Patriot Warrior

What is the truth about Radical Islam?

To our homegrown rabid anti-American, left-wing, secular-progressive liberal ideologist, facts are very often inconvenient. And … Islamic Jihadists always want to murder anybody who tries to tell the “whole” truth about Islam.

It is vitally important, for those of us who want to see religious freedoms defended in a world where such freedoms are under a very real global assault by a growing totalitarian religious movement with hundreds of millions of adherents, to understand the TRUTH about radical Islamists.

It is true that all Muslims are not terrorists … but right now, almost all terrorists are Muslims! And … I see very few of the non-terrorist Muslims standing up to their radical brothers and sisters, and saying … STOP! Not in the name of our religion!

While there may, in truth, be many moderate and peaceful Muslims, the real question we need to be addressing as a nation is what is the truth about Islam itself? Is it really a religion of peace, or is it, in reality, a religion fully compatible with, and the theological basis for, radical Islamic violence?

How does Islam REALLY compare with Christianity on several important key issues, like the nature of democracy, the treatment of women, and freedom of conscience? If you will take the time to examine each of these areas carefully, you will find there is a very big difference between these two world religions.

For example, we could compare just one important difference … say … the broader issues of politics, democracy and freedom.

Left-wing, secular-progressive liberals like to argue that both radical Islam and conservative Christianity seek to impose a theocracy on the free West. Well, they are only half right. The radical Islamists are absolutely dedicated toward this goal. The imposition of sharia law over the entire globe, or a global caliphate, is definitely spearheading the Islamist agenda.

In fact, Muslims leaders are quite clear about their intentions here. Many Muslim leaders are very open in stating their plan to wage holy war against all unbelievers … until a global Islamic caliphate is created on planet earth.

So …. where are the radical Christians calling for an end to democracy and the establishment of a theocracy?

The left-wing, secular progressives usually point to the Christian Reconstructionists. But what about them? They are very small in number and hardly mainstream in the Christian community. They are mainly confined to the United States, and most leading Christian groups have long-ago distanced themselves from these Reconstructionists.

And … they are not blowing up non-believers!

There is also no global movement to replace secular law with Biblical law. However, in contrast, Islamist jihad is an international movement, with violent activist elements working to achieve their goals in nation-states all around the globe.

And … even if some Christians are arguing for a Christian America, they state that this is to be a voluntary outcome, achieved by Christian evangelism and Christian persuasion. This is hardly at odds with the Constitution.

And for all the left-wing scare-mongering tactics aimed at the Christian Reconstruction movement, many members of this group are really about such harmless agendas as getting more Christians to vote, and to raise their voices in the public arena. Sorry folks, that is simply not an anti-democratic crusade.

In fact, it was Christianity that gave the modern world its notion of the separation of church and state.

This concept goes all the way back to the teachings of Jesus Christ, when he said that we should render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and render unto God what is God’s. In fact, there has been a long Christian tradition going back to 494 B.C. and Pope Galesius and his two swords theory: the state and the church. Each is ordained by God, and each has its own sphere of authority and influence.

The fact that these two spheres of authority may have sometimes become confused by men does not negate the basic Biblical position that the two are to remain separate, yet overlapping, authorities.

This, of course, is in direct opposition to Islam. There is absolutely no separation of church and state in Islam. There is no “secular” in Islam. Every facet of life is controlled by sharia law and the will of Allah. That is why real democracy is not going to happen in Muslim nations.

Even those Muslim states where a semblance democracy is established, like in Turkey or Indonesia, things are very different form from Western democratic nations. While Muslims in Turkey or Indonesia enjoy the full range of rights and benefits found in many Western nations, Christians are at best second class citizens in these so-called Islamic democracies. The persecution of Christians in Turkey and Indonesia is an ongoing problem, and the condition of dhimmitude, or servant-hood, in which they find themselves, is well documented in these nations.

When the left-wing, secular-progressive liberals seek to minimize the differences between Christianity and Islam in the name of tolerance, political correctness, and/or getting along, they only result in the denigration of Western democratic freedoms, and the quashing of necessary criticisms of radical Islam.

There is a very real war going on … and it really is a clash of diametrically opposed ideologies. This clash between the Judeo-Christian world view and the Islamic world view is about “two fundamentally opposed visions for society: one based on sharia … a true theocracy … and the other based on freedom”.

Muhammad’s teachings, Islam, literally means submission, and all people are to be the slaves of Allah.

