Which Will Come First: $5 Per Gallon Gas or an Iranian War?

When Barack Hussein Obama was inaugurated the 44th President of the United States, back in January of 2009, a gallon of gas cost $1.84.

A little over a month before Obama ascended to his throne, his loyal minion, Tom Brokaw, of NBC, made the following suggestion:

Let’s talk for a moment about consumer responsibility when it comes to the auto industries. As soon as gas prices dropped, consumers moved back to the larger cars once again. The SUVs are the big gas consumers. Why not take this opportunity to put a tax on gasoline, bump it back up to $4 a gallon where people were prepared to pay for that, and use that revenue for alternative energy and as a signal to the consumers: “Those days are gone. We’re not going to have gasoline that you could just fill up your tank for 20 bucks anymore.”

Well, it look like ol’ Liberal Tom is going to get his wish:

CNBC.com has the story:

The world’s top oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, appears to have cut both its oil production and export in December, according to the latest update by the Joint Organizations Data Initiative (JODI), an official source of oil production, consumption and export data.

The OPEC heavyweight saw production decline by 237,000 barrels per day (bpd) from three-decade highs of 10.047 million bpd in November, the JODI data showed on Sunday.

The draw-down was sharper for the actual amount exported, declining by 440,000 bpd, or 5.6 percent, to come in at 7.364 million bpd, the data also showed. The level would still be similar to exports after a steep ramp-up last June.

In its monthly report on February 10, the IEA put Saudi Arabia’s production number for December slightly lower at 9.55 million bpd, a disparity of 260,000 bpd versus the JODI data.

Iran appeared not to have filed data in time for the latest release, providing no additional clues about how many export barrels were already lost in December, as some reports have suggested.

In a related story, courtesy of Reuters.com:

Iran has stopped selling crude to British and French companies, the oil ministry said on Sunday, in a retaliatory measure against fresh EU sanctions on the Islamic state’s lifeblood, oil.

“Exporting crude to British and French companies has been stopped … we will sell our oil to new customers,” spokesman Alireza Nikzad was quoted as saying by the Ministry of Petroleum website.

The European Union in January decided to stop importing crude from Iran from July 1 over its disputed nuclear program, which the West says is aimed at building bombs. Iran denies this.

Iran’s oil minister said on February 4 that the Islamic state would cut its oil exports to “some” European countries.

The European Commission said last week that the bloc would not be short of oil if Iran stopped crude exports, as they have enough in stock to meet their needs for around 120 days.

Industry sources told Reuters on February 16 that Iran’s top oil buyers in Europe were making substantial cuts in supply months in advance of European Union sanctions, reducing flows to the continent in March by more than a third – or over 300,000 barrels daily.

France’s Total has already stopped buying Iran’s crude, which is subject to fresh EU embargoes. Market sources said Royal Dutch Shell has scaled back sharply. Shell had no comment on the announcement.

Among European nations, debt-ridden Greece is most exposed to Iranian oil disruption.

Motor Oil Hellas of Greece was thought to have cut out Iranian crude altogether and compatriot Hellenic Petroleum along with Spain’s Cepsa and Repsol were curbing imports from Iran.

Iran was supplying more than 700,000 barrels per day (bpd) to the EU plus Turkey in 2011, industry sources said.

By the start of this year imports had sunk to about 650,000 bpd as some customers cut back in anticipation of an EU ban.

And, if ke you lose your breakfast, this probably will.

The Associated Press reports that:

The U.S. and Britain on Sunday urged Israel not to attack Iran’s nuclear program as the White House’s national security adviser arrived in the region, reflecting growing international jitters that the Israelis are poised to strike.

In their warnings, both the chairman of the U.S. joint chiefs of staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, and British Foreign Secretary William Hague said an Israeli attack on Iran would have grave consequences for the entire region and urged Israel to give international sanctions against Tehran more time to work. Dempsey said an Israeli attack is “not prudent,” and Hague said it would not be “a wise thing.” It was not known whether their messages were coordinated.

Both Israel and the West believe Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb – a charge Tehran denies. But differences have emerged in how to respond to the perceived threat.

The U.S. and the European Union have both imposed harsh new sanctions targeting Iran’s oil sector, the lifeline of the Iranian economy. With the sanctions just beginning to bite, they have expressed optimism that Iran can be persuaded to curb its nuclear ambitions.

[As mentioned earlier] On Sunday, Iran’s Oil Ministry said it has halted oil shipments to Britain and France in an apparent pre-emptive blow against the European Union. The semiofficial Mehr news agency said the National Iranian Oil Company has sent letters to some European refineries with an ultimatum to either sign long-term contracts of two to five years or be cut off. The 27-nation EU accounts for about 18 percent of Iran’s oil exports.

Israel has welcomed the sanctions. But it has pointedly refused to rule out military action and in recent weeks sent signals that its patience is running thin.

Israel believes a nuclear-armed Iran would be a threat to its very existence, citing Iran’s support for Arab militant groups, its sophisticated arsenal of missiles capable of reaching Israel and its leaders’ calls for the destruction of the Jewish state.

Last week, Israel accused Iran of being behind a string of attempted attacks on Israeli diplomats in India, Georgia and Thailand.

There is precedent for Israeli action. In 1981, the Israeli air force destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor. And in 2007, Israeli warplanes are believed to have destroyed a target that foreign experts think was an unfinished nuclear reactor in Syria.

So, America, here we are, with our Ship of State on a precipice, looking down into the abyss.

And at the helm, we have our own Dear Leader, who is busily counting all the money he will be able to give to his Green Energy Cabal, after the $5 per gallon gas prices hit.  And, at the same time figuring out how to appease the hungry lion (the Muslim Brotherhood), so that they will eat us last.

That is…if the world doesn’t blow up first.

