As I've been saying all along, members of the CIA are unsung heroes valiantly defending America from the mass-murdering Muslim monsters of radical Islam--the same monsters who, by the way, deliberately target the mosques of other Muslims--and we should be praising them (or at least letting them be) rather than attacking them, as Obama and Holder are doing. Now you can hear a little of the hidden story of how the CIA defends us silently from terrorists, like antibiotics fighting the latest lethal bacteria. Remember too that although the liberal media have been demonizing the CIA--excluding yesterday's remarkable article in the Post--the liberal career lawyers at the Justice Department signed off on the CIA's interrogation techniques, and Holder himself said he wouldn't do exactly what he's doing now. Do Obama and Holder really hate America SO much that they want to destroy our first line of defense again mass-murdering Muslim terrorists?
I fully expect Obama, Holder and their leftist pro-terrorist proxies to persecute Mr. Clizbe with all the powers at their disposal. To come forward like this Mr. Clizbe must have an extraordinary level of courage, but then we knew that from his CIA activities defending America.
I should add too that while the Obama-Holder prosecution represents in part an attack on the achievements of the Bush presidency, like no repeat of 9/11, it even more represents the culmination of decades of leftist hatred for the CIA, stemming from the CIA's dogged opposition to communism. The leftist hatred of the CIA goes back at least as far as 1953, when the CIA backed the Shah of Iran in a coup against a democratically-elected socialist prime minister, in order to prevent the possibility of the Soviets from having another puppet government in Iran, as they had when they'd left Iran after World War II. During the 1990s, with the Cold War over, the Clinton administration tied the CIA's hands by creating a "wall" between the CIA and the FBI, preventing the CIA from learning facts that might have allowed them to foil 9/11 as they have foiled ever terrorist attempt in America since. The Bush administration, whatever its other weaknesses (and it had many) made the wise move of dismantling the Clinton "wall" and untying the CIA's hands. For its success in stopping every single terrorist plot since 9/11, the CIA now faces the wrath of the left in the form of the Obama-Holder persecution.
It's ironic that the left so hates the CIA today. Harry Truman, who founded the CIA, actually leaned heavily to the left himself, as his unconstitutional efforts to seize control of the entire steel industry without even a law from Congress demonstrate. Back in Truman's day, however, it was possible to a leftist in America without hating America. Since Vietnam, however, the left in America has turned heavily anti-American. So as left as he was, I'd gladly take a Truman in exchange for an Obama and a Holder. Heck, I'd even give you an American-hating Michelle in the bargain!
I suspect that the CIA will survive the Obama-Holder war on it, but will it remain able to stave off constant terrorist threats with while defending itself from a pro-terrorist president and attorney general? Or will Obama and Holder, like Clinton and, well, Holder, so tie up the CIA that the terrorists succeed at another 9/11? We need a public outcry against the Obama war on the CIA to make sure it can continue to defend us from mass-murdering Muslim monsters who want to repeat 9/11.
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_holder_war_with_cia/2009/08/31/254698.html?s=al&promo_code=87B8-1
Showing posts with label Michelle Malkin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michelle Malkin. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Tea Party, Anyone?
It started in 1773, when a group of 200 American colonists, disguised as American Indians, tossed the cargo of tea from each of three British ships in the Boston Harbor to protest Parliament's imposition of direct taxes on the colonists, including on tea, to repay debt borrowed to fund the French and Indian Wars.
Fast forward to February 27, 2009, when 15,000 American attended the Chicago Tea Party and similar events in other American cities to protest the Obama-Bush-Democrat massive spending policies under which we're now suffering, which, if not stopped, will double the federal debt to about $20 trillion in the next few years. The success of the Chicago Tea Party inspired grass roots organizers to organize a bigger protest with more people in more cities on April 15, 2009, a mere 9 days from now as I write. You can learn more about the coming Tea Party at http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/taxday.htm. Michelle Malkin, the beautiful, conservative, oriental columnist and pundit (i.e., talking head) has signed on as a sponsor (http://www.michellemalkin.com/), has Newt Gingrich's American Solutions (http://americansolutions.com/teaparty). Sean Hannity of Fox News plans to do his April 15 show from the Atlanta Tea Party. People in the DC metro area plan a large Tea Party across the street from the White House. Facebook has a Tax Tea Party group (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=55223597239&ref=ts), and between it and the Surgeusa.com website, it looks like we could have at least one Tax Day Tea Party in every one of the 50 states, and several in some states. (For an enthusiastic endorsement of the Tax Day Tea Party, please see my buddy Don's blog at http://donliberty1787.blogspot.com/2009/04/join-tea-party-movement.html.)
