A Whole New Netbook Market May Rain On Microsoft’s Parade

Microsoft, the bloated multi-billion dollar software company, has ultimately controlled the personal computer market in one way or another for years. Now it is grudgingly losing its grip a bit, but not by much . . . yet.

Most recently, it was Microsoft that was mostly responsible for limiting the growth and development of the netbook computer market. They did that through threats to computer manufactures and sellers and by providing Windows XP very cheap for the netbooks so better Linux operating systems would not be developed and used.

After all, when the first netbook, the little Eee PC, came to market it used a very efficient and easy to use form of Linux and that obviously frightened the hell out of the management at Microsoft. The Eee PC was fast and “easy” to learn to use, unlike Windows. So, Microsoft soon went into protection mode by telling manufactures and sellers that they would sell them a subset of Windows XP Home Basic dirt cheap if they would keep their netbooks’ functions to a strict minimum.

That mostly worked, to the detriment of development on netbooks. Manufactures used Linux less and all but a very few Chinese netbook computers were offered with “lower” processing speeds and somewhat diminished graphics than today’s technology could provide for about the same price.

But, that was then and this is now. Things have been changing considerably these past few weeks.

For instance, Microsoft is ready to release the new Windows 7, which they say is much faster and more efficient than Vista or XP. It can also come with touch-screen availability. And . . . Microsoft will allow any version of Windows 7 to be run on netbook computers. Of course, Microsoft will also sell Windows 7 at full price (to most of us). That’s why they will allow it to be used on netbooks, after all.

This week, Intel announced what may very well be a very efficient quad-core processor for laptops (core i7) and a slightly lower power version for netbooks. Intel also has a new chipset for graphics that sounds great and we’ll assume that it is intended to work with the new quad-processor. Of course, these new Intel processors will be rather expensive for a while. But other chip manufactures are gearing up to offer lower priced multi-core processors and good graphics systems for netbook computers, too, so the consumer will win because of that competition.

There have also been a few reports that netbook manufactures have been ordering a lot of the newer style touch screens that are between 10 and 12 inches. That’s also very good news for consumers! Quantity orders, after all, also work to keep prices down.

This means, now that Microsoft again seems to feel it can make its bucks from almost every computer sold, they will “allow” the manufactures to develop netbooks to their fullest potential. And so it is happening -- quickly, too.

So, let’s put this all together for the netbook product that interests most of us:

By this time next year we should see the real netbook computer that I want on the market for well under $500 each, and there will be many brands (competition driving down price!) from which to choose.

The one I will buy will have an 11.6 to 12 inch touch-screen and a great keyboard. It will have a relatively fast duel or quad processor and at lest 2 GB of RAM, with a somewhat large hard drive. Of course, there will also be a few USB ports and a good memory card-reader. It will also sport a large, multi-touch mouse-pad and have very good Wi-Fi. Truthfully, I do not care what operating system it runs, as long as it quickly performs the dozen or so functions for which I normally use a computer.

Those who will have such a netbook computer ported to one of the cell-phone networks so they can connect anywhere might also run an iteration of Android on the side with a fancy GPS system and all the Google “street” and “earth” goodies. I sure would!

Sure, early on the new Microsoft operating system will certainly reign king on these new netbooks, keeping the prices too high for many buyers. But, sitting in the background, quietly waiting, are a few hundred developers for operating systems like Android, Moblin, Chrome, and various distributions of Linux, who also have a great deal to offer for the new netbooks. Unlike the Microsoft Windows 7 operating system, these operating systems will mostly be free, which will cut the end-user price of the more powerful netbooks considerably.

As I wrote above: As long as it’s easy to use and does everything I want, why should I care what operating system my new netbook runs? The fact is, I don’t! And, many of the these other operating systems will be designed to be much easier to use than any version of Windows. Besides, the price is right. . . .

Hence, I see a very well appointed netbook – a fast and efficient netbook – in my future within the next few months. The cost will be less than almost any laptop available. The only downside is that it probably will not have a CD/DVD drive included, so I may have to purchase an inexpensive outboard at some point. And, chances are great that it will not be running Windows, which doesn’t break my heart at all. Because, I should mention here, like the Linux based Eee PC netbooks, the “free” open source operating systems also have lots of “free” software available for those who wish to download some. And that is over and above all the great stuff that already comes with the initial package when you buy the computer running one of these alternative operating systems

Will Microsoft lower prices to stay in competition? They will probably have to. But, don’t look for that to happen anytime soon. Meanwhile, watch how an open and competitive netbook market provides quality computers at reasonable prices. Then, a little later, notice how that exerts pressure on the laptop market. Those positive pricing and quality changes may only take a few months. Actually, it’s starting now; but few have noticed yet.

Rent-a-Mob Socialists Activated Yet Again

Heck, I can remember when Town Hall meetings with the Congresscritter used to be interesting. Lately, though, some are becoming dangerous places to be. 

In the mostly blue collar town of Romulus, Michigan, Rep,. John Dingle (D-MI) was greeted by jeers (from Democrats, no less!) at an over-packed town hall meeting when he stated support for socialized government medicine.  Dingle actually had police remove some of the folks speaking against the scheme.

It’s disheartening to see that the Socialist-Democrats are back to hiring the “rent-a-mob” thugs from the unions and ACORN again. Yup, just like the Nazi Brown Shirts, these jerks are sent in to do whatever they can to disrupt the gatherings so nothing of substance can be discussed.

Think about the dichotomy here: 90% of the union workers around the country already have great health insurance provided by their employer. So, why the hell would they disrupt town hall meetings and say they support a government medical plan operated by federal regulators? Fact is, they do not really support the government operated health insurance scheme; the thugs are paid to be there and disrupt those who are against the government socialized medical insurance plan.

In every election cycle, those far left leaders of the unions, and other socialist-leaning groups, pony up hundreds of millions of dollars in what is called “walking around money” for far left activists. Much of that money is used for paraphernalia, food and booze, as well as busses and phone banks -- and to pay disrupting thugs. In other words, it is used to pay those leftist-liberal activists we see out there and bus then around to wherever they are most needed. You didn’t think they were doing that gratis, did you?

Worse, many of the leftovers from the Clinton cabal formed “non-profit” political activist groups that have collected hundreds of millions of dollars in donations. Not only do they support socialist candidates for office, they also pay rent-a-mobs and activist groups to do whatever possible to support socialist programs.

