Category: Politics

Paul Krugman’s Comments A Fraud?

http://news.yahoo.com/paul-krugman-paul-ryan-budget-romney-supports-fraud-181245136–abc-news-politics.html  Maybe it is not Mr. Krugman’s analysis that is fraud.  Maybe it is the reporting.  What this article says is that Mr. Krugman’s opinion is that Representative Ryan’s plan is not a plan and that President Obama’s plan is a plan.  Now to say that Rep. Ryan’s plan is a fraud is to say that the Ryan plan is based on lies.  Mr. Krugman tried to disarm his own biting criticism by saying that he is not personally attacking Mr. Ryan, but that he is just saying that the plan Mr. Ryan put forward is a fraud.  I think a fraud is a lie and therefore a person who puts forth a fraud is a liar.  Is that reasoning flawed?  I am just trying to get to the facts and not the spin.  Then we read that Mr. Krugman is in favor of the Obama plan.  He says that is a plan he understands.  He does not comment on the validity of the Obama plans numbers, approach or process.  So, I take it he likes the plan.  So, what we have here is a report about Mr. Krugman saying he doesn’t like the Ryan plan and therefore Mr. Ryan’s plan is a fraud and by inference, Mr. Representative Ryan is a liar.  And that Krugman likes the President’s plan and therefore Mr. Obama is not a liar.  Seems to me that the liar and fraud here is Mr. Krugman, who makes broad accusations against a U.S. Congressman and excuses the President.  How to solve this?  Take Mr. Obama’s own words to heart and instead of name calling and innuendo just say plainly, I, (Mr. Klugman) do not agreed with the Ryan plan for this and that (specific) reason and I agree with the Obama plan for this and that reason.

Obama Administration and US Military Engage in Terrorism-Repeatedly

http://news.yahoo.com/u-drone-strike-kills-15-northwest-pakistan-officials-033713485.html  Amazing, no screams of outrage by the Left.  No Washington Post, New York Times outrage. No Chris Matthews and Obermann rants against the Obama White House.  All of this silence displays the mainstream media’s murderous complicity in acts of international murder against innocent foreign nationals.  These same media and this administration were highly indignant when GW Bush agreed to allow waterboarding interrogation of known terrorist prisoners. All of whom are alive today.  But when the Obama administration repeatedly allows the murder of what now amounts to well over fifty innocent “suspects” there is no protest and even open praise of the activity.  Maybe it is true that there is no morality anymore.  But for this writer, murder is murder.  Also for this writer, the actions of our nation must not imitate the actions of the september 11th terrorists.   I am not for the jurisdiction of International Courts.  But I am amazed that the much praised International Criminal Court at the Hague does not indict the Obama Administration for criminal aggression and terrorism.  Pakistan is a sovereign nation and our drones illegally transgress their national borders, and kill its citizens. Basically, these actions are the actions of a rogue State that condones and fosters international terrorism.  The USA and NATO with United Nations sanctions just completed a very bloody and illegal war against the legal government of Gaddafi in Libya.  The excuse for that war?  We were told that they committed acts of murder against their own people.  The end of that war?  We toppled the Libyan central government, installed the NTC which is a French puppet regime groomed by French and British intelligence agencies and at the last, murdered the Head of State.  All along we were told to remember Locerbie and the airliner bombing that killed people.  Now the Obama government and the US military are killing people weekly and we are told that it is okay because the US military and the Obama government think that the people we kill are really terrorists.  Amazing arrogance but much worse, these are the actions of a government that is morally bankrupt by the false notion that individual acts of terror against suspected terrorists and their families, children and neighbors resulting in their wholesale slaughter is okay because we are protecting America.

Belonging to an Organization on your own terms?

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/6/3/worldupdates/2012-06-01T212930Z_1_BRE8501F4_RTROPTT_0_UK-USA-CATHOLIC-NUNS&sec=Worldupdates

The Nuns agreed to belong to an organization ruled in a monarchial  fashion by a top man and administered by his male agents.  Their agreement to part of the Roman Catholic Church was not forced on them.  It was part of their belief system.  They trained not as Presbyterian or Lutheran Nuns but as Roman Catholic.  They vowed faithfulness not to the magisterium of the Episcopal Church but to the Roman Catholic.  That system has a very clearly defined and easily understood set of rules.  These rules are not secret and they are not imposed on adherents by force.  The key concept being that the Pope, his Cardinals, Archbishops and Bishops are the teachers of the Roman Catholic church and that these persons are entrusted with the duty and responsibility to teach and to protect the universally accepted doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.  When the Nuns and their leaders were accepted into the Order of the Church they willingly and publicly accepted this system, its procedures and the oversight of the Magisterial hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church.  Now, in this last days, this magisterial hierarchy has examined the leadership of the Nuns and found it lacking.  The Pope and his agents have conducted an open, transparent and public examination of the Leadership Conference and published its findings openly with a recommendation that the Leadership Conference accept a more direct management by a trio of bishops appointed by the President (Pope) of their organization.  To this writer, the intention here is to right any wrongs and foster a more collegial decision-making process which by definition will be consonant with the Pope and the whole Church.  In conclusion, this writer is not proposing that the Process, procedures or organizational structure of the Roman Catholic Church is the only right or good one.  However, when a nun or any other person freely joins such an organization and additionally seeks to be a Nun- teacher of that organization then they should abide by the rules of oversight.  Granted, that his Holiness and the bishops have invited a response, however, in the end, the nuns must decide if they will remain in the organization they love or chose to become members of one of the many Protestant organizations.  However, it will be intellectually impossible to remain a Roman Catholic Nun in rebellion against the Church.  Why?  Because of their vows.

