Barack Obama again on why your electricity bill must raise…. to paraphrase him ” uh… if you can convince enough people of that, then…” I have a freaking bridge to sell you. This isn’t what our economy needs, this isn’t what the third world countries need, it isn’t what your children’s future needs. It is what Greenpeace wants. Are we electing Greenpeace, or a president who really cares for the long term future of American, your children, and the world? [ handy reference to what higher energy prices lead to here…. hint: the costs are counted in human lives.] video below the fold
The real change you can believe in ….
A seriously well produced and well sung send up of the Democrat’s socialistic tendencies. Video below the fold.
Most Americans would not recognize the acronym “BMD” or understand its meaning, but Ballistic Missile Defense is a keystone to our strategic defense systems as well as those of NATO.
Russia, China, and a raft of third world thugs and dictators are as openly and adamantly opposed to the program as Obama is.
James Lewis at American Thinker has an article up about this, and I will take a moment here to completely underline one of the key effects of BMD for Geo-political strategy. To help you understand this effect I’m going to explain what I call the “Snapshot Bully Scenario.”
While nuclear war would be unthinkable with either Russia or China, and Ballistic Missile Defense at present isn’t designed to cope with their large arsenals, BMD does prevent the “snapshot bully” scenario. A single nuclear shot or threat of one by Russia or China against a neighbor they were trying to coerce would be unlikely, but it’s also unlikely that the response would be nuclear in return if they were given slight pretext and only one nuclear device were used or threatened. The opposition would be world wide, but it probably wouldn’t be military since that would initiate WWIII at a nuclear level. The precedent for limited nuclear weapon use was already set by the US when we used them against Japan.
What’s more likely is that Russia or China could threaten through proxy – a nuclear armed North Korea, Pakistan, India, or Iran backed by a tight alliance with either Russia or China could use the snapshot bullying tactic of a single shot or threat of a single shot to gain compliance, and that would be more likely than the direct threat scenario outlined above. Not to mention that if Iran gets nukes, it’s likely they will share the awful bounty with people like Hugo Chavez to threaten our allies in this hemisphere. Without BMD it’s likely that the Eastern European or South Asian country threatened would knuckle under to whatever demand was made under coercion from snapshot nuclear blackmail.
The current BMD program (once in place) completely removes that threat, since it makes it highly unlikely that a single shot would succeed in reaching target. Japan is already protected from snapshot scenarios, as are others in the area by their BMD batteries and ships.
China and Russia’s strategic nuclear forces also make the conventional armies of countries in East Europe and the Sub-continent of Asia somewhat useless in defending against an ally of either Russia or China, and there are many other scenarios you could imagine where the ability to defeat a single nuclear shot becomes extremely important beyond just that of the madman with a nuclear ICBM scenario most people think of.
Barack’s opposition to BMD and the space program is clearly a disaster in the making for the US and our Allies. Please write or join here and let your support of BMD be known. ( Please note that I am conservative, and oppose Barack Obama and the Democrats in general, but the MDAA is Non-partisan and supports the concept of BMD in general without lobbying for any particular technology.)
Frontpage is reporting that one of Barack Obama’s big bundlers is Jodie Evans, one of the founders of Code Pink. From Frontpage:
According to Ralph Nader’s Public Citizen, Evans has bundled “at least $50,000” in donations for Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign. “Bundling” is a process in which people turn over a large number of “individual” political contributions as a group, in the hope of exerting greater influence if their candidate is elected.
According to Human Events reporter Catherine Moy, “Evans and her son, a student who lives at her Southern California address, each also gave the maximum individual allowable donation of $2,300 to Obama’s campaign.”
And who is Jodie Evans? A former political appointee of Jerry Brown during his tenure as governor of California and his presidential campaigns, Evans briefly made headlines in 2003 by arranging for women to claim Arnold Schwarzenegger groped them. However, she has kept lower company for the last few years. Her official biography states “her life has been consumed with Codepink: Women for Peace since September of 2002.”
Of course if you’ve read this blog any time at all or just look at the picture, then you know who Jodie’s good friends are.
This is a reprise of an article I wrote back in July, at the time I thought I was a bit on the edge for coming out and openly declaring that Barack Obama is a socialist. Time and the facts have proven me right however in light of his call for billions of dollars for public service in the form of a “civilian defense force” [never mind that we have layers and layers of civilian agencies like the local police, the FBI, the state troopers, the county inspector, etc. etc.] and with his call for “sharing the wealth” coupled with tax increases and increases in social welfare spending by the government. The old article continues below:
Obama is clearly the most socialist candidate ever to win the nomination of a major political party in the United States. In Europe they love him because he matches the politicians that they are used to there. The concepts and proposals that he vaguely puts forth match those of the Euro parties of trade-unionists, elite socialists, technocrats, and populists whose alliance to Marxist principle varies by only faint shades in the reddish rainbow of European politics.
Months ago in political discussion with friends I mentioned that the word “justice” is used very often by Barack Obama, and in this century it’s shorthand for socialist policy. Since that policy is largely discredited they can’t call it socialism, which is why the Communist group “The World Can’t Wait” calls for political justice, social justice, just wages, just…. everything. They are joined in this chorus for justice by international ANSWER, but these really are the new faces of the Communist party in America.
But let’s get back to Barackian “justice,” is it somehow different? Not really if you look at his proposals, as IBD does in detail here.
Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to the entitlement days of old.
Of course, Obama is too smart to try to smuggle such hoary collectivist garbage through the front door. He’s disguising the wealth transfers as “investments” — “to make America more competitive,” he says, or “that give us a fighting chance,” whatever that means.
Among his proposed “investments”:
• “Universal,” “guaranteed” health care.
• “Free” college tuition.
• “Universal national service” (a la Havana).
• “Universal 401(k)s” (in which the government would match contributions made by “low- and moderate-income families”).
• “Free” job training (even for criminals).
• “Wage insurance” (to supplement dislocated union workers’ old income levels).
• “Free” child care and “universal” preschool.
• More subsidized public housing.
• A fatter earned income tax credit for “working poor.”
• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa.
His new New Deal also guarantees a “living wage,” with a $10 minimum wage indexed to inflation; and “fair trade” and “fair labor practices,” with breaks for “patriot employers” who cow-tow to unions, and sticks for “nonpatriot” companies that don’t.
That’s just for starters — first-term stuff.
My friends thought that I was loopy when I connected Barack’s constant use of the word Justice and Marxism, and you might also — except WCW and ANSWER are both avowedly communist but trying to appear socialist. If you disbelieve just go to their web sites, or visit Zombietime.com where you can see photos of them selling communist literature and shirts, and expousing communist ideology and websites with their placards.
We defeated the USSR and put Communism on its back, but what’s the point if we give up freedom and capitalism now?