McCain Proposes a "League of Democracies "

During a speech before the Hoover Institution on May 1st, Sen. McCain spoke about the formation of a "League of Democracies" which would enable "democratic friends and allies...to build a new global order of peace...that can last...for a century: and "where the dangers and threats we face diminish and where human progress reaches new heights."

Call me a wild-eyed idealist--of the conservative genre, of course--but such a pioneering concept in these treacherous and transformative times is, for me, very appealing and definitely worth exploring. Despite cynical detractors both on the left and the right, it's my belief that new challenges call for new approaches and, hopefully, remedies. For that reason, formation of the League is definitely worth pursuing.

Though I was unable to cull a lot of spedific information on this proposal, from what I've gleaned such a league is intended to be a viable and constructive alternative to a UN rife with parochial interests, corruption and ineptitude. It appears that the League would not supplant the UN; rather, it would, in parallel, independently supplement UN capabilities.

The theory goes that the nearly 100 democracies which would comprise this coalition would share common values and similar viewpoints on important matters, thus better ensuring more effective unified action on international issues and challenges of common concern. And, of course, as long as we don't delude ourselves in believing that such a league would morph into a "Grand Alliance" or otherise diminish the need for existing military alliances, such as they are, then a League of Democracies just might make the positive differences on the world scene McCain is hoping for.

Though international organizations have been inherently and notoriously ineffective, the League's greatest asset would be its constructive example which might well help to invigorate burgeoning democracies while encouraging a UN woefully in need of major reform to do so.

As a respectable international watchdog of sorts--with credible ecoomic, political and military leverage to boot--the League would be unconstrained by unconstructive and pftem irresponsible Security Council vetoes. Chances are probably better than even that a League of Democracies would be able to more effectively and quickly intercede in acute humanitarian crises like the Rwanda massacres and Darfur. As an international aid worker in my past life, possessing an aggressive humanitarian capability (my words) alone would render the League's formation well worth the effort. I suspect that the UN's role would be appropriately reduced to that of handling those humanitarian crises with which it would be more adept and familiar, e.g. UNICEF, UNHCR and less politically challenging disaster relief and peacekeeping operations worldwide. And, of course, the UN would continue to be a venue where international crises and concerns would be discussed--just not the only one.

In any event, I hope this concept has legs. Though it hasn't been talked about much by either Sen. McCain or the media, I believe it has genuine merit. If nothing else, it would serve to reinvigorate America's international diplomatic purpose and clout while enhancing the Free World's collective security as well. One would hope so anyway.

("Freedom lies in being bold." Robert Frost)

Obama's Policy Positions a Clear and Present Danger

Over the past several months, I've attempted three times to responsibly outline Obama's policy positions, and despite his myriad "clarifications" and outright reversals I believe I have managed to pull together what is--today, at least--a fairly accurate picture of where he stands on many key issues.

Because of his more unscrupulous and nimble flip-flops on public financing, NAFTA, Iran, Iraq, Jerusalem, special interests, Cuba, gun control, wiretapping, illegal immigration and the decriminalization of marijuana, I have necessarily and heavily relied upon his actual voting record and his verifiable public pronouncements to more accurately gauge what are most likely his core beliefs, principles and positions. For better or for worse, here it is:

During his tenure as a state legislator in Illinois, he supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of hand guns and opposed the right to carry concealed weapons; he opposed a bill which would have prohibited anyone other than a parent to accompany a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion; he voted against SB 1661 which would protect a child born alive during an abortion from being denied medical care after birth; and he voted in favor of HB 3396 which would deny the right to a secret ballot to organize a union if 50% of eligible workers publicly supported unionization.

During his time as a U.S. Senator, he opposed listing Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization; he voted to restore habeas corpus rights to GITMO detainees; he pledged to remove all troops from Iraq by March 2008 (irrespective of the conditions on the ground); he supports the imposition of socialized/universal health care; he opposes school vouchers; he voted against banning partial birth abortions; he supports "alternative sentencing” and rehabilitation; he voted against the Bush tax cuts and repealing the Death Tax; he opposes declaring English as the official language of the U.S. government; he voted against confirming justices Alito and Roberts (and expressed his preference for justices like Ginsberg); he supports extending welfare, health care and social security benefits to illegal aliens; he pledges huge cuts in defense spending inclusive of funding for the anti-missile defense system and most other weapons research and development programs; he favors increasing the upper income tax bracket to 40% and supports levying a 12.5% FICA tax on ALL incomes, thus effectively rendering a 60% tax bracket for incomes over $250,000, the third highest rate in the world; he would nearly double the capital gains tax to 28% and nearly double the dividend tax; he supports passsage of the Global Poverty Act (an $845 billion boondoggle supported by the U.N. which insanely believes that such a gargantuan expenditure by American taxpayers will magically eliminate poverty in the developing world); he would require Homeland Security to notify terror suspects they are under investigation within seven days of starting an investigation; he would prohibit Homeland Security's search and seizure of documents unless there is "probable cause that the targeted individual is linked to a specific terror group" (vs the current standard that the search be "relevant to a terror investigation"); he opposes nuclear power, shale conversion, ANWR and offshore oil drilling.