BlogTalkRadio Program

This writer also broadcasts a half hour radio broadcast on Blogtalkradio.  Granted it is not regularly but I, like you, have to make a living.  I like the comment on my blog today that said, “writing is the only work that is not criticized for not making money”  Anyway, if you care to tune into the program, it is on Blogtalkradio.com and the title is Considerations.  I also broadcast a rock and roll radio program using radionomy.  It is a non DJ program so all you hear is music, not even adverts yet because the listenership is low but it is a great station and works real good as background music while you are on the computer.  It’s at Radionomy.com and the title is “Uplifting”  If you like either program please let me know via the “like” botton.  Thanks

What About Hassan Nidal?

http://news.yahoo.com/awol-muslim-soldier-guilty-fort-hood-bomb-plot-205502556.html  Noteworthy here is the relative swiftness of the indictment, trial and judgement.  However, as is clear, although there was a serious possibility of harm to people, it was a plan and no one was killed.  However, Hassan Nidal killed 13 soldiers in cold blood as they were deploying.  He was himself shot and treated and is still being treated at tax payer expense while the families of the dead soldier have only their grief.  The murders by Nidal were on video tape and any jury can see him actually walk up to soldiers and murder them.  But what has happened?  He has not gone to trial and I cannot understand why?

Wrong math?

Thank you to the commenter who corrected my math by pointing out that we pay taxes on income so that if Senator Lautenberg increased his taxes to 55 % of income then he would still be richer year after year.  The writer also commented that I probably pay too much taxes.  I might, but I am comfortable with taxes as they are now because I actually do feel that taxes are a requirement for living in this great and wonderful USA. However, I don’t like giving the government additional powers over my life, and taxes are one way for governments to exert power.  It may not be one persons fault, Obama, because under our present understanding of government, taxes are used to employ people. These many millions in positions of government authority want job security and for them taxes on everybody so that they can be government employees may seem the right thing.  This includes pensioners and Social Security and Disability recipients. But I do not think of employment as a primary objective of taxes.  I think that we need to limit government’s control over the individual and that includes the wealthiest among us.  Specifics?  Actually, I could list mine and say that I am right.  But then, you would list the opposite position and say it is right.  So, there is an impasse.  However, at least for now, we still have a Congress and an independent judiciary and both are benevolent.  So my fears are allayed and I am secure.  But I will remain vigilant to safeguard the freedoms enjoyed in the USA.  And granted, nothing, even freedom, can be absolute.  But any curtailment should be through vibrant and even  very robust public debate with the decisions made in open meetings, (no back room politics please) and with a rule that the separation of powers be not only respected but demanded by the electorate.  A long way from wrong math?  Yes, but my stream of consciousness writing style took me there.  And such fault, if it be a fault, is not Obama’s and not George Bush’s.  It’s mine!