Most of that flow of cash is actually illegal as hell, but prosecutors fear doing anything about it because that system is well entrenched within the leftist factions and the Democrat Party. So, illegal, in this case, is conveniently overlooked. The Democrats in Congress even fixed it so ACORN receives a lot of taxpayer funding to support unconstitutional and socialist programs.

Someday, conservative folks might catch on and fight back with like action. But, currently, there are no conservative groups doing anything like that.

Every person seen at any meeting speaking against government regulated socialized medicine is there on their own time and speaking their own mind. The interesting point is that conservatives are smartening up and that is why they greatly outnumber the rent-a-mob thugs at all meetings. The problem is that they still allow the thugs to make more noise and disrupt things.

However, conservatives are slowly catching on. So, some of this may start changing soon. I just hope things don’t get too rough.

More Waste of Funds in our High-Living Congress

The “Elected Ones” are at it again.  By that, I mean that they are spending hundreds of million of taxpayer dollars just to make life more comfortable for themselves.

There are commercial airlines flying all over the globe and all of these commercial airlines have cushy first-class accommodations for the wealthy.  However, apparently these cushy first-class accommodations are not good enough for the elected ones in Congress.  They want better.

Today, Rollcall (a D.C. newspaper that watches Congress) published an article indicating that the “House Orders Up Three Elite Jets”:

At the end of July, the House approved nearly $200 million for the Air Force to buy three elite Gulfstream jets for ferrying top government officials and Members of Congress.

…

The Gulfstream G550 is a luxury business jet, which the company advertises as featuring long-range flight capacity that “easily links Washington, D.C., with Dubai, London with Singapore and Tokyo with Paris.”  The company’s promotional materials say, “The cabin aboard the G550 combines productivity with exceptional comfort.  It features up to four distinct living areas, three temperature zones, a choice of 12 floor plan configurations with seating for up to 18 passengers.”

This is the very same Congress that chastised the captains of the auto industry for flying private jets.  Yet, the Congresscritters want to be able to fly themselves -- along with their staff and families -- around the world on those dubious “fact finding” trips (read golf, dinners and beach) in the ultimate of luxury.

Yup, they spout that the nation (and government) has fell on hard times, and then they spend $200-million on even more luxury jets for their own use.  Worse, this is just one instance of many. . . .

Isn’t it time we hired some adults to take their places?  Think about it, because this is the time we voters should start looking for good candidates for next year’s primary election -- and start whipping up support for our chosen candidates.

About that Socialist Proposal for Federal Health Care

Apparently Hillary Care lives, and has grown even more onerous this time around. One bright light in the newly proposed Marxist/socialist mess that would be government controlled health care is that many of the really bright lights in the medical community are again coming out in opposition.

Here’s a question that must be answered: Anyone see any authority in the Constitution authorizing the federal government to regulate health care in any way whatsoever? Nope. Of course not, because there is none! Therefore, they should keep their nose out of it completely. Nonetheless, Obama has a plan to do away with the insurance companies and make all health care government owned and operated. And, we can believe that to be true because he said so specifically.

Toker-about-town, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), isn’t known for being too bright but had the correct approach to federal government controlled health care. Conyers proposed a Constitutional amendment making health care a “right”. That will never pass, of course, but at least it’s the proper way for the federal government to get the authority to do such things.

Anyway, Congress has two legal laboratories with which to try such a scheme legally and should show us how good it is by making the plan work there for a few years first:

There are millions of federal employees (including everyone in Congress -- but not the military) who should try their proposed health care system first. Also, the Constitution gives Congress all plenary authority over the District of Columbia, which would also be a great test for the proposed system. This would give federal regulators a few years to get the kinks out (or scrap it completely) before it is imposed on everyone in the nation.

After all, the federal government has a strong history of messing up nearly everything it touches and we cannot expect it to do any better with health care. So, they’ll need some practice before instituting a nation-wide program. Let’s repeatedly suggest that to any available official and see how they like it.

Meanwhile, the White House is officially asking for snitches:

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we are asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

Ahem . . . Okay then, perhaps we should send them mail, both pro and con. But, to be sure, we should send them mail anytime we hear a politician spouting off untruths about the proposed socialist health care plan -- along with an actual quote from the bill showing how said politician was wrong. And yes, we should also publish it on the net for all to see.

Sure, this is a serious matter. But, that’s not to say that we can’t also use it to have a little fun messing with the socialist heads of the political types along the way by forcing them to participate in the scheme first. Because, if it’s not good enough for them now, it’s most certainly not good enough for the rest of us later.

Tell them so.  Repeatedly.

Rep. Conyers admits to negligence in Congress

Yet again, the Congressman from Detroit shows his utter disrespect for his position in government and his complete disregard for the wellbeing of his constituents back home.  Worse, this jerk is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, too.

Yesterday, CNSNews.com and others reported:

During his speech at a National Press Club luncheon, House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), questioned the point of lawmakers reading the health care bill.

“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Conyers.

“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”

Remember, now, Conyers has been in Congress for a couple decades and currently chairs the House Judiciary Committee.  So, one would think, he is probably trained well enough to know his job description.

It is both the duty and responsibility of each member of congress to read and understand every aspect of every bill long before voting on it.  If they do not, then simply put, they are negligent and should be charged as such.

What Should Happen When a Judge Lies under Oath?

We all could guess, easily, that any judge knows damn well that it is against the law to lie while testifying when under oath. Most judges will get you for that and cause unpleasant circumstances for your person and/or your bank account.

So . . . what do we do with a judge who blatantly lies while they are under oath? Should they be promoted to a higher position? Should they be charged with the felony and taken off of the bench completely? What?

The instant topic, of course, is Judge Sonia Sotomayor and her Senate hearing for the Supreme Court. According to Fox News yesterday:

She said her work as a judge for 17 years does not show any "liberal instincts" in the cases she officiated over. "If he was talking about the fact that I served on a particular board that promoted equal opportunity for people, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, then you could talk about that being a liberal instinct in the sense that I promote equal opportunity in America and the attempts to assure that," Sotomayor said.

Sigh . . . I guess she thinks that her opposition to Constitutional rights, like our Second Amendment rights, our right to freely contract, and her propensity for supporting special rights for special groups, doesn’t count as liberal positions for the purpose of the Supreme Court hearings.

