We Are The 53%

After initially hearing about the occupodos claiming to represent the 99% (people who make less than $343,000) my reaction was "No you are not! You are the 47% who don't pay any taxes!".

So if you go on and do the math, that means the rest of us are the 53%. The people who actually pay taxes.

Apparently there is a burgeoning movement coalescing under the banner of "We Are The 53%". I get it. And in fact I am for whatever storyline is required to unravel the lies of the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET crowd. But let's be frank. The 53% is the Tea Party. It was the Tea Party that got out first to protest the bank bail outs, and to put an end to the Fed. The main difference is that the Tea Party blames the government for the bailouts while the occupodos blame Wall Street and the free market capitalism system that has made America great.

Let me go on to stipulate my own grand conspiracy theory surrounding the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET movement. It is not a grass roots movement inspired by sudden frustration as was the case with the Tea Party. It is part of a vast left wing conspiracy to get President Obama elected to a second term. It is no coincidence that the community-organizer-in-chief reignited the class warfare front with his business bashing rhetoric, and that Warren Buffet declared the rich should be taxed more, and that then college students, unemployed recent grads, and ancient hippies reliving their glory days, suddenly began to occupy ( camp - party - defecate ) public parks close to financial institutions with the support of unions and the ACORN infrastructure.

Everybody now knows, including the Presidents supporters, that the Emperor has no clothes, and so he has brilliantly orchestrated events to rev up his base. Not that his base was going to vote for the other team, but maybe they just weren't going to show up. Even better, maybe the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET astro-turf movement will get his base "to get in the face" of the independants that he will oh so desperately need.

But I could be wrong. Just say'in.

The Rich Should Pay For EVERYTHING!

Ummmm..... No!

"You do not make the poor rich by making the rich poor"

-Abraham Lincoln

H/T to Micheal Graham for pulling out this video. And according to his wishes I want to pass it on to you.

A Single Economist Destroys The Entire Premise Of The Occupy Movement In 7 Minutes

It takes Professor Richard Epstein less than 7 minutes to demolition Liz Warren’s economic idiocy, President Obama’s far-Left insanity and the entire premise of the Occupy movement.

Not bad for one PBS interview.

Please watch this, then send the link to your “The Rich Can Pay For EVERYTHING!” friends.

Watch Does U.S. Economic Inequality Have a Good Side? on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

Marc Ash Is Still A Moron: #OWS

Atlanta #OWS Rally

Pigheaded progressive propagandist March Ash over at Reader Supported News is waxing poetically over the Occupy Wall Street movement. It wasn't too long ago that I posted about his fear and loathing over Tea Party protests and how he wagged his finger at their violent overtones.

Marc Ash is a Moron.

It's time to set the record straight. The reason that Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the brain, "through and through," was that an individual hated and feared her political objectives enough to commit the cowardly act.

His hyperbolic contortions to blame the Tea Party for the violence done to Gabrielle Giffords were pornographic, never mind a complete lie.

And now? Now that violence has come to the streets he wells up with pride and adulation at the stinky dirty occupodos currently occupying the streets of Oakland.

A Witness to the Violence in Oakland

Whatever meaning the Occupy Movement represents to the protesters who participate, to the Oakland Police Department, and the system they are paid to protect, it obviously represents something to be feared and repressed ... violently, and even lethally, if necessary.

Apparently, now being feared is good. He goes on to lie about their non-violent nature.

Armed only with a growing chant of "Our streets!" the marchers moved forward towards the line of police in riot gear. Shoulder to shoulder in non-violent defiance, the marchers tried to filter through the line of riot-armored police.

Brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it? Only, as usual, it's not the whole story.

Occupy Clashes Test Mayors

The trouble began after some demonstrators in front of the Oakland Library Tuesday afternoon began throwing "paint or other hazardous material" at officers, said a statement from Oakland police posted on Twitter.

Oh c'mon! A little paint and "hazardous material" never hurt anyone. I wonder if by "hazardous material" they mean feces? But what the hell?

Police said protesters threw M-80 fireworks at the officers as well as objects including bottles, rocks, pots and pans.

Damn police! They never let anyone have any fun!

Marc Ash goes on to preach about how this movement can never be stopped.

And there is no indication that police violence can stop it.

That maybe so, but unlike an old hippie like Marc Ash who's Marxist vision can never be extinguished, the useful idiots that make up the Occupodos are in fact learning something from this experience.

Remedial Economics

Nan Terrie learned an expensive lesson last week about the importance of property rights. "Stealing is our biggest problem at the moment," the 18-year-old protester told the New York Post. "I had my Mac stolen—that was like $5,500." Why? Because she left it in a public place, amid a crowd demanding the redistribution of wealth. Imagine that.

It's always going to be a good day when a Wall Street Journal Op/Ed piece can give you a good chuckle, but it's a great day when they can make you laugh out loud (lol - for you occupodos who might be reading this).

Perverse incentives were at work at Occupy Boston, where 36-year-old Andrew Warner told the Boston Herald: "It's turning into us against them." By "them" he didn't mean rich bankers but street vagrants: "They come in here and they're looking at it as a way of getting a free meal and a place to crash, which is totally fine, but they don't bring anything to the table at all." The same is true in New York, where "sanitation committee" member Lauren Digioia told the Daily News: "There's a lot of takers here and they feel entitled."

Really! You cannot make this stuff up.

Marc Ashe ignores the reports of beatings, rapes, robberies and does not talk about the fact that the encampments have begun to put together their own brown shirt squads to try and police themselves, mostly because it's embarrassing to have to call the police you have been battling to come to the aid of a rape victim.

More than anything else, given his completely based in no fact at all indictment of the Tea Party and their violent imagery, I would like to know what he thinks about the violent imagery and intimidation being used by the occupodos?

Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed....said in a statement. Among his apparent concerns were an unauthorized hip-hop concert held at the park last Saturday, which drew large crowds, and a protester who circled the park Tuesday toting an AK-47, which he had a permit to carry but which unnerved others in the park.

Such are the travails of a hard core propagandist.

Occupy Providence

I went to check out the Occupy Providence encampment yesterday. There is not a lot going on there. Honestly there were more tents set up than there were people. My best guess was that the residents of those tents were attending the classes that Mom and Dad paid for, or sneaking back to the dorm to take a shower and would likely return the nights festivities. It really did feel like a normal campground. Everybody was very nice and non-threatening, but it also lacked a feeling of passion. People were just hanging out.