Joining the Tax Day Tea Party is fun, and I signed up too, but will it have an actual political impact? Of that I'm not sure. Even the large conservative resurgences during my lifetime have had relatively minor impacts, mostly serving just to slow the growth of Big Government. The Reagan resurgence did win the Cold War, so that had a lasting impact, but is the world safer now than during the days when the Soviets held the leashes of most of the world's terrorists? I warned people back when the USSR collapsed that the collapse of the Soviet Union wasn't 1) the "end of history" as the liberal media was proclaiming, 2) the "end of socialism" as the liberal media were also proclaiming, or 3) the beginning of a safer world.
I will also give the Reagan conservative resurgence credit for deregulating the price of domestic oil and gas, so that we never had a repeat of the gas station lines of the 1970s, and for indexing the federal income tax system, especially using the CPI, which overstates inflation, giving us each a tiny little tax cut each year. (The same political forces that led Congress to start deregulating oil and gas prices under Jimmy Carter led to the election of Ronald Reagan, who completed the deregulation of oil and gas prices.)
How about the Newt resurgence? He did manage to de-entitle some of the smaller entitlement programs, and at least start a phase-out of grain price subsidies. On the whole though I'd have to say that the Newt resurgence had even less long-term consequence even domestically than did the Reagan resurgence. So what will the Tax Day Tea Party achieve? If I had to bet real money--if I had any after the federal and state governments steal 28% of my income this year (not the marginal rate but the average rate for the year)--I'd bet that it will have no lasting impact. Alas I'm not even sure it will even have any short-term impact on taxes or spending.
In a recent email a friend of mine said that 98% of Americans support socialism. I don't know that it's 98%, and keep in mind that a large minority of eligible adults don't even vote, but I do suspect that a majority of adult Americans support some socialism or other. They do not all support systematic socialism (although pretty much everyone on the left does) but rather targeted socialism.
Some support socialism targeted to line their own pockets, such as the "conservative" Iowa farmers who think they have a divine right to grain price supports, or the mushy moderate chamber of commerce types who whine about paying taxes for welfare but have no trouble imposing local taxes to pay for bike trails for their kids or libraries that have their names up in neon lights.
Others support socialism targeted to benefit someone else whom they think has gotten or still has a raw deal, like many Jewish liberals who don't want social programs for themselves, but rather for poor blacks or other minorities whom the Jewish liberals believe have gotten a raw deal and therefore cannot succeed on their own (unlike Jews who got a raw deal but somehow managed to succeed on their own!).
Keep in mind too that people get addicted to the status quo, so if they're getting social welfare benefits, they don't want to lose them. That means that virtually every elderly person in the country supports the Social Security system, which is why even Reagan could make no headway with de-socializing the SS system. (W. Bush campaigned on a partial-privatization of SS, but then let it die on the vine in Congress without giving it any support. Liberals then used the collapse of the stock market bubble caused by liberal inflationary policy at the Federal Reserve System as "proof" that SS privatization would have been a bad idea, even though if you had been investing your SS tax in stocks for the last half century, you'd still be vastly better off than you are with your meager SS payments.)
With people who don't support systematic socialism, it's possible to persuade them to abandon at least pieces of the socialism they do like in favor of freer markets and better protection for their property rights. It's certainly possible to make reduce socialistic policy at the margin. That's a big part of why I wrote columns in Iowa and blog now.
And if the Tax Day Tea Party isn't just going to be a fun event where people vent their frustrations with Big Government, a lot of people are going to have to be willing to give up some of their targeted socialist policies.