Santorum: Obama Has a Different Theology

Republican Candidate for their Presidential Nomination, Rick Santorum,  made some remarks about the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that have been been the fodder for conversations around office coolers and Sunday after-church lunches for 3 years now.

Reuters.com has the story:

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum challenged President Barack Obama’s Christian beliefs on Saturday, saying White House policies were motivated by a “different theology.”

A devout Roman Catholic who has risen to the top of Republican polls in recent days, Santorum said the Obama administration had failed to prevent gas prices rising and was using “political science” in the debate about climate change.

Obama’s agenda is “not about you. It’s not about your quality of life. It’s not about your jobs. It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology,” Santorum told supporters of the conservative Tea Party movement at a Columbus hotel.

When asked about the statement at a news conference later, Santorum said, “If the president says he’s a Christian, he’s a Christian.”

But Santorum did not back down from the assertion that Obama’s values run against those of Christianity.

“He is imposing his values on the Christian church. He can categorize those values anyway he wants. I’m not going to,” Santorum told reporters.

A social conservative, Santorum is increasingly seen as a champion for evangelical Christians in fights with Democrats over contraception and gay marriage.

“This is just the latest low in a Republican primary campaign that has been fueled by distortions, ugliness, and searing pessimism and negativity – a stark contrast with the President who is focused everyday on creating jobs and restoring economic security for the middle class,” said Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt.

So, is President Barack Hussein Obama, a Christian?

For 20 years, Obama sat under the teachings of Rev. Jeremiah Wright at the Trinity United Church of Christ .  Let’s look at the background of Rev. Wright, courtesy of freerepublic.com, shall we?

What most people do not know is that Reverend Jeremiah Wright was a Muslim and a Black Activist before he became the founding pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ, a Black Liberation Theology Church.

The rest, you already know.  As a reminder, though, Discoverthenetworks.org gives us the following summation of  Reverend Jeremiah Wright:

  • Longtime pastor and spiritual mentor of Barack Obama
  • Considers the U.S. to be a nation rife with racism and discrimination
  • Blames American racism for provoking the 9/11 attacks
  • “Islam and Christianity are a whole lot closer than you may realize,” he has written. “Islam comes out of Christianity.”
  • Embraces liberation theology and socialism
  • Strong supporter of Louis Farrakhan
  • Likens Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to South Africa’s treatment of blacks during the apartheid era

But, what is Black Liberation Theology?

Again, discoverthenetworks.org gives us the lowdown:

The chief architect of black liberation theology was James Cone, author of Black Theology and Black Power. One of the tasks of this movement, according to Cone, is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in light of the experience of blacks who have long been victimized by white oppressors. According to black liberation theology, the inherent racism of white people precludes them from being able to recognize the humanity of nonwhites; moreover, their white supremacist orientation allegedly results in the establishment of a “white theology” that is irrevocably disconnected from the black experience. Consequently, liberation theologians contend that blacks need their own, race-specific theology to affirm their identity and their worth.

“What we need,” says Cone, “is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of Black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” Observing that America was founded for white people, Cone calls for “the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world.” He advocates the use of Marxism as a tool of social analysis to help Christians to see “how things really are.”

Another prominent exponent of black liberation theology is the Ivy League professor Cornel West, who calls for “a serious dialogue between Black theologians and Marxist thinkers” — a dialogue that centers on the possibility of “mutually arrived-at political action.”

Matthew 7:16 tells us,

You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

Think back on the last three years and try to remember some of the actions by President Barack Hussein Obama.

For instance, one of the first things he did when ascending to the throne, err, the presidency, was to lift restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad.

Per reuters.com:

The Democratic president’s decision was a victory for advocates of abortion rights on an issue that in recent years has become a tit-for-tat policy change each time the White House shifts from one party to the other.

Now, three years later, Obama has made the headlines in his attempt, through the bureaucratic monster known as Obamacare, to force Catholic Hospitals to go against their Denomination’s beliefs and to make them provide contraception and the morning after (abortion) pill.

Again, think back on everything he has done in between these two specific cases.

Is he a Christian?  

“You will recognize them by their fruits.”

What Happened to “Mr. Inevitable”?

It’s seems like, just the other day, that Mitt Romney supporters, known on Conservative websites as “Mittbots” were insisting that the Nomination of Mitt “The Legacy” Romney as the Republican Presidential Candidate was a fait d’accompli.

Things have changed.

Reuters.com has the story.

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s struggles in Michigan are fueling speculation that Republicans might have to resort to a doomsday scenario and launch a frantic search for a 2012 savior at their nominating convention in late August.

Rare in the modern age of U.S. politics, a “brokered convention” could result in Republicans ditching their current crop of candidates and turning to someone else who they feel would have a better chance of defeating Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.

How did Republicans get to this point? Romney’s failure to get conservatives fully behind him and put down yet another challenger in the party – this time it’s Rick Santorum – is causing angst in the party.

Many senior Republicans do not think Santorum, a social conservative caught up in the U.S. culture wars over issues like abortion and contraception, has a chance to beat Obama if he wins the party’s presidential nomination.

When he ran for re-election as a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania in 2006, Santorum lost by 18 percentage points. But, nevertheless, he is exposing Romney’s weaknesses in Michigan, where Santorum leads polls ahead of the big Midwestern state’s February 28 primary.

A Romney loss to Santorum in Michigan, the state where he was born and where his father was governor, would only intensify the talk about a weak Republican field and feed demands for someone else as the party’s candidate to challenge Obama.

“It’s hard for me to see how Romney rights the ship if he loses Michigan,” said Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak. “There is no level of spin that can overcome that disaster.”

Michigan will set the table for “Super Tuesday,” the March 6 jackpot when 10 states hold Republican nominating contests. A loss for Romney in Michigan would raise serious doubts over whether he can rally enough support to have a big day on Super Tuesday and make a big move toward clinching the nomination.

