalism enjoys over the free is just that: professional journalists, whose paid positions give them the time and resources they need to commit more fully to the task. If we can’t do better, so be it. But at the current rate, we won’t have the opportunity to find out.
Of course, Murdoch’s remarks are really just a trial balloon. He has initiated a conversation—but one that few of us are in a position to back up with a multibillion-dollar media empire. By suggesting that he is ready to pull the plug on universally searchable news, he is inviting other publishers in the same position to consider taking the same leap.