With Ahmadinejad and the mullahs taking maximum advantage of Obama’s apology tour, it was time to make a bold statement regarding a second nuclear installation in Iran.  What better place and what better time than at the U.N. Security Council meeting especially with President Obama holding the gavel as the current chairman.  At least that was what French President Nicholas Sarkozy thought, as well British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

The problem was that President Obama was basking in the glow of his makeover of America.  Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, after all, told the General Assembly that he no longer smelled the sulfurous odor of El Diablo, President Bush.  It was another Obama global love fest.  Why spoil it by talking about global security in the Security Council of all places?  It would be far better to talk about global security the following day at an economic summit of the G-20.  Don’t you think?

French Fried

Sarkozy apparently had his U.N. speech prepared to take a strong stance against Iran in the Security Council Meeting, but was forced to remove that part of the speech.

President Sarkozy in particular pushed hard. He had been “frustrated” for months about Mr. Obama’s reluctance to confront Iran, a senior French government official told us, and saw an opportunity to change momentum. But the Administration told the French that it didn’t want to “spoil the image of success” for Mr. Obama’s debut at the U.N. and his homily calling for a world without nuclear weapons, according to the Paris daily Le Monde. So the Iran bombshell was pushed back a day to Pittsburgh, where the G-20 were meeting to discuss economic policy. — WSJ, September 29, 2009

Welcome as it is, at the same time somewhat embarrassing that the French are frustrated that the United States isn’t taking a harder line.  President Obama has certainly come full circle from President Bush in just nine months.  As for me, I slept better with an American cowboy in the White House.

When given an opportunity to speak in Pittsburgh, President Sarkozy could hardly contain himself:

“We are right to talk about the future,” Mr. Sarkozy said, referring to the U.S. resolution on strengthening arms control treaties. “But the present comes before the future, and the present includes two major nuclear crises,” i.e., Iran and North Korea. “We live in the real world, not in a virtual one.” No prize for guessing into which world the Frenchman puts Mr. Obama.

Sarkozy continued,

“I support America’s ‘extended hand.’ But what have these proposals for dialogue produced for the international community? Nothing but more enriched uranium and more centrifuges. And last but not least, it has resulted in a statement by Iranian leaders calling for wiping off the map a Member of the United Nations. What are we to do? What conclusions are we to draw? At a certain moment hard facts will force us to make decisions.”

Vive la France. I hope we make it to 2012.

Douglas “Wrong Way” Corrigan was an aviator in the 1930s.  In 1938 he mistakenly flew from New York to Ireland when he was supposed to fly from New York to California, because he claims he misread his compass.  It later turned out that he really intended to fly to Ireland but couldn’t get permission.

What’s Hillary’s excuse?  As the Obama Administration has called the removal of Honduran President Manuel Zalaya a coup d’etat, more attention is being focused on what the law in Honduras really says.  The Congressional Research Service looked into it and had this to say:

“The Supreme Court of Honduras has constitutional and statutory authority to hear cases against the President of the Republic and many other high officers of the State, to adjudicate and enforce judgments, and to request the assistance of the public forces to enforce its rulings.”

—Congressional Research Service, August 2009

So why is Hillary Clinton now attacking the Honduran Supreme Court by pulling the visa of all fifteen members of the court?  The U.S. sided with Hugo Chavez and Costa Rica to reach a “negotiated” settlement that would put Zalaya back in the presidency.  Honduras said, sorry, that would violate our constitution.  He broke the law, we dealt with it according to our constitution, and that’s that.

Mary Anastasia O’Grady writes in the Wall Street Journal:

The upshot is that the U.S. is trying to force Honduras to violate its own constitution and is also using its international political heft to try to interfere with the country’s independent judiciary.

Hondurans are worried about what this pressure is doing to their country. Mr. Zelaya’s violent supporters are emboldened by the U.S. position. They deface some homes and shops with graffiti and throw stones and home-made bombs into others, and whenever the police try to stop them, they howl about their “human rights.”

When will the apology tour end and we start standing up for liberty and democracy?  Is it more important that Hillary have an accomplishment she can brag about than following  the rule of law?  This administration has so much, so backwards it is hard to keep track of it.  They focus all their time and energy doing things they are not constitutionally authorized to do (health care, taking over car companies and banks, funding ACORN), and ignoring their fundamental constitutional duties of foreign policy and national defense.  Let’s hope some pressure can be brought to bear on the Obama Administration to back off before Chavez puts a puppet in place.