The candidates are engaging in a state-by-state battle to become the Republican nominee. The party will officially pick a nominee at its August convention in Tampa, Florida.

Why is Romney losing in what was once his “home state”, a state where his own father, George Romney, was once Governor?

L.Z. Granderson, in an article published on CNN.com, has a possible explanation:

One very clear reason why Mitt Romney is far from a lock to win the Michigan primary, despite his ties to the state, is that he’s not really tied to the state.

He was born here, he lived here. But he’s not family. Not anymore.

That’s why the characterization of Rick Santorum polling well in Romney’s backyard is a bit misguided. The truth is, many of us disowned that two-faced liar years ago. We remember how, back in 2008, Romney came home promising to do all he could to save the auto industry. And we believed him and voted for him and he won the primary here. Then, after he dropped out of the race, he wrote a New York Times op-ed that carried the headline “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”

The opening sentence: “If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.”

What the he@@?

I thought he said he was one of us.

Later in the piece, Romney talks about why we should let the auto industry go bankrupt. Although he lays out some very sound reasons for this — including an anecdotal story of when his father, George, took over American Motors — at the end of the day he fails to mention the most important thing. Us.

He forgot about the people back home who depended on the auto industry to put food on the table, pay mortgages, send the kids to college. He greeted us like family when he needed our votes, but when he left town he treated us like strangers.

If Romney didn’t think a bailout was the best way to help the state, he should have said that when he came here looking for delegates and let the people at his rallies decide if they agreed with him. Instead he pandered, then kicked dirt in our faces on his way out the door — an all too familiar pattern with Romney.

The reason Santorum is gaining votes in Michigan isn’t because he’s so liked here, though his social conservative rhetoric plays well in the western side of the state. But it’s because we’ve been burned by Romney before. He tells the people in front of him what they want to hear. But when he sets his sights on a new shiny object, he changes the script to fit his new needs.

Unfortunately, for The Legacy, other Americans besides Granderson and the Michiganders have figured out his Karma Chameleon nature, also.

According  to pollster Scott Rasmussen:

…Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum has now bounced to a 12-point lead over Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters finds Santorum with 39% support to the former Massachusetts governor’s 27%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich follows from a distance with 15% of the vote, and Texas Congressman Ron Paul runs last with 10%. Three percent (3%) like some other candidate in the race, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Now, I’m just an average American, sitting here outside Memphis, Tennessee (Detroit South) in the Northwest Corner of Mississippi, but it seems to me, as I’ve said before, that average Americans, especially Conservatives here in the Heartland, are a stiff-necked people.

We tend to stand up on our hind legs when someone tries to force something (or in this case, someone) upon us that we really don’t trust, or care for.

For an example, please watch a certain Supreme Court Case coming in a few months, concerning the Constitutionality of forcing everyone in America to buy Health Insurance in order to participate in a Federal Government-run bureaucratic nightmare of a Healthcare System, that the overwhelming majority of Americans remain opposed to, but was shoved down our throats, anyway.

By the way, where did Obama and his Administration ever find a state-run Healthcare System to model Obamacare after?

Oh, yeah.  Romneycare.

You know, that might have something to do with Romney’s campaign tanking, as well.

What do YOU think?

Iran: Those Who Do Not Learn From History…

Since the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America.

Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

 On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

Unfortunately, these same barbarians now have new “toys” to threaten us with.

USNews.com has the story:

Iran has the ability to fire missiles at U.S. targets in the Middle East and “temporarily” close a key sea transit route, a senior intelligence official said Thursday. Tehran has a missile arsenal capable of reaching “targets throughout the region and into Eastern Europe,” Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, Defense Intelligence Agency director, told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Iran has … threatened to launch missiles against the United States and our allies in the region in response to an attack” on its nuclear facilities or other targets, he said. What’s more, Iran “could also employ its terrorist surrogates worldwide,” Burgess said. He also noted that “Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz,” the key sea lane used to move oil and other goods to destinations around the globe. The U.S. intelligence community believes Iran “is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict or launch a preemptive attack,” Burgess told the panel.

The Leader of Israel has a better grasp of this dangerous situation than the Obama Administration does.  Ynetnews.com reports that

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Cypriot President Dimitris Christofias signed a search and rescue agreement on Thursday. According to the agreement, in the event of a disaster Israeli aircraft will be authorized to enter Cyprus’ airspace, and vice versa. A similar agreement between the Jewish state and Turkey was revoked recently in light of heightened tensions between the countries. While in Nicosia, Netanyahu also addressed the Iranian nuclear threat, saying the sanctions imposed by the international community on the Islamic Republic “are not working.” Iran is the most irresponsible force in the world, he said, claiming the sactions imposed on the Islamic Republic have not had an effect so far. According to Netanyahu, the regime in Tehran violates every resolution and has no respect for international norms. He added that Iran’s race towards nuclear weapons should concern the US and every other country. Nuclear arms in the hands of the Iranian regime is a cause for great concern to the US and Israel, he said.

The U.S. Senate is concerned, as Freebeacon.com reports:

A bipartisan slate of senators announced this afternoon they would reject “any United States policy that would rely on efforts to contain a nuclear weapons-capable Iran.” Drawing a clear line in the sand, the senators – among them Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) – demanded that President Obama reject “any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat,” according to a new Senate resolution set to be unveiled later today. The resolution “warns that time is limited to prevent the Iranian government from acquiring a nuclear weapon” and demands that the hostile regime immediately suspend all uranium enrichment activities. Most noteworthy, perhaps, is the resolution’s thorough accounting of the Iranian regime’s hostile behavior. It details, for example, Iran’s connections to terror groups and its various efforts to harm U.S. interests across the Middle East. “Iran has provided weapons, training, funding, and direction to terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Shiite militias in Iraq that are responsible for the murders of hundreds of American forces and innocent civilians,” the resolution declares. It states unequivocally that Iran and nuclear weapons are simply anathema. “If Iran were successful in acquiring a nuclear weapon capability, it would likely spur other countries in the region to consider developing their own nuclear weapons capabilities,” it reads. Earlier in the week, opponents of tough action towards Iran appeared almost gleeful over reports that lawmakers were having trouble attracting Democrats to the resolution.