Jesus made a radically different claim: “I no longer call you slaves … But I have called you friends.” (John 15:15)

Freedom and personal responsibility characterize the Judeo-Christian view of mankind. Servitude and tyranny are the inevitable results of the Islamic world view. The two could not be more diametrically opposed. It is time that these distinctions are pointed out and shouted to the world, instead of being covered up by left-wing, secular-progressive Christophobes and the appeasers of Islam.

Islam has a recorded history!  America must open its eyes and read it. We must take the time to really understand the Qu’ran, and Islam … both modern and medieval … and not just what the Muslim apologists want you to hear

The facts are the facts, whether the left-wing, secular-progressive postmodern liberal West likes them or not! And … I guess … really, that’s the entire point of this post.

Axis of Evil

Looks like President George Bush may be getting a little vindication after all the fuss liberals made out of his “Axis of Evil” comments about Iran, Iraq, and North Korea and their support of terrorism and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. John Bolton, then United States UN Ambassador, when beyond the “axis of evil” to include by including Libya, Syria, and Cuba in this group.

U.S. intelligence officials will show members of Congress a videotape and other supporting evidence to prove their case that Syria was building a nuclear reactor with North Korean assistance. Those gutsy Israelis bombed the site in September 2007 as a preemptive national defense measure.

Intelligence officials claim the evidence is very clear and compelling and that it comes from a variety of sources, and … not just Israeli intelligence.

The Syrian reactor was similar in design to a North Korean reactor that has in the past produced small amounts of plutonium, the official said. It was not yet complete but was far enough along to demonstrate a resemblance to the North Korean reactor at Yonbyon.

It seems that Syria had not reported the site to the International Atomic Energy Agency nor was it under international safeguards, possibly putting Syria in breech of an international nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Why would they act this way if it were legitimate and non-military in nature? Maybe we should ask Nancy Closing … she is on great terms with the Syrians.

Plutonium-producing reactors are of international interest because plutonium can be used to make high-yield nuclear weapons … and we all know how liberals like fight for the right for terrorists to build their own nuclear weapons.

Open Borders

96 Border Patrol Officers have been killed by violent criminals coming here to “do the jobs most Americans won’t do.”

These photos show how easy it is along many sections of our southern border to cross into this country. Are these the footprints of a terrorist, a drug smuggler, or just some hard working hispanic families? The real problem is, we have no way to know who they are or where they’re actually from. They could just as easily be Al-Qaeda or Hamas terrorists as they could be hard working Hispanic families! … how would you know? …. how can you tell?

While generous budgets are allotted to massive social service programs to support these illegal immigrants, our national security is literally left wide open. Millions have crossed in remote places such as these while many of our elected representatives have ignored the problem to get re-elected,  bowed to anti-American political pressure, or even worse … knowingly looked the other way.

It’s time for those who have benefited from this influx of cheap illegal immigrant labor and the government agencies who cater to these illegal immigrants be brought to task by the American people … the interest and security of the United States citizens should always be first consideration of our government.  That was the founders point in creating a federal government to begin with.

For an accurate real time count of the illegals crossing our borders go to ImmigrationCounters.Com

This disturbing video clearly shows illegal alien children freely crossing a US Border Patrol Checkpoint in Arizona to attend US public schools. Now, I am not advocating persecuting or prosecuting children … but where do it all end?  School bus service, free breakfast and lunch programs and a full range of public services are provided these illegal alien children. Could it be the fact that school budgets are based on attendance levels, that the school district or their teachers union mind this situation at all? This same kind of scenario is being repeated across our nation every day …. at the expense of our children.

This telling video exposes statements made by some of the leaders of the illegal alien movement, many of which are our own elected officials and academic leaders. Why are these individuals fostering such division and anger in a country that has traditionally welcomed legal immigrants. Many of their statements are outright falsehoods, but then again liberals have never let the “facts get in the way of a good story.”  The fact is that the Mexican government’s ceded the barren and undeveloped border land to America for $15M in the “Treaty of Guadalupe” and in return , the U.S. forgave all the Mexican debt owed America. Here’s a link to these historical facts; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Guadalupe_Hildalgo .

These individuals are simply trying to blur the lines between legal and illegal, to dismantle the borders to create a new voter base for themselves.

Americans have nothing against LEGAL IMMIGRATION, we all immigrated here from somewhere else! But the unchecked influx of illegal immigrants, many of them criminals, if having a disastrous effect on our country, its economy, and our national security …. it must be stopped. Contact your Senators and Congressman … let them know where you stand!

