If you ever thought a shadow government couldn't exist in this country, think again - the following article is just one of the glimpse that we get into the inner workings of this hidden organization.
The New York Times is the mouth piece of this organization as we see almost daily, or just in time to change national events in their favor, in their head lines and articles detailing classified information that puts our country at risk - this information comes from the state department, Justice department, the CIA and the FBI as well as the Pentagon. They are everywhere.
This article, from NewsMax, is a little long but packed with heart wrenching information - I said it's not possible that this can be happening in America - I was wrong -
The liberal Democrats want America to fail, totally. They want to destroy this country just to gain power - they do not care about anything else.
Keep the faith - the battle is joined!
U.S. Intel Possibly Duped by Iran
Tuesday, December 4, 2007 9:38 AMBy: Kenneth R. Timmerman
A highly controversial, 150 page National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear programs was coordinated and written by former State Department political and intelligence analysts — not by more seasoned members of the U.S. intelligence community, Newsmax has learned.
Its most dramatic conclusion — that Iran shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003 in response to international pressure — is based on a single, unvetted source who provided information to a foreign intelligence service and has not been interviewed directly by the United States.
Newsmax sources in Tehran believe that Washington has fallen for “a deliberate disinformation campaign” cooked up by the Revolutionary Guards, who laundered fake information and fed it to the United States through Revolutionary Guards intelligence officers posing as senior diplomats in Europe.
Dangerous Game
The National Intelligence Council, which produced the NIE, is chaired by Thomas Fingar, “a State Department intelligence analyst with no known overseas experience who briefly headed the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research,” I wrote in my book "Shadow Warriors: The Untold Story of Traitors, Saboteurs, and the Party of Surrender."
Fingar was a key partner of Senate Democrats in their successful effort to derail the confirmation of John Bolton in the spring of 2005 to become the U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations.
As the head of the NIC, Fingar has gone out of his way to fire analysts “who asked the wrong questions,” and who challenged the politically-correct views held by Fingar and his former State Department colleagues, as revealed in "Shadow Warriors."
In March 2007, Fingar fired his top Cuba and Venezuela analyst, Norman Bailey, after he warned of the growing alliance between Castro and Chavez.
Bailey’s departure from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was applauded by the Cuban government news service Granma, who called Bailey “a patent relic of the Reagan regime.” And Fingar was just one of a coterie of State Department officials brought over to ODNI by the first director, career State Department official John Negroponte.
Collaborating with Fingar on the Iran estimate, released on Monday, were Kenneth Brill, the director of the National Counterproliferation Center, and Vann H. Van Diepen, the National Intelligence officer for Weapons of Mass Destruction and Proliferation.
“Van Diepen was an enormous problem,” a former colleague of his from the State Department told me when I was fact gathering for "Shadow Warriors."
“He was insubordinate, hated WMD sanctions, and strived not to implement them,” even though it was his specific responsibility at State to do so, the former colleague told me.
Kenneth Brill, also a career foreign service officer, had been the U.S. representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna in 2003-2004 before he was forced into retirement.
"Shadow Warrior" reports, “While in Vienna, Brill consistently failed to confront Iran once its clandestine nuclear weapons program was exposed in February 2003, and had to be woken up with the bureaucratic equivalent of a cattle prod to deliver a single speech condemning Iran’s eighteen year history of nuclear cheating.”
Negroponte rehabilitated Brill and brought the man who single-handedly failed to object to Iran’s nuclear weapons program and put him in charge of counter-proliferation efforts for the entire intelligence community.
Christian Westermann, another favorite of Senate Democrats in the Bolton confirmation hearings, was among the career State Department analysts tapped by Fingar and Brill.
As a State Department intelligence analyst, Westermann had missed the signs of biological weapons development in Cuba, and played into the hands of Castro apologist Sen. Christopher Dodd, D, Conn., by continuing to use impeached intelligence reports on Cuba that had been written by self-avowed Cuban spy, Ana Belen Montes.
“After failing to recognize the signs of biological weapons development in Cuba and Cuba’s cooperation with Iran, Westermann was promoted to become national intelligence officer for biological weapons,” I wrote.
“Let’s hope a walk-in defector from Iranian intelligence doesn’t tell us that Iran has given biological weapons to terrorists to attack new York or Chicago,” I added, “because Westermann will certainly object that the source of that information was not reliable — at least, until Americans start dying.”
It now appears that this is very similar to what happened while the intelligence community was preparing the Iran NIE.
The Defector
My former colleague from the Washington Times, Bill Gertz, suggests in today’s print edition of the paper that Revolutionary Guards Gen. Alireza Asgari, who defected while in Turkey in February, was the human source whose information led to the NIE”s conclusion that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
But intelligence sources in Europe told Newsmax in late September that Asgari’s debriefings on Iran’s nuclear weapons programs were “so dramatic” that they caused French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his foreign minister to speak out publicly about the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Sarkozy stunned his countrymen when he told an annual conference of French ambassadors on Aug. 27, 2007, that Iran faced a stark choice between shutting down its nuclear program, or tougher international sanctions and ultimately, war.
“This approach is the only one that allows us to escape from a catastrophic alternative: an Iranian bomb, or the bombing of Iran,” Sarkozy said.
Three weeks later, Foreign Minister Bernard Koucher warned in a televised interview that the world’s major powers needed to toughen sanctions on Iran to prevent Tehran from getting the bomb and to prevent war. “We must prepare for the worst,” Kouchner said. “The worst, sir, is war.”
Those comments were prompted by reports that were given to the French president about Iran’s nuclear weapons program derived from debriefings of the defector, Gen. Ashgari, a Newsmax intelligence source in Europe said.
Ashgari is the highest-level Iranian official to have defected to the West since the Islamic revolution of 1979. His defection set off a panic in Tehran.
As a senior member of the general staff of the Revolutionary Guards Corps, Asgari had access to highly-classified intelligence information, as well as strategic planning documents, as I reported at the time.
A damage assessment then underway in Tehran was expected to “take months” to complete, so extensive was Asgari’s access to Iran’s nuclear and intelligence secrets.
Asgari had detailed knowledge of Iranian Revolutionary Guards units operating in Iraq and Lebanon because he had trained some of them. He also knew some of the secrets of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, because he had been a top procurement officer and a deputy minister of defense in charge of logistics. But Asgari never had responsibility for nuclear weapons development, and probably did not have access to information about the status of the secret programs being run by the Revolutionary Guards, Iranian sources tell Newsmax.
In an effort to cover up the failure of Iranian counter-intelligence to prevent Asgari’s defection, a Persian language Web site run by the former Revolutioanry Guards Comdr. Gen. Mohsen Rezai claimed in March that Asgari was on a CIA “hit list” of 20 former Revolutionary Guards officers and had been assassinated.
The Senate intelligence committee will be briefed today on the NIE, and the House committee on Wednesday.
But already, the declassified summary has Republicans grumbling on Capitol Hill.