Senate Republican turncoat Arlen Specter was quoted saying that his fear is that Sonia Sotomayor may say one thing at her confirmation hearing and do another as the next Supreme Court justice. Really? Wow, such insight from a Democrat, eh?

"Is there anything the Senate or Congress can do if a nominee says one thing seated at that table and does something exactly the opposite once they walk across the street?" he asked Sotomayor Wednesday during Day 3 of her confirmation hearings as she seeks to become the first Hispanic to sit on the high court.

Yes, Senator, there is something that should be done: Charge her with perjury for all the lies she has already told while under oath and kick her butt out of the judiciary forevermore. After all, she has an extensive written record to fall back on.

Have you no ethics whatsoever in the Senate? Don’t you even care when judges tell obvious lies while under oath?

Oh wait . . . I guess y’all answered my ethics question during the Clinton impeachment trial, huh.

Why All Those Socialist-leaning Bills in Congress This Year?

In January of 2007 the House of Representatives for the 110^th Congress voted 233-202 to elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as Speaker of the House.  She was elected on a strictly party-line (unanimous) roll call vote.  This action by the Democrats was, of course, an outward sign that the Democrat Party was finally acting under their true political colors.  The problem was that, because of our very liberal mainstream media, the underline reason was hushed up and few American voters noticed.

Nancy Pelosi, of course, has been a long term member, and served on the executive committee, of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is actually an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

So, let’s take a moment to see what type of mischief these card-carrying socialist in Congress have the ability to get into.  According to the Progressive Caucus web site:

The Co-Chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, U.S. Representatives Raúl M. Grijalva and Lynn Woolsey, welcome your interest in the growing Progressive Caucus.  Our Caucus Members want to do more than speak out against extremism from the Right.  We want to take on the Bush Administration's agenda by providing a comprehensive, thoughtful, progressive alternative -- what we call The Progressive Promise -- Fairness for All (PDF).

So, let’s look at the Progressive Caucus leadership.  The Co-Chairs are:

Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ) – a member of the Committee on Education and Labor and the Committee on Natural Resources.  He pushes socialized medicine.

Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) – sits on the Committee on Education and Labor and chairs the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.  She is also on the Committee on Science and Technology.

There are seven Progressive Caucus Vice-Chairs:

Diane Watson (D-CA) -- sits on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and chairs the Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement.  She also sits on the on the Subcommittee for Domestic Policy and the Subcommittee for  Information Policy, Census, and National Archives, and the House Foreign Affairs Committee.  She chairs the Congressional Entertainment Industries Caucus and is a Co-Chair of the Korean Caucus

Keith Ellison (D-MN) -- serves on the Financial Services and Foreign Affairs Committees.

Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) -- sits on The Committee on the Judiciary, The Committee on Homeland Security and The Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mazie Hirono (D-HI) – sits on Education and Labor Committee and the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) -- Chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.  He is also a member of the Education and Labor Committee.

Donna F. Edwards (D-MD) -- serves on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee where she sits on the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit,  Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, and the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.

Alan Grayson (D-FL) -- sits on the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittees of both the House Financial Services Committee and the House Science and Technology Committee.

There are also seventy-some other House members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, as well as two senators.  Many of these members, such as John Conyers (D-MI), chair important committees and sub-committees.   More on that later, as time allows. 

Background on the Democrat’s Activities in Congress

Everyone seems to have their favorite conspiracies nowadays and we get "alerted" to four or five new ones a week. So, herein, we shall not be starting yet another. Nonetheless, there really is a well entrenched political organization active in Congress whose goal is to unabashedly reorganize life in the United States as we know it. This group is not at all secret, either; it just never gets much press. Yet, they hold semipublic meetings in our nation's Capitol and everyone in the Washington press corps know about them.

Fifty years ago, most members of Congress would have quickly labeled the goals and activities of groups like this as "un-American activities." Today, all the members of the group in question are members of the Democrat Party, as well as members of Congress.

So, while this cannot be labeled as a secret conspiracy, there really is a workable plan afoot that put the leadership of many of the important committees in Congress in the hands of people with decidedly un-American intentions.

We’re talking about the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Seventy -some members of the House actively belong to the Progressive Caucus (including the Speaker of the House) and herein is part of what drives and defines that segment of the Democrat Party.

The Progressive Caucus is actually an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Their web page was even hosted by DSA until we (and then others) exposed them in a newsletter a few years ago. Originally, their web page was operated by the avowed socialist Representative from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, and the Progressive Caucus was labeled as the affiliated arm of the DSA in Congress.

And, according to them: "DSA is the largest US affiliate of the Socialist International (SI), the worldwide organization of 140 socialist, social democratic and labor parties. The SI has the distinction of being the largest political organization in the world."

Some folks might correctly remember that the SI membership included well known politicians like Josef Stalin, Friedrich Engels, V.I. Lenin, and Leon Trotsky. That probably explains why so many of the planks of the Communist Manifesto are included in the Democrat Party's platform and are the expressed goals of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Again, they prove that with their own words. The think tank of the Progressive Caucus is The Progressive Challenge -- The Institute for Policy Studies. The progressive Challenge bills itself as: "Linking grassroots activists, scholars, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus toward a multi-issue movement for fairness and justice for all." It is also aligned with the DSA.

As their introduction states:

The Congressional Progressive Caucus, the Institute for Policy Studies and countless national and community organizations and citizens around the country have been fighting tirelessly for a Fairness Agenda for America -- for a redirecting of national priorities toward fairness and economic justice.

Their "Fairness Agenda" comes as close to calling for the implication of all planks of the Communist Manifesto (those not already written into law) as they dare at the moment.

The Progressive Caucus and Progress Challenge support the Transnational Institute, which has yet another interesting take on socialism in the United States and worldwide.

Studying the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and these associated groups, will provide great insight on what is happening in Congress today and why.

More on this coming up soon. . . .

The Negligence of the House

If you hire someone, provide them with a nice office suite and large staff, a huge expense account, and plenty of benefits, wouldn't you expect them to at least try to do their job properly? Well then, tell them so because, in this case, you are supposed to be their boss.

It seems that the majority of the members of the House of Representatives are more reprehensive than representative. Actually, many of us would call them just plain negligent! Not only do they pass bills that are blatantly unconstitutional, they also pass major legislation without even knowing the full impact on the American public.