In the video you will see that they did put together a protest against the Bank of America. I thought it was lack luster and not very well attended. One of the chants they used was "Banks Got Bailed Out! We Got Sold Out!". This chant made me want to ask one of them; 'If you are angry about the bailouts, then why did you not go to the Tea Party protests? And aren't you protesting the wrong people? The Government gave the banks our money, and the banks had to take it. It was not optional'. But I had chosen just to observe. Something about the vibe suggested that logic would not take the day. I now regret that decision.

At least the homeless people who typically who inhabit the park seemed to enjoy the company of the student and their willingness to share their food and water. That was nice.

So Much for Peaceful Protestors

The story line that police are beating innocent and peaceful protestors is bullshit. But you have to go outside of the U.S. to see the truth reported.

Police confront barrier-storming protesters 

There is a line of policemen right beside me and a few minutes ago they put up this barricade. That is because about 15 minutes ago a call went around the group [0f protestors] for anyone who wanted to be arrested to move to the front of the group. They did so, they locked arms, and they tried to push through the steel barricades at the top of Wall Street.

None of these types of provocations are being reported by mainstream left wing media.On the contrary, they are reporting the propaganda line about "innocent people being beaten and arrested". And now that the union organizers have shown up, the violence will be more organized and bloodier.

Occupy Wall Street vs Tea Party

It is amazing to sit back and watch the main stream media lavish the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET crowd with pity and support, all the while remembering how peaceful Tea Party Protests were depicted as angry and violent mobs.

With the cries for 'civility' from the left now just a distant memory, they can no longer suppress their penchant for hate and violence. The party that loves to hate is back on the street, and they are pissed!

One of Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals was to "accuse your opponent of the awful things that you are doing or about to do"

Clearly accusing the Tea Party of violence fell into the "about to do" category.

And now that there is some blood in the water the unions are joining the fun. The self proclaimed thug army for Obama can't stay away from a good street fight.

---

Of Course America is Soft Mr President! It's what progressives have been wishing for!

In a continued campaign to blame anything and everything except his leadership for the current state of the union, the economy, our international prestige and everything else he is supposed to be in charge of, President Obama has stopped blaming bush and now blames all of us.

"I mean, there are a lot of things we can do," Obama said. "The way I think about it is, you know, this is a great, great country that had gotten a little soft and, you know, we didn't have that same competitive edge that we needed over the last couple of decades. We need to get back on track."

Of course America is weaker then it was decades ago Mr President Thanks to the progressive movement we now live in a politically correct society where competition is frowned upon. It's not good form to have an honor roll at school. Young soccer players don't keep score so as not to make the other team feel bad. Being successful and making money is a sin for which you will be punitively taxed while being ridiculed, and you better not push back either.

Gee Mr President, I wonder how America got soft?

Careful what you wish for.

Michael Graham: About Those Millionaires Not Paying Their “Fair Share”

Obama deflected the charge of resurecting the class war the other day by saying:

“If asking a billionaire to pay the same rate as a plumber or a teacher makes me a warrior for the middle class, I wear that charge as a badge of honor,”

He lies to the American people by suggesting that Billionaires don't pay the same rate as regular people. Well, they don't. THEY PAY A HIGHER RATE!

as I pointed out in a post the other day, IRS data shows they do pay a higher rate.

Krugman's Social Contract and the Coming Class War

and in a post today by radio talk show host Michael Graham, more IRS data to prove the point. The post is so good I am posting it here in it's entirety (without his permission. I hope that's OK Michael.)

About Those Millionaires Not Paying Their “Fair Share”

Economist Veronique de Rugy continues to fight the media-driven ignorance on taxes and who pays them.

In 2009, millionaires made up 0.1 percent, or just fewer than 240,000, of the 140 million tax returns filed that year. Despite their small demographic imprint, the magnitude of their contribution in paid taxes is hard to overlook. Over the past ten years, millionaires have paid 17 to 28 percent of total income tax returns per year.

Also note that, under evil George W. Bush and his “tax cuts for the rich,” the share of the income tax bill went UP—not down—by about 60%.
Add all the other facts about the people earning 20% of the income but paying 30% of the income tax bill, and I ask you again: How much more do they have to pay before you’ll call it “fair?” If they pay double their share—40%—would that be “fair?” Triple? 60%?
The LAST thing angry extremists like Elizabeth Warren want is “fairness.” They want “equal outcomes” for the hard-working and the lazy; for the smart and the dumb; for the risk-taker and the coward. Everybody gets to share the wealth.
What could be less “fair” than that?

Micheal Moore's Class Warfare

Can you imagine if some Tea Party spokesman came out and said:

"The people coming to these town hall meetings are mad! They are sick and tired of their tax money being wasted. They are sick of the welfare state and they are not going to take it any more. If the government doesn't change,there could be violence.No one wants to see that but that's what could happen"

Holy crap! Oh my god! Nancy Pelosi's head would have exploded.

Just speaking your mind at a town hall meeting was a violent threat in their minds. And now, real threats of violence, and real acts of intimidation are ignored by the main street media. The same band of propagandists who wanted you to think those Tea Party were crazy and violent are now telling you, " uh oh, These Marxists might be violent, we better appease them!".



But it's OK when the class warriors on the left threaten you with violence.

The violent left is getting impatient with Obama.

Krugman's Social Contract and the Coming Class War

Coming to the defense of Elizabeth Warren, and foreshadowing the go for broke rhetoric that is to come in 2012, Paul Krugman become a class warfare denier.

The Social Contract

This week President Obama said the obvious: that wealthy Americans, many of whom pay remarkably little in taxes, should bear part of the cost of reducing the long-run budget deficit. And Republicans like Representative Paul Ryan responded with shrieks of “class warfare.”

OK. Stop right there. Could someone please first make the case that the rich do not pay their fair share? Could someone please tell me what that fair share is?

I guess not. Paul Krugman doesn't even make an attempt to answer either of these question. He does cite a meaningless statistic though.

Meanwhile, over the same period, the income of the very rich, the top 100th of 1 percent of the income distribution, rose by 480 percent. No, that isn’t a misprint. In 2005 dollars, the average annual income of that group rose from $4.2 million to $24.3 million.

So what? That means such an individual's share or tax burden increased by 480 percent. Right? Good for everybody!

From the Wall Street Journal

Let's actually look at some hard data, and make the case that top earners pay more than their fair share.

If we were really talking about a fair share, then everybody would pay the same percentage. A flat tax. And as you made more money your contribution would rise proportionally. But, as you can see from the chart nearby, the data bears out that the more you make, the larger your piece of the pie becomes.

So we already have the system that Paul, Elizabeth and the other Marxists are haranguing for.

How much is enough?

There isn't enough. There will never be enough. Why? Because this is a class war.

Paul goes on to say:

Which brings us back to those cries of “class warfare.”

Republicans claim to be deeply worried by budget deficits. Indeed, Mr. Ryan has called the deficit an “existential threat” to America. Yet they are insisting that the wealthy — who presumably have as much of a stake as everyone else in the nation’s future — should not be called upon to play any role in warding off that existential threat.

I can't decide whether this is extraordinary hyperbole, or an out right lie. THEY DO CONTRIBUTE Paul!

I am so sick of the class warfare, whinny sanction of the victim crap that if it would actually solve everything, I would capitulate. Fine. Sorry rich people, I know it's unfair, but we have to shut these people up and fix all of our problems.

The fact of the matter is that it would not even come close. There just aren't enough rich people to pay for the prolific spending the government is doing. This turns out to be further evidence that this is class warfare. These people are un-serious about solving problems. It is class warfare, and if you think "so what? I'm not rich", guess what. They are coming for you next.

From the Wall Street Journal

Like I said. There just aren't enough rich people to pay for the prolific spending the government is doing. So where will they go next?

So to all of you 'tax the rich' cheer leaders, what are you going to say when the political class turns around and says 'OK, now it's your turn to pay your fair share'?

The Class Warriors won't be happy until we are all unhappy.

Right, Wing-Nut!: Elizabeth Warren: A Poison To The Body Politic

Great minds think alike.

While I was putting together my own version of the Elizabeth Warren video rant, the Jersey Nut put into words a well articulated disection of what is going on in the video.

Go read it.
Right, Wing-Nut!: Elizabeth Warren: A Poison To The Body Politic

No need for me to duplicate, but I will share my video with commentary. 

---

Al Gore's High School Logic

Just like Jason from Halloween, or Hillary Clinton, just when you think you have slayed the evil monster, they come back to life. Just like in the movies.

How is it that we are still talking about Global Warming as settled science? But just like any other religion, if you use logic or ask thoughtful questions to one of it's true believers you need to expect a caustic reaction if it challenges their belief system.

So it goes with Al Gore. Since the climate gate scandal broke he's been livid.

High School Physics

That's how Al Gore described the science of climate change this week, by which we suppose he meant it's elementary and unchallengeable.

I think that is both precious and prescient. It reveals and seems to advocate the simpleton logic behind the pseudo-scientifc belief that man made carbon causes Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever ails you.

Even if the data had not been manipulated and it actually did show that that an increase in carbon coincided with an increase in temperatures; that's your scientific theory? Really? It is foolish logic on par with the reasoning that the earth is flat. It has to be flat! Otherwise the oceans would have spilled off and we would have no oceans! That's what the "scientific minds" of the day thought when a flat earth was considered settled science.

What about the 4 billion years of climate change before man even showed up? What about the ice age, and then the warming, and then the next ice age and so on and so on. How did all of that happen without man made carbon? You can't explain to me how or why all of that climate change took place, but you're positive that this time it's because of man made carbon. Great. Fine. Thanks, but I need to speak with the Jehovah's witness waiting behind you. Have a nice day.

Well, Mr. Vice President, meet Ivar Giaever, a 1973 physics Nobel Laureate who resigned last week from the American Physical Society in protest over the group's insistence that evidence of man-made global warming is "incontrovertible."

In an email to the society, Mr. Giaever—who works at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute—wrote that "The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me . . . that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."

Mr. Giaever was an American Physical Society fellow, an honor bestowed on "only half of one percent" of the members, according to a spokesman. He follows in the footsteps of University of California at Santa Barbara Emeritus Professor of Physics Harold Lewis, a former APS fellow who resigned in 2010, calling global warming "the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist."

It's a fraud because they pretend their belief is based in science, while it is nothing more than a belief system on par with any other religion on earth.

One of the least savory traits of climate-change advocates is how they've tried to bully anyone who keeps an open mind. This is true of many political projects, but it is or ought to be anathema to the scientific method.

Climate Change Denier is just a code word for heretic. The fire and brimstone label pinned on those who would even dare question the idea that man made carbon is responsible for climate change.

Global Warming is Real!

Right, Wing-Nut!: Redefining "Civility" Down...

Right, Wing-Nut!: Redefining "Civility" Down...

So "civility", like so many words in the Age of Obama, has been redefined, to mean you are forbidden to speak ill of of me, but I am free to say the most horrible, hateful, and untrue things about you that my imagination can conjure up.

My thoughts exactly!

If you are an actual thug, who actually uses violence to advance your cause you can use violent rhetoric as long as your cause is favored by the left. 

"War!"
"We like a good fight!"
"Let's take these sons of bitches out!"
"President Obama! This is your Army!"

But if you're merely a fed up citizen who is concerned about deficit spending that has no end in sight then don't even think of using words like

"Target"
"Lock and load"

You'll make Nancy Pelosi and Patches Kennedy cry.

The Audacity of Hate

Where are the Cries for Civility?

 

---

Change You Were Dumb To Believe In

"When I said ‘change we can believe in’ I didn‘t say ’change we can believe in tomorrow.’ Not change we can believe in next week. We knew this was going to take time because we’ve got this big, messy, tough democracy.”

-Barack Obama

---

---

Even kids know it's wrongt to hide behind fine print.

Obama Finally Creates Bipartisanship Through Dissapointment

It's expected that over at the Wall Street Journal you will find critiques of president Obama's policies a little more in depth than at left leaning lame stream media outlets. Yesterdays opinion piece by Brett Stephens was notably pointed though well said.


Is Obama Smart?

"I think I'm a better speech writer than my speech writers," he reportedly told an aide in 2008. "I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I'll tell you right now that I'm . . . a better political director than my political director."

On another occasion—at the 2004 Democratic convention—Mr. Obama explained to a Chicago Tribune reporter that "I'm LeBron, baby. I can play at this level. I got game."

Stuff we have come to expect from our promiser-in chief. But just like he explained last week that he never meant that change would come tomorrow or next week, it appears that many are wondering if he really has 'got game'.

Then there is Mr. Obama as political tactician. He makes predictions that prove false. He makes promises he cannot honor. He raises expectations he cannot meet. He reneges on commitments made in private. He surrenders positions staked in public. He is absent from issues in which he has a duty to be involved. He is overbearing when he ought to be absent.

Again, not surprising coming from the WSJ. But it appears that the sentiment is not purely partisan. Support on the left is becoming shaky. Especially from Hillary supporters who held their nose and voted for Obama anyways.

Hillary Told You So

At a New York political event last week, Republican and Democratic office-holders were all bemoaning President Obama’s handling of the debt-ceiling crisis when someone said, “Hillary would have been a better president.”

“Every single person nodded, including the Republicans,” reported one observer.

At a luncheon in the members’ dining room at the Metropolitan Museum of Art on Saturday, a 64-year-old African-American from the Bronx was complaining about Obama’s ineffectiveness in dealing with the implacable hostility of congressional Republicans when an 80-year-old lawyer chimed in about the president’s unwillingness to stand up to his opponents. “I want to see blood on the floor,” she said grimly.

"Blood on the floor". Glad to see that the left is staying the course with their appeals for civilty and their discomfort with rehtoric that could be seen as threatening or violent. But we'll save that for a different post. This post is about the left becoming unnerved with the Obama administrations continued dissapointments.

In his New York Times Sunday Review essay “What Happened to Obama?” Emory University psychology professor Drew Westen summed up the president’s lack of experience with devastating succinctness.

“Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he occasionally, as a state senator in Illinois, voted ‘present’ on difficult issues,” wrote Westen, author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.

The presidential scholar Matthew Dickinson went even further with a post under the headline “Run, Hillary, Run!” on the blog Presidential Power. “She did warn you,” Dickinson reminded his readers.

“Remember that 3 a.m. phone call? Remember the warning about the rose-colored petals falling from the sky? Remember about learning on the job? Sure you do. Doesn’t a part of you, deep down, realize she was right?” wrote Dickinson, a political-science professor at Middlebury College. “If I heard it once this last week, I heard it a thousand times: You were duped by Obama’s rhetoric—the whole ‘hopey-changey’ thing. And you wanted to be part of history, too—to help break down the ultimate racial barrier. That’s OK. We were all young once. But now it’s time to elect someone who can play hardball, who understands how to be ruthless, who will be a real ... uh ... tough negotiator in office. There won’t be any debate about Hillary’s, er, ‘man-package.’”

Wow! Is a Hillary run a possibility? During her run for the presidency, at many different points when others pronounced her demise, I never bought in. I always knew, and wrote that Hillary is like Jason from the movie Halloween or a vampire from any vampire flick you want to select. When you think Hillary is dead, DO NOT TURN AROUND AND DROP THE KNIFE, STUMBLING AWAY THINKING THAT YOU HAVE VANQUISHED THE MONSTER!

Until I see a decapitated Hillary, who has been dragged into a church and surrounded by a ring of garlic will I ever count Hillary Clinton 'out'.

Obama: The great Communicator?

Here is Charles Krauthammer's dead on short analysis of Obama's AAA downgrade speech.

“He went out there with the Dow minus 400. After he spoke it went down to minus 600. He looked weak, plaintive, and small: weak and plaintive because he comes out there and he blames the Tea Party, Europe, Japan, Middle East -- probably God because he's the author of earthquakes -- everybody except him.”
-- Charles Krauthammer on “Special Report w/Bret Baier” 8/8/2011

Pretty much sums it up.

My big take away was the mostly "Nothing to see here" message that he pursued. After weeks of posturing, scare tactics, and partisan sniping suddenly the downgrade of the credit rating for the USA is no big deal. It wasn't even a week ago that the democrats were howling about the eminent danger of a downgrade, and so reasoned that the Tea Party should just shut up and raise the debt limit. Obama got what he wanted in exchange for a paltry 1 trillion dollar cut in government spending over ten years, and the USA was still downgraded. Mainly because S&P had already warned the government that it need to see a 4 trillion dollar ut in advance of the deal. The worst case scenario that would mean Armageddon for the US economy happened anyways, even though the debt limit was raised.

Obama Bid to Boost Confidence Falls Short

"Markets will rise and fall, but this is the United States of America," Mr. Obama said. "No matter what some agency may say, we've always been and always will be a triple-A country."

What?!?!?!?  Nothing to see here?!?!?!?

What about the disaster that would occur if we were downgraded?

It is becoming apparent to both the left and the right that this president is over his head. More to come on that.

Obama Gets A Grade: AA+

Sounds pretty good right? Well it's not.

America Gets Downgraded
A spend and tax policy mix always leads to economic decline.

Friday's downgrade by Standard & Poor's of U.S. long-term debt to AA+ from AAA will be the first of many such humiliations if Washington doesn't change its economic and fiscal policies.

Unfortunately Washington doesn't get this. All weekend long democrats have been blaming the Tea Party for the downgrade. Ha! What a hoot! a real ROTFLMAO! Unfortunately there are people who believe this partisan propaganda. In our new upside down world reality the Obama administration can put this talking point out there despite logic and facts, and people will still prefer to believe the lie.

So let's think about the Tea Party's guilt in this national embarrassment. For over a decade Democrats and Republicans have been spending like drunken sailors. Then a third party almost arises, but then loosely aligns themselves with old school spendaholic Republicans so that they might have more than a snowballs chance in hell to win some seats in the House and the Senate. Their stated mission is to reduce Government spending and save the country from the fate we are witnessing in Greece. Ergo, the downgrade is the fault of the Tea Party. Yep! Just like the villian in Saturday morning Scooby-doo cartons used to say "Those meddling kids! I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for them".Yep. Nobody would have figured out that massive runaway deficit spending would eventually collapse like a Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme.

Yet is there anything that S&P said on Friday that everyone else doesn't already know? S&P essentially declared that on present trend the U.S. debt burden is unsustainable, and that the American political system seems unable to reverse that trend.

This is not news.

The very idea that if the Government had just quietly raised the debt ceiling with no debate, then everything would be just fine is laughable! Think about these numbers.

The Bush Presidency and previous GOP Congresses contributed to the current problem by not insisting on domestic cuts to finance the cost of war, and by adding the prescription drug benefit without reforming Medicare. But as recently as 2008 spending was still only 20.7%, and debt held by the public was only 40.3%, of GDP.

Pretty bad huh? I remember the Hate Bush Party (sort of the opposite of the Tea Party) freaking out over this. My own mother lamented with crocodile tears about the horrible debt her grandchildren were going to inherit.

In the name of saving the economy from panic, the White House and the Pelosi Congress then blew out the American government balance sheet. They compounded the problem of excessive private debt by adding unsustainable public debt.

They boosted federal spending to 25% of GDP in 2009, 23.8% in 2010 (as TARP repayments provided a temporary reduction in overall spending), and back nearly to 25% this fiscal year. Meanwhile, debt to GDP climbed to 53.5% in 2009, 62.2% in 2010, and is estimated to hit 72% this year—and to keep rising. These are all figures from Mr. Obama's own budget office.

From 40% to 72% in three short years. If pre 2008 spending drove you to the Hate Bush Party, then why isn't your head exploding today! Where is the seething hate? Even my mother no longer seems to be overly concerned about the debt her grandchildren will inherit despite these eye popping numbers.

But what is even more astonishing is the notion that if it were not for the darn Tea Party, everything would be fine. Standard & Poors would have never taken notice.

Yea.....riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

Think of it in real world terms. If you get a credit card and you pay your bills your credit score goes up. But, If you keep adding more credit cards and piling up more debt, at some point your score will go down, even if you are paying your bills. Your income to debt ratio makes you suspect in your ability to catch up on your bills. That's what happened to America on Friday. And it's not the Tea Party's fault, it's the fault of all those who would not listen to them. I hate to be the one to say it but "They tried to tell you so".

And as for yesterday's collapse in the stock market, it is my opinion that the correction is due more to the recent announcement that first half GDP number that was less than 2% growth. How could the market claim it is more valuable (11000  in January to 12750 in July) if the GDP is not growing at a similar rate? Hmmmmm... My stocks must be over priced. I'm outa here!

Obama was right about one thing yesterday "It's not rocket science".

Bernie Sanders is Right! Americans are Angry! He Just Has No Idea Why.

In today's Wall Street Journal Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) spins his version of "Why Americans Are So Angry". He is absolutely correct in his assertion, however his reasoning as to why is way off base and is a testament to his out of touch socialist ideology.

Why Americans Are So Angry 

The rich are getting richer. Their effective tax rate, in recent years, has been reduced to the lowest in modern history. Nurses, teachers and firemen actually pay a higher tax rate than some billionaires. It's no wonder the American people are angry.

I don't understand this accusation. I pay taxes and I have seen the progressive tax tables. I invite someone to show me some math as to how this is possible, unless of course it's due to tax loopholes that were granted by Congress.

Many corporations, including General Electric and Exxon-Mobil, have made billions in profits while using loopholes to avoid paying any federal income taxes.

Yes. We are very angry about this. This is why we want a short term deal on the debt ceiling. We want you to have just enough time to reform the tax code, and deliver on promises of spending cuts. The Corporate Tax rate should be lowered to 20% or 25% and all loopholes should be eliminated. 35% is the highest corporate tax rate in the world, and what good does it do you if you can't collect it, other than scaring away other multi-national corporations who might come here and create some jobs, and hurting the small businesses who do have to cough up the 35% because they don't have armies of accountants searching for loopholes. Imagine if we collected 20% of General Electrics profits?

If the Republicans have their way, the entire burden of deficit reduction will be placed on the elderly, the sick, children and working families. In the midst of a horrendous recession that is already causing severe pain for average Americans, this approach is morally grotesque. It's also bad economic policy.

This type of demagoguery does not help. What American's want Congress to do is to increase revenue by fixing the tax code and to reduce spending. Just increasing taxes doesn't even come close to fixing the problem. It's like pissing in the ocean in an effort to raise its temperature. It shows that liberals are more interested in scoring a victory in their culture war rather than fixing the problem. Sen. Sanders sanction of the victim argument is just an excuse to ignore the tough reality we now face.

What's more, Mr. Boehner's plan would reopen the debate over the debt ceiling, which is now paralyzing Congress, just six months from now.

Exactly Bernie! We don't trust you! We don't trust the promises of tax reform and spending cuts. If we give you the money to keep on spending thru the election you and the rest of Congress will move on to less important issues. We will have let you "kick the can down the road". We want you and Congress held accountable. We want this debate to happen again in six months so that we can take measure of your performance in advance of the election. If you do not increase revenues by fixing the tax code and you do not deliver on your promises to reduce deficit spending then we will send you all packing.

Now shut up and get to work!

Climate of Hate Making a Comeback

After the shooting of Rep Gabby Giffords the left came out and and basically blamed Sarah Palin for the whole thing. Her rhetoric was violent when she said things like "Lock and load", and her imagery was violent when she used cross hairs to identify districts locked in close races. Never mind that phrases like 'battleground state' have been used by many for as long as I have been alive.

I have always said that there are a lot of democrats who have the need for hate. They have to have someone to hate. For 8 years it was Bush derangement. Now it's Sarah's turn. And the big irony was that they used hate as their instrument to project hate! Saul Alinsky would be proud.

• RULE 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. One way of doing this is to accuse your enemy of what you are doing or going to do)

Well, now things are heating up in Washington over the debt and the seething hate by the left is turning into violent rehtoric. It's OK for them to do it though.


Larry Summers the Cable Guy

Larry Summers is a brilliant guy, or so he's told us. But the former Treasury Secretary, Harvard University president, and until this January the most senior White House economic aide sure can say some dumb things.

Take his remarks yesterday comparing Republicans in Congress to terrorists. "Is the President right to not yield to terrorism?" Mr. Summers, who is once again a Harvard don, told Bloomberg TV. "Yes, the President is absolutely right to not yield to threats to send the country into default. You can't run the country that way."

and the article went on to quote Mr Summers as saying

"The financial terrorism threats are untenable."

So calling someone a Nazi is out, and terrorist is in. Did everyone get the memo?

comparing a debate over spending and debt to murderers who hijack airliners and target civilians is overwrought even by the standards of modern cable television.

And with this pithy close the editorial piece gets another good jab in.

Mr. Summers could at least be a little less Keith Olbermann-like in his choice of words toward those trying to clean up his mess. Unless, of course, he's looking for a gig on MSNBC.

And on the same page we see another example of the left cranking up the violent rhetoric.

Elizabeth Warren Forgets

In the hyperbole department, does anyone do it better than Elizabeth Warren? Yesterday she told reporters that today's House vote on a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau reform bill is an effort to "try and kill this agency." Little did we know that accountability and murder were synonymous in the Harvard law professor's vocabulary.

 Where are the Cries for Civility?

Lefty Liberals Still Own Hate and Violence: and they HATE Glenn Beck!

As we have observed on these pages many times before, it is the left who is the party of hate, and the irony is that they vigorously and actively accuse the Tea Party, Republicans, and anyone else who does not buy into their Marxist ideology as being the purveyors of hate and violence.

This is of course right in line with Saul Alinsky's Rules for modern American radicalism; A religion for the true believers on the left.

• RULE 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. One way of doing this is to accuse your enemy of what you are doing or going to do)

So, in order to document yet another hypocritical act of indecency here on these pages this post observes the treatment of Glenn Beck and his family in public.

Glenn Beck’s Wife Attacked in NYC Park

Glenn Beck says his family was accosted while watching a movie in a New York City park Monday night. On his radio show and his website today, Beck described the incident and said an angry moviegoer kicked a glass of wine onto his wife Tania’s back, and as she got up to walk away, a man shouted: “We hate conservatives here.”

Glenn went on to observe:

“I swear to you I think, if I had suggested, and I almost did, ‘Wow, does anybody have a rope? Because there’s tree here. You could just lynch me.’ And I think there would have been a couple in the crowd that would have.”

Nice, The guy can;t even go out in public with his family. Now, it's completely O.K. to disagree with Glenn, but if you don't have the intellect or command of the facts or even worse if you are just flat out wrong, then you need to resort to personal attacks, and violence; Just like Saul Alinsky told you to.

• RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

I have long advocated that the Tea Party should adopt Sauls 'Rules for Radicals'. My view on this comes from the old adage "Fight Fire with Fire".

D-Day: 67 years ago on this day

this day in history:  67 years ago today.

---

---

Just imagine. Could you have done that?

Listen My Children and You Shall Hear the Midnight Ride of ..... Jack Jouett?

June 4th, 1781

A little more than 5 years after Paul Revere called the Minute Men to arms in what would be the "Shot Heard Around the World", another man would quietly save the revolution.

JACK JOUETT of VIRGINIA the "Other Ride"

Jouett was a Captain of Virginia Militia and was stationed in the Charlottesville, Virginia area. Late on the evening of June 3rd of 1781, Captain Jouett was asleep on the lawn in front of the "Cuckoo Tavern" (now a private residence). He was awakened by the sound of a large number of horsemen. Sitting up, he observed a large unit of the dreaded "White Coats", a nick-name given to the British Dragoons in Colonel Banastre (the Butcher) Tarletons regiment. Tarleton himself was leading the cavalry column. Jouett was quick to realize the objective of this force. The Virginia General Assembly was in session at Charlottesville, some forty miles from the Cuckoo Tavern, and Governor Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and many other notorious 'rebels' were there. They were virtually helpless, as most of Virginia's fighting men were up north with General George Washington, and the local Militia was ill-equipped and too few in numbers to stop Tarleton. The young General Marquis de LaFayette, who had been so successfully harassing the British, Tarleton in particular, was too far away to be of any assistance. The enormity of the situation sat squarely on Captain Jouetts broad shoulders.

Col Banastre Tarleton A.k.a "Bloody Bana" or "the Butcher" is the historical figure for which  Col. William Tavington from the 2000 film "The Patriot" is loosely based on.

Revere rode only 15 miles over good roads. Col. Tarleton certainly had advance scouts on the road to Charlottesville, hence that route was denied to Jouett. He had to go through the tangled Virginia backwoods.

No sooner had the hoofbeats of the British Dragoons faded into the night, when Captain Jouett saddled his horse and plunged into the dense woods.

I have stood in awe of Paul Revere's great deed most of my life, so I have to give props here. Jack had 40 miles between him and Charlottesville where Thomas Jefferson was staying at his Monticello.

With the first light of dawn he arrived at Thomas Jefferson's famous home, Monticello. He awoke Governor Jefferson and some of the Virginia Legislators who were staying at Monticello. Then, without hesitation, the exhausted Captain turned his horse and galloped to Charlottesville to spread the alarm. The Assemblymen at Charlottesville scattered, but only after voting to reconvene on June 7th at Staunton.

Shortly after Governor Jefferson received the warning, he dispatched his family, gathered his important papers and then, he too departed.

Imagine if the British had captured Jefferson on June 4th? Being one month before the 5th anniversary of the Declaration of Independance the loss of Jefferson would have been a serious blow to morale.

God Bless America. Truly the Home of the Brave!

Barack O'Bama and the Luck of the Irish!

How fitting it is that a place in Iresland called Moneygall claims President O'bama as their native son.


Obama Arrives in Ireland for Six-Day Trip to Europe

MONEYGALL, Ireland — President Obama may not be related to everybody in this postage-stamp Irish hamlet of 300, which claims him as its native son. But on Monday, Mr. Obama appeared determined to hug, kiss, shake hands or raise a glass with every last one of them.

He must have found a pot-o-gold at the end of a rainbow, because Ireland is stoked!

Moneygall’s association with Mr. Obama has transformed it into an instant tourist destination. Or, as Susan Wallace, a lifelong resident said optimistically, “The name might change to Money-all.”

Even if they don't get the tourist traffic they are hoping for they still might call it Money-all.

Obama Promises U.S. Support for Ireland’s Efforts on Economy After Bailout

President Barack Obama, on the first stop of a four-country European trip, pledged the U.S. will “do everything that we can to be helpful” to aid Ireland’s economic recovery.

This has lead many to speculate that O'bama is contemplating a U.S, Sponsored bailout for Ireland? Just like Egypt?

This guy is throwing money at countries like a drunken sailor! And then he's going to come back and read the riot sct to congress because they won't raise the debt ceiling. Apparently they have a problem borrowing money from the Chinese and then turning around and giving it to other countries.

Faith and Begorrah!

World Ends Tomorrow: So just in case.....

I am going to finish my best bottle of whiskey tonight.

Also, I pledge to get in one more round of golf. I'll need an 11:30 tee time just to be sure to have enough time to finish the round and have a few beers at the club house before 6pm rolls around.

My recommendation for movie viewing tonight is "The Seventh Sign".  You can stream it on NetFlix.

On Sunday, I expect to be replacing that really good bottle of whiskey, and maybe playing another round of golf.

Hey Santana! Shut Up and Play!

Long respected rock and toll oldie Carlos Santana has put aside his tiresome but distinctive sound for a new but even more tiresome tune.

Carlos Santana uses Phillies-Braves ceremony to criticize immigration law

Carlos Santana was given the Beaconof Change award before the Atlanta Braves' fifth annual Civil Rights Game on Sunday against the Philadelphia Phillies and he used the opportunity to criticize Arizona and Georgia for their new immigration laws.

Saying he represented immigrants, the Grammy winner said at Turner field, “The people of Arizona, and the people of Atlanta, Georgia, you should be ashamed of yourselves.”

On Friday, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal signed a bill that requires many employers to check the immigration status of new hires and authorizes law enforcement officers to check the status of some suspects. The law, one of the toughest in the nation, is similar in some respects to one enacted last year in Arizona.

“This law is not correct. It's a cruel law, actually,” Santana, who emigrated to San Francisco in the 1960s, said after the ceremony. “This is about fear. Stop shucking and jiving. People are afraid we're going to steal your job. No, we aren't. You're not going to change sheets and clean toilets. ...

“This is the United States. This is the land of the free. If people want the immigration laws to keep passing, then everybody should get out and leave the American Indians here.”

 The notion that there should be no immigration laws and that any one should be able to come to this country any time and be able to pick and choose what laws they feel like following is absurd. No country on earth has such a policy. Santana, a Mexican immigrant himself, should look to reform his Motherland, and it's hypocritical position on immigration.

Viva la Crimmigrants!

Even in Europe, the open borders within the EU are retreating. They are relearning why there are good reasons to have a secure border.

Someone please tell Carlos that it has nothing to do with fear. It has nothing to do with racism. It has everything to do with the rule of law. If you don't like the law, well that's OK, you are free to set about getting it changed. It's a democracy here in the United States, and that's the way it works, but spare us your whiny holier-than-thou condescension and your preposterous notion that anyone can come here anytime they want without permission.

Illegal immigration posts

Happy Mothers Day

Happy Mother's Day to all the Mom's out there

Ocho de Mayo

Headline: Osama Bin Laden Is Still Dead

May Day! Osama Bin Laden is Dead!

Happy belated May Day.

What is usually a celebration of communist ideals will hopefully be replaced with a day remembered for nothing other than the death of Osama Bin Laden.

We rejoice at his demise. We now know that his life for the past ten years was to cower in a mansion that was his self imposed prison, in Pakistan, very close to a Pakistani military installation.

My only wish is that like with the death of Hitler, that this meant the end of the war. But, I fear not.

Homeland Security has elevated it's threat level/stance/guard or what ever the hell they are using these days, because of perceived possibilities of retaliation.

Fear not. The Al Qaeda animals would have already attacked us if they had the capabilities. They have never held back. When they have the chance, they take their shot. Any cries of reprisal from Bin Laden's followers means nothing.

Maybe the people that brought you the shoe bomb, and then the underwear bomb are now working on the turban bomb or brazier bomb, but you should not fret as they will fail in the same laughable way.

Screw you Bin Laden!

Your burial at sea befits your subhuman existence. You belong at the bottom of the sea. May the fish and the crustaceans rip the flesh from your bones, and may eels and snails use your skull as their new homes.

God Bless Seal Team Six!

---

Topics for another day: Obama sanctions state sponsored assassinations? The seal team went in with orders to kill. Unlike Bush who said he wanted Osama dead or alive, Obama clearly wanted him dead. Don't get me wrong, I do not criticize that decision. It just seems to me that some one with his ideology would never sign up for state sponsored assassination. Perhaps it was the thought of the nightmare that bringing Osama to the what should be closed Guantanamo prison would bring that made the president say "screw it, just kill him!".

Union and Labor Organizations Lay Siege to the Massachusetts Capitol

Well, not really.

But that is the headline you would have expected to read given the actions and the media coverage that took place when Wisconsin moved to revoke some collective bargaining rights, why wouldn't the same thing happen in Massachusetts? Because Massachusetts is union strong and would never do such a thing? Wrong!

Union Busting, Massachusetts Style

Pop quiz: What political party, in what state, this week passed a bill in the dead of night stripping public-sector unions of their collective- bargaining powers? Republicans in Wisconsin? The GOP in Ohio or Indiana?

Try Democrats in Massachusetts. Maybe the debate over public-sector benefits isn't all that ideological after all.

Where are the banging drums? Where is the overnight occupation of the capitol building? Why aren't union thugs physically blocking lawmakers from entering the premises to vote?

There are none. The unions are stunned. This is not how the corrupt system of collective bargaining is supposed to work! Especially not in true blue Massachusetts!

Robert J. Haynes, president of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, was so irked he forgot to stick to the union script about "rights" and a "war" on the "middle class." He skipped to the real outrage—that the 81 Democrats who voted for the bill were failing to play by the political rules. "These are the same Democrats that all these labor unions elected. The same Democrats who we contributed to in their campaigns," he complained. The unions would fight this to the "bitter end," he vowed. "Massachusetts is not the place that takes collective bargaining away from public employees."

The system where unions collect dues from employees (against their will if necessary) and then hand that money to politicians who in return strengthen the unions position and funnel more tax payer money to the unions is a vicious circle of corruption. But like most criminals their greed knows no bounds and they have negotiated themselves agreements that the tax base can no longer afford. They are willing to kill the goose that lays their golden eggs.

Municipal health costs have as a result averaged near 11% growth annually—for a decade. The average premium is today 37% higher than in the private sector, and one-third higher than premiums for federal plans. The numbers have so exploded that personnel costs—salaries and benefits—are now eating up an astonishing 75% of local Massachusetts budgets.

So where are the SEIU and AFL-CIO armies? Where is the siege of the capitol and the intimidation of local businesses to support the unions? Why didn't the Democratically controlled State House members run away from themselves and take refuge in nearby New Hampshire or Rhode Island?

Wisconsin moved to rein in collective bargaining powers that are crushing the state. Massachusetts moved to rein in collective bargaining powers that are crushing the state. The only difference is that Democrats have chosen to portray Mr. Walker's legislation as "union-busting" while presenting their own as necessary reform.

Now, everybody act surprised!

Trump for President: The Art of the Spiel. Trump 1 Obama 0

It's been fun watching and listening to all the varied spin, er, I mean analysis on the Trump/Obama birth certificate story.

It was surreal to be watching cable news and hear that President Obama would be speaking to the nation in ten minutes regarding his birth certificate, and then immediately after that watch Donald Trump get out of his Helicopter in Portsmouth NH and claim credit for being the one who finally got the President to release his birth certificate.

Trump Takes Credit For Obama Releasing A Birth Certificate

"I'm taking great credit and you have to ask the president, 'why didn't he do this a long time ago? Why didn't he do it a long time ago?' When Hillary Clinton was asking, when everybody was asking, why didn't he do it? It's shocking. It's shocking," Donald Trump said at a press conference this morning on President Obama's birth certificate.

I was literally laughing out loud, shaking my head, clapping slowly and thinking "Beautiful, just Beautiful".

Having grown up in New Jersey, and having gone to college in New York City I have been exposed to the Donald a little longer than the rest of the nation. I respect and like Mr Trump, but when I heard he was running for president I thought, "here we go again". Yes, I was dismissive. But my head is now turned, and I am listening closely.

Here is what others are thinking and saying.

Right, Wing-Nut!: Birthers 1, Obama 0

Even with an offical long-form birth certificate, Obama has lost this round badly to the "birthers".  If they're the crazy nincompoops that the media makes them out to be, and yet are able to bend the president to their will, well...what does that say about his mental capabilities,exactly?

Keith Olbermann: Maguffins 1 Obama 0

It is another reflection of our well-meaning but sometimes utterly tone-deaf President that he really dug up the long-form birth certificate – even after the previous one had been released,

Going on to say that of course this is all due to racism.

And then from the Wall Street Journal.

Born in the U.S.A. 

As for Mr. Obama, he easily could have allowed the birther bubble to grow, further tarnishing the mainly right-leaning crowd that either fell for it or, as with Sarah Palin, was willing to give it too much credence. He then could have pricked that bubble by releasing the certificate at a moment of maximum political convenience to his re-election campaign. That the President didn't do so is an act of leadership that deserves a note of appreciation.

Pretty charitable of the WSJ. But, sorry, I can't agree. Obama did this to himself. He could have put this to bed a long long time ago by releasing the very same birth certificate he released yesterday, but the fact of the matter is that he did not. The super genius - smarter than all of us president held it back for all of the cynical political evil genius motives that the WSJ suggests, and insiders have confirmed. And sorry, it was not an act of leadership that lead him to release the birth certificate, it was Donald J Trump who was beating the president like a baby seal over this issue, and the president wanted it to stop. I think that is a form of Karma when you do something for evil selfish purposes and it comes back to bite you. Mr Obama really has no one to blame but himself.

Not ever being a "birther" myself I do have to admit to taking immense amusement and schadenfreude over the whole ordeal. After all, it was the democratic party that first went after John McCain as being not qualified to serve as president because he was born in Panama. More Karma, don't you think?

And in the Irony department? This whole movement was born of a Clintonista dirty trick. Her team originally made the assertion. The "birthers" are not just GOP'ers as the main stream media would have you believe. There are a lot of female Hillary supporters out there who hate the president for what he did to their Hillary.

Anyways, I guess in the big picture, it is good when the circus leaves town, but somehow you still miss it a little.

the thinker: Being A Skeptic

Interesting post over at the ThinkingProf Blog.

the thinker: Being A Skeptic

He writes what I consider to be an irrefutable truth. Especially with the 'I get my news from John Stewart' demographic.

At times, I'm not sure people are even reading--much less reading critically and carefully--the information that they present and the links that they post.

And then goes on and uses one of my posts as an example.

I like the post because imparts some historical details I previously did not know (historical perspectives is a stated goal of this blog). It's worth a read.

I think his overall point is that in the arena of discourse facts can be used fast and loose and details may be obscured?

In this day and age of the sound bite, 'John Stewart as a Journalist', and hyperbolic propaganda, I could not agree more. I just feel a little self-conscious that I was singled out (not really). I would urge the professor to cite examples of the left committing similar transgressions (if that is what in fact he thinks they are) as well.

I am not sure the professor necessarily debunked the message I tried to convey by using the quote which was "The girl couldn't quite communicate the point of her sign. She was just super smart and if you didn't get it then you were just too dumb"

Kiss My Hamas: Part X

While there is zero national interest for the United States to be bombing Libya, we are there, and we are actively participating in the bombing of targets of opportunity.

Now in Syria the Military has turned on it's protestors in much the same way that Qaddafi did.

Seeing regime change in Syria is in the national interest of the United States.

Syria is the lynch pin to the Iran, Hamas, & Hezbollah triad. Through Syria, Iran is able to supply Hezbollah and Hamas with weapons with which they can perform acts of terror and acts of war on Israel. President Obama has an opportunity to influence a significant shift of power among Mideast blocs to be further in the pro-west camps.

Will he do so? Doubtful.

Either by massive miscalculation, stupidity, naivete, wishful thinking, or just plain dumb luck President Obama has made the wrong move in every critical turn with his dealings in the Mideast.

1. First the president was unable to convince Iran to stop it's nuclear ambitions with his unicorns and fuzzy bunny era of detente.
2. Then the president ignored the Green Revolution. When the population of Iran came out to protest the corrupt election, and protest their oppressive government much like they did in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia, the president showed no support and let the movement be brutally put down by their government, much like Libya and Syria are trying to do.
3. The president publicly cooled relations with America's staunchest Mideast ally Israel.
4. Despite remaining quiet and inactive when our enemies in Iran were threatened with public uprising, President Obama publicly comes out and calls for regime change in Egypt (which he never did for Iran). Mubarak wasn't a nice guy, but he was in the pro-Western bloc, and faster than you can say Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama through Mubarak under the bus.
5. Having witnessed the United States throwing Mubarek under the bus, Col. Qaddafi a recently reformed western antagonist determines he must take take matters into his own hands, and uses military force to quell the uprising. Just like they did in Iran when the west did nothing. President Obama sends the military into Libya on humanitarian grounds.

Now what? Just like Libya, the Syrian government is using it's military to quell the public uprising. Will Syria get the Libya treatment or the Iranian treatment?

If they are not treated the same way Libya has been handled, then what does that say? Does it mean that if you are friendly towards the United States or at least not an antagonist you can be sure that America will stab you in the back? But if you are an open aggressor of the great Satan you can rest assured that your enemy is too timid to dare and reproach you (at least with anything more than words).

Or worse, does it merely mean that the Obama doctrine is that we only fight wars for oil.

Most of Obama's Mideast blunders are documented on this blog.
Kiss My Hamas
Very Foreign Policy