“We want to know why we should believe this,” one congressional Republican told Newsmax. “This is such a departure from the past and there are so many unanswered questions.”
While the intelligence community is supposed to report just the facts and its assessment of those facts and their reliability to policy-makers, this NIE clear advocates policy positions.
“Our assessment that the program probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure suggests Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue that we judged previously,” the NIC wrote in the declassified “Key Judgments” of the NIE.
The NIE opined that the new assessment leads to the policy conclusion that the United States should offer “some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunites,” in order to lock in Iranian good behavior.
This carrot and stick approach has been the State Department’s preferred policy for the past 27 years, and has only strengthened the resolve of Iran’s leaders to continue defying the United States. “Those [countries that] assume that decaying methods such as psychological war, political propaganda and the so-called economic sanctions would work and prevent Iran's fast drive toward progress are mistaken," Ahmadinejad said in Tehran in September at a military parade.
By “progress” Ahmadinejad was referring to Iran’s recently-declared success at enriching uranium.
Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees “have been running around with big smiles on their faces,” a Republican source tells Newsmax.
Republicans on the committees intend to ask for more information on the sourcing of this latest NIE during closed door briefings today and tomorrow.
© 2007 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
in America but it's true -
Monday, December 10, 2007
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Elect Democrats and Lose Your Soul
Many things have changed in the last 100 years but the one thing that hasn't changed is the need to be free to pursue our dreams - to be all that we can be and not be dictated to by those the have an agenda that wants to take these freedoms away from us.
Live the dream - take control of your life - do not allow others to decide what is best for you. Live and die by decisions that you make. A principled life is a rich life no matter how much money you have.
Keep the faith - the battle is joined!
This is what we get when we elect Democrats!
TAXES!
Tax his land, Tax his wage, Tax his bed in which he lays.
Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes is the rule.
Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat.
Tax his ties, Tax his shirts, Tax his work, Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he tries to think.
Tax his booze, Tax his beers, If he cries, Tax his tears.
Tax his bills, Tax his gas, Tax his notes, Tax his cash.
Tax him good and let him know That after taxes, he has no dough. If he hollers, Tax him more, Tax him until he's good and sore.
Tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in which he lays.
Put these words upon his tomb, "Taxes drove me to my doom!" And when he's gone, We won't relax, We'll still be after the inheritance
TAX Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit
Tax CDL License TaxCigarette
Tax Corporate Income
Tax Dog License
Tax Federal Income
Tax Federal Unemployment
Tax (FUTA)Fishing License
Tax Food License
Tax Fuel Permit TaxGasoline
Tax Hunting License
Tax Inheritance
Tax Inventory
Tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax), IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), Liquor Tax, Luxury Tax, Marriage License Tax, Medicare Tax, Property Tax, Real Estate Tax, Service charge taxes, Social Security Tax, Road Usage Tax (Truckers), Sales Taxes, Recreational Vehicle Tax, School Tax, State Income Tax, State Unemployment Tax (SUTA), Telephone Federal Excise Tax, Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax, Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax, Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax, Telephone Recurring andNon-recurring Charges Tax, Telephone State and Local Tax, Telephone Usage Charge Tax, Utility Tax, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Watercraft Registration Tax, Well Permit Tax, Workers Compensation Tax.
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in theworld. We had no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world.What happened?
And now we have to "press 1" for English.
Live the dream - take control of your life - do not allow others to decide what is best for you. Live and die by decisions that you make. A principled life is a rich life no matter how much money you have.
Keep the faith - the battle is joined!
This is what we get when we elect Democrats!
TAXES!
Tax his land, Tax his wage, Tax his bed in which he lays.
Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes is the rule.
Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat.
Tax his ties, Tax his shirts, Tax his work, Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he tries to think.
Tax his booze, Tax his beers, If he cries, Tax his tears.
Tax his bills, Tax his gas, Tax his notes, Tax his cash.
Tax him good and let him know That after taxes, he has no dough. If he hollers, Tax him more, Tax him until he's good and sore.
Tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in which he lays.
Put these words upon his tomb, "Taxes drove me to my doom!" And when he's gone, We won't relax, We'll still be after the inheritance
TAX Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit
Tax CDL License TaxCigarette
Tax Corporate Income
Tax Dog License
Tax Federal Income
Tax Federal Unemployment
Tax (FUTA)Fishing License
Tax Food License
Tax Fuel Permit TaxGasoline
Tax Hunting License
Tax Inheritance
Tax Inventory
Tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax), IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), Liquor Tax, Luxury Tax, Marriage License Tax, Medicare Tax, Property Tax, Real Estate Tax, Service charge taxes, Social Security Tax, Road Usage Tax (Truckers), Sales Taxes, Recreational Vehicle Tax, School Tax, State Income Tax, State Unemployment Tax (SUTA), Telephone Federal Excise Tax, Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax, Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax, Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax, Telephone Recurring andNon-recurring Charges Tax, Telephone State and Local Tax, Telephone Usage Charge Tax, Utility Tax, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Watercraft Registration Tax, Well Permit Tax, Workers Compensation Tax.
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in theworld. We had no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world.What happened?
And now we have to "press 1" for English.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Israel Won't Accept NIE Report Findings
Israel has a good reason not to believe the NIE report in that it was falsified to meet an agenda of destruction of the Bush administration and the Israels -
The three men that wrote this report have come under close scrutiny as to their political beliefs and associations. They are found to be all liberals and are willing to sacrifice the entire American nation and the Israels to gain power -
The liberal will stop at nothing to secure power. How could anyone lie about nuclear weapons? Who are these monsters? Liberal Democrats - Marxists!
Israel challenges report on nukes
December 5, 2007 Wash. Times
By Joshua Mitnick - TEL AVIV — Israeli officials yesterday disputed the conclusions of Monday's surprise U.S. assessment of Iran's nuclear program, citing "clear and solid intelligence" that Iran is continuing to develop nuclear weapons to threaten Israel and Europe.
"We have no doubt," said one Israeli official, who requested to remain anonymous. "If one looks at the investment, if one looks at the nature of the project, if you look at the cost to the Iranian economy, there is no logical explanation other than that the Iranian program is not benign."
The intelligence assessment revealed a rare open rift between the intelligence communities of two allies, which have cooperated closely and share almost all their information about Iran's nuclear program.
The U.S. National Intelligence Estimate said that Iran froze its program to develop a nuclear weapon four years ago, while it continues to engage in uranium-enrichment activity.
In addition to virtually eliminating the possibility that the U.S. will attack Iran before the end of the Bush presidency, the estimate widens the gap between Israeli and U.S. estimates on the time remaining before Iran could achieve a nuclear weapon.
Israel still insists that there is as little as two years to stop Iran from going nuclear, while the new U.S. assessment finds that unlikely to happen before 2010 to 2015.
"Until now, there were no sharp differences in interpretation," said Yuval Steinitz, a Likud Party legislator who sits on the parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.