Aurora has a really great post on her blog, The Midnight Sun, that sums up nicely thoughts I have had about the liberal elites and the spreading growth of American apologists and American-loathing liberals in this country that is perpetuated by the many media outlets worldwide.

Take a minute and read her post, I hope it will give you some food for thought:

http://www.themidnightsun.org/?p=2356

This is great.  I borrowed it from Road Sassy who got it from Michael Leeden’s weblog.  This needs to get around!

From the weblog of Michael Ledeen, Why Do They Love Us?, comments on the US Military in Iraq by an Australian.

Before I came over here I thought we (the Australian Army) were pretty…hot….. was I ever wrong!….The Yanks (I hope you don’t mind me using that word) are so professional from the top to the bottom that it is almost embarrassing to be in their company, and to call yourself a soldier….don’t get me wrong, we are good at what we do but the Yanks are so much better…..they are complete at what they do, how they do it and their attitude is awesome….they don’t complain they just get on with the job and they do it right…..I carry a Minimi (SAW) so I am not real worried about a confrontation but I tell you I feel safer just knowing that the US Army is close by….If we got into trouble I know that our boys would come running and we could deal with it but they would probably be passed by a load of Hummers. No questions asked, no glory sought, the Americans would just fight with us and for us because that is their nature, to protect those in need of protection…..We use the American Mess so you could say that we are fed by the Americans…..they have every right to be pissed at that but they don’t bitch about that they just make us feel as welcome as possible….what gets to me is that the Yanks don’t walk around with a “we are better than you attitude” and they could because they are, they treat us as equals and as brothers in arms. If nothing else, coming here has taught me that the Americans are a truly great Nation and a truly great bunch of people…..Let’s face it they don’t HAVE to be here, they could stay in America and beat the shit out of anyone who threatened them, BUT THEY ARE HERE because they believe they should be here, and the Iraqis would be screwed if they weren’t here…..When I come home, you and I we are going to the US, we will buy some bikes and we are going riding….

So the question arises, why isn’t this sort of thing on the front pages of the various US newspapers? Silly question to ask I suppose.

Indeed!  Sadly, a very silly question considering the political leanings of our US Newspapers and most other media outlets!

Wally World To Police Gun Owners!

I have always disliked shopping at Wal-Mart for several reasons: First, because they put local retailers out of business. Second, because they are so big they can dictate to their distributors the prices they will pay for the merchandise they sell …. often causing their distributors to go out of business. Now I have another reason … and I will no longer shop at Walmart …. period!

Wal-Mart recently joined New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s war on law abiding gun-owners by attending a gathering of Bloomberg’s anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, to announce a series of changes to the way in which Wal-Mart will handle future firearm transactions. At the gathering, J.P. Suarez, chief compliance officer for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., stated: “The costs are, we think, part of what it takes to be responsible.” Suarez also added, “This is not a signal that we’re getting out of firearms.” Well, I think they may as well be … I hope their firearms sales fall through the floor.

Once these changes have been instituted, firearm purchases at Wal-Mart will involve getting a video record of the sale, which the chain will then keep on file . It seems Wally World is now getting into the law enforcement market and effectively creating its own video database of gun purchasers. Wal-Mart also is giving its employees the discretion to deny the sale of a firearm to anyone who has ever had a firearm traced by BATFE for any reason …. including those who have had a firearm stolen that was later used by a criminal in the commission of a crime.

I say anyone who gets video taped buying a firearm at Wal-Mart deserves what they get!

Wayne LaPierre, NRA Executive Vice President, said, “I view it as a public relations stunt that stigmatizes law-abiding firearms purchasers exercising their constitutional freedoms. I honestly think it’s a corporation trying to curry favor with politicians as opposed to doing anything meaningful about stopping crime.”

I agree with Wayne LaPierre’s comment.

And … I think all American gun owners should boycott Wal-Mart permanently!

I, personally, will never give Wal-Mart another dime of my money. It is time for the 80 million law-abiding gun owners in this country to start making a stand against these consistent, and unconstitutional attacks on our Second Amendment Rights by liberal elitists whatever stripe they choose to hide behind.

Clinton and Obama Now Support The Second Amendment?