Chavez, Castro, et al, were cheering on their protege, Manuel Zalaya to make himself president for life and impose their same style of dictatorship on the people of Honduras.  Zalaya is term limited, but tried to push through a referendum to amend the constitution to lift that restriction.  That is against the law in Honduras.

Zalaya had his minions break into a facility that held the confiscated referendum ballots.  The Honduran Supreme Court declared that he had broken the law, the military captured Zalaya and sent him out of the country.  The cry throughout the region was that this was a coup removing Zalaya, but no one is saying where the Honduran Congress or Supreme Court did not follow their own laws, and show that Zalaya was not violating the same.

To Meddle or Not To Meddle?

The Obama administration was oddly silient when democracy was trying to break out in Iran, but spoke out against the laws being followed in Honduras.  Now as Zalaya plays provocative games on the border, it appears the Obama administration is negotiating with the Honduran military for the return of Zalaya to power:

The communiqué was drafted in Washington after days of talks between mid-level Honduran officers and American Congressional aides.  — NY Times, July 26, 2009

The communique it appears, indicates that the military would not stand in the way of Zalaya’s return.  Is this not meddling?  Left wing forces in the regions are trying to create another dictatorship like Venezuela and Cuba, the laws in Honduras are followed that prevent this, and the Obama administration weighs in on the side of the leftists.

There may not be a coup in Honduras, but we may be backing a socialist revolution.  We have come a long way from Ronald Reagan winning the Cold War and freeing Eastern Europe.

The press is sleepwalking.  As I have been reading the press reports concerning the crisis in Honduras, I have been struck by the lack of interest by the press in the full picture.  Other than Mary Anastasia O’Grady at the Wall Street Journal, no journalist seems to care about the facts in Honduras and whether this is truly a coup or following the rule of law and thwarting a dictatorial takeover of the government.

It seems like Honduras is lined up on one side and all the world on the other, and the uncontested facts on the ground tilt in Honduras’ favor.  Castro, Chavez, and their leftist brethren, the OAS, and the Obama administration all seem to be backing the dictator wannabe Zalaya.  It is quite a contrast to how the Obama administration dragged it’s feet in supporting Iran and now it is standing shoulder to shoulder with Hugo Chavez.  And the main stream media lazily goes along.

With Fidel Castro at the end of his life perhaps some thought the leftest threat to the hemisphere coming to a close.  However there is a new threat in Hugo Chavez.  The difference is that Castro’s Cuba was a ward of the Soviet Union and once they could no longer afford to support him, Castro’s relevance began to wane.  But Chavez has oil and does not need handouts and so is much more dangerous.

“This is a moment when the U.S. ought to be on the side of the rule of law, which the Honduran court and Congress upheld. If Washington does not reverse course, it will be one more act of appeasement toward an ambitious and increasingly dangerous dictator.” – O’Grady, WSJ, 07/06/2009

The World is Watching

The world is watching and taking the measure of Obama, and when push comes to shove they will choose where their best interests lie.  If we will not stand behind democracy in our hemisphere, then other countries will try to cut the best deal they can with Chavez.  North Korea gets bolder by the day.  Iran kills its citizens and Obama wants to keep the door open to dialog.  Weakness abounds and everyone can see it.

Brothers in Arms

When I first heard the news of a “coup d’etat” in Honduras I thought, “This isn’t good.”  America cannot be a champion of democracy if we only support democracies where we like the outcome.  Recall the coup in Venezuela that ousted Hugo Chavez for a couple of days, and we got behind it.  But he was elected and to avoid being hypocrites we have to support the process.

Not So Fast

As more news came out about exactly what happened in Honduras, it became clearer that the military was following the democratic process not subverting it.  The bad news is that while President Obama kept silent or tepid at best regarding Iran, he came out forcefully on the side of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez condemning the military’s action in Honduras.

