Remember who we are...
I won't say "enjoy" the newsbites found (within the comments section), because there's nothing "enjoyable" in reading of our nation's decline...
(*SIGH*)
...but armed with knowledge in context - being willing to share and educate - it's our only real hope of being part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
11 comments:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_AFGHANISTAN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-08-06-06-27-19
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- A military helicopter crashed in eastern Afghanistan, killing 31 U.S. special operation troops...
The Taliban claimed they downed the helicopter with rocket fire while it was taking part in a raid on a house where insurgents were gathered in the province of Wardak late Friday. ... NATO confirmed the overnight crash took place and that there "was enemy activity in the area," but it said it was still investigating the cause...
Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Saturday gave the first public word of the new crash, saying in a statement that "a NATO helicopter crashed last night in Wardak province" and that 31 American special operations troops were killed.
* A "NATO" HELICOPTER.
* "NATO" CONFIRMED.
* THESE WERE AMERICANS, MY FRIENDS; OUR COUNTRYMEN.
* AMERICAN BLOOD... AMERICAN EQUIPMENT... AMERICAN TREASURE...
* SQUANDERED. WASTED. DISHONORED. ABUSED.
* WHEN WILL PEOPLE SEE THAT WE "WON" AFGHANISTAN WHEN WE FIRST DISLODGED THE TALIBAN AND SET UP THE (CORRUPT - BUT APPARENTLY THE LESSER EVIL) KARZAI GOVERNMENT. WE SHOULD HAVE GOT OUT THEN. INSTEAD IT'S BEEN ALMOST 10 YEARS AND AMERICAN MILITARY PERSONNEL ARE STILL BEING MAIMED AND KILLED AND BILLIONS OF AMERICAN DOLLARS CONTINUE TO BE WASTED - AND STOLEN.
* OUR MILITARY ARE BEING USED AS PAWNS - AS MILITARY "PIECES" SET UPON A POLITICAL CHESSBOARD.
* SAY WHAT YOU WILL ABOUT BUSH... BUT EVERYTHING BUSH DID CONCERNING THE U.S. MILITARY I FIRMLY BELIEVE HE DID BECAUSE HE FELT IT WAS BEST FOR OUR NATIONAL INTEREST. OBAMA...? DOES ANYONE BELIEVE THAT ANYTHING BUT HIS OWN BEST (POLITICAL) INTERESTS ARE AT THE HEART OF MILITARY DECISIONS HE MAKES?
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD IN DISGUST*)
* R.I.P. THE AMERICANS WHO DIED IN AFGHANISTAN TODAY; DAMN THE POLITICIANS TO HELL WHO ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR DEATHS.
http://detnews.com/article/20110805/MIVIEW/108050350/Obama-s-illegal-MPG
In its zeal to fight "global warming," Lisa Jackson's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has executed a breathtaking power grab by changing the Corporate Average Fuel Standards (CAFE) without congressional authorization.
The Obama administration's new 54.5 mpg fuel mileage mandate is regulatory over-reach... [a]nd it is illegal.
Drafted by Congress in 1975, CAFE authorized the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) to administer the law.
Congress re-authorized CAFE in 2007 (to 35 mpg by 2020), but then Obama stealthily...
*AND IN MY VIEW ILLEGALLY!
...granted EPA co-administrative authority with NHTSA in speeding up the 2020 standards (to 2015) upon taking office in 2009.
Now with its 54.5 mpg diktat, EPA has discarded Congress altogether, pulling an arbitrary number out of thin air without any congressional oversight, and forced it down the throats of U.S. automakers.
EPA's power grab is a first step in solidifying the agency's power over all economic activity in the country.
* WELL... NOT THE FIRST STEP. THE FIRST STEP WAS ACTUALLY (READ ON...)
[T]he Supreme Court's controversial 5-4 2007 ruling which gave the EPA authority to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act.
* OF COURSE CONGRESS COULD SIMPLY OVERRIDE THE EPA IF IT CHOOSE TO - BUT WITH HARRY REID IN CHARGE OF THE SENATE THERE'S LITTLE CHANCE OF THAT.
This action has enraged House Republicans who have just passed out of committee an amendment that would strip EPA of the funds to implement CAFE.
The charge has been led by Republicans John Carter of Texas and co-sponsor Steve Austria of Ohio. Carter's state is not only home to Toyota's new Tundra truck manufacturing facility, but one of every four of his constituents buy pickup trucks.
"There is no way that pickup trucks could stay on the market at prices affordable for average Americans under these kind of restrictions," says Carter. "Washington bureaucrats are so out-of-touch with real life in America they can't conceive of the personal and economic damage they would cause by effectively taking the American pickup off the road."