As Democratic Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama battled each other at the Democratic debate in Philadelphia last week, the debate moderator Charlie Gibson, from ABC News, opened the debate on the gun issue by stating, “Both of you, in the past, have supported strong gun control measures. But now when I listen to you on the campaign, I hear you emphasizing that you believe in an individual’s right to bear arms. Both of you were strong advocates for licensing of guns. Both of you were strong advocates for the registration of guns.” (Sound familiar to you? It does me!) “Why don’t you emphasize that now, Senator Clinton?”

Hillary answered with her typical stream of generic generalizations, but manage to be clear on at least one position stating, “I will [also] work to reinstate the assault weapons ban,” also noting that, “the Republicans will not reinstate it.”

Gibson then asked Obama about the Heller case which is now before the United States Supreme Court, and specifically whether he thinks the D.C. gun ban is somehow “consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms.” Obama’s response was, “ I confess I obviously haven’t listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence. As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right…”

Mr. Gibson again asked, “But do you still favor the registration of guns? Do you still favor the licensing of guns?”, while Barack Obama was very evasive and never really gave a straight answer, causing the moderator to comment, “I’m not sure I got an answer from Senator Obama.”

Senator Clinton was then asked, “Do you support the D.C. ban?” Hillary, too, was very evasive but did state that she wants, “to give local communities the opportunity to have some authority over determining…” firearms law. Again Gibson pressed her about the D.C. Gun Ban, “But what do you think? Do you support it or not?”

“Well, what I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms,” she said.

“Is the D.C. ban consistent with that right?” asked the Charlie Gibson.

“Well, I think a total ban, with no exceptions under any circumstances, might be found by the court not to be. But I don’t know the facts,” Clinton concluded.

At least Hillary Clinton was right about that.

The fact is that neither candidate joined more than 300 of their congressional colleagues in signing a brief in the Heller case in support of the Second Amendment, and both candidates’ records are well documented and show, without doubt, that they’re both radically anti-gun. For either of them to now even attempt to convince Americans they support gun-owner’s rights is absurd. If neither one of them can plainly state that a ban on guns in the home for self-defense runs contrary to the Second Amendment, one can have little doubt that either candidate believes any gun law would.

This blog is something that I have been batting around in my head for a while now, and me sitting down to write it coincides perfectly with the conclusion of my term papers and Darren’s latest blog.

Sci-Fi writers can see the writing on the wall.

In the 1970’s Science Fiction writer Jerry Pournelle sat down and wrote a book entitled West of Honor and its sequel The Mercenary, which are combined into Falkenburg’s Leigon, these where the inaugural books in the popular CoDominium series, and where followed by Prince of Mercenaries, Go Tell the Spartans, and Prince of Sparta the last two were written with S.M. Stirling, all of these are prequels to the best selling Mote in God’s Eye and The Gripping Hand.

These books where written during the Cold War and still make reference to the USSR. In this series the CoDominium is an alliance between the Soviets and America, in which the 2 countries essentially control the world. (Wikipedia has a good article on the back ground just search for CoDominium) My main concern with all of this is part of the internal structure of the USA at this point in time.

The stories start of in the 2040’s or 50’s and assume that humanity has colonized the stars. In the USA there are essentially 2 classes of Americans: Taxpayers and “Citizens.” The term “Citizen” as it is used here is a derogatory term, given to the class of people making up, what I guess to be, 60-80% of the population. I know that’s a wide range but he never gives any numbers that I can recall. The “Citizens” live in Welfare Islands where the government gives them money to live, they can get an education if they want and they can get a job, but once they get a job then they get kicked of the welfare rolls although they don’t necessarily have to pay taxes.

The Taxpayers, however, are the ones who reap all the major benefits. They usually have the largest share of power and get all kinds of perks from the government, because they float the system. This device is used in another prominent Sci-Fi series David Weber’s Honorverse, where this role is played by the Doles of the Peoples Republic of Haven.

It seems to me that this is unfortunately where America is headed. The more the upper class floats the government, and the more the government support the lower class, the less that the lower classes need to be involved in anything. If the government is going to give poor people who don’t work free money what do they care about who runs the government, as long as they get their share. Welfare creates a dangerous sense of entitlement and complacency when people believe they are owed something for doing NOTHING ! The very fiber of American society is coming undone. For America to be a land of equal opportunity it needs to be a land of equal contribution.

Now I realize that some people might say “But William, the poor can’t contribute as much as the rich!”