How can we make such an accusation? Easy. They sometimes vote on bills that were not even fully written yet so there is no way they could have studied and understood the full impact on the legislation on the American people.

Take, for instance, that obnoxious “cap-and-trade” bill. Nancy Pelosi and her negligent band of Democrats in the “people’s House” really stuck it to us with that bill. All proposed legislation should be posted on the net for all Americans to see before it is voted on. But, that’s kind of hard to do when the legislation is not yet written. Worse, as The Washington Times editorialized today:

Welcome to Speaker Nancy Pelosi's House of Representatives. The "people's House" is now a place where bills are voted on not only before legislators or the public have read them, but also before parts of the bills even have been written. Such was the case with a 300-page amendment to the cap-and-trade bill the House passed on June 26. The House leadership could not even produce this amendment on paper, in final form, before it was voted on.

So, how the did the majority of the House know what the hell they were voting on and how it would affect commerce in these United States and impact on the expenses of American families? Fact is, they didn’t and couldn’t!

As also reported by The Washington Times, there’s a citizen’s group attempting to correct this outrageous legislative negligence:

In response to that and other recent outrageous infringements of real representative democracy, a group called Let Freedom Ring is pushing all 435 members of Congress and 100 senators to sign a pledge against such shenanigans on any health care reform bill Congress considers.

We agree with The Washington Times and Let Freedom Ring that “all 535 of them ought to do so” for ALL legislation. Let’s tell them so.

Polls Starting to Favor Republicans

We can tell how obvious a situation is becoming when even the liberal media Obama propagandists and their polling companies start mentioning it.  And, this political situation is serious enough to get all those socialists in the leadership of the Democrat Party to start getting their Prozac and Zantac prescriptions doubled and refilled.

The “why” of the situation is easy.  Democrats gave away a couple Trillion dollars of our money to prop up quite a few banks, stock and bond traders and private businesses that appeared to be falling on hard times simply because of their own risky actions. 

Of course, many voters also noticed the news last week when, “Members of US House Financial Services Committee Snapped Up or Dumped Bank Stocks as Bottom Fell Out of Market.”  Yeah, not only were legislators and aides on Capitol Hill unconstitutionally involved in schemes to allow the federal government to control many aspects of banking and industry, a number of them were also using this inside information to bet on the stock and bond markets against the instant results of Congress’ actions .  In industry, that would be illegal.  Not for our self-exalted professional legislators though, eh?

Then there’s all the talk of massive budget deficits leaving certain tax increases for our children and grand-children and the rumblings of large tax increases for us next year.  Add into the mix the administration wanting to socialize medicine and their seemingly adamant attempt to control all forms of energy consumption under the false flag of “fighting” global warming.  So, it’s no surprise when Rasmussen reported yesterday that “Just 18% of U.S. voters now say Congress is doing a good or excellent job, down from 23% in May.”  And, again this week, Rasmussen reports that “Republicans Lead Again on Congressional Ballot.”

The correction for some of this, of course, will be to elect some right thinking adults -- in the form of new Republican blood -- to Congress next year and both Rasmussen and Gallup (the far-left’s favorite pollster) are starting to indicate that is likely to happen.  Hence, my remark above that the socialists in the leadership of the Democrat Party are starting to refill their Prozac and Zantac prescriptions.

Yesterday, Gallup reported that “More Americans See Democratic Party as ‘Too Liberal’.” 

A Gallup Poll finds a statistically significant increase since last year in the percentage of Americans who describe the Democratic Party's views as being "too liberal," from 39% to 46%. This is the largest percentage saying so since November 1994, after the party's losses in that year's midterm elections.

Well, Duh. . . !  Democrats are acting like a bunch of Third World socialists and they expect most of the American voters to approve?   Sorry, but this will not happen.  A slim majority bought into the snake-oil style rhetoric of Obama and his band of social-Democrats during the last election cycle.  But, now that these voters have a moment to see and think about the actions associated with those words there’s a minor revolt brewing.

The revolt, of course, will favor Republican candidates next year.  Better yet, if we see these numbers top 50% favoring Republicans, there could be a major wipe-out in Congress next year and Obama will be yet another failed one-term presidency.

Cap-and-Trade is Tax and Regulate

When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor of the House Friday night, Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) told The Hill, "Hey, people deserve to know what's in this pile of shit."

Rep. Boehner labeled it correctly in one word.  Even so, there’s a bit of background to this story that readers may find interesting.  For instance, the leadership over at EPA is intentionally lying to the American people about CO2 “pollution”.

Judson Berger at Fox News reported that “Sen. Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report,” which should get every good American’s blood boiling after the House passing that stupid Cap-and-Trade bill last week:

A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it." 

The controversy comes after the House of Representatives passed a landmark bill to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one that Inhofe said will be "dead on arrival" in the Senate despite President Obama's energy adviser voicing confidence in the measure.

But wait . . . there’s even more recent “news” about this foolishness of trying to limit the amount of “carbon” dioxide available to carbon based life in a carbon based world.  In the words of Dr. Tim Ball, an environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, “An energy policy built on the lie that human CO2 is causing global warming is likely to fail.  It is a bigger lie when CO2 is incorrectly called carbon.”  That in itself is real food for thought, but then Professor Ball goes on the clarify a little: 

A scientific definition of carbon dioxide (CO2) is; a colorless, odorless gas produced by burning carbon and organic compounds and by respiration.  So basically carbon is a solid and CO2 is a gas. They claim CO2 can slow heat escape from the atmosphere and an increase from human activity causes warming. It has not happened at any time and is not happening now. Carbon occurs as particles of soot in the atmosphere causing cooling by blocking sunlight. I expect them to blame soot for failure of their warming predictions.

What we’ve got here is an administration wanting a reason for harsh regulations and instructing an administrative agency to insure it happens.  Then the House came along to pass a draconian cap-and-trade bill where, as it seems, every socialist Democrat in the place added in their favorite control legislation, just because they could.  Now we see that even EPA’s own people do not believe any of that is necessary -- and the whole concept is a big scam, anyway.

Why is this all getting shoved into federal law and regulation in such a hurry?  Easy.  One needs only to follow the money trail.

The legislation/regulation has many wealthy lobbyists enticing legislators and regulators to get this “cap and trade” scheme to be the law of the land simply because there is money to be made from it.  Lots of money.  In fact, a very lot of money!   As any thinking person knows, none of this foolishness has anything whatsoever to do with global warming.  It’s just a way for traders to levy a hidden tax and make money from the misfortune of many million of other unsuspecting Americans.  The Democrats (and a few Republicans) in Washington are making that all possible. 