Evidently, these Senators opposing tough action, learned nothing from the Hostage Crisis.

Those who do not learn from history…are doomed to repeat it.  

The War Against Christianity: Battleground Your Child’s School

According to a study done by The Pew Forum on Public and Religious Life, completed in January of 2011, and reported in USA Today, the number of Muslims in American will almost double by the year 2030, growing from a mere 1 % of our population to 1.7%.

However, if you read the articles about Muslims in the Main Stream Media, and all the hubbub concerning the poorly received series on TLC, All-American Muslim, an average American would think that they were a vibrant, rapidly growing, sizable minority here in America.

Liberals are bound and determined to push Islam down our American Christian Conservative throats…by indoctrinating our children:

Check out this story from foxnews.com:

A Colorado high school student says he quit the school choir after an Islamic song containing the lyric “there is no truth except Allah” made it into the repertoire.

James Harper, a senior at Grand Junction High School in Grand Junction, put his objection to singing “Zikr,” a song written by Indian composer A.R. Rahman, in an email to Mesa County School District 51 officials. When the school stood by choir director Marcia Wieland’s selection, Harper said, he quit.

“I don’t want to come across as a bigot or a racist, but I really don’t feel it is appropriate for students in a public high school to be singing an Islamic worship song,” Harper told KREX-TV. “This is worshipping another God, and even worshipping another prophet … I think there would be a lot of outrage if we made a Muslim choir say Jesus Christ is the only truth.”

But district spokesman Jeff Kirtland defended the decision to include the song.

“Choral music is often devoted to religious themes. … This is not a case where the school is endorsing or promoting any particular religion or other non-educational agenda. The song was chosen because its rhythms and other qualities would provide an opportunity to exhibit the musical talent and skills of the group in competition, not because of its religious message or lyrics,” Kirtland told FoxNews.com in an email while noting that the choir “is a voluntary, after-school activity.”

“Students are not required to participate, and receive no academic credit for doing so,” he said.

At an upcoming concert, the choir is scheduled to sing an Irish folk song and an Christian song titled “Prayer of the Children,” in addition to the song by Rahman.

“The teacher consulted with students and asked each of them to review an online performance of the selection with their parents before making the decision to perform the piece,” Kirtland said, and members who object to the religious content of musical selections aren’t required to sing them.

Rahman, who has sold hundreds of millions of records and is well-known in his homeland, has said the song is not intended for a worship ceremony. He told FoxNews.com in a written statement that the song, composed for the move “Bose, the Forgotten Hero,” is about “self-healing and spirituality.”

“It is unfortunate that the student in Colorado misinterpreted the intention of the song,” Rahman said. “I have long celebrated the commonalities of humanity and try to share and receive things in this way. While I respect his decision for opting out, this incident is an example of why we need further cultural education through music.”

The state of Florida is not immune from the Liberals’ plans, either.  Again, Fox News reports:

Parents in Tampa are the latest to protest school officials inviting a controversial Muslim civil liberties advocacy group to speak to students.

Dozens of people showed up at a Hillsborough County school board meeting Tuesday night to complain that a member of Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, spoke to history students at Steinbrenner High School last fall. They cited the group’s alleged ties to terrorist group Hamas. The group, which purports to promote diversity and tolerance of the religion, has met a similar reception in Texas and Georgia in recent years.

“We do not have a problem with Islamic groups speaking with students, but we do have an issue with a group that has ties to terrorism speaking,” Randall McDaniels, head of the Jacksonville Chapter of ACT for America, one of the groups actively seeking to stop CAIR members from speaking to students in public schools, told FoxNews.com

CAIR spokesman Corey Saylor dismissed the criticism as “fear-mongering.” Hassan Shibly, the Florida CAIR member who spoke to the students, said the parents are misguided.

“This hatred and animosity only shows the importance of reaching out to the community,” he said, “It’s insulting to the school and the students to think that one person can influence their beliefs. It’s misleading.”

The group, the nation’s largest Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization, also has come under criticism for, among other reasons, being named by the Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in a major terror financing case involving the Holy Land Foundation.

Michael Rubin, a resident scholar with the American Enterprise Institute who focuses on the Middle East and terrorism, said concerns about CAIR are not unfounded.

“They have been co-conspirators in a terrorism finance trial and seek to stymie debate rather than safeguard it,” Rubin said. “Almost every day, jihadists on religious Internet forums belie CAIR’s claim that religion has nothing to do with terrorism. Ultimately, there is a battle for interpretation going on inside the world of Islam, and rather than seek to win that debate for the moderates and proponents of tolerance, CAIR acts as the jihadists’ offensive linesmen.”

Parents in the Houston-area town of Friendswood objected to a presentation CAIR made to junior high students in 2008, sparking a furor that led to the principal’s resignation. In 2010, parents in Gwenett County, Ga., forced the school system to disinvite CAIR from holding classroom presentations.

Gosh.  The Liberals’ plans for the Islamic indoctrination of our Schoolchildren, in the name of diversity, are not going so well.  

These Liberal school administrations found out, as President Obama has, facing a backlash over his arrogant plan to force Catholic Hospitals to dispense birth control and the morning after pill, that this country was founded on a system of Judeo-Christian beliefs, and 78% of our citizens (according to gallup.com) still proudly proclaim their Christian Heritage…and they’re not about to give it up.

Obama to Cut National Defense to 1950 Level

When he assumed office, President Ronald Reagan faced the daunting task of rebuilding our National Defense, decimated by his ineffectual predecessor, Jimmy Carter.

Ronald Reagan, as he always did, went directly to the American people, in a televised speech given on the night of March 23, 1983.