I understand that, and accept that. However equal does not always mean an equal amount. What if they just contributed the same percentage that everybody else did? What I’m talking about is a flat rate tax of 15-18%. I realize that some people dislike like paying taxes and think that it’s wrong and unconstitutional, but lets face it people … the government needs money to stay afloat or at least make an attempt at it.

Speaking of seeing the future

Author Tom Kratman has come out with a new book which has bumped it’s way to the top of my must read list. From what I can tell this book is set 100 or so years in the future when Europe, due to it’s declining birthrates, has become an Islamic territory. That’s about all I know, I did like his first book State of Disobedience and A Desert Called Peace, and Carnifex are on my list of books to read though it may be a while before I get to them. Kratman usually does a good job of writing books that make you think about government and I doubt these will be any different.

The Religion Of Peace?

In a recent sermon by a prominent Muslim cleric, who is also a Hamas member of the Palestinian parliament, openly declared that “the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital,” would soon be conquered by Islam.

According to the FOXNEWS, A …

fiery sermon, delivered by Yunis al-Astal and aired on Hamas’ Al-Aqsa TV, predicted that Rome would become “an advanced post for the Islamic conquests, which will spread though Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas, even Eastern Europe.”

“Allah has chosen you for Himself and for His religion,” al-Astal preached, “so that you will serve as the engine pulling this nation to the phase of succession, security and consolidation of power, and even to conquests through da’wa and military conquests of the capitals of the entire world.

“Very soon, Allah willing, Rome will be conquered, just like Constantinople was, as was prophesied by our prophet Muhammad,” he added.

Al-Astal last June preached how it was the duty of Palestinian women to martyr themselves by becoming homicide bombers.

“The most exalted form of jihad is fighting for the sake of Allah, which means sacrificing one’s soul by fighting the enemies head-on, even if it leads to martyrdom,” he said in a June 23, 2007 interview.

“When jihad becomes an individual duty, it applies to women too, because women do not differ from men when it comes to individual duties,” he said, calling Jews “the brothers of apes and pigs” who should “taste the bitterness of death.”

Friday’s rant repeated that theme: “Today, Rome is the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital, which has declared its hostility to Islam, and has planted the brothers of apes and pigs in Palestine in order to prevent the reawakening of Islam.

“I believe that our children, or our grandchildren, will inherit our jihad and our sacrifices, and, Allah willing, the commanders of the conquest will come from among them.

“Today, we instill these good tidings in their souls – and by means of the mosques and the Koran books, and the history of our Prophets, his companions, and the great leaders, we prepare them for the mission of saving humanity from the hellfire at whose brink they stand.”

Do you ever stop to wonder why Jimmy Carter likes these Hamas guys so much more than his own people or our Israeli allies?

It seems that, former president, Jimmy Carter has a great admiration for Hamas. Here is just a small sampling of what Jimmy Carter is irresponsibly excusing and, thus indirectly, endorsing.

Jan. 29, 2004 - A suicide bomber detonated a bag laden with explosives on a No. 19 bus line on Aza Street in Jerusalem. Ten Israelis and one foreigner were killed and 44 were injured…Sept. 9, 2003 - A suicide bomber detonated an explosive device at the entrance of the “Hillel Cafe” in Jerusalem. Seven Israelis were killed and 70 injured…

April 30, 2003 - A suicide bomber detonated an explosive belt at the entrance to the “Mike’s Place” pub on the Tel Aviv boardwalk. An additional suicide bomber hurled an explosive device nearby. Three Israeli civilians were killed and 62 were wounded…

May 7, 2002 - A suicide bomber detonated an explosive belt and an additional explosive device in a bag, at a club in Rishon Letzion. Sixteen Israeli civilians were killed, and 51 were wounded…

March 27, 2002 - A suicide bomber blew himself up with an explosive belt in the Park Hotel in Netanya. Thirty Israeli civilians were killed and 144 were wounded…

Aug. 9, 2001 - A suicide bomber blew himself up at the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem. Fifteen Israelis were killed and 110 wounded…

June 1, 2001 - A suicide bomber detonated himself at the entrance to the “Dolphinarium” club in Tel Aviv. Twenty-two Israeli civilians were killed, and 83 were wounded.

And … were supposed to be the bad guys?

Are We Raising Stupid, Violent Teens!

I don’t normally put videos in my blog … but this is something else!

What kind of teenagers commit this kinds of crimes? And why are they dumb enough to film it for YOUTUBE?