Carter is also ex-Texas judge and knows a violation of the law when he sees one. "The EPA is saying 'we don't care what the law says,'" Carter's Communications Secretary John Stone tells The Michigan View.com. "We're going to bypass congressional oversight," is how Stone characterized the EPA's attitude.
In its zeal to "transform" America, the Obama Administration sees Congress as a deliberative roadblock to its ambitious green agenda.
Thomas Friedman of the New York Times pines for the U.S. to be "China for a day" where its executive branch could accelerate "green technology" by simply decreeing it.
Obama's CAFE power grab is one step towards that authoritarian dream.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/opinion/sunday/why-redacting-e-mails-is-a-bad-idea.html?_r=1
* FOLKS... YA GOTTA READ THIS ONE IN FULL! THE NYT... CAUGHT OUT AGAIN!
* ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE LINK... JUST GOOGLE "Why Redacting E-Mails Is a Bad Idea" BY ARTHUR S. BRISBANE, PUBLIC EDITOR (OMBUDSMAN) OF THE NYT.
* HERE... LET ME GIVE YOU THE TEASER:
Can an intern be an “official”? It doesn’t sound right to me.
Today I want to look closely at the front page shale gas article that appeared one day later, which relied heavily on documentation with sections blacked out to shield its anonymous provider.
E-mails, quoted extensively in the article and published in a document “viewer” on nytimes.com, captured conversations between summer 2009 and April 2011. The Times redacted all the names, substantial sections of the e-mails and even whole e-mails.
The doubts highlighted in the e-mails left a cloud over the E.I.A., which policymakers rely on for information. E.I.A.’s acting administrator, Howard K. Gruenspecht, called before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee, said the e-mails were “largely to and from a person who was hired by E.I.A. in 2009 as an intern and later developed into an entry-level position.”
“The e-mails as posted on The Times Web site were heavily redacted and redacted in ways that I think provide misleading information on their context,” Mr. Gruenspecht added.
In the article and in the document viewer, readers never learn the actual positions or identities of the e-mail senders, who are characterized using descriptors like “official,” “energy analyst,” “federal analyst,” “senior adviser” or “senior official.”
Nowhere is an e-mailer characterized as an “intern.”
* ANYWAY... YA GOTTA READ THE FULL EXPOSE. DISGRACEFUL - ABSOLUTELY DISGRACEFUL.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/08/04/morning-bell-blame-the-washington-bureaucracy-for-high-gas-prices/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%252BBell
Americans are paying more for gasoline today than they were six weeks ago when President Obama released 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve...
(*HEADACHE*)
...meanwhile, 10 drilling rigs - more than one-third of the fleet - have left on Obama’s watch.
(*GNASHING MY TEETH*)
This incomprehensible energy policy is not only costing Americans more money at the pump. Bureaucratic delays in Washington are also stunting job growth and adding to the budget deficit.
The most glaring example of Obama’s mismanagement is the decision to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve on June 23. [W]hat did it accomplish? Aside from diminishing a vital national security asset, it didn’t reduce the price of gas. Americans were paying an average of $3.61 for regular unleaded on June 23, according to AAA. [On Thursday - when this Heritage briefing was released -] the average was $3.70.
[I]t’s increasingly apparent that Obama took the action to bolster his dismal poll numbers, hurt by the sluggish economy and rising gas prices [- not because he truly felt that doing so was in the best long-term interest of the United States].
If the President was serious about bringing down the cost of gas, he would instruct his Administration to reduce the bureaucratic red tape on energy projects in the Gulf of Mexico. A new report from Greater New Orleans Inc. revealed that the issuance of drilling permits is down 71% compared to the monthly average over the past three years.
* To be continued...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
Two weeks ago the respected IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates and IHS Global Insight revealed the potential for production if government simply approved the drilling permits [and the] implications are staggering:
Next year alone, additional production from deepwater wells could generate 411,000 barrels per day or 150 million barrels for the year. That’s five times the amount that Obama released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
* "COULD." (*SIGH*) BUT WITH OBAMA IN CHARGE... (*WRINGING MY HANDS*)
That additional oil would ease the pain on consumers’ wallets and reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil — a matter that’s even more pressing in light of OPEC’s new leader, Rostam Qasemi, an Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander under U.S. and European Union sanctions.
* YEP! THAT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE! UNFRIGG'NBELIEVEABLE... OR AT LEAST... ONE WOULD THINK PRIOR TO THE AGE OF OBAMA.