The Tax and Spend Obama Administration

The Rasmussen Reports indicated today that, More Voters See Their Taxes Increasing Under Obama, and this ain’t funny.

Thirty-nine percent (39%) of likely voters now expect their personal taxes to rise under the Obama administration, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

That's up three points over the past two weeks,up eight points since the inauguration, and the highest level of concern measured to date.

Some of the liberal pollsters are saying that President B. Hussein Obama’s approval numbers are rather good because he’s still in the honeymooned period. But, as Rasmussen points out, “During last fall's campaign, then-candidate Obama pledged to cut taxes for 95% of Americans. Just 26% of voters believe he has kept that promise.” That, of course, makes me wonder just how some of the pollsters are deriving their numbers -- by polling the stay at home ACORN rent-a-mob socialist constituency in the early afternoon, maybe?

There are rumblings in the halls of Congress that the socialist-Democrats want a large hike in automobile fuel tax and they’ve already stuck a huge tax increase on tobacco products. Such taxes impact largely on the poor and those with fixed incomes, the very same folks these liberals in Washington need to stay in office. Now they propose that draconian Waxman-Markey bill that will be a huge energy tax on all sectors of society. And, of course, they propose bills that will “close some loopholes” (read, restrict freedom) in the income tax law.

Interestingly enough, Rasmussen reports that “only 10% now say they expect their personal taxes to decrease under Obama.” Which means, put another way, 90% of voters fully expect Obama to break his major campaign pledge to cut taxes for 95% of Americans.

It gets worse, though. That trillion or so of federal dollars that were used for stimulus packages didn’t come out of thin air. Nope! And they didn’t just go out back where the money trees grow and pick it. They invented it out of thin air, as in printing new money to pass around.

Well, that is in effect a tax on all of us. Because, when government adds more money into the system like that the result is to devalue the money that is already there and cause inflation. That inflation will start hitting hard on low income families and those on fixed incomes by the end of this year and may kick in full-force by this time next year. Watch the food lines for the poor swell for outward evidence of that.

The way President B. Hussein Obama is going, he’ll soon be making Jimmy Carter look like a moderate.

The Anti-American Waxman-Markey Bill

Talk about the Mother of All Tax Increase -- here’s part of an alert from Myron Ebell, Director of Energy and Global Warming Policy, at the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.:

House Democratic leaders plan to bring to the floor this week the Waxman-Markey energy-rationing bill, H. R. 2454. If enacted, Waxman-Markey would be the biggest tax increase in the history of the world and the biggest government intervention in people’s lives since the Second World War, which is the last time that Americans needed ration coupons to buy gasoline, food, and other necessities. The energy price increases required by H. R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, are not a one-time event, but will go up steadily year after year until at least 2050.

Yeah, unfortunately it’s true. In the name of fighting global warming, Democrats like Pelosi and Waxman want to stick us with a draconian (and blatantly unconstitutional, I might add) energy tax and rationing plan -- even though large countries like China and India have already said there is no way they would buy into any such foolishness.

The best point was made over at the Green Hell Blog where they rightfully wonder if this “is the most intellectually-and morally-corrupt bill ever seriously considered by Congress.” I would say that H.R. 2454 is most certainly one of the worst pieces of legislation for the economics of our nation since FDR started up all those regulatory agencies and rammed the scheme past the Supreme Court by threatening court packing. Already President B. Hussein Obama jumped in to make matters worse by ordering the EPA to declare carbon dioxide -- something all humans and animals exhale and that plants need to grow -- a threat to the public welfare.

Oh, and where’s the global warming? Well, now that the sun spots are down to a minimum, we’re starting to experience global cooling. But, there’s big bucks and more central government power to be had from these global warming schemes, so that’s the name of that story.

We have an election coming up in 18 months. If a lot of us work together, perhaps we can get some clear thinking people in the halls of Congress and through the central planning socialist-Democrats out. For the future of out great country, I surely hope so.

Taking an Irate TSA agent to Task

It seems that the Transportation Security Administration can get a little overbearing and intrusive. And, at least one time, a quick-thinking airline passenger recorded the conversation with TSA agents when he was inappropriately singled out for close inspection. The results are interesting, as Jim Salter of AP reported in “Suit accuses TSA of unreasonable airport detention”:

A lawsuit filed Thursday against the Transportation Security Administration alleges a Ron Paul supporter was unreasonably detained at the St. Louis airport because he was carrying about $4,700 in cash.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of Steven Bierfeldt, director of development for the Campaign for Liberty, an organization that grew out of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign.

The organization had hosted an event in St. Louis that included the sale of tickets, T-shirts, stickers and other materials and Bierfeldt said he was carrying the cash proceeds in a metal box when he was detained at Lambert Airport for about 30 minutes on March 29.

As reported, the lawsuit does not seek money but asks the court to declare the TSA's actions unconstitutional and to prohibit the agency from similar searches, which would probably be a very good ruling for many reasons.

"It's obviously important that the safety of flights be ensured," Bierfeldt said in a telephone interview (with AP). "But subjecting innocent travelers like me who are doing nothing wrong -- I think it diverts TSA away from its core mission of safeguarding air travel."

Now, it’s not very often that I agree with the ACLU, but there are a few important points to be made with this lawsuit. It’s called our Right of Personal Liberty -- "This consists in the power of locomotion, of changing situation, of moving one's person to whatever place one's own inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint, unless by course of law," as Sir William Blackstone identified in the Absolute Rights of Individuals section of his Blackstone’s Commentaries many years ago.

The UPI report of the incident was also interesting:

The ACLU said in a news release its lawsuit accuses the federal agency of subjecting travelers to illegal searches by TSA agents at airports throughout the United States.

"Airport searches are the most common encounters between Americans and law enforcement agents. That's why it is so important for TSA agents to do the job they were trained to do and not engage in fishing expeditions that do nothing to promote flight safety," Ben Wizner, ACLU National Security Project staff attorney, alleges.

CNN posted part of the conversation Bierfeldt had with an over-active agent:

"I asked them, 'Am I required by law to tell you what you're asking me? Am I required to tell you where I am working? Am I required to tell you how I got the cash? Nothing I've done is suspicious. I'm not breaking any laws. I just want to go to my flight. Please advise me as to my rights.' And they didn't."