Because … we teach them they can get away with what ever they want, and that there is no such thing as right and wrong! Morals are relative and stupid … oh yeah … and so un-cool! Whats really important is how much cools stuff you have!!!!! You can shoot that kid and steal his shiny new Nikes … no big deal! You’ll get off because you are simply a misunderstood kid who the “village” failed to nurture enough …

Schools don’t teach anymore … they fill our kids with liberal, secular-progressive, left-wing gobbledygook … and then we wonder why they commit violent crimes things like this.

Of, course … if you try to put the blame where it belongs … on the destruction of the American family because of loony left-wing, secular-progressive liberal policies running rampant in our schools and our televisions … liberals simply cry foul and get the liberal activist judges they keep in their pockets to trample still more American freedoms to enforce their agenda.

I think home school or private school is the only means to save our country from this NEA lunacy…

Taxation Truth

So, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama don’t think the wealthy people in this country don’t pay their fair share of taxes.

In a 2004 paper presented to the American Statistical Association, IRS economists Michael Strudler and Tom Petska calculated percentiles data that included both income taxes and Social Security taxes. In 1999, the top 1 percent paid 23.3 percent of combined payroll and income taxes, the top 10 percent paid 52.2 percent, and the top 20 percent paid 68.2 percent.

Basically, that means that the top 20% wealthiest people in this nation already pay almost 70% of the nation’s tax revenue. How is that unfair to the poor? Tell me … I am waiting to hear!

A common liberal retort to this fact is that they exclude payroll taxes, which are assumed (key word being assumed) to be largely paid by the poor. However, as it actually it turns out, when payroll taxes are included in the calculations, they have far less impact on the distribution of the tax burden than most people would assume, because the wealthy also pay a large share of those taxes.

I guess, If we are going to discuss the PNAC, we should start with an examination of the mission statement of the PNAC. There are several signatures at the bottom of this statement … including, interestingly enough, Francis Fukuyama.

This was, of course, before his ant-Bush “Road to Damascus” experience and his book, America at the Crossroads.

It is important to point out, though, that Francis Fukuyama still claims to hold to his neocon beliefs … he just feels that they have been abandoned, or lost, by the Bush administration.

Here is the mission statement from the PNAC website:

Statement of Principles

June 3, 1997

American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America’s role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital — both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements — built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation’s ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration’s success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

While mission statements and purposes in any movement can become corrupted, or lost in the shuffle, or temporarily misplaced … I see nothing in this mission statement I strongly disagree with. I do see, however, where areas could lead to abuses of power by certain individuals … but that is always the case in any underlying or guiding policy developed by any political body.

If anyone thinks that, given her track record, Hillary Clinton does not abuse her political power, or would not abuse her presidential power, were she elected president … they are monumentally naive.

I stumbled on this interesting article by Ann Coulter and liked it so much I decided to post it here in its entirety. There is so much nonsense about how wonderful Barack Obama is! How he will unite the races! How he will save the poor white folk who are simply scared of black men!

What a load of crap!

Sorry … Folks! There is absolutely no possible way that Barack Hussein Obama was an active member of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ congregation for over twenty years, claimed to be his friend, and even claimed he was mentored by the good Rev. Wright; without knowing about and hearing the good Reverend’s venom filled, racist, anti-American views about whites and this country!  Jeremiah Wright even performed the wedding ceremony for Barack and Michelle Obama and baptized their children!

How stupid does he think Americans are?   He stayed there … and listen  … and “Amen’d”  …. for twenty-plus years … be real folks!  Now I ask you … would you stay for twenty-plus years in a church you disagreed with what the pastor was preaching?  Can you answer that honestly?  Are are you simply enslaved by Barack Obama’s RockStar charismatic personality?

If you actually swallowed that story you, my friend, are an idiot!! And … sadly, as stupid as Obama thinks you are ….

I am not a racist … unless calling a black racist a racist qualifies me as one. But … I am also not a white apologist. My family never owned slaves, my ancestors fought to free slaves, and I grew up with friends of many races and religions.

I treat all people equally based on who they are as person … and I certainly do make judgments about who I will like and dislike, accept or reject as a friend, or … even who I would defend and who I consider an enemy! But that judgment is not based on race, religion, or creed. It is based on that individual person’s moral character, integrity, and how they view and treat other people.

Morality, judgment, character, good, and evil … while they might have some gray fringes … they are certainly not relative and they are not outdated concepts.