Presidentialrhetoric.com provides the transcript:

…The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and defend against aggression – to preserve freedom and peace.

Since the dawn of the atomic age, we’ve sought to reduce the risk of war by maintaining a strong deterrent and by seeking genuine arms control. “Deterrence” means simply this: making sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States, or our allies, or our vital interests, concludes that the risks to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he won’t attack. We maintain the peace through our strength; weakness only invites aggression. This strategy of deterrence has not changed. It still works. But what it takes to maintain deterrence has changed. It took one kind of military force to deter an attack when we had far more nuclear weapons than any other power; it takes another kind now that the Soviets, for example, have enough accurate and powerful nuclear weapons to destroy virtually all of our missiles on the ground. Now, this is not to say that the Soviet Union is planning to make war on us. Nor do I believe a war is inevitable – quite the contrary. But what must be recognized is that our security is based on being prepared to meet all threats.

There was a time when we depended on coastal forts and artillery batteries, because, with the weaponry of that day, any attack would have had to come by sea. Well, this is a different world, and our defenses must be based on recognition and awareness of the weaponry possessed by other nations in the nuclear age. We can’t afford to believe that we will never be threatened. There have been two world wars in my lifetime. We didn’t start them and, indeed, did everything we could to avoid being drawn into them. But we were ill-prepared for both. Had we been better prepared, peace might have been preserved.

For 20 years the Soviet Union has been accumulating enormous military might. They didn’t stop when their forces exceeded all requirements of a legitimate defensive capability. And they haven’t stopped now. During the past decade and a half, the Soviets have built up a massive arsenal of new strategic nuclear weapons- weapons that can strike directly at the United States.

…This is why I’m speaking to you tonight – to urge you to tell your Senators and Congressmen that you know we must continue to restore our military strength. If we stop in midstream, we will send a signal of decline, of lessened will, to friends and adversaries alike. Free people must voluntarily, through open debate and democratic means, meet the challenge that totalitarians pose by compulsion. It’s up to us, in our time, to choose and choose wisely between the hard but necessary task of preserving peace and freedom and the temptation to ignore our duty and blindly hope for the best while the enemies of freedom grow stronger day by day.

President Reagan coined a very famous, but simple, phrase describing his Foreign Policy:  

Trust, but Verify.

Evidently,  our 44th president and his Administrative Staff only believe in the first half of that phrase.

LATimes.com reports:

President Obama greeted the Chinese heir apparent in the Oval Office on Tuesday morning, a venue where the U.S. president usually receives only the nation’s closest friends.

But even as the two countries eye one another warily, the Obama administration wants to keep its options open with Vice President Xi Jinping as he prepares to take his place as president next year.

In a joint appearance before their meeting, Obama told reporters that the U.S. relationship with China is based on “mutual interest and mutual respect,” and that such a relationship is in the interests of the rest of the world, too.

The United States welcomes China’s “peaceful rise,” Obama said, which he said has the power to “help to bring stability and prosperity to the world.”

As Al Jolson once said:

Wait a minute…wait a minute…you ain’t seen nothing yet!

According to the Associated Press :

The Obama administration is weighing options for sharp new cuts to the U.S. nuclear force, including a reduction of up to 80 percent in the number of deployed weapons, The Associated Press has learned.

Even the most modest option now under consideration would be an historic and politically bold disarmament step in a presidential election year, although the plan is in line with President Barack Obama’s 2009 pledge to pursue the elimination of nuclear weapons.

No final decision has been made, but the administration is considering at least three options for lower total numbers of deployed strategic nuclear weapons cutting to: 1,000 to 1,100; 700 to 800, and 300 to 400, according to a former government official and a congressional staffer. Both spoke on condition of anonymity in order to reveal internal administration deliberations.

The potential cuts would be from a current treaty limit of 1,550 deployed strategic warheads.

A level of 300 deployed strategic nuclear weapons would take the U.S. back to levels not seen since 1950 when the nation was ramping up production in an arms race with the Soviet Union. The U.S. numbers peaked at above 12,000 in the late 1980s and first dropped below 5,000 in 2003.

Obama has often cited his desire to seek lower levels of nuclear weapons, but specific options for a further round of cuts had been kept under wraps until the AP learned of the three options now on the table.

A spokesman for the White House’s National Security Council, Tommy Vietor, said Tuesday that the options developed by the Pentagon have not yet been presented to Obama.

All you Americans in your 50s, like me, and older…remember the old “Duck and Cover” films we watched in school?

Well, those things we learned from those films, won’t help now.

I suggest prayer.

Smart Power? $4 Per Gallon Gas, Bankrolling Barbarians, and Ignoring Our Friends

Tonight, in celebration of Valentine’s Day, a lot of American couples will be using their cars to go out to dinner.

Enjoy going out while you can still afford to, Americans.

ABC.go.com has the story:

Gasoline prices could soon hit $4 a gallon, a threshold they haven’t flirted with since last spring.

The average price paid by U.S. drivers for a gallon of regular now stands at $3.52, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which released its latest figures this afternoon. That price represents an increase of 0.04 percent from a week ago and 0.38 percent from a year ago.

Experts expect prices to spike another 60 cents or more, with the $4 mark being touched—or exceeded—sometime this summer, probably by Memorial Day weekend, the peak of the summer driving season. The last time the U.S. saw $4 gasoline was back in the summer of 2008.

“I think it’s going to be a chaotic spring,” says Tom Kloza of the Oil Price Information Service. He expects average prices to peak at $4.05, though he and other industry trackers say prices could be sharply higher in some markets.

Historically, $4 a gallon has been the upper limit of what consumers have been willing to pay. Last April, national prices peaked at about $3.98 a gallon before receding. “It’s going to be tough to sustain that level,” thinks Brian Milne of energy tracker Televent DTN. “People will drive less.”