"I don't know of any piece of intelligence that supports this conclusion. It seems to me that this report repeats the mistake of Iraq, but taking it to the opposite conclusion.
"We have a lot of very clear and solid intelligence, that to my best understanding, clearly shows that the Iranians are developing nuclear weapons today, as they did two years ago. This is not a matter of speculation, but this is about solid intelligence."
Defense Minister Ehud Barak was only slightly less definite in published interviews yesterday.
"It looks like Iran stopped its program to create an atom bomb in 2003 for a certain time, but as far as we know, it has since probably renewed it," he was quoted as saying. "There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told reporters that Israel "will make every effort — first and foremost with our friends in the U.S. — to prevent the production" of nuclear weapons by Iran.
Although Israeli and U.S. intelligence agencies share most of their data regarding the Iranian threat, it is possible that Israel has some exclusive information.
"Just because we are friends doesn't mean we are going to share everything," said Meir Javedanfar, a Tel Aviv-based analyst who co-authored a book on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the nuclear program titled "The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran."
Israelis were uncertain whether to be relieved at the distancing of an existential threat or to be concerned that readiness to confront that threat has been dissipated, perhaps for good.
A leading Israeli analyst, Ehud Ya'ari, said on Channel 2 television that the American finding showed that the Iranian program "is further behind than we assumed."
Washington, he said, had rejected Israel's belief that the Iranians are pursuing one or two secret nuclear programs that are not monitored by the West.
"The Americans apparently came to their conclusions on the basis of human intelligence," he said, mentioning Gen. Ali Reza Asghari, a former Iranian deputy defense minister who defected to the West in February.
Oded Granot, a commentator on Channel 1, who, like Mr. Ya'ari, has good connections with Israel's security establishment, said American intelligence had intercepted a transmission from a senior Iranian military official several months ago, in which he expressed disappointment that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been halted.
Although this might have been deliberate misinformation, Mr. Granot said that in recent weeks a flood of other evidence pointed to the program's being frozen.
Mr. Granot said Israel has learned that many of the 3,000 centrifuges that the Iranians had begun to activate in order to enrich uranium — whether for civilian or military purposes — have broken down.
The three men that wrote this report have come under close scrutiny as to their political beliefs and associations. They are found to be all liberals and are willing to sacrifice the entire American nation and the Israels to gain power -
The liberal will stop at nothing to secure power. How could anyone lie about nuclear weapons? Who are these monsters? Liberal Democrats - Marxists!
Israel challenges report on nukes
December 5, 2007 Wash. Times
By Joshua Mitnick - TEL AVIV — Israeli officials yesterday disputed the conclusions of Monday's surprise U.S. assessment of Iran's nuclear program, citing "clear and solid intelligence" that Iran is continuing to develop nuclear weapons to threaten Israel and Europe.
"We have no doubt," said one Israeli official, who requested to remain anonymous. "If one looks at the investment, if one looks at the nature of the project, if you look at the cost to the Iranian economy, there is no logical explanation other than that the Iranian program is not benign."
The intelligence assessment revealed a rare open rift between the intelligence communities of two allies, which have cooperated closely and share almost all their information about Iran's nuclear program.
The U.S. National Intelligence Estimate said that Iran froze its program to develop a nuclear weapon four years ago, while it continues to engage in uranium-enrichment activity.
In addition to virtually eliminating the possibility that the U.S. will attack Iran before the end of the Bush presidency, the estimate widens the gap between Israeli and U.S. estimates on the time remaining before Iran could achieve a nuclear weapon.
Israel still insists that there is as little as two years to stop Iran from going nuclear, while the new U.S. assessment finds that unlikely to happen before 2010 to 2015.
"Until now, there were no sharp differences in interpretation," said Yuval Steinitz, a Likud Party legislator who sits on the parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.
"I don't know of any piece of intelligence that supports this conclusion. It seems to me that this report repeats the mistake of Iraq, but taking it to the opposite conclusion.
"We have a lot of very clear and solid intelligence, that to my best understanding, clearly shows that the Iranians are developing nuclear weapons today, as they did two years ago. This is not a matter of speculation, but this is about solid intelligence."
Defense Minister Ehud Barak was only slightly less definite in published interviews yesterday.
"It looks like Iran stopped its program to create an atom bomb in 2003 for a certain time, but as far as we know, it has since probably renewed it," he was quoted as saying. "There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told reporters that Israel "will make every effort — first and foremost with our friends in the U.S. — to prevent the production" of nuclear weapons by Iran.
Although Israeli and U.S. intelligence agencies share most of their data regarding the Iranian threat, it is possible that Israel has some exclusive information.
"Just because we are friends doesn't mean we are going to share everything," said Meir Javedanfar, a Tel Aviv-based analyst who co-authored a book on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the nuclear program titled "The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran."
Israelis were uncertain whether to be relieved at the distancing of an existential threat or to be concerned that readiness to confront that threat has been dissipated, perhaps for good.
A leading Israeli analyst, Ehud Ya'ari, said on Channel 2 television that the American finding showed that the Iranian program "is further behind than we assumed."
Washington, he said, had rejected Israel's belief that the Iranians are pursuing one or two secret nuclear programs that are not monitored by the West.
"The Americans apparently came to their conclusions on the basis of human intelligence," he said, mentioning Gen. Ali Reza Asghari, a former Iranian deputy defense minister who defected to the West in February.
Oded Granot, a commentator on Channel 1, who, like Mr. Ya'ari, has good connections with Israel's security establishment, said American intelligence had intercepted a transmission from a senior Iranian military official several months ago, in which he expressed disappointment that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been halted.
Although this might have been deliberate misinformation, Mr. Granot said that in recent weeks a flood of other evidence pointed to the program's being frozen.
Mr. Granot said Israel has learned that many of the 3,000 centrifuges that the Iranians had begun to activate in order to enrich uranium — whether for civilian or military purposes — have broken down.
Monday, December 03, 2007
Hugo Chavez Gone in 2012
With this vote in the can so to speak, Hugo Chavez will not be president for life. He wanted this so he could convert the entire country to socialism, including his special secret police that are being trained by Cubans.
The question now is will he step down in 2012 or will he have consolidated enough power to take the government by force? His secret police should be ready to take control by then in most parts of the country. With death squads operating in the larger cities carrying out Chavez's orders, and if the army is on his sideas well as the Cubans, it will happen.
I think Chavez will never relinquish power. Have you ever heard of a communist that willing gives up power? Just look at what lengths the Clinton's are going to to get back into power. Remember, liberals love mass killers and totalitarian dictators.
The Clinton's and Chavez will make a great pair.
CARACAS, Venezuela - (an AP release)
Humbled by his first electoral defeat ever, President Hugo Chavez said Monday he may have been too ambitious in asking voters to let him stand indefinitely for re-election and endorse a huge leap to a socialist state.