I can already hear the flight of American capital as it flutters into offshore accounts and overseas investments.

Historically, the economic positions he champions have proven over and over again to be unworkable and economically destructive. The economic disincentives his policies would create and his massive spending plans would effectively debilitate America's economic competitiveness and, by most estimates, would increase the current deficit to a stifling $1 trillion by 2011!

To achieve his economic and political makeover of America, the scope and power of the government would also be grossly expanded well beyond even the limits advocated by the most progressive interpreters of the Constitution.

Apparently, his far left-wing formula for ostensibly improving Americans'lot in life is premised on what clearly appears to be his elitist and alien belief that individuals are incapable of helping themselves (despite all the evidence to the contrary), that the middle class needs to be bought off (with dollars exprpriated from the "wealthy"), and that the "upper income" class should be cut down to size, all in a Marxist effort to achieve "fairness" and "equality" through income redistribution and tighter government control over Americans' lives. (For verification of his socialist game plan, listen for the endless socialist code words "fairness" and "equality" in his florid and otherwise vapid rhetoric.)

Saul Alinksy, Karl Marx and liberal elites both in DC and on the ivy league circuit will be immensely proud of Obama, their student, if he can pull this off in November.

The crucial question is this: will enough Americans see the socialist which lurks beneath Obama's shiny veneer in time to save themselves and their country from him? Incredibly, it's still too early to tell.

Many Americans are loathe to allow a socialist takeover of an America whose traditions and values are so deeply ingrained and honored and for which so many friends and relatives have died defending.

Thank God the 2nd Amendment--though always under assault--is still alive and well.

("The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing what happened." Norman Thomas, Socialist Party of America, cir 1925)

("[Saul Alinsky] taught [community organizers] to ridicule opponents when the arguments of their opponents could not be refuted by logic, evidence, or argument; for Alinsky, the middle class was a pawn with which he could produce his desired "change" [aka social revolution] by convincing the middle class to side with him in its own destruction; Alinsky taught that power was everything and that image, words, and positioning were just methods to capture power, working from communities up." Dr. Jerome Corsi)

Critique of Obama's 9/4 Interview with O'Reilly

In short, you didn't miss a thing. It was totally uninformative and nauseatingly predictable. Obama's responses were hackneyed and characteristically nuanced. I honestly believe the man is either viscerally incapable of telling the truth or has been so blinded by his own shortsighted ideology that he cannot see the truth.

A prisoner of his finely honed talking points, Obama still couldn't bring himself to unambiguously admit the screamingly obvious fact that the "surge" has worked. And, as revealing, he again refused to admit that his opposing the surge was a mistake. So much for political courage and honor.

With a platform invested from the beginning in America's defeat in Iraq, he also disingenuously implied that the seminal Anbar "awakening"(rejection of AQI) was nothing more than a fortuitous phenomenon totally unrelated to the surge and to Gen. Patreaus's enormously successful counterinsurgency strategy.

And, of course, when queried about our enemies in the world, noticeable was his studious avoidance of the term "Islamofascism."

Yup. The "community organizer" and flimflam man from Illinois remains an accomplished spinmeister with the character of an asp.

Global Warming or Global Cooling?

Though difficult, one can still cull authoritative information which scientifically contests politically correct viewpoints regarding global warming. And with costly global warming-friendly legislation such as cap-and-trade threatening us all, we should do our best to stay informed.

In my June 9th post, I reported on the May 2008 submission of a petition to Congress and the President by 31,000 scientists representing the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine which debunked doomsday global warming scenarios (such as those advanced by Gore and his political allies) and which warned against ill-conceived legislative fixes.

Now these latest tidbits from the scientific community:

1. Canadian climatologist T. Ball warns that "if we are facing a [global climate] crisis at all, it is that we are preparing for warming when we should be preparing for cooling."

2. Australian scientist Peter Harris asserts that "the Earth is nearing the end of the typical interglacial cycle and is due for a sudden cooling climate change." He goes on to say that "based upon careful analysis we can say that there is a 94% probability of imminent global cooling and the beginning of the coming ice age." He notes that climate is currently unstable and that "most of the natural climate processes we are witnessing now are interdependent and occur at the end of each interglacial period, ultimately causing sudden long-term cooling."