The New Yorker also wrote about the incident, labeling Bierfeldt as a “Libertarian,” as if there is something wrong with that. But, they did offer a little more information, as well as a link to the complete conversation between Bierfeldt and the over-acting TSA agent:

Libertarians can be fun, and the case of Bierfeldt v. Napolitano, filed yesterday, has many appealing aspects. First, the premise: a Ron Paul operative teams up with the A.C.L.U. to challenge the practices of the Transportation Security Administration. Second, the action: Steven Bierfeldt, after passing through an X-ray checkpoint with a metal box containing $4700 from the sale of T-shirts and literature at a Ron Paul-related event, is taken to a small room by T.S.A. agents who want to know who he works for, the source of the money, where he’s “from originally,” and, generally, what he’s all about. (It is, by the way, perfectly legal to carry that amount of money on a domestic flight.)

Third, and perhaps best of all, the soundtrack: Bierfeldt, who is twenty-five, recorded his half-hour detention on his iPhone. The A.C.L.U. has posted the audio. We get to hear Bierfeldt repeatedly, politely, and sensibly asking, “Am I legally required to answer that question?”-- and never getting a real reply.

The good part is that this case is probably not going to go away until resolved. The bad part is that there are many other overbearing government agents around and very few innocent citizens are willing to make an official complaint about their wrongdoing.

Blog Speech to be Restricted by FTC

First let me say that I have never once received any type of payment, either goods or money, for anything I published for the past decade. Truth be told, at present, I would like to change that, but it hasn’t started to happen yet.

Now I see that the Federal Trade Commission is going after bloggers who write about products. PCWorld broke the news today in an article titled, “FTC Eyes Blogs for Conflicts of Interest.” Therein, Brennon Slattery reports:

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission wants to crack down on this, the latest form of payola, as part of its longstanding charge to protect consumers from false and misleading advertising. In order to do so, the organization proposes searching blogs for misleading information and failure to publicize potential conflicts of interest. That means any blog that reviews products -- whether it is padded by corporations or not -- is subject to a thorough examination.

FTC’s proposed new guidelines, Guidelines Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, is available in PDF format for all to read. The problem is that the text is 86 pages long and the public comment time ended last January. Therefore , look for this stuff to become regulation/law sometime this summer.

So, the FTC plans to go after bloggers who are being compensated for what they write. And, apparently, that compensation can be in any form, not just dollars.

Personally speaking, I would not feel a bit bad about openly disclosing that I was paid, or received free equipment, to write about a product. All technical blogs and websites I read always do that. Nonetheless, we have a freedom of speech clause in our Constitution and I expect this new FTC foolishness to be tossed out just as soon as it gets tested in court.

After all, I also write about vitamins, minerals and other health food and preparations. Need I always tell which ones I use and where I got them? I purchase them myself, but must I disclose that now? I think not . . . and I will not! The same thing applies to electronic devices. Often I drive to wherever I can get hands-on the device for a couple hours before writing about it. And, no, I do not disclose that when I write. That way, I am free to write about the bad points, as well as the good.

Anyway, I think that the FTC is opening up a can of worms that is going to come back and bite them in the butt at some point. Because, if this one is tossed out by a court, there’s a very good chance that a few other of their associated draconian rules and regulations will be tossed out at the same time.

Here Comes Global Cooling?

Here’s a report a good research scientist friend sent me this morning and requested comments. Because of the content, I think I should make this public.

This report, dated today, is titled: Coldest Weather in 100 Years to Strike by 2012 -- America Unprepared for New Cold Climate Because of President Obama’s Climate Change Policies. So, okay, that got my attention and I was interested. . . .

The report stated that we are in a time of global cooling, not global warming – which I also believe. Even so, I had to take the time to understand the background of the person making the claim and get some information about how he came to that conclusion.

The enclosed memo was from a group calling itself the Space and Science Research Center out of Florida. The author is John L. Casey, billed as the Director of the Space and Science Research Center, who was once a space policy advisor to the White House and Congress. He has been a consultant to NASA Headquarters performing space shuttle and space station analysis. He has also led teams conducting commercial spaceport design world wide, as well as performing rocket launch studies for the Department of Defense. Here is what I received:

Today, for the first time in over two years, the Director of the Space and Science Research Center (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida, has issued a new prediction of the next climate change intended to emphasize the imminent ill-effects of this new climate period in an important warning to the American people and their leadership in Washington.

According to Center Director John Casey, “The climate change predictions which I started to pass out to our government and media in early 2007 based upon the ‘RC Theory’ have now come to pass, exactly as forecast. Global warming has ended, conclusively, as predicted. The Earth’s average temperature has begun its steep decline within the time frame I said it would. And last but not least, the Sun has entered a state of ‘hibernation’ when I said it would. This new solar period is one of the most amazing events in the history of science. During solar hibernations, the Sun makes significant reductions in output which always, always, brings long cold climates to the Earth. Unbelievably, this historic phenomena is still largely and intentionally unreported by the media and our leaders and therefore unknown by the American people. The new cold climate will usher in global travail that will be amplified specifically because of the catastrophic climate change policies of the administration of President Barack Obama that will leave most citizens unprepared.”

The full report has some interesting predictions. Among them is that “fuel shortages will arise in part from the loss of large percentages of corn crops now committed to ethanol for automotive fuels. The utter stupidity of using farm land and food crops for fuel will now be played out on a stage of global distress for all its people.”

Yes, I’ll have to admit that I am basically in agreement with this report, just not too sure about the time-frame mentioned. For instance, some of us may know the old quip about corn being “knee high by the Fourth of July.” Well, that will not be happening again this year -- although the crops are certainly expected to mature at some point this fall. But, yes, the times (weather) they are a-changing. We are obviously getting cooler.

An Environmental Tax on the American People

Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) published an Op-Ed in The Hill today titled, “Democrats’ Cap and Tax rush job: all economic pain, no climate gain,” which is quite informative. Inhofe opens the article by stating:

The Obama administration and the Democratic leadership are attempting to push through global warming cap-and-trade legislation as quickly as possible, and for good reason: The more the public learns about what is in the bill, the more likely they are to oppose it.