“I understand and accept that the proposal I made was quite profound and intense,” he said after voters narrowly rejected the sweeping constitutional reforms by 51 percent to 49 percent.
Opposition activists were ecstatic as the results were announced shortly after midnight — with 88 percent of the vote counted, the trend was declared irreversible by elections council chief Tibisay Lucena.
Some shed tears. Others began chanting: “And now he’s going away!”
Without the overhaul, Chavez will be barred from running again in 2012.
Foes of the reform effort — including Roman Catholic leaders, media freedom groups, human rights groups and prominent business leaders — said it would have granted Chavez unchecked power and imperiled basic rights.
Chavez told reporters at the presidential palace that the outcome of Sunday’s balloting had taught him that “Venezuelan democracy is maturing.” His respect for the verdict, he asserted, proves he is a true democratic leader.
“From this moment on, let’s be calm,” he proposed, asking for no more street violence like the clashes that marred pre-vote protests. “There is no dictatorship here.”
U.S. sees vote for democracy.
The White House took note of Chavez’s setback.“We congratulate the people of Venezuela on their election and their continued desire to live in freedom and democracy,” National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.
U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns also said it was a victory for the country’s citizens who want to prevent Chavez from having unchecked power.
“We felt that this referendum would make Chavez president for life, and that’s not ever a welcome development,” Burns told reporters in Singapore. “In a country that wants to be a democracy, the people spoke, and the people spoke for democracy and against unlimited power.”
Chavez, who was briefly ousted in a failed 2002 coup, blamed the loss on low turnout among the very supporters who re-elected him a year ago with 63 percent of the vote.
Seven in 10 eligible voters cast ballots then. This time it was just 56 percent.
The defeated reform package would have created new types of communal property, let Chavez handpick local leaders under a redrawn political map and suspended civil liberties during extended states of emergency.
Jose Miguel Gomez / Reuters
Chavez blamed the loss on low turnout among the very supporters who re-elected him a year ago with 63 percent of the vote.
Other changes would have shortened the workday from eight hours to six, created a social security fund for millions of informal laborers and promoted communal councils where residents decide how to spend government funds.
The question now is will he step down in 2012 or will he have consolidated enough power to take the government by force? His secret police should be ready to take control by then in most parts of the country. With death squads operating in the larger cities carrying out Chavez's orders, and if the army is on his sideas well as the Cubans, it will happen.
I think Chavez will never relinquish power. Have you ever heard of a communist that willing gives up power? Just look at what lengths the Clinton's are going to to get back into power. Remember, liberals love mass killers and totalitarian dictators.
The Clinton's and Chavez will make a great pair.
CARACAS, Venezuela - (an AP release)
Humbled by his first electoral defeat ever, President Hugo Chavez said Monday he may have been too ambitious in asking voters to let him stand indefinitely for re-election and endorse a huge leap to a socialist state.
“I understand and accept that the proposal I made was quite profound and intense,” he said after voters narrowly rejected the sweeping constitutional reforms by 51 percent to 49 percent.
Opposition activists were ecstatic as the results were announced shortly after midnight — with 88 percent of the vote counted, the trend was declared irreversible by elections council chief Tibisay Lucena.
Some shed tears. Others began chanting: “And now he’s going away!”
Without the overhaul, Chavez will be barred from running again in 2012.
Foes of the reform effort — including Roman Catholic leaders, media freedom groups, human rights groups and prominent business leaders — said it would have granted Chavez unchecked power and imperiled basic rights.
Chavez told reporters at the presidential palace that the outcome of Sunday’s balloting had taught him that “Venezuelan democracy is maturing.” His respect for the verdict, he asserted, proves he is a true democratic leader.
“From this moment on, let’s be calm,” he proposed, asking for no more street violence like the clashes that marred pre-vote protests. “There is no dictatorship here.”
U.S. sees vote for democracy.
The White House took note of Chavez’s setback.“We congratulate the people of Venezuela on their election and their continued desire to live in freedom and democracy,” National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.
U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns also said it was a victory for the country’s citizens who want to prevent Chavez from having unchecked power.
“We felt that this referendum would make Chavez president for life, and that’s not ever a welcome development,” Burns told reporters in Singapore. “In a country that wants to be a democracy, the people spoke, and the people spoke for democracy and against unlimited power.”
Chavez, who was briefly ousted in a failed 2002 coup, blamed the loss on low turnout among the very supporters who re-elected him a year ago with 63 percent of the vote.
Seven in 10 eligible voters cast ballots then. This time it was just 56 percent.
The defeated reform package would have created new types of communal property, let Chavez handpick local leaders under a redrawn political map and suspended civil liberties during extended states of emergency.
Jose Miguel Gomez / Reuters
Chavez blamed the loss on low turnout among the very supporters who re-elected him a year ago with 63 percent of the vote.
Other changes would have shortened the workday from eight hours to six, created a social security fund for millions of informal laborers and promoted communal councils where residents decide how to spend government funds.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Oh No, He's Telling the Truth
When Minister Joe Wright was asked to open the new session of theKansas Senate, everyone was expecting the usual generalities, butThis is what they heard;
'Heavenly Father, We come before you today To ask your forgiveness and To seek your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil good' But that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium And reversed our values.
We have exploited the poor andCalled it the lottery.
We have rewarded laziness And called it welfare. We have killed our unborn And called it choice.
We have shot abortionists And called it justifiable. We have abused power And called it politics.
We have coveted our neighbour'sPossessions and called it ambition.
We have polluted the air With profanity andPornography and called itFreedom of speech and expression.
We have ridiculed the timeHonoured values of ourForefathers and called it enlightenment.
Search us, Oh, God,And know our hearts today;Cleanse us from every sinAnd set us free.Amen!'The response was immediate.
A number of legislators walked Out During the prayer in protest. In 6 short weeks, Central Christian Church, where Rev . Wright isPastor, logged more than 5,000 phone calls with only 47 Of thoseCalls responding negatively.
The church is now receiving International Requests for copies of this prayer from India , Africa and Korea .Commentator Paul Harvey aired this prayer on his radio Program, 'The Rest of the Story,' and received a larger response to this program Than any other.
'Heavenly Father, We come before you today To ask your forgiveness and To seek your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil good' But that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium And reversed our values.
We have exploited the poor andCalled it the lottery.
We have rewarded laziness And called it welfare. We have killed our unborn And called it choice.
We have shot abortionists And called it justifiable. We have abused power And called it politics.
We have coveted our neighbour'sPossessions and called it ambition.
We have polluted the air With profanity andPornography and called itFreedom of speech and expression.
We have ridiculed the timeHonoured values of ourForefathers and called it enlightenment.
Search us, Oh, God,And know our hearts today;Cleanse us from every sinAnd set us free.Amen!'The response was immediate.
A number of legislators walked Out During the prayer in protest. In 6 short weeks, Central Christian Church, where Rev . Wright isPastor, logged more than 5,000 phone calls with only 47 Of thoseCalls responding negatively.