(*DEEP SHUDDERING SIGH*)
Then there’s the impact on federal, state and local governments. At a time when many are facing budget deficits, the money generated from royalty payments and taxes would add an extra $12 billion in revenue next year.
* OH! AND DON'T FORGET JOBS...!!!
The biggest upside might be the number of jobs created from the additional production. Those jobs aren’t just in Louisiana and Texas, either. They’re spread out across America, according the study. A total of nearly 230,000 new jobs - an amount that exceeds the size of General Motors - is forecast for 2012 if the pace of offshore energy development and permitting increases.
* "IF." AGAIN, FOLKS... BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE SENATE.
* OH! AND GET THIS, FOLKS:
[President Obama's] Department of the Interior might let hundreds of Gulf of Mexico drilling leases expire, costing jobs and further decreasing production. “In 2011 alone, more than 300 offshore leases in the Gulf of Mexico are due to expire,” Senator David Vitter (R-LA) announced yesterday. “If these leases are allowed to expire, they will revert to the federal government, killing jobs and cutting off potential revenue from exploration and production.”
(*FEELING SICK TO MY STOMACH*)
The long-term implications are devastating otherwise. New exploration, which impacts oil supply in seven to 10 years, isn’t happening at a pace to keep up with demand.
Americans, meanwhile, bear the brunt of the Obama Administration’s misguided decisions.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903454504576490623948066948.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird
[T]he White House and Democrats renewed their push Friday to extend one of the tax cuts [the then-wholly-Democrat-controlled] Congress enacted last year.
* BUT... BUT... BUT... I THOUGHT TAX CUTS WERE... er... WRONG...??? I THOUGHT TAX CUTS WERE THE REASON FOR ALL OUR PROBLEMS - AT LEAST ACCORDING TO THE DEMOCRATS?
[T]he proposal - a payroll-tax holiday for employees - is set to expire at the end of 2011. Extending the tax break would cost about $112 billion over a year.
* BUT... BUT... BUT... I THOUGHT WE WERE TRYING TO LOWER THE DEFICIT - NOT INCREASE IT?!?!
Mr. Obama is asking Congress to extend the payroll-tax cut, as well as expiring unemployment-insurance benefits, as soon as it returns in September.
* WASN'T IT JUST... er... LAST WEEK WHEN OBAMA WAS PREACHING FISCAL RESTRAINT AND RESPONSIBILITY...???
* FOLKS... BOTTOM LINE... THIS TAX "CUT" WAS IRRESPONSIBLE AND HARMFUL WHEN IT WAS PASSED LAST YEAR AND TO RENEW IT WOULD MAKE A MOCKERY OUT OF EVERYTHING BOTH REPUBLICRATS AND DEMPUBLICANS HAVE PROMISED US CONCERNING TACKLING DEFICITS AND DEBT.
* OH... AND AS FOR (FURTHER) EXTENDING UNEMPLOYMENT "BENEFITS" - I SAY NO! I SAY HELL NO! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/273876/mad-debt-mark-steyn
* BY MARK STEYN (WHO BTW IS ONE OF MY "GO TO GUYS." IN FACT, HE'S RIGHT UP THERE WITH BUCHANAN AND SOWELL!)
On Thursday, in honor of Barack Obama’s 50th birthday, the Dow dropped ten points for every year he has walked among us.
We should be relieved he wasn’t turning eighty.
(*HUGE FRIGG'N GRIN*)
The markets are apparently concerned that the entire global economy may be “stalling.”
(You don’t say? Observant fellows, these market chappies!)
And yet...
(*SIGH*)
...in a certain sense, these are still the good times.
* KEEP READING, FOLKS; HE'S RIGHT!
At the end of the week, U.S. Treasury yields plunged to Eisenhower-era rates. America, explained Ethan Harris of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, “still gets the safe haven money.”
That’s to say, as crazy as Washington is, Europe is perceived to be crazier.
(*NOD*)
But I wonder if “the safe haven money” is quite as safe as its investors assume.
* AH, YES... THERE'S THE RUB! (KEEP READING...)
Under the “historic” “resolution” of the debt crisis (and don’t those very words “debt crisis” already feel so last week?), America will be cutting federal spending by $900 billion over ten years.
* WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT... (KEEP READING...)
“Cutting federal spending by $900 billion over ten years” is Washington-speak for increasing federal spending by [at least] $7 trillion over ten years [and perhaps as much as $13 trillion over this same period].
[A]s they’d originally planned to increase it by eight trillion, that counts as a cut.
(If they’d planned to increase it by $20 trillion and then settled for merely $15 trillion, they could have saved five trillion. See how easy this is?)