Obama’s Dimestore ‘Mein Kampf’

by Ann Coulter (more by this author)

Posted 04/02/2008 ET
Updated 04/09/2008 ET

If characters from “The Hills” were to emote about race, I imagine it would sound like B. Hussein Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams From My Father.”

Has anybody read this book? Inasmuch as the book reveals Obama to be a flabbergasting lunatic, I gather the answer is no. Obama is about to be our next president: You might want to take a peek. If only people had read “Mein Kampf” …

Nearly every page — save the ones dedicated to cataloguing the mundane details of his life — is bristling with anger at some imputed racist incident. The last time I heard this much race-baiting invective I was … in my usual front-row pew, as I am every Sunday morning, at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

Obama tells a story about taking two white friends from the high school basketball team to a “black party.” Despite their deep-seated, unconscious hatred of blacks, the friends readily accepted. At the party, they managed not to scream the N-word, but instead “made some small talk, took a couple of the girls out on the dance floor.”

But with his racial hair-trigger, Obama sensed the whites were not comfortable because “they kept smiling a lot.” And then, in an incident reminiscent of the darkest days of the Jim Crow South … they asked to leave after spending only about an hour at the party! It was practically an etiquette lynching!

So either they hated black people with the hot, hot hate of a thousand suns, or they were athletes who had come to a party late, after a Saturday night basketball game.

In the car on the way home, one of the friends empathizes with Obama, saying: “You know, man, that really taught me something. I mean, I can see how it must be tough for you and Ray sometimes, at school parties … being the only black guys and all.”

And thus Obama felt the cruel lash of racism! He actually writes that his response to his friend’s perfectly lovely remark was: “A part of me wanted to punch him right there.”

Listen, I don’t want anybody telling Obama about Bill Clinton’s “I feel your pain” line.

Wanting to punch his white friend in the stomach was the introductory anecdote to a full-page psychotic rant about living by “the white man’s rules.” (One rule he missed was: “Never punch out your empathetic white friend after dragging him to a crappy all-black party.”)

Obama’s gaseous disquisition on the “white man’s rules” leads to this charming crescendo: “Should you refuse this defeat and lash out at your captors, they would have a name for that, too, a name that could cage you just as good. Paranoid. Militant. Violent. Nigger.”

For those of you in the “When is Obama gonna play the ‘N-word’ card?” pool, the winner is … Page 85! Congratulations!

When his mother expresses concern about Obama’s high school friend being busted for drugs, Obama says he patted his mother’s hand and told her not to worry.

This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved — such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”

First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover — he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?

The man is stark bonkersville.

He says the reason black people keep to themselves is that it’s “easier than spending all your time mad or trying to guess whatever it was that white folks were thinking about you.”

Here’s a little inside scoop about white people: We’re not thinking about you. Especially WASPs. We think everybody is inferior, and we are perfectly charming about it.

In college, Obama explains to a girl why he was reading Joseph Conrad’s 1902 classic, “Heart of Darkness”: “I read the book to help me understand just what it is that makes white people so afraid. Their demons. The way ideas get twisted around. I helps me understand how people learn to hate.”

By contrast, Malcolm X’s autobiography “spoke” to Obama. One line in particular “stayed with me,” he says. “He spoke of a wish he’d once had, the wish that the white blood that ran through him, there by an act of violence, might somehow be expunged.”

Forget Rev. Jeremiah Wright — Wright is Booker T. Washington compared to this guy.

I hear ya … Ann!

Blood For Oil?

Do you really think the War in Iraq and its relationship to oil is that simple?

When will the public demand the real truth from our government officials? There is so much misinformation available today it is scary. Some are naive enough to think that the war in Iraq is simply about oil! Well, maybe it was for France, Germany, and Russia. Those countries signed lucrative oil deals with Saddam Hussein not too long before the U.S. led invasion of Iraq to oust that despotic, brutal, murdering dictator in an effort to help stabilize the Middle East region. No wonder they didn’t support U.S. actions … it seems that oil before principles … was their watchword!

The U.S. does consume something like 14 million barrels per day. As Americans, we like our SUVs, our four-wheel-drives, and our liberal elite sure do like their private jets … despite the fact that doing so directly contradicts their politically correct lip service to the “global warming” problem!

Senator Hillary Clinton is busily doing her share … contributing to the global warming problem, and not just through her campaign rhetoric … even if it is just a lot of hot air.