The church is now receiving International Requests for copies of this prayer from India , Africa and Korea .Commentator Paul Harvey aired this prayer on his radio Program, 'The Rest of the Story,' and received a larger response to this program Than any other.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Republican Debate on U Tude
I wonder what questions the candidates will be asked tonight - since it's UTube, and if it's like the last time, it will be really stupid -
I know if I were a candidate for the presidency and I was asked a inane question by some screw- off in a dorm some where, I would be pissed -
Keep the faith - the battle is joined!
I know if I were a candidate for the presidency and I was asked a inane question by some screw- off in a dorm some where, I would be pissed -
Keep the faith - the battle is joined!
Monday, November 26, 2007
Liberals can Not be Happy
There seems to be a law that states" if you are a liberal, smiling or laughing or giving thanks is prohibited!" To illustrate this I wrote a note to all of my contacts in the family and what friends I have managed gather over the years, describing what I thought America means to me on this past Thanksgiving day -
I got one response, I didn't expect any as this was just a statement, from a relative in California. She is a very nice person and I have know her all my life, although we haven't seen each other for twenty years or more.
I had stated that America was the best place in the world to be and I love my country which has given me everything. I said we have everything. Opportunity, security and chooses in our lives. I said we should give thanks for all of the those who gave their lives so the rest of us can enjoy such God given gifts.
The response stated she could not except my view of America - everything is wrong - the war is tearing us apart and as a result, everyone hates us. Were not in this war because we were attacked , it's about oil and big business. There is fear in America that we are outcasts and that we have attacked and killed innocent people in Iraq. After all they love there country too and we smashed it, took it away from them.
She ended by saying we have to have a truce -!? Wait a minute, I just stated how I love my country and I was thankful for living here - she had to run down the country and explain why she thinks America is wrong headed. What is wrong with just saying 'I am glad to be in America too' and leave it at that!!!!! No, the liberal has to go negative.
I guess when someone says 'I love my country' it's a signal to explain how wrong they are - nobody should feel that way especially if you live in America. That really ticks me off -
In any event, keep the faith, the battle is joined!
I got one response, I didn't expect any as this was just a statement, from a relative in California. She is a very nice person and I have know her all my life, although we haven't seen each other for twenty years or more.
I had stated that America was the best place in the world to be and I love my country which has given me everything. I said we have everything. Opportunity, security and chooses in our lives. I said we should give thanks for all of the those who gave their lives so the rest of us can enjoy such God given gifts.
The response stated she could not except my view of America - everything is wrong - the war is tearing us apart and as a result, everyone hates us. Were not in this war because we were attacked , it's about oil and big business. There is fear in America that we are outcasts and that we have attacked and killed innocent people in Iraq. After all they love there country too and we smashed it, took it away from them.
She ended by saying we have to have a truce -!? Wait a minute, I just stated how I love my country and I was thankful for living here - she had to run down the country and explain why she thinks America is wrong headed. What is wrong with just saying 'I am glad to be in America too' and leave it at that!!!!! No, the liberal has to go negative.
I guess when someone says 'I love my country' it's a signal to explain how wrong they are - nobody should feel that way especially if you live in America. That really ticks me off -
In any event, keep the faith, the battle is joined!
Sunday, November 25, 2007
How and Why JEWS and WASPs Function
Little wonder why America has had such a history of progress towards innovations and the need to succeed.
This article show how the Jews and Western civilization, including Britain, worked well together to build the most prosperous nations and civilization in history - failed societies around the world hate the Jews and any country that has adopted a market economy such as America and Britain. The simple truth is ; Success is hated by those that aren't successful.
Too simple you say, look at Harry Reid or John Murtha and their kind - they have no vision for the future and anyone that does must be hated. It's all about power.
*Jews and Wasps*
BY WALTER RUSSELL MEADNovember 16, 2007New York Sun
"I say there are two sides in the struggle:" wrote Osama bin Laden in one of the bombastic manifestoes that have so signally failed to unite the Islamic masses under his leadership. "One side is the global Crusader alliance with the Zionist Jews, led by America, Britain and Israel, and the other side is the Islamic world." President Ahmadinejad sees it the same way: America, Britain, and Israel are out to destroy everything that gives meaning and decency to the world.This isn't just about power. The United States, says bin Laden, has "the worst civilization witnessed in the history of mankind." Greedy, licentious, exploitative — we are a danger to man and an offense to God.
The Syrian parliamentarian and critic of Hollywood culture Muhammad Habash describes the "project" of American culture to "crush the weak, oppress the weak, crush them, climb all over their corpses."On this point, our enemies are less original than they suppose. A common hatred of Britain, America, Jews, and liberal capitalist modernity emerged in the 19th century and played a major role in the history and culture of the last 100 years.
Today's anti-Americans, anti-Semites, and anti-Zionists — whether they are ex-Marxists, thuggish populists like many supporters of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez or fanatical jihadis holed up in Waziristan — have embraced a set of images and beliefs that haunted the European imagination for hundreds of years.
This hatred is the product of the great story of modern world history: the rise of a global system of power, commerce, finance, culture, and ideology resting first on the power of Britain and now on that of America. As horrified Spanish, French, German, Japanese, and Soviets looked on, since 1688 the British have been on the winning side in every great power conflict in which they have fought — with the single exception of the American Revolution. In other words, the two great English speaking powers have either separately or together won every major war since the 17th century, and the global system resting on their military and commercial prowess remains the foundation of international order today.
Those who have fought and opposed this system attacked both its geopolitical ambitions and its ideological foundations. Where the Anglophones considered themselves to be fighting for freedom and tolerance, their enemies saw an economic and social system based on exploitation, greed, and a ruthless will to power.
European suspicion of the allegedly harsh and inhuman character of the dreaded "Anglo-Saxon" model of capitalism echoes these concerns.Jews and Wasps have their differences, but the rest of the world saw us as fighting on the same side long before America's support of Israel became a major world issue. French Jacobins attacked Britain as "Carthage" — a cruel, commercial, maritime, and Semitic empire that opposed the noble agrarian Latin world. By the Dreyfus controversy, French anti-Semites increasingly saw specific linkages between the supposedly rootless and cosmopolitan Jew and the terrifying Anglo-American economic machine.
Throughout Europe the Boer War was seen as evidence that Jewish plutocrats secretly manipulated British politicians to launch a war against virtuous farmers to protect Jewish interests in South African gold. "Oncle Sam" became "Oncle Shylock" in French nationalist propaganda during the 1930s.
Fascist leaders attacked both Churchill and Roosevelt as tools of the Jews, pointing to the significant presence of Jews among their closest advisors and friends. Stalinists shared both the hatred of liberalism and the identification of liberal capitalism with evil, cosmopolitan, and unmistakably Jewish values. As the Soviet apologist Genrikh Volkov put it, American capitalism reflected a "Shylock passion to utilize for the sake of profit not only a man's blood but also the living soul and his beating heart."
