Last month it was reported that economic growth for the last quarter was a paltry 1.1%, much lower than the average 4% in previous quarters. Leftists wasted no time in seeking to capitalize on this seeming downturn in the fortunes of our economy. The downturn, however, was very short lived.

As we predicted, the growth rate, would be revised upward, though not as high as we had imagined. The US economy grew by 1.6% during the last quarter, according to recently released figures. Such events do happen and it is highly unlikely that growth will remain so low when figures for the next quarter are released. By most estimates, in fact, 1st quarter economic growth is expected to be a very health 4%, or greater. Far outpacing most western industrialized nations.

The signs of a robust US economy are evident all around us. Unemployment remains low, currently at the lowest level of Bush’s presidency. American businesses continue to expand and consumer confidence remains high. Such indicators bode well for continued economic growth over the next year. The simple fact remains that the economy will flourish in the least restrictive environment. The president, in spite of his many, many, many flaws, has excelled in that regard. Inevitably, there will be those who will take the opposite view, not because such a premise is backed by empirical evidence, which it is not, but because their governing philosophy requires the heavy hand of government, even at the expense of progress, such can be the expected result after the leftists retake Congress this fall.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/gdp/2006-02-28-gdp-revised_x.htm

Its not every day that the Phalanx calls for a non-nuclear nation to develop an indigenous nuclear weapons program, but then again Taiwan is a unique situation. For decades the tyrants in Beijing have threaten to invade Taiwan. The Chinese communists maintain that Taiwan is a renegade province and is the legitimate territory of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The Chinese have argued that any move toward “independence” would risk attack from the Chinese People’s “Liberation” Army. To prove their point, and to instill constant fear in the heart of ordinary Taiwanese citizens, the PRC has frequently staged military exercises and missile tests off Taiwan’s coast, in a not so subtle reminder of China’s military prowess.

The situation was so tenuous in the late 1990s, that president Clinton sent a naval squadron to the region to remind China that the US supports the status quo. The status quo, however, only feeds the Chinese threat. The suggestion that Taiwan is not an independent nation is laughable. Taiwan has its own government, economy, military and its own currency, and certainly should be considered a sovereign nation. China has no more claim to Taiwan than does Japan. Only this week, China renewed its threat of military invasion. In a terse statement, released this week, China warned that Taiwanese President Chen was moving toward independence, a move that could bring “disaster” to Taiwan.

For years Taiwan’s vibrant economy and massive foreign direct investment in the PRC shielded the island nation from Chinese threats. The Chinese simply could not afford to risk a devastating war, which would threaten the country’s economic growth. Today, however, China’s economy has long since eclipsed that of Taiwan, no longer is China dependent on Taiwan to foment economic growth, leaving the island nation exceptionally vulnerable to Mussolini-esque politicians in Beijing who seek to draw attention away from the lack of democratic freedom in China, by playing up the imagined threat and national dishonor that would come from an independent Taiwan. Thus, Taiwan must face the realization, that one day soon it may be forced to defend itself, given China’s overwhelming military superiority, the island nation would have no hope of success in a conventional war, thus Taiwan should pursue, clandestinely, the development of nuclear weapons.

According to the parameters of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), five states are allowed to possess nuclear weapons: China, France, the UK, the US and the Soviet Union (now Russia). It is also well known that India, Pakistan and Israel also possess nuclear weapons. Though Taiwan is a signatory to the NPT, China, considers Taiwan a part of China, the Taiwanese should therefore not feel bound by the NPT and should vigorously pursue the development of such weapons as a matter of the utmost secrecy. Once development is complete, Taiwan should make their existence known through extensive underground testing. Such a development would inevitably lead to a war of word with China, but the PRC would be much less inclined to assault a nuclear weapons state with the means to destroy, Shanghai and Beijing within minutes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4757568.stm

Sixty years ago, the suggestion that unabashed Nazis would walk proudly through the streets of Florida (or any American city) would have been met with laughter and disbelief. No American would believe that some of their fellow countrymen would embrace Hitlerism, as Nazis were the avowed enemies of America and American culture. Hitler and company, proudly attacked people of faith and ridiculed representative government and made no secret of their desire to crush America and subjugate its people. Given such realities, no true American would have embraced Nazism, those who did would have been labeled traitors, and rightly so. Traitors to all that which Americans have fought for since this country began.

Today those who march in honor of the likes of Adolf Hitler and the like, belong to one of two groups: those who clearly understand the philosophy of the Nazis and oppose democratic freedom and those ignorant wretches who latch on to any ideology which provides a platform for their mindless hatred.

Such was the case in Orlando this weekend, where protestors form the Minnesota based “National Socialist” movement marched through a local neighborhood, carrying their message of hate and stupidity. The marchers were met by a large number of anti-Nazi protestors, determined to stand against a resurgence of Nazi tyranny. Without question, these Nazis have the right to march and protest and any law that would deprive them of that right must be vigorously opposed, as it would undermine the very ideals these Nazis seek to destroy.

The Orlando march did not remain peaceful, however, as anti-Nazi forces, soon became enraged with the presence of these fascists. Police soon arrested several protestors. None of the goose stepping fascists, however, were arrested and none of their injuries were serious, though we would certainly shed no tears if the opposite were true.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1662514

Only this weekend we discussed the ongoing peril foreign oil poses for the United States, and now there is word from Venezuela, that Mussolini Chavez and company have threatened to cut off oil exports to the United States.