Andrew Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates in Houston, says where prices will go long-term is anybody’s guess. He has been following gas prices one way or another for more than 30 years. He distinguishes between those forces affecting prices that are predictable, and others that are not.

Chief among the unknowns is war in the Middle East–or if not war, increased tensions. It’s such worries, he says, that are most responsible now for the run up in prices at the pump. Also boosting prices is the higher seasonal demand that comes with summer vacations, plus a federally mandated switch from winter gas formulations to costlier ones for summer. The summer ones, designed to reduce emissions, require further refining steps.

Where could gas be by year’s end? “It depends if the Middle East blows up in a war or not,” says Lipow. “That’s really the big headline out there: Whether or not geopolitical events disrupt supply. We see that affect already.”

We all know that the Middle East is a powderkeg.  Revolution is in the air, and all of the secular despots that America was used to dealing with, are being replaced by Muslim despots, who believe that we are all infidels, and who rather kill us than look at us.

So…what is our president, the Leader of the Free World doing?  Is he negotiating with Ali Baba and his forty thieves in order to drive our oil prices down, thereby stimulating our stagnant economy?

Nope.  This yutz wants to bankroll the barbarians.

Reuters.com reports:

The White House announced plans on Monday to help countries swept by “Arab Spring” revolutions with more than $800 million in economic aid, while maintaining U.S. military assistance to Egypt despite a crisis triggered by an Egyptian crackdown on U.S. democracy activists.

In a year marked by fierce debate over U.S. budget deficits, President Barack Obama sought to maintain the core of U.S. spending on overseas aid and development while squeezing savings out of existing programs and scaling back proposals to build new embassies and hire more diplomats.

In his annual budget message to Congress, Obama asked that military aid to Egypt be kept at the level of recent years – $1.3 billion – and sought $250 million in regular economic aid for the country as it makes its shaky transition away from autocratic rule following the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak last year.

The proposals are part of Obama’s budget request for fiscal year 2013, which begins Oct. 1. His requests need the approval of Congress. Some lawmakers have urged cuts to overseas spending to address U.S. budget shortfalls and are particularly angry at Egypt.

Obama proposed $51.6 billion in funding for the U.S. State Department and foreign aid overall, when $8.2 billion in assistance to war zones is included.

The White House sought a 1.6 percent increase in the State Department’s budget, excluding spending for Iraq and Afghanistan, which was tallied up separately.

Most of the new economic aid for the Arab Spring countries – $770 million – would go to a new “Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund,” the president said in his budget plan.

Officials said the bulk of this would be new money, and would be spent on initiatives to support long-term economic, political, and trade reforms for countries in transition such as Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen.

“We’re in a new world. The Arab Spring has come,” said Deputy Secretary of State Tom Nides, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chief budget official.

“We need to make sure we have the tools and flexibility in which to fund these initiatives. … The world is evolving as we see it, and we felt it was important to have a pool of money.”Obama continued the practice of putting proposed foreign assistance for war zones in a separate account. This account, known as the “Overseas Contingency Operations,” includes $8.2 billion for the State Department and foreign aid.

It includes $3.3 billion for Afghanistan, $1 billion for Pakistan, and $4 billion for Iraq, where U.S. troops have left the country but the State Department has picked up some of their functions such as police training.

Overall funding for Iraq declined about 10 percent from the 2012 fiscal year to $4.8 billion.

Assistance for Israel was steady at around $3.1 billion.

Let me try to wrap my head around this.  While Americans face the propect of $4 per gallon gas, the Obama Administration’s  Middle East Policy is to reward the people jacking around with the gas prices, a bunch of murderous barbarians, and ignore our greatest ally?

And they call this Smart Power?

A Greece Fire

If you have paid any attention to International News at all, you are aware that Greece is in the throes of an Economic Crisis, one which Economic Experts and Political Pundits say, may be headed to the United States of America.

Well, things have escalated in that ancient land.  Reuters.com has the details:

The Greek parliament approved a deeply unpopular austerity bill to secure a second EU/IMF bailout and avoid national bankruptcy, as buildings burned across central Athens and violence spread around the country.

Cinemas, cafes, shops and banks were set ablaze in central Athens as black-masked protesters fought riot police outside parliament.

State television reported the violence spread to the tourist islands of Corfu and Crete, the northern city of Thessaloniki and towns in central Greece. Shops were looted in the capital where police said 34 buildings were ablaze.

Prime Minister Lucas Papademos denounced the worst breakdown of order since 2008 when violence gripped Greece for weeks after police shot a 15-year-old schoolboy.

“Vandalism, violence and destruction have no place in a democratic country and won’t be tolerated,” he told parliament as it prepared to vote on the new 130 billion euro bailout to save Greece from a chaotic bankruptcy.

Papademos told lawmakers shortly before they voted that they would be gravely mistaken if they rejected the package that demands deep pay, pension and job cuts, as this would threaten Greece’s place in the European mainstream.

“It would be a huge historical injustice if the country from which European culture sprang … reached bankruptcy and was led, due to one more mistake, to national isolation and national despair,” he said.

The chaos outside parliament showed how tough it will be to implement the measures. A Reuters photographer saw buildings in Athens engulfed in flames and huge plumes of smoke rose in the night sky.

“We are facing destruction. Our country, our home, has become ripe for burning, the centre of Athens is in flames. We cannot allow populism to burn our country down,” conservative lawmaker Costis Hatzidakis told parliament.

The air in Syntagma Square outside parliament was thick with tear gas as riot police fought running battles with youths who smashed marble balustrades and hurled stones and petrol bombs.

Terrified Greeks and tourists fled the rock-strewn streets and the clouds of stinging gas, cramming into hotel lobbies for shelter.

How did one of the cradles of ancient civilization come to resemble the Watts riots?