The critics have seen something real. Despite a steady undercurrent of anti-Semitism, both Britain and America have long histories of tolerance and more than tolerance for Jews. From the time of Oliver Cromwell, when medieval laws against Jews began to lapse, Jewish immigrants played a growing role in the commercial and cultural life of the English speaking world. Benjamin Disraeli's father received an honorary degree from Oxford in tribute to his scholarly achievements.
Disraeli himself, though baptized a Christian, was openly proud of his Jewish heritage even as he headed the ultra-traditionalist Tory Party.Other European courts tolerated wealthy "court Jews" as financiers. Disraeli was seen as the ideological heir of Edmund Burke and helped construct an ideology of English identity that remains strong today. In the 20th century, men like Isaiah Berlin and Milton Friedman were leading influences in the development of "Anglo-Saxon" political and economic liberalism.Where critics see a conspiracy, I see a confluence. On the one hand, as Max Weber observed, Judaism like Protestantism provides a solid foundation for success at capitalist enterprise.
On the other, it turns out that cultural and religious tolerance are necessary qualities for capitalist success.Capitalism requires careers that are open to talent: successful investment banks need to be run by the best brains rather than the best pedigrees. At the same time, capitalism produces social change. Competition leads companies to invest in new technologies. Great social cataclysms like the industrial and information revolutions change the way people live.
Urbanization uproots farmers and peasants in the tens and ultimately hundreds of millions and sends them into alien new cities. Within and across national frontiers, vast migrations of people course across the landscape.Some cultures, some societies, tolerate this kind of diversity and upheaval better than others.
Jewish society, with a culture shaped by millennia of exile, encountered capitalist modernity with the ability to maintain a sense of identity and continuity in the face of change and has generally adapted well to the new conditions.Wasps, with cultural roots in a form of Protestant Christianity that is individualistic and future-oriented, have also managed to negotiate the challenges of liberal modernity relatively smoothly.
For different reasons, we are at home in the same kind of world, and the "Anglo-Judaic" synthesis remains the despair of our enemies.
Mr. Mead, author of "God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World," which was just released, is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
This article show how the Jews and Western civilization, including Britain, worked well together to build the most prosperous nations and civilization in history - failed societies around the world hate the Jews and any country that has adopted a market economy such as America and Britain. The simple truth is ; Success is hated by those that aren't successful.
Too simple you say, look at Harry Reid or John Murtha and their kind - they have no vision for the future and anyone that does must be hated. It's all about power.
*Jews and Wasps*
BY WALTER RUSSELL MEADNovember 16, 2007New York Sun
"I say there are two sides in the struggle:" wrote Osama bin Laden in one of the bombastic manifestoes that have so signally failed to unite the Islamic masses under his leadership. "One side is the global Crusader alliance with the Zionist Jews, led by America, Britain and Israel, and the other side is the Islamic world." President Ahmadinejad sees it the same way: America, Britain, and Israel are out to destroy everything that gives meaning and decency to the world.This isn't just about power. The United States, says bin Laden, has "the worst civilization witnessed in the history of mankind." Greedy, licentious, exploitative — we are a danger to man and an offense to God.
The Syrian parliamentarian and critic of Hollywood culture Muhammad Habash describes the "project" of American culture to "crush the weak, oppress the weak, crush them, climb all over their corpses."On this point, our enemies are less original than they suppose. A common hatred of Britain, America, Jews, and liberal capitalist modernity emerged in the 19th century and played a major role in the history and culture of the last 100 years.
Today's anti-Americans, anti-Semites, and anti-Zionists — whether they are ex-Marxists, thuggish populists like many supporters of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez or fanatical jihadis holed up in Waziristan — have embraced a set of images and beliefs that haunted the European imagination for hundreds of years.
This hatred is the product of the great story of modern world history: the rise of a global system of power, commerce, finance, culture, and ideology resting first on the power of Britain and now on that of America. As horrified Spanish, French, German, Japanese, and Soviets looked on, since 1688 the British have been on the winning side in every great power conflict in which they have fought — with the single exception of the American Revolution. In other words, the two great English speaking powers have either separately or together won every major war since the 17th century, and the global system resting on their military and commercial prowess remains the foundation of international order today.
Those who have fought and opposed this system attacked both its geopolitical ambitions and its ideological foundations. Where the Anglophones considered themselves to be fighting for freedom and tolerance, their enemies saw an economic and social system based on exploitation, greed, and a ruthless will to power.
European suspicion of the allegedly harsh and inhuman character of the dreaded "Anglo-Saxon" model of capitalism echoes these concerns.Jews and Wasps have their differences, but the rest of the world saw us as fighting on the same side long before America's support of Israel became a major world issue. French Jacobins attacked Britain as "Carthage" — a cruel, commercial, maritime, and Semitic empire that opposed the noble agrarian Latin world. By the Dreyfus controversy, French anti-Semites increasingly saw specific linkages between the supposedly rootless and cosmopolitan Jew and the terrifying Anglo-American economic machine.
Throughout Europe the Boer War was seen as evidence that Jewish plutocrats secretly manipulated British politicians to launch a war against virtuous farmers to protect Jewish interests in South African gold. "Oncle Sam" became "Oncle Shylock" in French nationalist propaganda during the 1930s.
Fascist leaders attacked both Churchill and Roosevelt as tools of the Jews, pointing to the significant presence of Jews among their closest advisors and friends. Stalinists shared both the hatred of liberalism and the identification of liberal capitalism with evil, cosmopolitan, and unmistakably Jewish values. As the Soviet apologist Genrikh Volkov put it, American capitalism reflected a "Shylock passion to utilize for the sake of profit not only a man's blood but also the living soul and his beating heart."
The critics have seen something real. Despite a steady undercurrent of anti-Semitism, both Britain and America have long histories of tolerance and more than tolerance for Jews. From the time of Oliver Cromwell, when medieval laws against Jews began to lapse, Jewish immigrants played a growing role in the commercial and cultural life of the English speaking world. Benjamin Disraeli's father received an honorary degree from Oxford in tribute to his scholarly achievements.
Disraeli himself, though baptized a Christian, was openly proud of his Jewish heritage even as he headed the ultra-traditionalist Tory Party.Other European courts tolerated wealthy "court Jews" as financiers. Disraeli was seen as the ideological heir of Edmund Burke and helped construct an ideology of English identity that remains strong today. In the 20th century, men like Isaiah Berlin and Milton Friedman were leading influences in the development of "Anglo-Saxon" political and economic liberalism.Where critics see a conspiracy, I see a confluence. On the one hand, as Max Weber observed, Judaism like Protestantism provides a solid foundation for success at capitalist enterprise.
On the other, it turns out that cultural and religious tolerance are necessary qualities for capitalist success.Capitalism requires careers that are open to talent: successful investment banks need to be run by the best brains rather than the best pedigrees. At the same time, capitalism produces social change. Competition leads companies to invest in new technologies. Great social cataclysms like the industrial and information revolutions change the way people live.