3. Noting that over the last 500,000 years there is a 100% correlation between gravitational cycles to the beginning and ending of global warming cycles, in his book, Global Warming - Global Cooling, Natural Causes Found, the culmination of 19 years of research, meteorologist D. Dilley writes that "by 2023 global climate temperatures will become similar to colder temperatures in the
1800's."

4. The Russian Academy of Sciences warns that "Earth is now at the peak of one of its passing warm spells which started in the 17th century when there was no industrial influence on the climate and no such thing as the hothouse effect." In a companion story, Oleg Sorakan of the Academy notes that "carbon dioxide is not to blame for global change," and goes on to say that "solar activity is many times more powerful than the energy produced by the whole of humankind."

5. Victor Herrera, a Mexican geophysicist, reports that global warming prognostications "are incorrect because they are based solely upon mathematical models and present results from scenarios that do not include solar activity." He concludes that "in 2 years or so there will be the beginnings of a little ice age that will last 60-80 years" and that "the immediate consequences of this will be drought."

6. UK astrophysicist P. Corbyn asserts that "there is no evidence that CO2 has ever driven or ever will drive world temperatures and climate change. Worrying about CO2 is irrelevant." And where have we heard that before?

7. A recent U.S. Senate committee report highlighted Russian physicists' collective projection that "global temperatures will cool--not warm--within the next decade."

So, despite the politicization of the subject, and the beltway's general acceptance of global warming as an incontrovertible fact of life, what is actually occurring in our global climate is still hotly contested among rank and file scientists.

On such a weighty subject, transparent and responsible scientific discussion of the subject at the national level should be demanded. A "climate change commission" comprised of scientists--not political hacks--who represent a variety of scientific viewpoints and perspectives on the subject of climate change should be immediately convened to develop a coherent body of data and recommendations for the consideration of both Congress and the President. Our government's attempting to legislate without the benefit of intelligent, apolitical scientific discussion is both shortsighted and insane. The damage to the country caused by the lethal mix of politics with science could be incalculable.

"OBAMA NATION" a Must Read for All

In sociological and psychological circles it is generally unassailable that we are each influenced, often profoundly, by our youthful experiences and associations.

Authored by Dr. J. Corsi, Obama Nation has come under intense liberal fire for his having penetrated Obama's pre-30 experiences. Amazingly, though predictably, many of Dr. Corsi's detractors assert that Sen. Obama's youthful experiences and associations are irrelevant and that exposing them is somehow unjustly intrusive and vile by its very nature.

I say these detractors are either willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest or congenitally averse to logical dialogue and reasoned argument.

Were a McCain Nation to be published which portrayed his pre-30 years with similar analytical and objective astuteness, the book simply wouldn't sell. Why? Because there's precious little in Sen. McCain's background which would be either alarming or disturbing, or which would cast serious doubts on his beliefs, character, world view and, therefore, his suitability for the Presidency.

Dr. Corsi's well-documented expose is extremely disturbing and should persuade the most ardent Obama sycophant that Sen. Obama is nothing more than a self-consumed fraud and utterly unfit to be President of the United States of America.

If nothing more, the expose should stir Obama supporters to take an objective and honest look at their candidate and, in the process of that careful analysis, not be bamboozled by all the blinding glitter. And, of course, they should carefully avoid invective and ad hominems as a substitute for objective argumentation.

I urge everyone to carefully read Obama Nation and to as carefully vet Dr. Corsi's sources as much as possible to determine the truth to one's own satisfaction. As for me, a retiree, I have been intensively enaged in that unpleasant examination now for nearly 6 months. And only after careful analysis have I become unqualifiedly convinced that Sen. Obama is absolutely unfit for the high office he seeks.

Frankly, the man genuinely scares me. And I'm not easily frightened.

(Within the next two months, I plan to post additional information about Sen. Obama. And should significantly negative background information about Sen. McCain come to light, that too will be posted.)

Russian Bear Upstages Olympics

In contrast to the more decorous competitions in Beijing, a classic David and Goliath military standoff is unfolding today between tiny Georgia, a democracy and strong ally of the United States situated on the eastern edge of the Black Sea, and the mightier Russian bear.

Russia's suspiciously well-planned and entirely unprovoked invasion of S. Ossetia, a separatist province of independent Georgia, shouldn't really be all that surprising.

While many in S. Ossetia have pushed for unification with N. Ossetia, a Russian province, many more have pressed for outright autonomy and have done so since 1921. (Why Georgia was granted autonomy at the time of the Soviet Union's dissolution in 1991 and S. Ossetia wasn't may, in time, be worthy of further study. But, as of today, it is internationally recognized as being a part of Georgia.)

Easily gleaned from today's newsprint, it was S. Ossetian separatist attacks on Georgia which precipitated Georgia's crackdown and the subsequent Russian intervention.