Dave Backus, of New York University’s Stern Business School, shared his thoughts, e-mailed “on the fly”, with The Economist’s View:

* Debt and deficits. Greece in serious budget trouble, with government debt at 125% of GDP and rising. Confidence in Greece has fallen with repeated upward revisions in deficit estimates, which raise suspicions that the situation is worse than reported.

* Contagion? Greece itself is small, but there’s fear that if Greece defaults or leaves the Euro Zone (or perhaps some other dire event), there could be spillovers to other Euro Zone countries (Italy, Portugal, and Spain lead the list). One version of this is that it would undercut the credibility of the Euro Zone. Member countries have (generally) reduced their borrowing costs by eliminating currency risk, but if investors see membership as reversible, that could change quickly.

* Conditions for help. The policy challenge is to keep the problems in Greece from spreading without creating adverse incentives for other countries. A bailout, for example, might make other countries less likely to resolve their own budget problems (mumble “moral hazard” around now). The traditional solution is some kind of “conditionality,” in which bridge loans are tied to concrete progress on the budget. IMF programs typically have this form, and the NYC bailout in the 1970s did, too. Such conditions solve the budget problem and make bailouts less attractive to other countries. When imposed by an outside agency (the IMF, for example), they may also provide political cover (“they made us do it”).

* Who? The challenge in the EU is that the rules explicitly forbid bailouts, so there’s no natural agency to execute a plan. That leaves us with ad hoc mechanisms (the finance ministers, for example). Or maybe the IMF.

* Euro Zone. It’s an inherently weak structure, since there’s no strong political entity at the top to enforce decisions on member countries.

* Who’s next? There are several other EU countries with budget problems. And in the US, many (most?) states have serious budget problems, California being the biggest one.

Per Money.MSN.com, our country could take a hit from the falling dominoes caused by a Greek default.

Exactly how far the damage would go depends on to which degree that bond markets would punish the bonds of Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain, which, along with Greece, make up the so-called PIIGS group. The exposure of U.S. banks to Greek debt alone is relatively small. But U.S. banks have $670 billion in total exposure to the PIIGS group.

Given the disastrous Domestic Economic Failure that is the Obama Administration, the fallout from a potential European Economic Disaster would be the icing on a very bitter cake.

The Arctic Fox Remains On Point

Fresh off her triumphant Keynote Address at Saturday’s CPAC Convention, Former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace.

FoxNews.com posted this official summary:

Former Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin sat down with “Fox News Sunday” anchor Chris Wallace to discuss the Republican presidential field, President Obama’s chance for reelection, and the current state of the tea party movement.

The former Alaskan governor was in Washington, DC, to be the keynote speaker for the annual CPAC conference. In her speech, Palin called out establishment conservatives. When asked who she was speaking about she explained that it was anyone for the “status quo” or more government. On the Tea Party freshmen members of Congress, who have not had a big role in either house, Palin said she “would like to see them in leadership positions.”

Recently the unemployment rate has ticked down and the president’s approval numbers have ticked up. Many have seen this as a concrete example of how the president will be the favorite heading into November. Palin disagreed by saying, “you ask those 13 million Americans who can’t find a job… they’ll tell you that no, this president and his failed policies should not be favored to win reelection.”

On Saturday Mitt Romney won the Maine Caucuses, ending a recent string of electoral losses. Palin said of Romney, “I think he’s a great candidate.”

Overall Palin stressed that the current field of Republican candidates need to, “all four of them, they need to quit beating each other up.” She continued, “We need to hear from our candidates, solutions. What is their plan?… the discussion needs to continue until we hear that.”

Finally, HBO is set to release their film “Game Change,” which is about the 2008 general election. Actress Julianne Moore plays Governor Palin. When asked what she thought of the impression, Palin replied, “We’re going to call that the Sarah Palin employment act and you guys need to thank me for employing more people, probably, in their imitations of Sarah Palin than the president has put Americans to work.”

What Fox News did not report (mainly, because they’re in the tank for Mitt) is this tasty little morsel that Governor Palin gave to Conservatives to chew on:

“I trust that his idea of conservatism is evolving. And I base this on a pretty moderate past he has had, even in some cases a liberal past,” Sarah Palin said on “FOX News Sunday” this morning.

“I am not convinced,” Palin said of Romney’s conservative claim. “And I don’t think that the majority of GOP and independent voters are convinced, and that is why you don’t see Romney get over that hump.”

“He has spent millions and millions and millions of dollars and hasn’t risen yet,” she added.

Gov. Palin has a point.  Take the Maine Caucus, for example.  As Mediaite.com reports:

Mitt Romney picked up a victory in the Maine caucuses Saturday to rounds of raucous applause, garnering 39% of the vote (2,190 votes). Ron Paul finished second, with 36% (1,996 votes). The Maine victory stems a state losing streak for Romney, who suffered three losses earlier in the week. Rick Santorum finished in third (18%), and Newt Gingrich was in fourth (6%).

In the days leading up to the announcement, the winner was expected to be either Romney or Paul, as Gingrich and Santorum had essentially ignored the state. Romney had planned on taking Saturday day off, according to the Associated Press, but decided to visit two Maine caucus sites instead, in hopes of giving a last-second boost to his chances; the strategy appears to have worked.

Per CNN.com:

Maine’s caucuses are non-binding, meaning the state’s 21 delegates will be allocated later. The state GOP encouraged municipalities to hold their caucuses between February 4 and 11, but some began in late January. One county representing about 2% of the vote was not able to complete its caucuses because of a heavy snowfall.

The contest was open only to registered Republicans, though independents and unregistered voters were able to register as Republicans on Saturday to participate.

Electoral-vote.com presents some food for thought:

Given that Maine is adjacent to New Hampshire, where Romney has a house, and not far from Massachusetts, where he was governor for 4 years, a win of 194 votes can’t really be considered a landslide, but at this point Romney is thankful for all the victories he can get. Noteworthy is that only 5,516 Republicans showed up to vote, even though they had an entire week to do so. In 2008, John McCain got 295,273 votes in Maine, so if we take this as the number of Republicans in Maine, fewer than 2% of Maine Republicans bothered to vote. That does not augur well for turnout in November.