Liberal environmentalists love chastise jet travelers because (according to them) the CO2 emitted by jets at high altitude is supposed to have a more rapid, negative impact on the climate than the same amount of CO2 emitted at sea level. This “fact” is often used as a justification for liberal elitist claims that we “common people” should be riding on trains … instead of flying home to see the family at Christmas.

However, despite the supposed horrors of global warming, Senator Hillary is still spending a great bit of time running around on private jets, as she campaigns for her version of a new Clinton Presidency, thus making her own, very real contributions to the global warming issue.

Adding to the irony, Senator Hillary spends a large part of her campaign time railing against corporate largess and executive pay scales.

So, just to get this straight in my mind … Hillary Clinton is against “corporate largess” … except for case of corporate largess involving corporate buddies of the Clinton’s … who are allowing their corporate jets to be used by Hillary so she can jet around the country…complaining about corporate largess and global warming.

Something is rotten in Denmark … me thinks!!

There is, however, a humorous part to this story. One of her corporate supporters is being sued by the corporation’s shareholders for wasting millions of dollars of corporate funds, including $900,000 spent on flying around … guess who … Bill and Hillary Clinton.

While all this is very interesting, however, the real truth is that oil plays very little role in the American War in Iraq, or global warming for that matter.

Did you know that the top source for crude oil imports to the U.S. is Canada at 1.944 million barrels per day. And … while Saudi Arabia is clearly second at 1.479 million barrels per day, Mexico comes third at 1.198 million barrels per day), Nigeria comes in fourth at 1.163 million barrels per day, and Venezuela comes in fifth at 1.135 million barrels per day. Of the top five exporters of crude oil to the U.S. …. only one is a Middle Eastern nation.

Or … to put it another way, of the top five exporters of crude oil to the U.S., only about 20% is imported from the Middle East. By the way, none of the oil the U.S. imports comes from Iraq!

Personally, I would like to see all imports of crude oil from the Middle East (and Venezuela … at least while Hugo Chavez is in charge) to the U.S. stopped … why don’t we instead buy more crude oil from Canada, Mexico, or even Nigeria. It seems silly to support the very terrorists who trying to blow us off the face of the earth!

Are our Arab allies really our allies … or are we being duped into financing the payments being made to the insurgents we are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hmmmmmmm?

Pelosi and Reid To The Rescue

Quick to act, but not to think … our non-all-seeing democratic leadership is declaring a new direction in energy policy. The House, on Saturday, edged toward passing $16 billion in taxes on oil companies and offering tax breaks and incentives for renewable energy and conservation efforts. Will someone please explain to me how raising the taxes on oil companies by $16 billion going to lower the cost of gas or reduce our dependency on crude oil form the Middle East?

Republican opponents of this proposed new direction in our national energy policy state the legislation ignores the need to produce more domestic oil, natural gas and coal. One GOP lawmaker pointed out the “the pure venom …,” our liberal democratic leaders in congress have. ” … against the oil and gas industry.”

I am not surprised … can you say “nest of vipers?” I knew you could!

Alaskan Oil Drilling Alternative

Would drilling for oil in an Alaskan wildlife refuge help ease our dependency on oil imports?

With oil prices nearing last year’s record highs, President Bush renewed his call for Congress to authorize oil exploration in Alaska’s largest wildlife refuge as part of a broader energy bill. Bush urged lawmakers to pass the energy bill that has stalled in Congress since the beginning of his first term, saying it would help wean the United States away from overseas sources of crude.

It might if that oil was used for that purpose. And … we are talking about an area that, in scale, is like a postage stamp in relation to the wildlife refuge. Also … modern oil drilling methods are vastly improved over the leaky oil rigs often visualized by those arguing against the idea of drilling in Alaska. The negative environmental impact to Alaskan wildlife is, in all honesty, essentially zero!

But is oil drilling in Alaska economically viable as a means to decrease U.S. dependency on foreign oil? Many experts say that Alaskan oil is simply to expensive logistically to transport by ship, truck, or pipeline to the continental U.S., and that it would make much more sense to sell Alaskan oil to Japan, and intead increase our imports of crude oil from Canada and Mexico.

President Bush has called on Congress to back the development of “clean coal” technology, which would allow broader use of the most abundant U.S. energy source with less environmental damage; encourage the construction of new nuclear power plants; and overhaul aging electrical grids and pipeline networks.

Sounds like a pretty good plan to me … why the opposition Pelosi? … Reid? … could it simply be partisanship politics?