Here is a rundown on what is going on in Honduras as reported in the Wall Street Journal on June 29 and June 30:

• Honduran President Manuel Zalaya is term limited.  He wanted to put a referendum on the ballot to change the constitution and lift the limits on his term so that he could be re-elected.
• While Honduran law allows for a re-write of the constitution the power to do that does not lie with the president but with its Congress.
• Zalaya declared the vote on his own and got the ballots to distribute from Hugo Chavez in Venezuela
• The Honduran Supreme Court ruled that the referendum was illegal because such referendums are forbidden by the constitution within six months of an election.
• The military followed the Supreme Court ruling and refused to distribute the ballots which is its usual role
• Zalaya fired the chief of the army and planned to proceed with the referendum against the Supreme Court ruling
• The Supreme Court ordered the general be reinstated, Zalaya refused
• The Honduran Attorney General and the Supreme Court said Mr. Zalaya would be prosecuted if he followed through
• Zalaya decided to proceed.  Supporters broke into where the ballots were being held and distributed them against the Supreme Court order
• Zalaya was arrested and is in exile in Costa Rica
• The Honduran Congress met in emergency session and named the President of Congress as the interim president of the country.  They further stated that the elections would proceed on schedule in November. The military was no longer in control.  The Supreme Court said the military acted on its orders

A Disturbing Pattern

Maybe it’s just me, but I see a disturbing pattern here.  In Iran where democracy is being clearly trashed, President Obama was extraordinarily restrained in criticizing the mullahs, while they shot their people in cold blood for exercising free speech and free assembly.  In Honduras, the government is carefully following the rule of law and its constitution while its president tries turn it into a dictatorship along the lines of Venezuela, and they are roundly condemned by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton.  President Obama lines up with Ahminedinjad, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, and against democracy.

Here at home he is orchestrating a massive expansion of government power and intrusion into every last detail of our lives.  Our liberty to live our lives as we choose is draining away.  I’m concerned.  Are you?

I’ll see you at the Tea Party tonight in New York.

Can liberty be saved?  Is there a chance that we can rescue our country from the federal juggernaut that wants to reach down into the deepest recesses of your life and take control?  They spend your money with reckless abandon and say, “What Me Worry?”  Those in power would have indulged in the trappings of office, sated on money and power, and be long gone with their spoils while the crumpled bill lies on the floor for you and your children and your children’s children to pick up and pay.

They have invited many to the party, to eat, drink, and be merry with promises of “middle class” tax cuts that are the greatest April Fools joke of all time.  Don’t worry we’ll get the rich to pay for it all.  You know, those evil fat cats on Wall Street.  But the Republicans on Wall Street have long be replaced by Democrats.  That’s right, Gordon Gecko is a Democrat.  60% of Wall Street contributions went to Democrats vs. Republicans.  How long will the top 2% of earners keep shouldering the burden before they slow down, stop, or emigrate.  Who will pick up the pieces then?  Who will support the drunken revelers that Obama piled on the public dole?

AIG Outrage

All of the outrage by Congressional and Administration leadership over the AIG bonuses is the epitome of hubris.  AIG contributed $104,000 to each Barack Obama and Christopher Dodd, during the recent election cycle.  Do you remember the brouhaha over language in the stimulus bill that had a loophole that allowed the AIG bonuses to be paid?  Dodd said he didn’t include the loophole.  Later he said he did include it but at the insistence of the Obama administration.  Now is it just me or does anyone else see a quid pro quo here?  Then they come out red-faced professing that the bonuses are an outrage.  Senator Schumer, who is threatening to unconstitutionally tax the bonuses into oblivion, took $112,000 in contributions from AIG.

Lessons from Hugo Chavez?

More recently President Obama effectively fired the CEO of General Motors and now speaks of bankruptcy.  I, among many others, said they should have filed for bankruptcy long before taxpayers bailed them out.  So now after we have sunk taxpayer money into GM and Chrysler, Obama steps in and effectively runs the company on “our behalf” as owners of 80% of the company and now says bankruptcy is a good idea!  When will the amateur hour come to an end?  But watch carefully, because Obama will assiduously avoid offending the auto workers union, despite the fact that the union contracts put US auto makers at a $2000 per car disadvantage against the competition.  GM (Government Motors) will now be forced to make cars that satisfy Obama’s left wing supporters but that Americans don’t want to buy.  It will be interesting to see how the government forces us to buy them.

What Do the Europeans Think?

For years we have been told by the left that we must listen to what the Europeans are saying.  They say we have to consider foreign laws in weighing Supreme Court cases.  They decried Bush’s policies as alienating our European friends.  So what do the Europeans think of Obama now?

The president of the European Union on Wednesday ripped the Obama administration’s economic policies, calling its deficit spending and bank bailouts “a road to hell.” — Washington Post, March 25

A Very Dangerous Path

In March of 1933 Adolf Hitler, proclaiming a national emergency of a potential communist revolution asked the German legislature, the Reichstag, to grant him emergency powers to deal with the situation.  Such a proposal required two-thirds approval by that body.  The final vote was 441 in favor, 84 opposed.  From that point on, Hitler was dictator. 

 Rahm Emmanuel likes to say, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”  President Obama is taking the current financial crisis to ram through a massive power grab.  The legislation is being rammed through with such force and urgency that no one has a chance to read it.  What ticking time bomb could be tucked in those pages that get voted on and passed without scrutiny?  Just look at the AIG fiasco for the answer.  No one seemed to know or admit it was in there.  If we allow this to continue, we may find some other provision included, in the dead of night, that will destroy our country forever.

Be on your guard.

Did you ever watch a historical movie about how some fringe group ominously takes over the government and leaves everyone scratching their head wondering how it happened?  At the end of the movie you say, “Whew, I’m so glad that could never happen in the good ol’ USA.”  Then you watch the news and see things that are eerily familiar to the movie and you say, “Nah, that’s just my imagination running away with me.”  Until the next piece of news drips on your head.

A news story this morning gave me that uneasy, pit of the stomach feeling again.  It probably shouldn’t have since it was about Venezuela.  Hugo Chavez got the term limit restriction lifted in his country that will allow him to be president for life.  That measure had previously failed but now it passed by a wide margin.  So why am I feeling uneasy about our liberties and what is going on in this country?  Here are some of my concerns.

Bipartisanship

After all the talk of bipartisanship by candidate Obama and the need to change the tone in Washington, the reality was something completely different.  In a so called “stimulus package” that will triple the budget deficit and was rammed through the Congress with no one, and I repeat no one, reading it, one party was virtually shut out of the legislative process.  At the same time 44% of the American people, in a Rasmussen poll, said names picked at random out of the phone book could do a better job on the economy than this Congress.  This package is chock full of 40 years of liberal programs that could not pass muster on their own, but as Rahm Emmanuel says, “You never want a serious crisis go to waste.”  When  Republicans protested about being shut out of the process, the response from the other side was, “We won.”

Fairness Doctrine

In the movie there will come a scene when the incoming powers break into the newspaper offices and smash the printing press, overturn the typesetting table, dump papers on the floor and set them ablaze.  The message is clear, there will be no opposition press.  There is only one message and that is of the new dictator and the new news will be his indoctrination.

Today, there is more and more talk about reviving the Fairness Doctrine.  Here is what former President Bill Clinton said:

“Well, you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side,” Clinton said, “because essentially there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows and let face it, you know, Rush Limbaugh is fairly entertaining even when he is saying things that I think are ridiculous….”

Liberals tried to bring balance to the discussion with Air America and it failed dismally.  Why?  People didn’t want to listen to left wing rants all day.  But face it, the main stream media overwhelmingly votes liberal.  So although no one will be smashing printing presses and torching newsrooms, the objective is to stifle the conservative point of view.  Once you do that the only voice that is heard is reinforcing the new ruler.

What the First Amendment says is:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for the redress of grievances.”

Congress shall make no law…so what are they doing? The line between news and opinion has long been crossed.  It used to be you couldn’t tell what Walter Cronkite’s politics were, because he kept his opinions, for the most part, out of the news.  But today there is little difference.  For a great example see this piece by Russ Roberts. (They Report. I Edit. You Decide). They will defend the Fairness Doctrine by saying it is not censorship, but here’s the dirty little secret.

Let’s say you are a radio program manager and you put on three hours of Rush Limbaugh.  Great show. Great ratings. You make lots of money.  Now along comes the Fairness Doctrine.  You don’t have to touch Rush’s show because that would be censorship.  What you have to do, however, is give three hours over to Air America to be “fair”.  Three hours of Air America hate <fill in the blank: Bush, religion, gun owners, pro life> rants.  Ratings for those three hours go in the tank.  No revenue. You’re making no money.  Listener’s start complaining.  So what is a station manager to do?  It’s what they used to do when the Fairness Doctrine was here before, tell Rush he has to close up shop, dump the Air America crowd and play Top 40s songs all day long.  The fact that it wasn’t censorship doesn’t matter, the effect is the same.

The Census

The census, conducted every ten years, is important in two regards.  One, it helps allocate how money from government programes is distributed, and it determines how the number of Congressional seats will be apportioned among the states.  Based on current estimates states like New York (Blue) will lose one or two seats and states like Texas (Red) will gain seats.  That could mean a shift in power from the Democrats to the Republicans.  Uh oh.

The scene in the movie shifts to a darkened office with a light over the conference table.  “We cannot allow the oppostion to gain any strength back, we have to consolidate our power.  What do we do?”

“Comrade, we can take control of the census.  Under our control we can count homeless people and illegal immigrants in Blue states and ignore them in Red states.”

“Brilliant!  You see that the census is directed out of your office rather than in some Department.”

You chuckle only for a minute, when you realize that Rahm Emmanuel will be overseeing the census, operating out of the White House, rather than handling it in the Commerce Department as it has been done for years.  Suddenly, the scene seems very real.

The Stimulus and ACORN

In the so called “stimulus bill” there appears to be about $4.1 billion for “neighborhood stabilization activities.”  The money was initially limited to state and local governments but later changed to include non-profits, such as ACORN.  ACORN is surrounded by allegations of vote fraud.  It doesn’t take much of an imagination to understand how close races can be tipped by an organization that perpetuates voter fraud.  Now think about how your tax dollars are being funneled to them to do it.

We Need More Votes in The House.  So Let’s Add a Representative

In consolidating power, what better way than adding votes where you need them.  One way is to add a representative in the House for the District of Columbia.  It is a heavily Democratic district, so why not?  The Constitution? Ignore it.  Just go ahead pass a law.  If the Republicans object, just crank up the racist machine.

Handouts

Of all the tried and tested methods for turning around an economy in trouble, the Democrats seem to be picking all the ones proved not to work.  If you want to stimulate the economy through tax cuts, you cut marginal tax rates.  Instead the Democrats want to give rebates to people who pay no income taxes.  That’s welfare not tax cuts.  But the goal is not to turn around the economy.  The goal is to consolidate power.  What better way than to make sure more than 50% get something from the government and less than 50% are stuck with the bill.  Majority rules.  We won.  Once that threshold is crossed, the majority can start jacking up taxes on those evil rich, so that the “working and middle class” get checks from the government.  Comrade, it from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.

Calling Dr. Mengele

In the movie a sinister doctor approaches the “patient” and plans how he is going to improve life for all of us.  For the “patient”, not so much.

Another provision in the stimulus bill is to establish a new bureaucracy that will “compare drugs, medical devices, surgery and other ways of treating specific conditions.”  This organization will take a role in your medical treatment that was formerly between you and your doctor. “Supporters of the research hope it will eventually save money by discouraging the use of costly, ineffective treatments.”  Isn’t that what medical journals are for?  Isn’t that why the AMA has conferences, to share such information?

“I’m sorry Mrs. Jones, we think you child has Down’s Syndrome, therefore you really must have the abortion, or your medical bills for your childbearing treatment won’t be covered by our national health care.  And you know the costs run into the hundreds of thousands.  What would you like to do?”

Do you really want some bureaucrat in Washington playing with a statistics program  telling your doctor what treatment he can and cannot perform to treat you?

Is This Real?

As you leave the theatre you laugh nervously that this couldn’t happen here.  But every time you pick up a newspaper, the similarity about how a dictator seizes control and then consolidates his power is just too eerie.  But as we have seen in the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and now in Venezuela, it can happen and once it does it may be decades before it can be undone, if at all.  The Founding Fathers were very wary of a strong central government.  They believed that the only powers that the Federal goverment should have are limited and they went to the trouble to spell them out in the Tenth Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Where does it say in the Constitution that education is a federal function? I’m not against education by any stretch of the imagination, but how can the federal government do a better job than the local school board?  Why is the federal government putting cops on the street?  Shouldn’t each municipality handle this? The Federal Government has gotten too big and too powerful.  It is so vast no one can manage it.  We keep pushing so much up to the federal level we are almost begging for a dictatorship to form.  And with everything they take, and they will take all they can grab, your liberties go with it.

We better wake up, people, and start cutting this monster down to size.  Otherwise it will either consume all of us leaving nothing but a wasteland, or we will be reading our founding documents and see that they are telling to prepare for the Second American Revolution.