Urbanization uproots farmers and peasants in the tens and ultimately hundreds of millions and sends them into alien new cities. Within and across national frontiers, vast migrations of people course across the landscape.Some cultures, some societies, tolerate this kind of diversity and upheaval better than others.
Jewish society, with a culture shaped by millennia of exile, encountered capitalist modernity with the ability to maintain a sense of identity and continuity in the face of change and has generally adapted well to the new conditions.Wasps, with cultural roots in a form of Protestant Christianity that is individualistic and future-oriented, have also managed to negotiate the challenges of liberal modernity relatively smoothly.
For different reasons, we are at home in the same kind of world, and the "Anglo-Judaic" synthesis remains the despair of our enemies.
Mr. Mead, author of "God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World," which was just released, is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Jimmy Carter Sucks Up to the Jews
Jimmy Carter is still a monster and always will be - the question is why does he hate this country so much and loves mass killers and tyrants?? And he wants to broker peace in the Middle East? He wants the Jews to die - Is he A Marxist? Worse??
This article tells it all - the man is insane -
Jewish Groups Spurn Jimmy Carter’s Olive Branch
Former President Jimmy Carter’s attempts to mend fences with the Jewish community have been rebuffed by leading Jewish organizations and Jewish legislators in Congress.
Carter’s relations with much of the organized Jewish community have been strained since the publication of his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” and his remarks about the Jewish lobby’s influence on U.S. foreign policy.
Carter attempted to repair those relations by inviting Jewish groups to discuss ways that he could help with the upcoming Middle East conference.
As President, Carter brokered the Camp David Accords, which led to a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt in March 1979.
But while Carter invited most of the major Jewish groups, only a small handful of organizations — all of which favor a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians — sent a representative, the Jewish publication Forward reported.
“I didn’t want to be used,” said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who turned down Carter’s invitation.
“I didn’t think anything constructive could come out of the meeting.”
Foxman also said: “He is entitled not to support Israel, but he is not entitled to come out and fuel anti-Semitic canards.”
A few hours after the meeting, Carter took part in a closed-door session with Jewish legislators on Capitol Hill. They voiced their displeasure over Carter’s book, published in November 2006, which argues that Israel’s “colonization” of Palestinian land has been a primary obstacle to peace.
“I told him that the Jewish community, [which] has great respect for his work around the world, is extremely hurt, disappointed and frustrated from his views and that he cannot serve as an honest broker,” Rep. Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat, told Forward.
The lawmakers told the former president he needs to apologize, but Carter did not do so.
Forward observed that the reception Carter received from the Jewish groups “suggests that the resentment is still strong and that it may pose an obstacle for him as he attempts to offer his help in brokering peace in the Middle East.”
This article tells it all - the man is insane -
Jewish Groups Spurn Jimmy Carter’s Olive Branch
Former President Jimmy Carter’s attempts to mend fences with the Jewish community have been rebuffed by leading Jewish organizations and Jewish legislators in Congress.
Carter’s relations with much of the organized Jewish community have been strained since the publication of his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” and his remarks about the Jewish lobby’s influence on U.S. foreign policy.
Carter attempted to repair those relations by inviting Jewish groups to discuss ways that he could help with the upcoming Middle East conference.
As President, Carter brokered the Camp David Accords, which led to a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt in March 1979.
But while Carter invited most of the major Jewish groups, only a small handful of organizations — all of which favor a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians — sent a representative, the Jewish publication Forward reported.
“I didn’t want to be used,” said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who turned down Carter’s invitation.
“I didn’t think anything constructive could come out of the meeting.”
Foxman also said: “He is entitled not to support Israel, but he is not entitled to come out and fuel anti-Semitic canards.”
A few hours after the meeting, Carter took part in a closed-door session with Jewish legislators on Capitol Hill. They voiced their displeasure over Carter’s book, published in November 2006, which argues that Israel’s “colonization” of Palestinian land has been a primary obstacle to peace.
“I told him that the Jewish community, [which] has great respect for his work around the world, is extremely hurt, disappointed and frustrated from his views and that he cannot serve as an honest broker,” Rep. Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat, told Forward.
The lawmakers told the former president he needs to apologize, but Carter did not do so.
Forward observed that the reception Carter received from the Jewish groups “suggests that the resentment is still strong and that it may pose an obstacle for him as he attempts to offer his help in brokering peace in the Middle East.”
Best Energy Policy: Stop the Democrats
This isn't something new by a long shot - the problem has been around for a long time - it's just now it has gotten to a point where we are in trouble and the future looks bad.
The environmentalists that demand we all must make sacrifices to save energy don't care what or who has to make the sacrifices. They live in a world where a camp fire is all the need to stay warm and hard tack is enough to eat. They have no clue as to the needs of the rest of us, 99.8% of the population, nor do they care.
The real question is how does such a small group of people have such power to control our lives? What ever happened to majority rule, minority rights? What hold do they have on the liberal Democrats that are the power brokers that make us all live by their agenda? The Democrats are the ones that have killed an bill that allows new drilling leases, new refineries, coal fired or nuclear power plants.
Isn't time that we take back our rights to have a voice in what effects us and our families as the majority? Isn't time we demand majority rule? What in God's name is holding us back? We all see where this is going and yet we do nothing but whirring our hands in despair.
For the foreseeable future the best way to get our energy needs in line with the demand is to not vote Democrat - they are the ones that are holding us hostage by siding with the environmentalist nut jobs. No one wants to destroy the earth. Get real.
They, the liberal Democrats, have no common sense or will to do the right thing for the country. Again, it's all about power.
We must stand together against the tyranny of the few. They want to do us harm and future generations will suffer the most - that is, our children. Think about it while you read the article below!
Keep the faith - the battle has been joined.
*Turning a cold shoulder*
November 25, 2007 - Wash. TimesBen Lieberman -
Millions of Americans are shelling out more than $3 per gallon for gasoline as they hit the roads this Thanksgiving, while those staying home will be racking up big heating bills. Worse, this costly double whammy could last all winter.
This ought to prod the federal government to do the right thing on energy. More likely, Washington will continue contributing to the problem.Despite high energy costs in recent years, so far we've avoided an overly expensive winter. Either energy prices backed off a bit before it got cold, as they did last winter, or we had remarkably mild temperatures, as happened the winter before.
But this year we head into the cold months with high prices and a real possibility for the most expensive heating season ever.Nearly 60 percent of America's homes are heated with natural gas, and current wholesale prices are more than triple the price a decade ago. Though the rise in gasoline prices has attracted most of the attention in recent years, the rise in natural gas has been almost as bad.
Natural gas expenditures this winter are expected to be 10 percent above last winter's levels, according to the Energy Information Administration. That's bad enough, but if temperatures turn out colder than normal, it will be one for the record books.Washington deserves much of the blame. Tough measures in the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments targeted new coal-fired power plants, and few have been built since.