Senators Are Old and Wealthy

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/09/lautenberg_frelinghuysen_among.html This article points us to two facts, the Senator from New Jersey is very wealthy and 88 years old.  I am not prejudice against either situation.  I want to get old and be healthy as is Senator Lautenberg and I want to be a 48 millionaire like him.  To his credit, the Senator made his money by hard work, entrepreneurial acumen and vision.  Very good qualities indeed and ones to be held up for imitation.  However, the Democrat President Obama has declared class warfare against the wealthy.  In his book he speaks forcefully against the avarice and greed of white Americans.  In his public statement Democrat Obama has spoken repeatedly against the wealthy saying that they must be taxed a lot more, their tax-free foundations abolished and their tax exemptions closed.  But does Senator Lautenberg agree and does it matter if he does.  I should think that people like the Senator are needed in the private sector to create companies like ADP and to lead job creation.  That is not done by Senators voting on Gay marriage and Pro Abortion and trade bills that make America less competitive in our world.  If he agrees with Obama and the so-called Buffet rule then he should voluntarily write very big checks to the US government and I would suggest, renounce his pay, perks, and pension for surely he needs none of them.  But does he agree that the wealthy are to be maligned and that a federal policy of “leveling the playing field” would best benefit the nation?  Well, let’s just say that as a very liberal Democrat who seems to wholeheartedly support the Obama agenda, Senator Lautenberg writes an additional 20% check to the IRS.  So we take 48 million and reduce it by 9.6 million.  How much is left? Let’s round it to 38 million.  Can Mr. Lautenberg live on that.  Yes, he can.  So the next year he does it again.  This time the check will be for 7.6 million bring him down to 30 million.  Next year it is 6 million bring him down to 24 million.  Then it is 4.8 million bring him to 19.  Then it is 3.8 leaving 15 million.  Then to 3 million making him a twelve millionaire.  Senator Lautenberg may agree to such a reduction in his wealth but it would still be a private matter and he would end up after a mere six years as only 1/4 of what he had to start.  Some readers will say,”good.”! But should that process be applied to all people with over 250  thousand dollars in wealth?  Should it be applied to your bank account or stock fund or 401 K or inheritance?  If it is good for one, say Senator Lautenberg, then it should be fair to apply it to everybody.  So, the question is,  Are you willing to be worth only 1/4 of what you are  worth today.  Now, philosophically, you may say “Yes.”.  But remember, Senator Lautenberg still ends up with 12 million.  If it is you, what do you end up with?  I will not do the math for you but I will suggest that although the formula is the same, you, at 250 thousand, will end up with not enough to pay for you childs junior college in state tuition.  So there is a difference.

Democrats Try Reversing Recent Supreme Court

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-22-states-join-campaign-finance-fight-063148340.html  Notable here is the subtle and secret influence of the Democrat party in using a coverup, namely the Montana election contributions law as the cause for their joining forces against the US Supreme Court Case, Citizens United.  The Democrat President Obama openly embarrassed himself, insulted the nation and angered several justices of the Supreme Court when he used the State of the Union Address to attack the Justices of the Supreme Court over Citizens United.  Now Democrat ruled New York State seeks to use this relatively innocuous law in order to reverse the Citizens United ruling.  Fortunately, the Justices do not live in ivory towers and their independence from coercive influences from any White House Administration is boldly protected by our Constitution and precedence law.  Yes, I agree that the US Supreme Court has not always ruled as I would like.  However, the rulings have overwhelmingly protected the citizens of the nation against  over-reaching and tyranny seeking White House administrations.  It is important to note that these are judicial decisions of Constitutional law and the enforcement of those decisions is left to the President, his attorney general and the States Attorneys General.  In the infamous and ignominious decision of the Andrew Jackson administration, the ruling in favor of the civil rights of the Cherokee native americans was not enforced.  Rather the reverse happened and US army forces were used to arrest, uproot, and remove by force thousands of indians from their ancestral lands to the deserts of the west.  This Trail of Tears is evidence of the cruel injustice that can be visited on people when White House administrations  radically opposed Supreme Court decisions.

Sarkozy Under Investigation?

http://news.yahoo.com/sarkozy-faces-slew-probes-immunity-ends-092003356.html  As I read this news story, and it is news not commentary, I wonder about all the moral high ground and moral posturing by Sarkozy when he spearheaded the criminal aggression against Libya.  Only a few months ago it was Sarkozy the Just against Gaddafi the Vile.  Back then, it was the France of Joan of Arc, the Britain of Churchill, and the USA of George Washington against the dirty desert dictator from Tripoli.  Back then the contrasts were so stark.  It was the tent of Libya against the Versailles of Sarkozy’s France.  But reading this article one’s eyesight focuses and the distinctions turn into desert sands which constantly morph into different shapes.  This writer has been consistent and is still committed to a “Realpolitic” that holds the self-righteous to the same standards they set for others.

In the USA, which is my county, our leader and his party have denounced terror and terrorism.  President Obama was quick to criticize the CIA for “waterboarding” which he called torture.  There was constant posturing as the Democratic Congress people like Pelosi and Senator Reid smirked about the terrible George Bush.  But today we witness President Obama willingly ordering political murder.  I have lost count of the number of assassinations by aerial drone the USA has committed.  We are told that the targets of these killings deserve what we deal to them.  They are terrorists we are told.  They are suspected of terrorism we are told.  They must be executed where they are before they have a chance to send terrorists to us.  Regularly, we are reading of another pinpoint assassination of some supposed terrorist or other as though the drone kills only the single human and leaves all others unharmed.  But we know that a drone is an aerial bomb and the alleged terrorist is joined in his death by all those around him.  Are none of the associates innocent or is anyone even standing in the vicinity of the drone’s target to be considered worthy of death?

Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama need to be investigated and also the United Nations and NATO should be called to the Bar, not only for political impropriety but also international criminal aggression.