Per usual, Governor Palin is spot on.  The Conservative Base, even in the Northeast, Romney’s stomping grounds, aren’t convinced of “The Legacy’s” Conservative credentials, and are certainly not very excited that he’s being pushed down our throats by the GOP Establishment.

Conversely, whenever Governor Palin speaks, the Conservative Base stands up and cheers, as was witnessed several times during her Keynote Address at CPAC.

It’s almost like America is a Center-Right nation…or sumpin’.

 

Sarah Palin at CPAC: Draining the Jacuzzi and Throwing the Bums Out With the Bathwater

Saturday, February 11, 2012, a little after 3:0 p.m. Central, a remarkable lady gave a remarkable speech, as the Keynote Speaker at CPAC 2012.

Here is a summary from the American Conservative Union’s website:

Before a jam-packed crowd, with hundreds more watching on monitors in the convention center hallways and overflow rooms, Palin attacked the Obama economic agenda from many angles.She identified the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a key culprit in destruction of jobs in America. Instead of developing America’s own homegrown resources, the EPA has put the country in a position where it must rely upon dubious foreign sources, she said. And the EPA makes it difficult for businesses trying to expand although, Palin noted wryly, the EPA never seems to block the construction of new government buildings in Washington D.C.

“Instead of calling Washington D.C. a swamp, call it a wetland,” she said. That would be one way to slow the march of government, she suggested.

Palin also took aim at “crony capitalism,” which she said, was growing the size of government at the expense of average Americans.

“The politicians arrive as men and women (in Washington D.C.) and they become plutocrats. And they spread the wealth around to their pals.”

Palin also reminded audience members that CPAC was initiated by conservative activists who were out to remake the Republican Party. Reagan called for “bold colors, not pale pastels,” she said.

There is a certain paradox at work in the current political cycle, Palin said. “The conservative movement has never been stronger or brighter, yet the federal government has never cast a bigger shadow.”

The Tea Party has momentum because “the American people have woken up” to the dangers of big government, she said.

If the country continues on a path where policy makers attempt to tax and spend their way into prosperity, the future of America will look more like the old world rather than the new world.

“That’s the dream of the far Left, not the American dream,” she said.

Never before in American history has there ever been such a division between how the president views the “state of the union” and how average Americans view the “state of the union,” she said.

In history of our republic between how our own president sees Americans see state of union and Americans he’s elected to serve see state of the union, Palin told audience members.

Unlike President Obama, Republicans are looking to free markets and to long-standing constitutional principles, she said.

“His plan isn’t winning the future, it’s losing the country.”

What the ACU doesn’t tell you is that during the speech, she also subtly called out the winner of this year’s CPAC Straw Poll, Mitt “The Legacy” Romney:

Devonia Smith, of examiner.com reports that Governor Palin said,

“Our candidate must be someone who can instinctively turn right.” Sarah stressed that conservationism is not something a candidate learns running for office, adding, “It’s either there or it isn’t.”

And the jury’s still out on “The Legacy”.

Governor Palin continued with her stemwinder of a Keynote Address…

 …Palin hit all the hot buttons issues while slamming President Obama. The audience stood longest and cheered loudest following her shout-out to Israel, when she slammed Obama as a weak Commander in Chief, vowing, “We will refuse to accept that a weak America means a better safer world.” A president’s job is protecting “… America people and our allies. God bless Israel! (Related: Sarah Palin: Obama is ‘our temporary leader’ Israel is our lasting friend)

Rolling her eyes, shrugging, gesturing, Palin recounted the rise of the Tea Party, “because Americans woke up.” After three years of the Obama administration, Sarah underlined his chance was at a close because “We can afford no more — he mucked it up!”

Speaking of “mucking things up”, Buzzfeed.com reports that some protesters tried to disrupt Governor Palin’s speech, but got more than they bargained for:

A few protesters mic-checked Sarah Palin’s keynote speech at CPAC today but didn’t last long. Nothing could touch Palin, who had the crowd on their feet for large portions of her speech.

The protesters in the back of the room yelled “Mic-check!” and were immediately greeted with a standing crowd — and Palin herself — chanting “USA, USA.” Security quickly whisked them out of the room.

“We just won — see how easy that is,” Palin said after they’d gone.

One of her more memorable metaphors of the afternoon was aimed at the tone-deafness of the current Administration and Congress.  Governor Palin remarked that it was time that “we drain the jacuzzi and throw out the bums with the bathwater”.

Even though Governor Palin did make a dig at “The Legacy”, she had an important message for Conservatives, as CBS.com reported:

Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin gave her marching orders to the Republican base at the Conservative Poilitical Action Conference here on Saturday, telling conservatives to “stand united” around the eventual Republican presidential nominee to defeat President Obama.

“We must stand as conservatives,” Palin said to a rousing standing ovation. “For the sake of our party, we must stand united with whoever our nominee is.”

Palin steered clear of directly injecting herself into the Republican fight for the nomination, declining to endorse a candidate.

“In America we believe that competition strengthens us. Competition elevates our name,” Palin told the CPAC crowd. “Competition will lead us to victory in 2012. We must stay true to our principles. I believe that the competition has gotta keep going but let’s make sure this competition brings out the best in our party.”

Governor Palin’s absolutely right.  This competition must continue, in order to prepare the eventual Republican Candidate for the withering firestorm of insults, falsehoods, and downright dirty politics that they will be forced to endure from the Re-election Campaign of President Barack Hussein Obama and his minions in the Main Stream Media.

Too bad the best Republican Candidate is sitting this one out.

Tags:  Sarah Palin, CPAC, Conservative