However, what may not be as obvious is the fact that S. Ossetia is strategically positioned as a corridor through which both gas and oil may be transported from Georgia via Ukraine to Europe outside the control of both Russia and Iran. (This is why in recent years Russia has been carefully cultivating and intensifying ties with S. Ossetian separatists.) Anyway, Russia can't blackmail Europe with oil and gas cut-offs if there's a viable alternative transport system available to them, right? Thus, the underlying reason for Russia's invasion to "protect" the poor victimized people of S. Ossetia.

Sound familiar yet?

And let's not forget that Russia is also intent upon reasserting hegemony over its lost territories now strategically ringing the moribund Soviet Union. For Russia, it's a historical imperative. The burgeoning coziness between many of the former Soviet-dominated republics, like Georgia, and the West as well as the specter of NATO members "surrounding" a shrunken Russia is nothing short of viscerally alarming to our friends in Moscow.

So, control of oil to hold Europe at bay + a primeval need for buffer zones = Russian invasion of neighbor

How history does repeat itself. And who says history is dead or of no practical relevance to the modern world? If innocents weren't being killed, it would be almost laughable. And, of course, all the diplomats of the world are scurrying about and wringing their hands with a keen sense of powerlessness in order to stanch the flow of blood and to restore order in Georgia.

In all sincerity, though, I hope the diplomats will again successfully blunder through and restore peace and stability there. And I hope the United States adopts a persuasively firm stance to protect its ally.

All Americans should know that with Georgia, a tiny country of about 5 million strong who deeply appreciate the fruits of their hard-won independence and liberty, we have enjoyed an extraordinarily close friendship and alliance. We should also be thankful for this tiny democracy's generous commitment of 2,000 troops to the coalition's successful struggle in Iraq. Faced with a Russian invasion, of course, this week Georgia was compelled to recall its contingent from Iraq. With America's help, these valiant Georgian soldiers are being hastily transported from Iraq to their beleaguered homeland.

Godspeed, Georgia. America is praying for you.

Congressional Disdain for "We the People" Once Again

While it's axiomatic that we "can't drill our way" or "conserve our way" out of the energy crisis in which we find ourselves, our representatives' simply abandoning their posts on August 1st without properly debating, fashioning and voting on a reasonable solution to this energy crisis before going on their ill-deserved 5-week vacation convinces me--as never before--that "we the people" must ensure that those who perpetrated and supported this unconscionable recess are taken to task.

Abandoning their legislative posts during what could be arguably characterized as a national economic and security crisis was grossly irresponsible, and the culpable should deservedly pay a heavy political price for their callous and reprehensible behavior.

As Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) declared, "This is the people's house; this is not Pelosi's Polituro."

For me, that pretty much sums up my view of the shameful events on August 1st. And this is but a taste of the tyranny which will ensue should the liberals achieve a stranglehold on the "people's house" in November.

While I strongly favor censuring the Democratic leadership in congress for their having abandoned their posts in the midst of this crisis merely for parochial political advantage, I know that won't happen. So, what can "we the people" on the local level do which may have any material impact?

For starters, we can all overload "Rep." Louise Slaughter's local office with phone calls and emails to protest her callous and self-serving dereliction of duty (232-4850; www.louise.house.gov). Protests in front of her office would also be a persuasive way to let her know who's in charge. Let her vacation be a memorable one.

(Oh, yes. In case you are unaware, "Rep." Slaughter is stealthily helping to lead the effort to re-impose the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a cold, calculating, cynical attempt by liberals to effectively silence conservative talk radio once the Democrats have achieved firm control of congress in November.)

Like so many of my friends and neighbors, I am utterly fed up with and increasingly frightened by the likes of Louise Slaughter, a career politician, and her self-serving party-first loyalist hacks on Capitol Hill.

Once an awesome and sacred symbol of American pride and democratic traditions, the illustrious Capitol Dome is being rapidly transformed into a symbol of tyranny from where "we the people" are disdainfully and imperiously ruled by an aristocracy of elites who have forgotten--indeed ignored--those whom they have pledged to responsibly represent.

If we really want to restore power to the people, our community's ridding itself of political hacks and party-first types like Louise Slaughter should be high on our agenda this year. The specter of a dominant and blatantly unresponsive Democratic elite in D.C. is too unbearable to contemplate. But this may the case if we choose to sit on the sidelines waiting for someone else to act.

I would like to see the local Republican and Conservative committees step up to the plate and help lead this local protest effort. I would be among the first to volunteer to help where and when I can. And I'm sure many of you would also pitch in with enthusiasm.

Yes, I am genuinely exercised and deeply concerned about the longer term meaning of the insidious events which unfolded on August 1st. I am sure that most of you are as well.

("When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, then there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson)