Sunday, October 30, 2011

Worse than a delusional drug addict…


At least a delusional addict doesn’t jeopardize the lives of thousands or perhaps millions.  But the United States shares many of the same characteristics of a delusional addict, and with worse consequences.  Among these characteristics are a schizophrenic  personality when dealing with friends and enemies, an absolute denial of his consumption problem, denial of the evil of the source of his substance abuse, and a total disregard for the consequences for the supplier’s indefensible and likely deadly actions.

In this case the delusional addict is the United States, the abused substance is oil.  The source of the substance is Saudi Arabia, the evil is Saudi Arabia’s ideology and anti-Semitism, and the consequences are our blindness to Saudi duplicity and the great potential for another 9-11, the annihilation of Israel, or worse.

How much of our substance of choice comes from Saudi Arabia?  Nearly 10% of our imports.  And we need to remember that Saudi Arabia is the “Don” that greases the palms of other Middle Eastern Islamic countries who supply another 15 to 20% of our total imports.

Now, let’s address our delusion.

How many of the 19 9-11 hijackers were Saudi?

American Airlines Flight 11 - One World Trade Center
Hijackers: Mohamed Atta (Egyptian), Waleed al-Shehri (Saudi Arabian), Wail al-Shehri (Saudi Arabian), Abdulaziz al-Omari (Saudi Arabian), Satam al-Suqami (Saudi Arabian).[7]
United Airlines Flight 175 - Two World Trade Center

Hijackers: Marwan al-Shehhi (United Arab Emirati), Fayez Banihammad (United Arab Emirati), Mohand al-Shehri (Saudi Arabian), Hamza al-Ghamdi (Saudi Arabian), Ahmed al-Ghamdi (Saudi Arabian).[7]

American Airlines Flight 77 - Pentagon

Hijackers: Hani Hanjour (Saudi Arabian), Khalid al-Mihdhar (Saudi Arabian), Majed Moqed (Saudi Arabian), Nawaf al-Hazmi (Saudi Arabian), Salem al-Hazmi (Saudi Arabian).[7]

United Airlines Flight 93

Hijackers: Ziad Jarrah (Lebanese), Ahmed al-Haznawi (Saudi Arabian), Ahmed al-Nami (Saudi Arabian), Saeed al-Ghamdi (Saudi Arabian).[7]

Well, golly gee, 14 our of the 19 were Saudis.  We’ve all known that since a week after 9-11.  But what have we done with that knowledge?  Saudi Arabia continues to be our 2nd best ally in the Middle East after the only nation whose values we share, Israel.  Oh, I forgot.  In Obama’s mind Saudi Arabia is No. 1.

I’ve often wondered why we went after Afghanistan and Iraq while we totally buddied up with Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is also the number one funder of Islamic Mosques in the United States which are used as sites of sedition and promoters of Sharia Law in the US.

And now look who is rewarding the capture of Israeli soldiers who will be kept as ransom for Islamic terrorists who randomly blow up buses, schools, and kids in Israel?  

Saudi royal offers $900,000 reward for capture of Israeli soldiers

Khaled's offer comes days after the prominent Saudi cleric, Awad al-Qarni, put $100,000 on the head of every Israeli soldier.

By DPA Tags: IDFPalestiniansHamasGilad Shalit

RIYADH - A Saudi royal offered a $900,000 reward to anyone who captures an Israeli soldier, on Saturday. Prince Khaled bin Talal, the brother of business tycoon Walid bin Talal, told the Saudi-based broadcaster Al Daleel that the captive would then be released in exchange for Arabs held in Israeli prisons.

Khaled's offer comes days after the prominent Saudi cleric, Awad al-Qarni, put $100,000 on the head of every Israeli soldier.

Al-Qarni's statement - posted on Facebook - was severely criticized, and messages posted online even warned of death threats.

Khaled told the broadcaster: "My offer also comes in response to the threats made against Sheikh al-Qarni."

The Saudi offers follows the recent deal between the Israeli government and Hamas, when Israel agreed to release 1,027 Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Gilad Shalit.

Am I the only one who feels betrayed by our policy toward Saudi Arabia?  Oh, I forgot.  We are an addict.  Saudi Arabia is a major supplier.  Our addiction causes our delusion.

Saturday, October 29, 2011

They won’t do the work Americans will do


It has finally happened.  Foreigners refusing to do the work Americans will do.  In this case it is a group of college-aged students from Turkey who were promised wonderful things by our State Department – instead finding themselves actually working – working, I say - in a Hershey candy factory in Pennsylvania.

Just in from the “I would not be surprised” department:  I would not be surprised if many of these foreign students joined the Occupy Wall Street Movement complaining about the cruelty of capitalism.  And I would not be surprised if the State Department bused them to Wall Street so they can experience “American Democracy in Action.”

Lucy and Ethyl at the candy factory doing  jobs Americans do, although their technique leaves a little to be desired.

Here is the story from the Washington Post:

Foreign students say visa program abused
By Pamela Constable, Saturday, October 29, 9:30 AM

For years, it has been touted as a form of vacation diplomacy: a U.S. government program that selects college students from across the globe to come work at beach resorts, amusement parks and other seasonal jobs. In the process, the visitors are expected to imbibe American culture, practice English and take home fond memories.

But this August, a group of students complained that their work conditions were closer to a sweatshop than a summer break, sparking demands for government intervention and a firestorm of bad publicity that federal officials are now trying to tamp down.

More than 300 young foreigners, packing candy in a warehouse in Pennsylvania, staged a high-profile walkout and protest against their employers and the State Department, which oversees the program. They alleged that they had been worked to exhaustion and had met few Americans except supervisors who pressed them to pack faster and threatened to have them deported.

“My parents agreed to send me because it would be a way to improve my English,” wrote Aysel Kiyaker, a student from Turkey who paid $3000 for her airfare and work visa. “They told us the job would be easy and fun and they would have pizza parties for us.”

Instead, Kiyaker found herself lifting heavy boxes on long shifts in the rural factory, owned by the Hershey Company. “After work my whole body was numb,” she wrote in an affidavit for the National Guestworker Alliance. She said one friend was threatened after she complained, and another was fired for not working fast enough. “After that happened, people were more afraid.”

The non-profit guest-worker group took up the students’ cause and filed a formal complaint against the State Department, as well as Hershey and the Council for Educational Travel USA (CETUSA), charging that they had exploited the students as cheap labor. The strike ignited a media frenzy and raised alarms in Congress, in part because of concerns that American workers were being displaced.

CETUSA, which manages the program for the State Department, denied the allegations. Company officials suggested the striking students had been misled by union activists, and said they had placed other students at Hershey for seven summers without any problems. Hershey officials said they owned the building but had no role in hiring or supervising the students, which were handled through sub-contractors.

“If any of them were dissatisfied, we were not hearing it,” said Terry Watson, CETUSA’s president. “We sponsor thousands of students every summer. The great majority of them have a wonderful experience and go home spreading the good word of America.”

But the bad publicity stunned and embarrassed the State Department. Officials there promised to investigate the alleged abuses and review the program, which brings more than 100,000 foreign students to the U.S. every summer. This week, department officials said they are planning a major overhaul to prevent such problems from recurring and reinforce the program’s diplomatic purpose.

“We want to make sure it meets our goals for worthwhile exchanges that promote better relations with other countries,” said Michael Hammer, an acting assistant secretary of state, adding that the summer jobs are supposed to be part of a “positive cultural experience.”

In July, before the Hershey case erupted, the department tightened program rules after reporting an increase in “fraudulent job offers, lax job vetting” and other problems. Yet Hammer said that more than 90 per cent of students report being satisfied with their experiences — and that many re-apply for a second summer.

Vlad Bicu, 26, a student from Romania, worked in Colonial Williamsburg for two summers and returned this June to work at an amusement park in Ohio. Each time he has saved his wages to travel around the United States before returning home. “I have seen all America now,” Bicu said this week while visiting New York City. “Your Grand Canyon is the most beautiful thing I have ever seen.”

Yin Fung Tan, 23, a student from Malaysia, spent this summer at Morey’s Piers, an amusement complex on the New Jersey shore, earning an average of $300 a week as a cashier and ride operator. The most important thing she learned was “to look people in the eye and speak to them. In our culture we never do that,” she said.

Company officials at Morey’s Piers said they recruit more than 700 foreign students each summer, travelling to job fairs from Singapore to Dublin. All start at $7.25 per hour and work alongside American students. “They learn from each other, and it changes their lives,” said Denise Beckson, director of human resources.

Labor activists, however, asserted that the alleged abuses were far more typical than officials acknowledge. They said even students in lighter hospitality jobs are often underpaid, poorly housed and threatened with losing their visas or right to return if they complain.

“While the State Department was asleep at the wheel, this entire program has turned into a captive labor source where students are exploited for profit,” said Saket Soni, executive director of the guest-worker group. He said the program left U.S. workers “locked out” of steady jobs and foreign students “locked in.”

The State Department already has rules in place to protect foreign student workers, who must be paid minimum wage and are banned from certain risky or sensitive jobs, such as patient care and adult entertainment. This week, department officials said they are planning to add further safeguards before the next students arrive.

In the Hershey case, however, officials said only that their investigation is “ongoing,” and they have taken no action against CETUSA, Hershey or its sub-contractors. In detailed formal complaints, the guest-worker group described systematic efforts to intimidate students who complained and charged that government investigators had worked in tandem with factory managers.

CETUSA, in turn, has fought back with competing affidavits from former Hershey workers. It quoted Lenka Vavrova, a Polish student, as saying she was “ashamed” of her co-workers for causing a fuss. They all knew what to expect at the candy factory, she wrote. “If they did not like it, they should have chosen something else.”

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Economic uncertainty: Is it Europe or is it Obama?

Wall Street seems to be greatly comforted by the deal struck by European leaders to bolster their bailout stash.  Up yesterday on the “hope” of a deal, and up twice a much today on the reality.

While it is too soon to tell whether Europe’s  fiscal precipice or Obama’s fiscal pubescence has been the primary cause of our economic doldrums, Europe seems to be winning at the moment.

If it turns out that the majority of our economic plight has been Europe-inspired and not Obama-inspired, and the unemployment rate begins to decline as a result, the Presidential race will become enormously more challenging for conservatives.

Not to wish economic doom and gloom, but a decisive, clear cut failure of the incumbent is much easier to deal with than a murky revival.

This is all to say that conservative candidates MUST, MUST, MUST promote talking points beyond the economy and the unemployment rate and jobs.  As mentioned in a previous blog, there are a number of other hot-button topics that are campaign-worthy.  These need to begin to be rolled out in earnest.

They include:
  • Government spending, waste, and collusion with wall street, big banks, and big business
  • Foreign policy, especially as regards our acknowledgement of the wastefulness in throwing money and resources at Islamic cultures while we ignore our long time allies.
  • Energy independence – drill, baby, drill and other things
  • Illegal immigration continues to sap our resources and dilute our culture
  • Excessive environmental regulation and taxation that chase business overseas.
Let’s hope we are not caught flatfooted with a single (jobs) issue campaign.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

More dissimilation from Occupy Wall Street

In the “wolf in sheep’s clothing” category is Karl Denninger.  Denninger is a “virtual” OWS protester who is weirdly portrayed as a conservative.  He is a rather strange animal who dabbles in economics and has embraced the credit of starting the Tea Party, along the lines of Al Gore inventing the internet.

His latest two very UN-conservative acts are 1)  highlighting police peace keeping actions taken out of context to incite anti- police outrage (not mentioning that the intent of the protestors is to bait police a hundred times a day, and 2) bragging on Russia Today that he is supporting the OWS movement – a very Dixie Chick-esque anti-American thing to do.
Here is Denninger’s entry on Wikipedia:
Karl Denninger was the CEO of MCSNet in Chicago, one of the area's first Internet providers. He is a founding contributer to conservative blog and was one of the early members of the Tea Party movement ("I cannot take credit for the idea floated on the forum, but I do like it").[1] Rick Santelli's CNBC mention of a tea party followed Mr. Denninger's blog entry on January 20th.
On January 20, 2009 Denninger published a blog post regarding the suggestion to mail tea-bags to the White House and Congress. The title of his post was "Tea Party February 1st?" It was written on the same day and in response to President Obama's inauguration[2], even though Denninger had voted for Obama.[3] The blog-post took issue with the bank bailouts, the US national debt and "the fraud and abuse in our banking and financial system" which included the predatory lending practices at the center of the home mortgage foreclosure crisis.[4]
Denninger, who helped form FedUpUSA in the wake of the March 2008 Federal Reserve bail-out of Bear Sterns, has been a guest on MSNBC, Glenn Beck and CNBC Reports.[5][6] By February 1, the idea had spread to various conservative and libertarian-oriented blogs, forums, websites and through a viral email campaign.[7]
On Oct 20, 2010, he blogged that Republicans had hijacked the Tea Party movement, and perverted its original goals to the standard Republican concerns of "guns, gays and God."[8].
Denninger stated on Russia Today that he supports the Occupy Wall Street movement.[9]

Denninger’s rants on his website take on a decidedly pro-anarchy, left wing community organizer slant.  Yes, anarchy and left wing do fit together just as well as Denninger and the OWS movement.  First comes anarchy – mock the idea of getting permits for protests, break the rules, discredit any authority, do all you can to incite the cops, flaunt the laws, raise hell, create chaos.  That is the anarchy part.  The leftist part is to get rid of capitalism and get the government involved in wealth redistribution.  The leftist part is also a huge dose of personal irresponsibility – an infantile urge to have others provide for them.  Denninger fits the mold of an uppity intellectual who believes he is god’s gift to socialism.  Perhaps he is.  Odd bird, indeed.  In fact there is a whole flock of them in the OWS movement.   Many well meaning people will be deceived.  It will not end well.

Beware when socialists sing The Star Spangled Banner

There is a new tactic that will confuse patriotic conservatives and independents.  It is the singing of patriotic songs by socialists, communists, radicals, America-haters, and Islamists.  Very confusing.  In fact, it is confusing by design.

You see, the left understands that voters, in fact, most Americans, don’t pay much attention to the politics going on around them.  Most are easily fooled by superficial bull-crap.  That is not to say that patriotic songs are “artificial bull-crap.”  But when such songs are used by those who disbelieve and actually dislike the words and meaning behind them in order to deceive the masses, that is unadulterated bull-crap piled exceedingly high.

But the fact is that these deceitful actions by the anarchist mobs desiring to create chaos and destroy our government also desire to divide and conquer those who sincerely stand for our way of life, personal initiative, and capitalism. 

So, beware the wolves wrapped in patriotic garb.  We are the ones who will look sheepish if we fall for their deceit.


Occupiers sing the national anthem, while an Orlando Police Officer takes down the American flag and removes it from the occupation site.
Police Evict Occupy Orlando from Senator Beth Johnson Park
October 26, 2011, Orlando
source: Lance Turner/


Occupiers sing the national anthem, while an Orlando Police Officer takes down the American flag and removes it from the occupation site.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

City with 11% unemployment invites immigrants to revive the City

This story has nothing to do with illegal immigrants – it has to do with insane City policy.

Dayton, OH, with an 11% unemployment rate and a rapidly declining population, is apparently desperate for “economic development.” So what do they do to economically develop?  They consciously adopted  “a plan to encourage immigrants to come and feel welcome here…to use them to help pull out of an economic tailspin.”

Of course, the fact that “Dayton officials said their plan still needs funding and volunteers to help put it in place…” could be a challenge.  What wealth redistribution plan doesn’t need funding?”  And what is the extra funding for?  “…Increasing information and access to government, social services and housing issues; language education and help with identification cards, and grants and marketing help for immigrant entrepreneurs to help build the East Third Street section.”

Let me understand this.  Dayton has a significant unemployment problem and a rapidly declining population resulting from the lack of jobs.  The folks who left are probably the ones who could afford to eat out occasionally.  The ones who remain are the poor.   Their recovery plan is to encourage repopulation with thousands of immigrants who don’t have an education, who don’t have any visible means of support, who have minimal skills, and who need significant amounts of government funding to make it all work.  They will fill jobs and create businesses that serve the remianing declining population who can afford to buy anything.

What the article fails to mention is the source of these “local government funds” that support this counterintuitive plan.  My use of the word “counterintuitive” is not in the sense of “inspiring out-of-the-box thinking” but more in the sense of “non-sensical” and  “insane.”

What do you want to bet that “local government funding” is from you and me –our  tax dollars that went to Washington, had 20% taken out in federal administrative costs, repackaged, much like derivatives, into grants and associated doles to the City of Dayton for this “inspiring” socialist program headed toward the infamy of text books on local government policy under the category of “the dumbest local economic development policies ever.”

Here is the full story:

Dayton, Ohio, welcomes immigrants as policy point



DAYTON, Ohio On the same afternoon thousands of Hispanics in Alabama took the day off to protest the state's strict new immigration law, Mexican-born Francisco Mejia was ringing up diners' bills and handing containers piled with carnitas to drive-thru customers on the east side of Dayton.

His family's Taqueria Mixteca is thriving on a street pockmarked with rundown buildings and vacant storefronts. It gets packed with a diverse lunchtime clientele of Hispanic laborers, white men in suits and other customers, white and black. "Business is very good," Mejia said, smiling broadly between orders.

It's the kind of success story that leaders in Dayton think offers hope for an entire city. It has adopted a plan not only to encourage immigrants to come and feel welcome here, but also to use them to help pull out of an economic tailspin.

Dayton officials, who adopted the "Welcome Dayton" plan unanimously Oct. 5, say they aren't condoning illegal immigration; those who come here illicitly will continue to be subject to U.S. laws.

While states including Alabama, Georgia and Arizona, as well as some cities, have passed laws in recent years cracking down on illegal immigrants, Dayton officials say they will leave that to federal authorities and focus instead on how to attract and assimilate those who come legally.

Other cities, including nearby Columbus and Indianapolis, have programs to help immigrants get government and community help, but Dayton's effort has a broader, and more urgent, feel.

Mayor Gary Leitzell told the city commission before the vote that immigrants bring "new ideas, new perspectives and new talent to our workforce. ... To reverse the decades-long trend of economic decline in this city, we need to think globally."

Hard-hit for years by the struggles of U.S. manufacturing, particularly in the auto industry, the recession pounded Dayton, which as the Wright Brother's hometown calls itself "the birthplace of aviation."

Thousands of jobs were lost with the crippling 2009 exodus to Georgia of NCR (formerly National Cash Register), one of Dayton's signature corporations, after 125 years, and by the 2008 shutdown of a General Motors plant in suburban Moraine.

Dayton's unemployment is nearly 11 percent, 2 percent higher than the national average, while population has fallen below 142,000, down 15 percent from 2000. Meanwhile, the city's official foreign-born population rose 57 percent, to 5,102, from 2000 to 2010, according to census figures.

City leaders aiming to turn Dayton around started examining the immigrant population: Indian doctors in hospitals; foreign-born professors and graduate students at the region's universities; and owners of new small businesses such as a Turkish family's New York Pizzeria on the city's east side and Hispanic-run car lots, repair shops and small markets. They say immigrants have revitalized some rundown housing, moving into and fixing up what had been vacant homes.

"This area has been in a terrible recession, but it would be even worse without them," said Theo Majka, a University of Dayton sociology professor who, with his sociologist wife Linda Majka, has studied and advocated for Dayton's immigrants. "Here we have this underutilized resource."

Dayton officials say their plan still needs funding and volunteers to help put it in place; they hope by the end of the year. Its key tenets include increasing information and access to government, social services and housing issues; language education and help with identification cards, and grants and marketing help for immigrant entrepreneurs to help build the East Third Street section.

"We will be more diverse, we will grow, we will have more restaurants, more small businesses," said Tom Wahlrab, the city's human relations council director, who helped lead the plan's development.

Besides thousands of Hispanics, there are communities in Dayton of Iraqi refugees, Vietnamese and other Asians, Africans from several countries, and Russians and Turks who, officials say, are already living here quietly and industriously.

"Immigrants are hard workers with a propensity to create jobs, and this will invigorate the economy," said Festus Nyiwo, an attorney in his home country of Nigeria who has been a small-business entrepreneur since coming to Dayton about eight years ago.

Around the country, the bad economy has helped inspire new laws targeting illegal immigrants, seen as taking scarce jobs and overburdening schools, police and services.

In Alabama, a new law allows police to detain indefinitely those suspected of being in the country illegally and requires schools to check new students' status; some farms and businesses say they're losing workers because of it. Georgia and Arizona also added tough restrictions.

The immigration debate continues in Hazleton, Pa., where officials five years ago passed a law aimed at driving out illegal immigrants they blamed for drugs, violent crime and overwhelming schools and hospitals. The measure has since been tied up in court challenges.

Dorothy Balser, manager of refugee resettlement services for Catholic Social Services, said that finding jobs can be a struggle, but that refugees have generally been able to fit into the Dayton community. She thinks the Welcome Dayton plan will have a "natural positive effect" on those already here without causing a significant rise in numbers immediately.

Dayton's schools say they're helping 525 students learn English, up from 420 less than two years ago. About half are native Spanish-speakers; the rest are a mix of Turkish, Arabic, Swahili and more. They're ready to accept more.

"We already are currently experiencing many students from many nationalities living in Dayton. That is a reality," said Jill Moberly, a spokeswoman for Dayton Public Schools.

Opponents fear it will encourage illegal immigration and give preferences to immigrants.

"If Dayton wants to help build its economy by letting people know that legal immigrants are welcome, that's their prerogative," said Steve Salvi, founder of Ohio Jobs & Justice PAC, an advocacy group that focuses on illegal immigration. "But when they accept a plan that clearly has the purpose of including those (illegal) people, that's a problem for everyone."

Roy Barber, who owns Roy's Lock Shop on East Third Street, says he's been in business for 30 years and doesn't like the city's plan.

"Nobody ever talked to me," he said. "Why not help us?"

Barber said most of the neighborhood's Hispanic immigrants work hard and cause no problems. But he predicts Welcome Dayton will bring more illegal immigrants.

"You see people out on the street and you know they're illegal," he said.

Rich Lober, 50, a lifelong Dayton resident, said Mexican and other immigrants have helped East Third.

"I like the idea of rejuvenating this neighborhood," Lober said. But he said Dayton should look to draw back former residents.

"I'd like to see a 'Welcome Back.' They should include American citizens, too," Lober said.

Black resident David Dewberry told city officials it's important not to neglect predominantly black neighborhoods, where residents might wonder where their welcome plan is.

"Rightfully so, there are some lifelong residents who are disenchanted," he said.

At Taqueria Mixteca, Mejia's mother and restaurant manager, Marta Guzman, believes Welcome Dayton will help relieve stereotypes.

"I know there are some (immigrants) who are causing crime and problems," said Guzman, who has lived in the United States for three decades, legalized through the 1986 amnesty program.

"I have struggled a lot in this country, working two jobs, raising three children" as a single mother, she said. "Most of us are here to work hard and to live the American dream."

Will the new policy bring more immigrants? Mejia smiled again.

"We're already hearing that there are some Mexicans who are planning to come here from Alabama," he said.


Contributing to this report were Associated Press reporters Lisa Cornwell in Cincinnati, Michael Rubinkam in Allentown, Pa.; Jacques Billeaud in Phoenix and Jay Reeves in Birmingham, Ala.

Contact this reporter at

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Cain’s detractors

Who are Cain’s detractors?  Presently they include all of the other eight Republican contenders  and their fans, plus most of the mainstream media.  Each detractor is motivated by their own special interests to provide reasons to discredit Herman Cain and his proposals.  Some comments are silly and contrived.  Others are superficial without sufficient analysis and understanding.  And what have these detractors come up with to disparage Cain and his agenda?

Here are a few along with my comments about their irrelevance:

“I thought 9-9-9 was the price of a Godfather pizza” – Cute but meaningless.
“999 is too simple” – If you want complex, stick with what we have.  This comment is laughable.

“9-9-9 opens up a new source of taxation by Congress.”  - This sounded like a credible concern until I gave it a little thought.  Our present system’s years of convoluting, adding, laundering, pork barreling, exemptions, special favors, and complexity upon complexity have created unimaginable overhead costs, a huge industry desiring to perpetuate this monstrosity, and continuing undecipherable new tax laws from Congress.   And we are concerned about Congress screwing around with this new, simple, transparent tax system?  A system that if Congress attempts to change one number, that event will be clearly on the radar of every American?   Compare that to the hidden shenanigans that Congress thrives on today.  Plus, changing the tax rates for any of the three components of 9-9-9 will require a 2/3 majority of each house of Congress to change.  And, as I understand it, even the legislation creating the 9-9-9 plan could not be amended without a 2/3 majority by each house of Congress.  So the 2/3 majority rule could not be eliminated without a 2/3 majority.  This is as good as a Constitutional Amendment.

“Cain has no foreign policy experience” - First, none of the debates thus far spent more than a fraction of the time on foreign policy issues, and the few questions asked have been superficial at best.  So none of the candidates have really had an opportunity to address what they know and don’t know.   Question:  How much “foreign policy experience” do any of the candidates have?  Obama?  Arrggghhh!   Obama proves that even with his now going on three years of foreign policy experience one can do great damage to our foreign policy. 

What is more important in a candidate -  Experience or values and principles?  Evidence indicates that these are most important:  Having a firm grasp of guiding principles  for the role of this country in the world; having an appreciation for our foundational culture compared to that of other nations and cultures; and a clear understanding of who our friends and enemies are and using our limited resources accordingly.  And finally, assembling a knowledgeable team who shares these common values – if there are any such creatures existent in the State Department or academia.

“Cain is too hard on Islam” -  Yes, early in his campaign Cain expressed some firm language concerning the Islamic threat to this nation and what he would do about it.  In fact, he is one of the few candidates who clearly understands the Islamic threat.  Compare Cain’s understanding of the Islamic threat with that of other candidates HERE.

Cain was part of and supports the Federal Reserve:  Conservatives who want to abolish the Federal Reserve claim that Cain is a big fan of it because he was President of the Kansas City Board of the Federal Reserve for a few years.  True, Cain served on the Board of the Federal Reserve from 1992 to 1996.  Since then, Cain admits, the Federal Reserve has made some inappropriate decisions.  Cain wants the Fed to stop worrying about unemployment and foucs on keeping inlation low.  In his words, "the Fed's fous needs to be narrowed."   Cain has never been an "insider" of the Federal Reserve and is not a apologist for it.

“After Obama, I will never vote for another Afro-American” -  It is true.  Obama’s failed presidency tainted the idea of a “black” president.  However, this is a thoughtless position.   First, Obama is not black, or Afro-American.  He is a good part Caucasian.  Some speculate with good reason that he may by primarily Indonesian.

Such speculation aside, a potential president should be selected on his merits, not on his race.  If you were dumb enough to vote for Obama in the first place because of race, you are an idiot.

But, detractors and their issues will change over time.

If Cain wins the Republican nomination (in fact, whoever wins the Republican nomination) another crop of detractors will evolve:  The entire Democratic, Obama, Pelosi, Soros progressive/socialist machine.

This is where the republican campaign has to be nimble and ready to address topics other than those that have been beaten to death during the Republican debates.  The economy, jobs, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been the topics of today.  The topics of the summer and fall of 2012 have a good chance of being entirely different.

We will be out of Iraq.  We will be well on our way out of Afghanistan.  Obama can point to dissing Osama and Kaddafi.  There is a good chance that unemployment could be below 7% and declining.  If these things all occur, what are the issues for the Republicans?

Let’s look at a few.  Cain is best suited to addressing these other issues which should include at least the following:

Promoting growth in the private sector:  Romney is the only one who comes close to matching Cain's private sector record of experience and successes.  But as Cain points out, Cain's experience is more related to Main Street than to Wall Street.

Islam and national security:  The designs of Islam and Sharia Law our greatest national security threat.  The president must create an awareness of this threat in the same vein as knowing who are our friends and who are our enemies and why. The ignorant dhimmi attitude that prevails in the Justice Department must be reversed.

Environmental regulations:  Their excesses and detrimental effect on the growth of jobs and businesses in this nation is well documented.  The EPA needs to be defanged and a Department of Commerce and EPA merger may be one way to achieve this.

Energy:   Related to the gross excess of environmental regulations, energy independence is a huge weakness of the Obama administration.  A focus on shaking up the obese and useless Department of Energy should be paramount.  Its mission when it was created in 1977 was to make the US energy independent.   With a $26 billion a year budget and 24 years later we are MORE energy dependent on enemy nations around the world.

Tax reform:  Whether 9-9-9 or some other program of radical tax reform, this is a good topic to highlight democrat weakness.

The whole American exceptionalism, Judeo-Christian basis of our nation’s founding and related cultural promoting attitudes of our next president should be high on the priorities of our campaign trail.  This is the paramount weakness of Obama.  This is explored HERE.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

The liberation of independence…

How often do you have to bite your tongue, stifle your opinions, or otherwise feel you have lost your right to speak your mind on matters important to you because of your job?  This is a fact of life whether you have a job with government or in the private sector, whether you work for someone or are self-employed.

If you want to keep your job or your customers, you have to watch what you say.  You need to be careful not to offend your boss, your coworkers, your customers, your shareholders, or even the media.  Especially the media because even if bosses, coworkers, and customers agreed with what you said, the media often distorts our words to further their own agenda – letters to the editor included.

I understand there are consequences to our words and opinions – we are always responsible for what we say or write.

But being one who is predisposed to thinking and forming opinions on government policy, ideology, and morality, I find it exhilaratingly liberating to be not be working – having neither boss nor customers nor coworkers to worry about offending.  I didn’t realize how shackled my alleged “freedom of expression” was in my employment (most often for a local government) until I retired a few years ago.

Having to be merely “politically correct” isn’t the half it when we are subject to the constraints of employer and customer.  When we are indoctrinated in a particular profession, along with that profession comes a myriad of taboos, sacred cows, and ill-conceived fads.  Professions are full of thought police in government, in education, in businesses.  My former city planning profession is full of proponents of human-caused global warming, “green” development and construction standards (which often prove not cost effective),  poorly thought through “sustainable development” requirements, and proponents of constrictive and wasteful top down regional and state planning.

Peer review of new ideas is one thing.  Peer intimidation and out-casting is quite another.  Fortunately, these things have not happened to me for two reasons.  One is because I hewed the line and didn’t roam far afield from the politically correct way to think.  Secondly, I found a way to relate to the objectives of the places I chose to work so there was a minimum of cognitive dissonance.

But until I removed myself from my profession, employer, and customers, I didn’t appreciate how constrained I was and how liberated I feel now.   I really hate to say this, but as long as we have to be beholden to anyone for our income, we are NOT free – freedom is a myth - with one exception:  Welfare recipients.  Those who receive government welfare as their source of income are more free than those who earn their living.  How?  Because laws require welfare recipients to receive their checks no matter how outspoken they are about anything.    They can march and protest and flash mob to their heart’s content without fear of loss of their income.  Ironic, isn’t it. 

This makes me wonder how much better our society might be if employees were totally free to responsibly express themselves publicly on any topic without consequences.   That is a Pollyanna-esque thought, with the weasel word being “responsibly.”  One mans’ “responsibly” is another mans’ “irresponsibly.”

By the way, from the number of posts in my “Blog Archive” in the top right column of this blog can you guess what year I retired?

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Dual economy killers: “Free” trade and enviro-Nazism

Two of the major causes of a crappy and declining US economy are the false promises of “free” trade and the reality of enviro-Nazism.  These two politically correct but destructive policies, together, result in unsustainable trade deficits, loss of jobs, greater national indebtedness, higher interest payments and will lead to the eventual collapse of our economy.

The two articles below summarize these joint self-imposed curses on our country.  Together they make it impossible for us to prosper and grow.

First, the enviro-Nazism article from The Blaze titled “Business  ‘A Clear Overreach’: Gibson CEO Blasts Justice Department.”  This article describes the strong-armed tactics of our government in seizing raw materials from the Gibson Guitar Company without any charges being filed.  The Justice Department (aka Department of Injustice under Obama) says they are enforcing a US law that protects the environment of another country.  Sources in that other country disagree.

Following that is the article from The Market Ticker titled “Free Trade = Free Financial Rapes.”  This article explains the pitfalls of our persistent $40 to $50 billion annual trade imbalance that requires our nation to increase its indebtedness each year.  Too many politicians have fallen into the trap of believing free trade is next to godliness when such beliefs are sinking our economy.