Fast forward to February 27, 2009, when 15,000 American attended the Chicago Tea Party and similar events in other American cities to protest the Obama-Bush-Democrat massive spending policies under which we're now suffering, which, if not stopped, will double the federal debt to about $20 trillion in the next few years. The success of the Chicago Tea Party inspired grass roots organizers to organize a bigger protest with more people in more cities on April 15, 2009, a mere 9 days from now as I write. You can learn more about the coming Tea Party at http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/taxday.htm. Michelle Malkin, the beautiful, conservative, oriental columnist and pundit (i.e., talking head) has signed on as a sponsor (http://www.michellemalkin.com/), has Newt Gingrich's American Solutions (http://americansolutions.com/teaparty). Sean Hannity of Fox News plans to do his April 15 show from the Atlanta Tea Party. People in the DC metro area plan a large Tea Party across the street from the White House. Facebook has a Tax Tea Party group (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=55223597239&ref=ts), and between it and the Surgeusa.com website, it looks like we could have at least one Tax Day Tea Party in every one of the 50 states, and several in some states. (For an enthusiastic endorsement of the Tax Day Tea Party, please see my buddy Don's blog at http://donliberty1787.blogspot.com/2009/04/join-tea-party-movement.html.)
Joining the Tax Day Tea Party is fun, and I signed up too, but will it have an actual political impact? Of that I'm not sure. Even the large conservative resurgences during my lifetime have had relatively minor impacts, mostly serving just to slow the growth of Big Government. The Reagan resurgence did win the Cold War, so that had a lasting impact, but is the world safer now than during the days when the Soviets held the leashes of most of the world's terrorists? I warned people back when the USSR collapsed that the collapse of the Soviet Union wasn't 1) the "end of history" as the liberal media was proclaiming, 2) the "end of socialism" as the liberal media were also proclaiming, or 3) the beginning of a safer world.
I will also give the Reagan conservative resurgence credit for deregulating the price of domestic oil and gas, so that we never had a repeat of the gas station lines of the 1970s, and for indexing the federal income tax system, especially using the CPI, which overstates inflation, giving us each a tiny little tax cut each year. (The same political forces that led Congress to start deregulating oil and gas prices under Jimmy Carter led to the election of Ronald Reagan, who completed the deregulation of oil and gas prices.)
How about the Newt resurgence? He did manage to de-entitle some of the smaller entitlement programs, and at least start a phase-out of grain price subsidies. On the whole though I'd have to say that the Newt resurgence had even less long-term consequence even domestically than did the Reagan resurgence. So what will the Tax Day Tea Party achieve? If I had to bet real money--if I had any after the federal and state governments steal 28% of my income this year (not the marginal rate but the average rate for the year)--I'd bet that it will have no lasting impact. Alas I'm not even sure it will even have any short-term impact on taxes or spending.
In a recent email a friend of mine said that 98% of Americans support socialism. I don't know that it's 98%, and keep in mind that a large minority of eligible adults don't even vote, but I do suspect that a majority of adult Americans support some socialism or other. They do not all support systematic socialism (although pretty much everyone on the left does) but rather targeted socialism.
Some support socialism targeted to line their own pockets, such as the "conservative" Iowa farmers who think they have a divine right to grain price supports, or the mushy moderate chamber of commerce types who whine about paying taxes for welfare but have no trouble imposing local taxes to pay for bike trails for their kids or libraries that have their names up in neon lights.
Others support socialism targeted to benefit someone else whom they think has gotten or still has a raw deal, like many Jewish liberals who don't want social programs for themselves, but rather for poor blacks or other minorities whom the Jewish liberals believe have gotten a raw deal and therefore cannot succeed on their own (unlike Jews who got a raw deal but somehow managed to succeed on their own!).
Keep in mind too that people get addicted to the status quo, so if they're getting social welfare benefits, they don't want to lose them. That means that virtually every elderly person in the country supports the Social Security system, which is why even Reagan could make no headway with de-socializing the SS system. (W. Bush campaigned on a partial-privatization of SS, but then let it die on the vine in Congress without giving it any support. Liberals then used the collapse of the stock market bubble caused by liberal inflationary policy at the Federal Reserve System as "proof" that SS privatization would have been a bad idea, even though if you had been investing your SS tax in stocks for the last half century, you'd still be vastly better off than you are with your meager SS payments.)
With people who don't support systematic socialism, it's possible to persuade them to abandon at least pieces of the socialism they do like in favor of freer markets and better protection for their property rights. It's certainly possible to make reduce socialistic policy at the margin. That's a big part of why I wrote columns in Iowa and blog now.
And if the Tax Day Tea Party isn't just going to be a fun event where people vent their frustrations with Big Government, a lot of people are going to have to be willing to give up some of their targeted socialist policies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)