The Waxman-Markey bill is the latest incarnation of costly cap-and-trade legislation that will have a devastating impact on the economy, cost millions of American jobs, push jobs overseas and drastically increase the size and scope of the federal government. Or, as a recent Washington Post editorial put it, the bill “contains regulations on everything from light bulb standards to the specs on hot tubs, and it will reshape America’s economy in dozens of ways that many don’t realize …”

Yup. If we want higher energy prices and much higher gasoline prices to go along with all the rampant inflation this administration is already causing, this cap-and-trade foolishness is the way to go! That is, if you like all pain and no gain, it’s the way to go. After all, if even the liberal, big government loving Washington Post labeled this legislation as something that “contains regulations on everything from light bulb standards to the specs on hot tubs, and it will reshape America’s economy in dozens of ways that many don’t realize,” it must be really, really bad.

By the way, has anyone else noticed that we’ve had a couple of the coolest years on record back to back during this so-called “global warming” era? Reports are in from farmers around the country that crops are again a bit slow in growing because it has just not warmed up enough yet. (Here in Michigan, I can see that to be true and do not need second hand reports.) And, apparently we are not the only country in the world experiencing this.

If this cooling keeps up, what will we be capping and trading then, the losses from low crop revenue, maybe? That is, if cooling comes and our famers experience a loss in revenue, will this cap and trade foolishness then make up the difference to them? If not, can this be said to be a well-balanced and fair bill?

I mean, let’s face it now, if these political hacks want to pass an environmental control bill that would tax us all for something that’s simply a natural occurrence, there must certainly be and up-side to it when the reverse happens. If not, then it is simply a bill to punish and tax the American people simply because those presently in government can -- and want to.

And, for the rest of us, according to the article, the National Black Chamber of Commerce, CRA International found that Waxman-Markey will destroy 2.3 to 2.7 million jobs in each year of the policy through 2030, increase electricity rates by 45 percent, and impose a gas tax of nearly 60 cents. Of course, it would also cause many American jobs to move overseas, where government environmental regulations are much more lenient. But that’s expected and is already happening. China will accept the factories and be happy to sell us the products at a profit.

Good News for the GOP “Generic” Candidate

Interesting political fallouts have been producing a bit of discontent with the socialist leadership of the Democrat Party nationwide. It seems that their head Democrat -- the one residing in the White House -- has taken such a sharp turn to the political left that a lot of self-professed moderate Democrats are starting to jump ship and favor Republicans.

What Republican would these so-called moderate Democrats favor? Really, we don’t know that and it apparently makes no difference at this point. They just do not favor supporting another Democrat.

As Rasmussen reported in an article titled Generic Congressional Ballot yesterday:

Democratic and Republican candidates are tied for the second straight week in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 39% would vote for their district’s Democratic congressional candidate while 39% would choose the Republican.

Better yet, the report stated that: “Voters not affiliated with either party favor the GOP 33% to 23%.”

As we’ve reported before, generally speaking, about 35% of voters can be classed as hard core liberals. That is, they will vote for any Democrat on the ballot, no matter what. Conversely, almost another 35% of voters are hard core conservatives and will always vote for Republicans. Of the remaining 30%, about 20% think of themselves as moderate and almost 10% just don’t give a damn. This means, any good politician must conform their campaign rhetoric to woo that 20% straddling the middle of the road.

So, even though Rasmussen says that the “Generic Ballot Remains a Tie for Second Straight Week” -- and that sounds rather uneventful -- if our “generic” GOP candidates are starting out with 35% of the vote and need to work to attract another 16% for a campaign win, that “voters not affiliated” sentence in the Rasmussen Report makes things look rather promising.

Think about it: If 33% of the moderates favor the GOP from the start, that represents yet another 6 to 7% in the final vote -- closing in on good position right out of the shoot for anyone with an “R” after their name who doesn’t come off sounding like a complete idiot. And this, as implied by Rasmussen, represents the situation nationwide, even in some strong Democrat districts.

This administration might remain in power for three and a half more years but it is starting to look very unlikely that the Democrats will control Congress after the election next year.

Yup . . . it’s about time for the liberal leadership to start sending their aides out to refill their Prozac prescriptions. They’ve got a rather tough eighteen months coming up.

More Unbridled National Socialism

We’ve read about government control of the auto industry. Now big government going after the medical industry. And, of course we’ve heard about the federal government’s control of sectors of the banking industry. What’s next, the baking industry?

Don’t laugh, there’s an administration plan afoot to take over almost any large industry in the name of protecting consumer's interests.

As Jim Puzzanghera writes in “Obama to propose strict new regulation of financial industry” for the Los Angles Times today:

The plan would give the government new powers to seize key companies whose failure jeopardizes the financial system, as well as creation of a watchdog agency to look out for consumers' interests.

Yes, you probably read that correctly – and read right over the most important part simply because you are used to reading such things frequently nowadays: “The plan would give the government new powers.”

THE PLAN – as in, the Administration’s Plan – would Give Government New Powers. In other words, the Obama administration is giving government these powers.

Are these powers allocated to the executive branch of our national government by our Constitution? If so, dear reader, would someone please point them out to me. If not, then just where the hell did this administration get these powers to give to government regulators?

Point is, we’re not just talking about a plan that’s a little unconstitutional here. Nope, as it seems to me, this administration is talking about instituting control plans that actually come from a form of government that was previously totally foreign to our great nation.

So, okay, what do you call it when a single head of government unilaterally decrees new and draconian controls over the affairs of the people?

More Liberal Media Babble

Tim Graham, the Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center, has a very interesting column today in Media Research Center titled: Newsweek's Fineman Disdains Branding Obama a 'Socialist'.

Apparently Newsweek senior Washington correspondent Howard Fineman was dissing Newt Gingrich yet again in a new piece for the magazine, titled: How lost are the Republicans? They're looking to Newt for answers. As Fineman rambles:

At the dawn of the Obama era, Gingrich has remade himself as the anti-Obama. He is arguably the GOP's most influential strategist and cheerleader, and a provocative scold of the administration. Where Obama exudes the new Washington equanimity, Gingrich exalts in the old-school insult. He is ruthless in caricaturing anyone who gets in his way as a "pagan" or "statist" or "socialist" or "racist" -- all words Newt has hurled in recent days.

Yeah, it’s true that Newt in “one of the GOP’s most influential strategists and cheerleaders.” But, since he has a doctorate and decades of experience on the topic, we might expect that Newt could have a few good ideas to toss out there for our consideration. However, Newt as the “anti-Obama”? Not hardly! Gingrich is a conservative who is against socialism. What’s wrong with that? Aren’t most of us?