* FOLKS... I KNOW I REPEAT THIS AGAIN AND AGAIN, BUT FOR GOD'S SAKE, UNDERSTAND THAT BY AND LARGE YOUR FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS, RELATIVES, AND THE VAST, VAST, VAST MAJORITY OF YOU FELLOW AMERICANS HAVE NO FRIGG'N CLUE THAT THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING...!!!
* THE MEDIA - INCLUDING THE WSJ, FOX NEWS, AND EVEN MOST WRITERS AT NRO ROUTINELY EMPLOY THE BABBLE OF "CUTS" IN THEIR STORIES AND ANALYSIS, THUS PROVIDING COVER FOR THE SCUMBAGS IN WASHINGTON TO CONTINUE BUSINESS AS USUAL!
* To be continued...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
As part of this historic “cut,” we’ve now raised the “debt ceiling” - or, more accurately, [locked in Pelosi/Reid/Obama spending "norms" and beyond that, signaled to the world that we intent to continue borrowing and spending!].
* WHY DO YOU SUPPOSE AMERICA'S CREDIT RATING HAS BEEN DOWNGRADED...?!?!
Do you ever discuss the debt with your neighbor? Do you think he has any serious intention to repay the 15 trillion racked up in his and your name? Does your congressman? Does your senator? Look into their eyes. You can see the answer. And, if none of these parties seem inclined to pay down the debt now, what are the chances they’ll feel like doing so by 2020 when, under these historic “cuts,” it’s up to 23-25 trillion?
* AND EVEN THIS QUESTION (AND ANSWER) IF SET UP UPON THE FALSE PREMISE THAT EVEN IF ALL THESE PEOPLE WANTED TO PAY OFF THE DEBT... WHERE WOULD THE MONEY COME FROM...???
(*LITERALLY SICK TO MY STOMACH THINKING ABOUT IT*)
Like America’s political class, I have also been thinking about America circa 2020. Indeed, I’ve written a book on the subject. My prognosis is not as rosy as the Boehner-Obama deal, as attentive readers might just be able to deduce from the subtle clues in the title: After America: Get Ready For Armageddon.
(*DARK CHUCKLE*)
Oh, don’t worry, I’m not one of these “declinists.” I’m way beyond that, and in the express lane to total societal collapse. The fecklessness of Washington is an existential threat not only to the solvency of the republic but to the entire global order. If Ireland goes under, it’s lights out on Galway Bay. When America goes under, it drags the rest of the developed world down with it.
(*LITERALLY FEELING AS IF I'M GONNA THROW UP*)
* THIS MAN'S PROGNOSIS MATCHES MINE, FOLKS.
[B]y 2020 just the interest payments on the debt will be larger than the U.S. military budget.
That’s not paying down the debt, but merely staying current on the servicing - like when you get your MasterCard statement and you can’t afford to pay off any of what you borrowed but you can just about cover the monthly interest charge.
When interest payments consume about 20 percent of federal revenues, that means a fifth of your taxes are entirely wasted. Pious celebrities often simper that they’d be willing to pay more in taxes for better government services. But a fifth of what you pay won’t be going to government services at all, unless by “government services” you mean the People’s Liberation Army of China, which will be entirely funded by U.S. taxpayers by about 2015.
* YA SEE, FOLKS... CHINA'S OUR CREDITOR... THEY'RE GETTING THE INTEREST... (*SIGH*)
* OH... AND FOLKS... IT'S ACTUALLY WORSE WHEN YOU CONSIDER THIS REALITY:
[T]hose numbers pre-suppose interest rates will remain at their present historic low.
(*SEMI-HYSTERICAL LAUGHTER THREATENING TO TURN INTO SOBS AND OUTRIGHT CRYING*)
Last week, the firm of Macroeconomic Advisors, one of the Obama administration’s favorite economic analysts, predicted that interest rates on ten-year U.S. Treasury notes would be just shy of 9% by 2021. If that number is right, there are two possibilities: The Chinese will be able to quintuple the size of their armed forces and stick us with the tab. Or we’ll be living in a Mad Max theme park. I’d bet on the latter myself.
(*NOD*)
As the Brokest Nation in History drowns in its profligacy, its commissars will grow ever more rapacious and desperate. If you think Obama’s dreary attempt to blame America’s woes on corporate-jet owners is unbecoming to the chief of state, wait till he’s reduced to complaining about two-car families.