We must seek Presidential and Congressional candidates whose clear agenda is to eliminate these destructive legislative handcuffs on our economy.

Business ‘A Clear Overreach’: Gibson CEO Blasts Justice Department

Gibson Guitar Corp.’s chief slammed the U.S. government on Wednesday for sending armed agents to raid two Tennessee factories under a law aimed at curbing the illegal harvest of tropical hardwoods, reports Reuters.

“Armed people came in our factory … evacuated our employees, then seized half a million dollars of our goods without any charges having been filed,” Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz told reporters and others at a Washington lunch.

“I think it’s a clear overreach,” he said.

Government agents seized a total of over $1 million worth of rosewood, ebony and finished guitars from Gibson factories in Memphis and Nashville in raids in 2009 and August of this year, Juszkiewicz told Reuters.

Gibson’s factories remain open “under great difficulty” because the raids took most of the company’s raw materials, the CEO said. In a Capitol Hill forum Wednesday, Juszkiewicz told Republican lawmakers the raids have so far cost the company more than $3 million in legal fees and manufacturing disruptions.

The price of their products will likely go up because of the financial hit they have taken.

Furthermore, the CEO cautioned that American jobs could be sent overseas as a result of the federal harassment.

“You know, there’s a very real possibility we will have to move at least some processing [jobs] overseas,” the Daily Caller reports Juszkiewicz saying. “I’m trying to avoid that. But you know, I have to do what the business requires, and that’s a very realistic possibility.”

The U.S. Justice Department declined on Wednesday to comment on the case but provided information on the Lacey Act, which aims to curb trafficking in wildlife, fish and plant products, including illegally obtained timber.

“By prohibiting trafficking in wood illegally harvested overseas, the Lacey Act prohibits companies from undercutting law-abiding U.S. wood products companies … by trading in artificially inexpensive raw materials that have been illegally harvested from foreign forests,” Justice and Interior department officials wrote in a letter.

Gibson Guitar uses a small fraction of the world’s tropical hardwoods, compared to that used for furniture and flooring, and because it uses so little it can use it sustainably, Juszkiewicz said.

“The issue here is not illegal logging or some conservation abuse,” he said. “The laws that are being identified by the Department of Justice have to do with protectionism by the country of origin, keeping work in that country and therefore not allowing something that isn’t that value-added to be exported.”

Gibson has filed suit in federal court in Nashville to recover the seized material, but that suit has been stayed while the investigation continues, reports Reuters.

Furthermore,  the guitar manufacturer has hired a Washington law firm to lobby on its behalf.

The Tennessean reports that Crowley & Morley LLP will lobby against the Lacey Act, which federal officials are investigating Gibson of violating.

Gibson’s chief said the law should be changed.

“I believe in the intent of the law … but I do believe that the way it‘s currently written allows what’s happening to me to happen to other companies, and that’s wrong,” he said.


"Free Trade" = Free Financial Rapes

And nowhere is it more evident than in the trade balance report for this month.

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, through the Department of Commerce, announced today that total August exports of $177.6 billion and imports of $223.2 billion resulted in a goods and services deficit of $45.6 billion, virtually unchanged from July, revised. August exports were $0.1 billion less than July exports of $177.7 billion. August imports were $0.1 billion less than July imports of $223.3 billion.

We are constantly told how "free trade" is good for America, and how it boosts our exports (and thus helps GDP - and employment.)

The truth is something else entirely.  Indeed, at this point one can no longer claim this is a "mistake"; it's an intentional fraud that is pushed by multinational corporations and the politicians in their pockets.  How can one realistically argue with this chart?

You might as well print that gap in red, for the blood of our workers (and monetary balance.)  Or maybe yellow is accurate (you pick the pejorative that fits your particular worldview.)

When all is said and done this sort of utter crap requires the explicit "support" of the monetary authority (read: Bernanke) to be sustained.  Trade deficits cannot be sustained otherwise, as the shift of capital causes a change in the relative value of currencies (in a floating fiat currency regime) that cuts off the ability to sustain the imbalance.

So what has The Fed and Congress done?  Conspired to create credit to replace capital in the economy to the tune of nearly a half-trillion annually!

This in turn appears to make these trade deficits sustainable.  But all credit comes with interest due, and there is no such thing as a free lunch in this regard.  All we do is temporarily delay and compound the negative effects, shifting them to the nation's citizens.

Inflation-adjusted (that is, looking at purchasing power) wages have declined in the last decade... there's your consequences!

"Free trade" is misnamed - when you hear it, repeat back at the speaker "free financial rapes", because that's exactly what these policies are.

Saturday, October 08, 2011

Herman Cain at the Values Voter Summit…

This is a speech that is too good to ignore.

Cain is the most dynamic speaker of the lot of Republican candidates.  This is someone who has ideals and is confident enough about them to promote them with enthusiasm.

You gotta listen to this…

O’Reilly: The “fair and balanced” anti-ideologue

Glenn Beck recently had Bill O’Reilly as a guest on GBTV.  Among other topics, they discussed which presidential candidates would be best for our country.

This is where the philosophical differences between Beck and O’Reilly really showed.  And this difference also manifests itself in the difference between moderate (aka “Rhino) Republicans and truly conservative Republicans.

Start at around the 3:20 mark.

Bill took issue with several of the candidates being “ideologues.”  Glenn took issue with Bill taking issue.  Glenn, being more of an ideologue than Bill, supports candidates who happen to be such.

What is an ideologue?  From Merriam Webster’s on-line dictionary…

1: an impractical idealist : theorist

2: an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology

Given these definitions, an ideologue does appear to be a difficult person to get along with.  These definitions suggest an ideologue is one who has a firm and impossible position without having the facts – a stubborn, strong-willed, half-cocked advocate.

It appears to me that the definitions Bill and Glenn were assuming, without specifying their definitions, were different, and crossed in the night.

Bill, I suppose, was using definition #1: an impractical idealist, and the first part of #2: an often blindly partisan advocate.

Glenn’s definition is more akin to the 2nd part of definition #2:  an adherent of a particular ideology.

It is too bad Webster mixed the two somewhat different meanings into one definition #2.

The opposite of “ideologue” is much worse than being merely a pragmatist.  More accurate antonyms would be “compromiser”, “uncommitted”, “easily swayed”, or “waffler.”

The “Free On-line Dictionary” has a single, clearer definition of ideologue:

An advocate of a particular ideology, especially an official exponent of that ideology.

Given this definition, Bill O’Reilly is a mealy-mouthed wimp with few really strong convictions.  By being an anti-ideologue, he would be opposed to strongly defending a particular ideology and would not support those who do.

This is one reason why I think the FOX News motto "fair and balanced" is so stupid.  O'Reilly has that little shtick down pretty well.  He will implement "fair and balanced" by having a jihad-inspired, Sharia-loving Islamist debating a “moderate” Islamist like Zudhi Jasser and call that "fair and balanced" - we report, you decide.  Absolute BS.  That is like having Satan debate Pontius Pilate.

If O’Reilly ran for office, he would run as a Rhino.   He would be one who would go along to get along.  He would let the nut cakes who have the most time on their hands run the country because while he would “report”, they would “decide” the loudest and longest.

This is also called “poor leadership”, leadership being one of the qualities sorely lacking in Washington.

Who are the presidential candidates Bill would call the ideologues?  Probably Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and maybe Newt Gingrich.  In other words, those who have the strongest convictions about their principles.  All the rest would go along to get along.

O’Reilly would tend to support the deal makers, the compromisers.  And really, isn’t that what “politics” is all about?  And I will add, isn’t that why many of us believe politics IS SO ROTTEN TO THE CORE!

Many Christian denominations and churches have become compromising, go along to get along anti-ideologues.  After all, we shouldn’t be too firm in our faith – we might offend someone.  Our ideology is something we should just keep to ourselves.

I will vote for the strongest “ideologue” I can find who doesn’t merely share our nation’s founding principles, but who will be the strongest, most steadfast and effective advocate for them.

Our next four years would be wasted if we had a conservative who is an uncommitted compromiser who waffles and is easily swayed.  Those like Bill O’Reilly who pretend to be principled but in fact are anti-ideologues make me sick.

Friday, October 07, 2011

Wall Street protests: 60’s déjà vu, and then some…

Today’s SEIU inspired anti-Capitalist Wall Street protests have numerous things in common with the Leftist/Communist-promoted anti-war protests of the late 60’s.  Except this time around things may get even worse.

There were three sets of demonstrations going on in the 60’s that officials had concerns with:  Leftist anti-war college protests, racial marches/riots, and right wing reaction to the first two.  I will focus on the left wing/anti-war demonstrations.
"The Wall Street demonstrations have many similarities to the 60’s anti-war protests.  They include:
  • High school, college, and twenty somethings are primarily involved, although I see a smattering of left over radicals from the sixties involved in the current protests, including older organizers of both.
  • Many radical leftists, communists, socialists, and anarchists were involved in the 60's; these also dominate the current demonstrations
  • The sixties demonstrations had a significant anti-authority, anti-capitalism component.  Remember the prolific use of the word "pigs"?  Current demonstrations will get to that point.
  • The sixties demonstrations had a substantial number of tag-along "useful idiots" that were out for the "social interaction", the drugs, and the excitement, similar to the motivations for involvement now.
  • Very significantly, many of the same organizers are involved in current demonstrations that promoted the sixties demonstrations:  Ayers, Dorn, and others yet to be widely publicised.
  • While the focus of the current demonstrations are not yet clear  to many, they will become more so as they gain steam, get "the establishment's" attention and make their pronouncements.  Right now the aims are allowed to stay purposefully vague and diverse so as to attract the largest mobs of disaffected, similar to the tactic of Obama's vague "hope and change".  Soon enough the radical anti-capitalist, anti-free enterprise, anti-Constitution agenda will be in our face.
Those of us today who suggest that the protestors of the 60’s were somehow smarter and wiser than the current crop of demonstrators and had “the courage of their convictions right or wrong" I would guess are those who either participated in or were sympathetic toward the anti-war movement of the 60’s.  These 60’s defenders maintain the memory of their youthful convictions, right or wrong, informed or ignorant, mature or juvenile.
Back then some did have the courage of their convictions.  Many didn't, especially the masses that were on dope and other masses that remained clueless.  Same as today.  Many today have "the courage of their convictions right or wrong."  Many of the convictions are not fully revealed yet, but we can guess what they are.  And don't forget the violence and destruction that occurred then and which are assured of happening today, sooner or later.
The demonstrators will assure the media stay involved, as they did in the 60's.  And the demonstrations WILL get violent.

The planners and other creative folk with all the time in the world on their hands will make sure there are hundreds of small sparks to provoke the cops - as they did in the 60's.  In fact, in the 60's the authorities were provoked to the extent that the US Army was called in in several instances.  I would not be surprised if the same was not required within the next year.  Participation rates will decline when the cold sets in.  But come springtime in New York things will get dicey.
And things are likely to get even worse than they did in the 60’s.
Today we have several new components that will attract greater participation:
  • Social networking
  • Higher unemployment
  • A much larger anti-capitalist, anti-business, anti-authority, anti-US contingent of leftists and radicals; more people are feeling screwed, even on the right.
  • A resurgent Islam to help things along - in a bad way
  • For the first time, we have a president who is sympathetic to and encouraging the protests
Many of these demonstrators will be well-meaning.  (But their mistaken blame of capitalism and business is for the most part an indictment of their own lack of judgment and personal responsibility – but that is another blog.)
Many also will do all they can to provoke police, instigate riots and engage authority in every way they can to make them look bad, to look like the out of control enemy.  And they will do this to discredit authority:  “Pigs”, the “establishment” as they said in the 60’s.
With the new ingredients to these protests as listed above, there are some of us who expect things to get really ugly.  Some predict demonstrations will go beyond the point of widespread violence, beyond the point of widespread destruction of property, beyond the point of calling in the national guard – very possibly to the point where it could be called “civil war.”  Not like the 1860’s, not  in the sense of one geographic area against another.  But primarily skirmishes focused in urban areas, including roving bands spreading to the burbs, with the overall motivation being  class against class, entitlement dependents vs. producers.  Socialist/Communist/Islamist promoters vs. constitutionalist and freedom promoters. 

Saturday, October 01, 2011

Presidential candidates position on Islam…

The ability to turn our economy around and decrease the jobless rate are the most popular qualities of a presidential candidate at the moment, but by no means the only significant ones.

High on my list of desirable candidate qualities is the ability to understand resurgent orthodox Islam that the great majority of Muslim leaders in the world are promoting.  By “understanding”, I don’t refer to the politically correct, ignorant perception that Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by a few dozen, hundred, or thousand radicals.  The correct understanding of Islam is it is a supremacist fascist political ideology operating under a religious theme.  Its political ideology is allied with the left in a coalition intent on destroying capitalism and our constitutional freedom.  The  Islamist coalition with progressives, socialists, communists, and other America-haters is a relationship of convenience until it can assert enough influence to complete their mission of invoking Islamic Sharia law and controlling the rest of us.