But America's electricity needs kept expanding, so growing demand has largely been met by building natural gas-using facilities. In less than two decades, plants that use natural gas to generate electricity have gone from relatively minor players to providing 20 percent of our electricity needs. About 25 percent of our natural gas supply now goes to electric utilities, rather than residential and other uses.
Naturally, this added demand has raised the price.At the same time federal policy drove up demand for natural gas, it has also suppressed supply. Tremendous reserves of natural gas, both onshore and offshore, have been placed off-limits due to various environmental restrictions.
A report from the Interior Department estimates there is 187 trillion cubic feet of natural gas on federally controlled lands, enough to serve America's residential needs for nearly 39 years. Another Interior report estimates that we can find even more natural gas offshore.However, only some of this energy is accessible.
A 2004 Energy Department report identified "more than 30 environmental policy and regulatory impediments to domestic natural gas production." Interior estimates 27 percent of our onshore natural gas is completely off limits, and another 60 percent is subject to significant restrictions. Similar constraints also limit offshore natural gas production.With Washington simultaneously increasing demand for natural gas while putting the squeeze on supply, it is little wonder prices have skyrocketed. For natural gas-using homeowners, this has meant higher energy bills, especially in the winter.
Another 7 percent of Americans use heating oil, mostly in the Northeast. Along with gasoline, it is made from petroleum and is at or near record prices. Like natural gas, restrictions on domestic production have contributed to the price increases, as have regulations making it difficult to build more refineries.Most of the rest of America's homes use either electricity or propane for heating, both of which have also gone up.Yet Washington is poised to crack down further on the energy sources used to heat our homes.
The pending energy bill would place additional regulatory restrictions on domestic natural gas and oil production. And a number of bills designed to fight global warming would strictly limit energy use and further increase prices.
Rather than untangle its red tape, Washington's answer to high winter energy prices has been the Low Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Under LIHEAP, the federal government doles out money for state distribution to those who can't pay their energy bills.But that doesn't address the underlying problem.
A better approach would follow the same ethical advice given to doctors — first do no harm. Before the feds give out money to make energy more affordable, they should cease doing the things that have made it so unaffordable in the first place.
Ben Lieberman is a senior policy analyst in the Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation (heritage.org).
The environmentalists that demand we all must make sacrifices to save energy don't care what or who has to make the sacrifices. They live in a world where a camp fire is all the need to stay warm and hard tack is enough to eat. They have no clue as to the needs of the rest of us, 99.8% of the population, nor do they care.
The real question is how does such a small group of people have such power to control our lives? What ever happened to majority rule, minority rights? What hold do they have on the liberal Democrats that are the power brokers that make us all live by their agenda? The Democrats are the ones that have killed an bill that allows new drilling leases, new refineries, coal fired or nuclear power plants.
Isn't time that we take back our rights to have a voice in what effects us and our families as the majority? Isn't time we demand majority rule? What in God's name is holding us back? We all see where this is going and yet we do nothing but whirring our hands in despair.
For the foreseeable future the best way to get our energy needs in line with the demand is to not vote Democrat - they are the ones that are holding us hostage by siding with the environmentalist nut jobs. No one wants to destroy the earth. Get real.
They, the liberal Democrats, have no common sense or will to do the right thing for the country. Again, it's all about power.
We must stand together against the tyranny of the few. They want to do us harm and future generations will suffer the most - that is, our children. Think about it while you read the article below!
Keep the faith - the battle has been joined.
*Turning a cold shoulder*
November 25, 2007 - Wash. TimesBen Lieberman -
Millions of Americans are shelling out more than $3 per gallon for gasoline as they hit the roads this Thanksgiving, while those staying home will be racking up big heating bills. Worse, this costly double whammy could last all winter.
This ought to prod the federal government to do the right thing on energy. More likely, Washington will continue contributing to the problem.Despite high energy costs in recent years, so far we've avoided an overly expensive winter. Either energy prices backed off a bit before it got cold, as they did last winter, or we had remarkably mild temperatures, as happened the winter before.
But this year we head into the cold months with high prices and a real possibility for the most expensive heating season ever.Nearly 60 percent of America's homes are heated with natural gas, and current wholesale prices are more than triple the price a decade ago. Though the rise in gasoline prices has attracted most of the attention in recent years, the rise in natural gas has been almost as bad.
Natural gas expenditures this winter are expected to be 10 percent above last winter's levels, according to the Energy Information Administration. That's bad enough, but if temperatures turn out colder than normal, it will be one for the record books.Washington deserves much of the blame. Tough measures in the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments targeted new coal-fired power plants, and few have been built since.
But America's electricity needs kept expanding, so growing demand has largely been met by building natural gas-using facilities. In less than two decades, plants that use natural gas to generate electricity have gone from relatively minor players to providing 20 percent of our electricity needs. About 25 percent of our natural gas supply now goes to electric utilities, rather than residential and other uses.
Naturally, this added demand has raised the price.At the same time federal policy drove up demand for natural gas, it has also suppressed supply. Tremendous reserves of natural gas, both onshore and offshore, have been placed off-limits due to various environmental restrictions.
A report from the Interior Department estimates there is 187 trillion cubic feet of natural gas on federally controlled lands, enough to serve America's residential needs for nearly 39 years. Another Interior report estimates that we can find even more natural gas offshore.However, only some of this energy is accessible.
A 2004 Energy Department report identified "more than 30 environmental policy and regulatory impediments to domestic natural gas production." Interior estimates 27 percent of our onshore natural gas is completely off limits, and another 60 percent is subject to significant restrictions. Similar constraints also limit offshore natural gas production.With Washington simultaneously increasing demand for natural gas while putting the squeeze on supply, it is little wonder prices have skyrocketed. For natural gas-using homeowners, this has meant higher energy bills, especially in the winter.
Another 7 percent of Americans use heating oil, mostly in the Northeast. Along with gasoline, it is made from petroleum and is at or near record prices. Like natural gas, restrictions on domestic production have contributed to the price increases, as have regulations making it difficult to build more refineries.Most of the rest of America's homes use either electricity or propane for heating, both of which have also gone up.Yet Washington is poised to crack down further on the energy sources used to heat our homes.
The pending energy bill would place additional regulatory restrictions on domestic natural gas and oil production. And a number of bills designed to fight global warming would strictly limit energy use and further increase prices.
Rather than untangle its red tape, Washington's answer to high winter energy prices has been the Low Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Under LIHEAP, the federal government doles out money for state distribution to those who can't pay their energy bills.But that doesn't address the underlying problem.
A better approach would follow the same ethical advice given to doctors — first do no harm. Before the feds give out money to make energy more affordable, they should cease doing the things that have made it so unaffordable in the first place.
Ben Lieberman is a senior policy analyst in the Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation (heritage.org).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