(*HEADACHE*)
No author writes a dystopian apocalyptic doomsday book because he wants it to happen: Apart from anything else, the collapse of the banking system makes it hard to cash the royalty check. You write a doomsday book in hopes you can stop it happening. But time is running short. If you think we’ve got until 2050 or 2025, you’re part of the problem.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/580672/201108051846/Defense-Budget-Needs-To-Feel-Guillotines-Cut.aspx
The Pentagon budget has risen for 13 years, which is unprecedented. Between 2001 and 2009, overall defense spending rose from $412 billion to $699 billion, a 70% increase...
Including the "supplementary" spending on Iraq and Afghanistan, we spent $250 billion more than average defense expenditures during the Cold War...
* WHEN WE FACED THE SOVIET UNION.
* ANYONE EQUATE IRAN WITH THE FORMER SOVIET UNION? HOW'BOUT LIBYA? HOW'BOUT THE TALIBAN?
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
After the Korean War, President Eisenhower cut defense spending 27%.
Richard Nixon cut it 29% after Vietnam.
(*SHRUG*)
* HONESTLY... EVEN I DIDN'T KNOW THE CUTS BACK THEN WERE SO LARGE.
As tensions declined in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan began scaling back his military spending, a process accelerated under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.
* YEP! ONCE AN OBJECTIVE IS MET, YOU REACT ACCORDINGLY. (LATELY WE'VE BEEN DOING THE OPPOSITE!)
Today, the U.S. defense establishment is the world's largest socialist economy. There is so much overlap among the military services, so much duplication and so much waste that no one bothers to defend it anymore.
(*SADLY NODDING IN AGREEMENT*)
Defense budget cuts would also force a healthy rebalancing of American foreign policy.
* THE POLITICIANS - OF BOTH PARTIES - HAVE SIMPLY TAKEN ON TOO MANY COMMITMENTS IN OUR NAME!
The result is a warped American foreign policy, ready to conceive of problems in military terms and present a military solution.
(*NOD*)
Describing precisely this phenomenon, WW-2 era General of the Armies and ultimately President of the United States Dwight David Eisenhower remarked that to a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/580676/201108051846/A-Happy-50th-But-not-For-Us.aspx
* JUST READ THE OP-ED. IT'S SO RIGHT ON TARGET THAT IT DESERVES TO BE READ IN FULL. DON'T WORRY... IT'S ONLY ONE PAGE.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/08/why-congress-wont-end-those-flights-nowhere
As a resident of Illinois, I'd never had any particular desire to fly from McCook, Neb., to Denver. But lately, I've been looking for an opportunity. Turns out the federal government is willing to pay me a handsome fee to do it.
Oh, I wouldn't get the cash directly. But the Department of Transportation provides more than $2 million to subsidize that particular route, which works out to about $1,000 for every passenger. My fare, meanwhile, would be less than $150.
I could get an even bigger hand on the hop from Lewistown, Mont., to Billings - $1,343. But if I'm feeling the need for indulgence, there is nothing to beat the flight from Ely, Nev., to Denver, for which Washington will kick in $3,720. That sum, of course, could buy me a perfectly functional used car.
These extravagances are part of the Essential Air Service initiative, which is part of the reason for the recent congressional impasse over a bill to keep the Federal Aviation Administration operating.
The House voted to trim $16 million from this $200 million program by eliminating service to 13 places - which, in an era of fiscal shortages, sounds reasonable enough.
But the Senate balked and eventually passed the bill on the understanding that the administration could continue the service to those towns.
* AND YOU WONDER WHY I QUESTION WHETHER ANY ACTION SHORT OF VIOLENCE CAN OVERCOME OUR POLITICAL MASTERS?
Essential Air Service was created in 1978 as a temporary measure to assure commercial flights to smaller towns after the deregulation of the airline industry.
The program has lasted three times longer than its original 10-year limit, even as transportation options have improved. The number of small towns served by airlines actually rose after deregulation.
The Lewiston-to-Billings leg normally attracts two people a day. The average subsidized flight in 2008, said GAO, was only 37% full, compared to 80% on the typical commercial flight.
The rationale for the program is hard to grasp, given that there are less insane options. Instead of laying out $679 for each passenger flying from Decatur, Ill., to St. Louis, the federal government could spend $40 on a bus ticket.
Even some of the beneficiaries find it all a bit much. Mike Olson, executive director of the Central Nebraska Regional Airport in Grand Island, told the Omaha World-Herald, "It's a waste of fuel, a waste of a lot of taxpayer dollars to fly one or two people, or three people, at most a handful a day."
But the program survives because most states get some aid and every state has two senators, who usually hang on to every federal dollar as if it were a Super Bowl ticket.
Post a Comment