The way we understand Islam has much to do with our approach to foreign policy and domestic security.  Our prolonged presence in Iraq and Afghanistan is a consequence of our recent past and current leaders NOT understanding these facts about Islam.  Instead, they believe the taqiyya-inspired propaganda that we are merely dealing with a few terrorists, not a 1.5 billion strong, formerly latent, resurgent ideology whose values are 180 degrees opposite those that founded our nation.  This misguided thinking leads us to the resource-draining assumption that we can "nation-build" Islamic nations into our own Judeo-Christian image.  It Ain't gonna happen!

A presidents’ correct, realistic understanding of Islam is essential to his or her effective implementation of foreign policy and domestic security. 

Understanding this, below I have characterized the public statements and attitudes portrayed by the leading presidential candidates, including the incumbent.   You may confirm these characterizations by Googling the name of the candidate followed by “Islam”, or “position on Islam.”  One other indication of where a candidate stands on Islam is the amount of expletive-laden vitriol emanating from the blogs of liberals against the candidates who dare speak the truth about Islam.

First, Barack Hussein Obama:
Obama has an Islamic background.  He had an opportunity to retain his non-Muslim name of Barry Soetoro but chose not to.  Many of his relatives are Muslim; he attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, and he has said and done many things before and during his presidency the reveal his affinity toward Islam.  He bows to the leader of Saudi Arabia; he appoints Muslim advisors; he apologizes to Islamic nations for the alleged sins of his country.  He believes the call to Islamic prayer at sunset is the prettiest sound.  He disses Israel.  He fails to call Islamic terror, e.g. the Fort Hood massacre, "Islamic terror."  He most definitely believes Islam is a religion of peace (but so did George Bush and so do several Repubican candidates).  Of all the candidates, though, Obama by far gives us the most reason to believe he esteems Islam more than Christianity or Judaism at the expense of US security.  His beliefs impact foreign and domestic policy in negative ways.  He has demonstrated that he holds the interests of Islamic nations in higher regard than the interests of our allies.  His national security policies discriminate against the average American (airport security practices) and give a pass to the most likely perpetrators of terror/Islamic jihad against our nation.
Grade:  F

Ron Paul:
Paul quotes of  “stop blaming Islam for 9/11” and “I don’t see Islam as our enemy”  reveal his deep ignorance of Islam.  His Alfred E. Newman-esque attitude toward Islam of “what, me worry” is dangerous.  A typical Ron Paul quote is
I don’t see Islam as our enemy.   I see that motivation is occupation and those who hate us and would like to kill us, they are motivated by our invasion of their land, the support of their dictators that they hate.” 
Most would have a difficult time distinguishing that quote from those of Obama.  He is ignorant of Islamic texts, doctrine, and intent.
 Grade:  D-

Rick Perry:
Perry has had a cordial relationship with Muslims.  He has declared “Islam is a religion of peace” almost as often as his Texas cohort George Bush has, which is saying a lot.  Some defend Perry’s Muslim ties suggesting that he is friendly only with a progressive, mild sect of Islam. More substantively, Perry helped coordinate development of a pro-Islamic history curriculum in Texas public schools that imply the west is inferior to Islam, and signed into law unique Islamic Halal-foods legislation.  The Islamic threat is closely associated with immigration policy.  Perry is opposed to a critical component of border security:  Border fencing.  He also supports subsidies for illegal immigrants attending state universities.   Supporters point out his strong support of Israel.
Grade:  D+

Mitt Romney:
Romney does not believe “jihad” is related to Islam.  He said:
“There is, however, a movement in the world known as jihadism. They call themselves jihadists and I use the same term. And this jihadist movement is intent on causing the collapse of moderate Muslim states and the assassination of moderate Muslim leaders. It is also intent on causing collapse of other nations in the world. It's by no means a branch of Islam. It is instead an entirely different entity. In no way do I suggest it is a part of Islam.”
This statement belies all facts concerning historical, orthodox Islam as practiced by the majority of Islamic leaders today.   He is engaging in wishful thinking.  Romney often talks a good talk about his concern about “radicals.”  But he fails to relate “radicals” and “jihadis” from orthodox Islam.  This thinking will be a millstone around his foreign policy and domestic security initiatives.
Grade:  D+

Michelle Bachman:
Bachman has admitted that “not all cultures are equal” in reference to the culture of immigrants from the tribal Islamic nations compared to the culture in the West.  The left hates this sort of comment.  She has distanced herself from Muslim interest groups in Minnesota that Pawlenty palled with.  She is very pro-Israel.  But what does bother some is her campaign manager, Ed Rollins, who also advises Muslims in Dearborn, MI, in how to gain political power and influence.  Not good, Michelle.
Grade:  C

Newt Gingrich:
Gingrich often compares Islam to Nazism, which is a fair and accurate comparison.  He has expressed concern that our nation is simultaneously drifting toward atheism and Islamism, that there is a marked bias against Christianity in government, education, and the media.  He has commented that Islam is an emerging threat to our constitution – again, true.  Gingrich is among the top tier of candidates who understands and is not afraid to publicly discuss the Islamic threat to our nation.
Grade:  A

Rick Santorum:
Santorum has said,
“Sharia law is not just a religious code. It is also a governmental code. It happens to be both religious in nature an origin, but it is a civil code. And it is incompatible with the civil code of the United States.  We need to define it and say what it is. And it is evil. Sharia law is incompatible with American jurisprudence and our Constitution.”
He has also written:
“The gathering storm I have been warning of for years has now formed over the West. Yet instead of fighting the gradual incursion of Sharia and the demands of an intolerant, even militant Islam, Westerners are cowering and fatalistic.”
Santorum understands Islam and its intentions against the West.  He continues to speak out on these concerns about Islam despite the vitriolic comments he receives from Islamic apologists on the left.
Grade:  A

Herman Cain:
Herman Cain is probably the most outspoken with the truth about Islam among all candidates.  He said he would not appoint a Muslim to his administration.  He believes that local communities should have the right to prohibit mosques in their communities, a comment that disappointed his libertarian friend Neil Boortz.  This comment is based on Cain’s belief that Islam needs to be treated in the same manner as any other seditious organization, whether it be the Fascist Party or orthodox Islam.  He is aware that mosques are funded primarily by Saudi Arabia and teach hatred of western values and promote seditious Sharia law.
Cain demonstrated his humility when he stated,
"Based upon the little knowledge that I have of the Muslim religion, you know, they have an objective to convert all infidels or kill them."
Cain has been truthful and forthright on Islam to the point of gaining the ire of leftists and Islamists in this country.  I say “good for him.”  And good for us if he is elected.

Grade:  A