Oh, sorry . . . the topic here is Howard Fineman, isn’t it. And Fineman seems to be a cheerleader for socialism. . . .

Graham wound up the article with a paragraph that rings true and clear to real conservatives and Republicans nationwide:

You can read between the lines of columns like these and find journalists counseling Republicans to go along and get along, that the road to recovery is in being an echo of liberalism, not a conservative alternative. A few weeks ago, Fineman thought the tea parties were too "apocalyptic" to help. I always think of Fineman back in 1995 pining for Colin Powell for President: "a lot of my colleagues are trying to accept the fact that the Republican Party has the upper hand, and they want a Republican Party they can live with, and Powell is a guy they could live with."

Don’t you just love it when the far left scribblers like Fineman try to instruct real conservatives and constitutionalists that we must “settle” on just any moderate (or liberal) just because they happen to call themselves a Republican! There will be no more “go along to get along” or RINO’s supported by conservatives. Newt Gingrich has many great conservative ideas. Exactly who we support to implement some of those ideas is yet to be determined.
.
.

Conservative Sector Growth Reported

Gallup reports that “Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group now. But also that: “Percentage of ‘liberals’ higher this decade than in early ’90s.” The number of self-professed “Moderates”, they report, has dropped some as more now admit to being conservative.

Anyone actually believe this stuff? Those of us who have worked political campaigns over the years do not. Not really, anyway.

Generally speaking, about 35% of the voters can be classed as hard core liberals. That is, they will vote for any Democrat on the ballot, no matter what. Conversely, almost another 35% of voters are hard core conservatives and will always vote for Republicans. Of the remaining 30%, about 20% think of themselves as moderate and nearly 10% just don’t give a damn. This means, any good politician must conform their campaign rhetoric to woo that 20% straddling the middle of the road.

That often presents a problem for liberal politicians because most of those moderates actually have some very conservative tendencies, if questioned. They will vote for a Democrat, when there is no Republican attractive enough to them. But, as soon as that Democrat goes liberal, they will drop that candidate at the next opportunity.

We have not seen an administration steering the nation to the hard left, as the Obama administration is, in our lifetime. Folks are noticing . . . and worrying about it. So, even some self-expressed moderates are now claiming their conservative tendencies.

Obama wooed the moderates to get elected. But, in office, he immediately took a hard turn to the left. Therefore, support from that 20% of the moderate electorate needed to stay in office is starting to vanish. And, rather than continue calling themselves “middle-of-the-roaders” and being associated with Obama, they now admit to their conservative tendencies.

It’s as simple as that.
.
.

Another Spin on the War on Terror

The Russia Today news-source has a theme that “Any story can be another story altogether” and, like many of our liberal major media outlets, often goes far to prove that in various ways.

For instance, Part 2 in their “Spin-a-War” series is titled: War on Terror as a spin of the imagination and opens by declaring:

The war on terror is a maze of magic mirrors creating perfect optical and mental illusions. It has been that way since Day One, or 9/11 as we came to call it. On that day we first heard that America is at war. Or rather -- we read it on the CNN screen. Or on the Fox screen. Every US and international TV channel came up with “America at war” sooner or later on that shocking day.

The article goes on to say:

In reality the attack was very precisely aimed at the symbols of America’s financial and military powers. … They were attacking the main vehicles of America’s hegemonic intentions. No one drove a plane into the Statue of Liberty.

True. But does that makes it any less than an actual attack?

As with any well written article, there are some interesting truths intermixed. Unfortunately, any truths are impeded by the speedbumps of anti-American socialist and communist ideology that always implies that a government elite few can do things best for all of the proletariat and peasants.

For instance, one recommendation states that:

The most effective way to rid the world of an abomination has always been to form a small group of professionals that learns all that can be learnt about the abomination, finds its weak spots, and strikes to kill.

On face value, that may sound okay. But, in this case, the “small group” the author is writing about is probably known to most of us as an all-powerful Politburo.
.
.

The Affect of the Far-Left Major Media

In an article titled Is Liberal Media Bias a Greater Threat Than Terrorism or Recession? in The Fox Nation today, Noel Sheppard made a very pertinent and biting comment: "All one need do is examine what happened during the 2008 presidential campaign, as well as since, and it is quite easy to conclude that not only is democracy being subverted by a relatively small number of people, but the net result could be far more long-lasting than the aftermaths of the 9/11 attacks and the Great Depression."

Sheppard first quoted Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) from last week as he announced the creation of a new Media Fairness Caucus, telling NewsMax: "The greatest threat to America is not necessarily a recession, or another terrorist attack. The greatest threat to America is a liberal media bias." ... "If the American people can't get good information, can't get the facts, and can't make good decisions, then we simply don't have a viable democracy."

How true that is! The liberal major media has become little more than cheerleaders for the socialists in the Democrat Party and no longer even mentions all the unconstitutional activities so common in our nation's capital nowadays.
.
.

Rampant Inflation is On the Way

Today's Wall Street Journal has a very informative article by Arthur B. Laffer titled: Get ready for Inflation and Higher Interest Rates. Laffer reports that "The unprecedented expansion of the money supply could make the '70s look benign."

Yup! I look for inflation to be quite obvious before next Christmas and galloping out of control all next year. After all, government cannot give all that money away without consequence. Your children and grandchildren will be paying that bill for many years to come.

What we are seeing from this administration is the Peter Principle personified. Obama is making Carter look almost knowledgeable. . . .
.
.

Use the Radical’s Tricks against Them

Anyone ever wonder where the radicals, socialists and other Democrat riff-raff gained the outline for their rules of engagement against democracy and capitalism? It’s all available for us to study, if we wish.

Back in 1971, socialist activist Saul Alinsky wrote an interesting book on grassroots organizing and obstructionism titled Rules for Radicals. Rules for Radicals can still be found in many bookstores and ordered from Amazon.

Yet another interesting set of instructions for community and political activists is Rhetoric for Radicals: A Handbook for Twenty-First Century Activists -- which also can still be found in many bookstores and at Amazon.

Due to the current political status in Washington, I think it would be a very good idea if thousands of us conservatives study and understand these texts -- and use some of their own tricks against the socialists and activists scheming against our Constitutional form of government.
.
.