Venezuela is one of the top 5 oil exporters to the US. The Chavez government argues that such a step could be used to counter supposed US “aggression.” Venezuela argues that they can easily find other buyers for their oil. Such threats have been repeated frequently by Chavez and his cronies, but the reality is, Venezuela has significantly increased oil sales to China, Latin America and throughout the world. Such news should trouble US policy makers.

Once again the dangers of foreign oil are revealed in the tenuous relationship between Washington and Caracas. China, has been quick to secure energy reserves from the Middle East to Latin America and would be more than happy to import more Venezuelan oil. So what is the US government doing to counter this very real threat? Not much, and without a comprehensive national energy policy, this country will remain vulnerable to the whims of Latin American tyrants and tyrants from around the world
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/27/news/venezuela.php

Just this week, Al Qaeda operatives attempted to destroy a Saudi oil facility. The attack was thwarted by Saudi Arabian security forces, but Al Qaeda has vowed to step up its attacks on critical oil targets in the Saudi kingdom. This incident highlights the dangers of foreign oil dependence. These Islamic radicals recognize how fragile the world economy truly is. At a cost of only a few thousand dollars, these terrorists can inflict untold damages on the world economy.

This incident also draws attention to the much ignored fact that in our position as an oil dependent nation, we are forced to make deals with the devil and thus forced to get in bed with nations whose policies vis-à-vis Islamic terror are peculiar at best and hostile at worse. As long as this nation is dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil in particular, we will remain vulnerable to the whims of terror organizations like Al Qaeda. Indeed, through our consumption of foreign oil we fund (directly and indirectly) the very enemy who seeks to destroy us.

Foreign oil dependence is a national crisis and the growing volatility in oil rich nations like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela and Nigeria make the world especially susceptible to the ravings of tin pan dictators, radical mullahs and aspiring tyrants. For too long this country, and the West in general, have ignored the warning signs. This country must develop a national energy policy, which weans this nation’s off fossil fuels once and for all. In so doing we will eliminate a major threat to our way of life and our very republic. Inevitably, this nation will wake up; the question remains whether it will be before or after the next terror strike.
Link to LATimes article

Years of social promotion, loose academic standards, lack of parental involvement, minimal school choice, glorification of Hollywood culture and a devaluation of learning have finally begun to take its toll on the American populace. It is well known that many high school dropouts can look forward to a life of minimum wage and exploitation due to a lack of higher order thinking, now it seems even today’s college graduates may face the same fate. According to the results of a survey conducted by the American Institutes for Research, approximately ½ of college students can’t comprehend everyday tasks. So what exactly is it that tomorrow’s leaders don’t know how to do?

1. Understand opposing viewpoints in a newspaper editorial
2. Identifying a location on a map
3. Calculating the cost of ordering office supplies
4. Consulting a reference guide to figure out which foods contain a particular vitamin
5. Balancing a checkbook
6. Understanding interest rates

The survey, which evaluated college students across the country, revealed what years of poor performance in math and science has netted: children and young adults devoid of basic reasoning, logic or rudimentary quantitative skills. The survey noted that in one example, the students surveyed could not even ascertain whether their car had enough fuel to reach the next filling station.

Such results are both sobering and frightening. If college students, who supposedly represent the upper echelons of today’s learned Americans, dare we say that our country’s fate may soon be sealed. These are skills which yesterday’s high school students would have been expected to master, now we discover that individuals in their late teens and early 20s still lack the basic life skills necessary to function and prosper in today’s society.

Such news must be quite refreshing for the American left, knowing that future generations will remain dependent upon the government more and more as competency continues to decrease. Sadly there is enough blame to go around. Certainly schools bare some responsibility for loose academic standards and watering down curriculum to allow the lowest common denominators in a class to pass without the requisite hard work. Parents, however, are equally to blame for playing a diminished role in their child’s education, by not demanding hard work for their students and by modeling behavior which diminishes the value and appreciation for commitment to a task and education. Today we see the ongoing result of such diminished standards, while most children eagerly await the next installment of American Idol, they can barely understand basic math or comprehend a book of literature.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-01-19-college-tasks_x.htm

It has been some time since we have spoken of the name Fred Phelps or his Westboro “church.” Phelps is the leader of a virulently anti-Gay, supposedly religious, faction based in Topeka, Kansas. The groups has made a name for itself protesting at the funeral of Iraq war veterans, even protesting at the funeral of late Chief Justice, Rehnquist.

According to Phelps and his “congregation,” which consists mostly of Phelps own family members, the casualties in Iraq are a direct result of America’s defense of gay rights. Their hatred is so virulent and so treacherous, that to call themselves Christian or people of faith is laughable to say the least. At their various protests they often carry placards with such egregious slogans as: “Thank God for 9/11” and “God hates fags” or “Thank God for dead soldiers.” I can just see Christ joining in such a protest if he walked amongst us today…. These so called Christians claim hatred as a pinnacle of their faith and have carried their hate filled message across this country as they protest at one funeral after another.

In response to the growing menace that is Fred “Adolf” Phelps, several local and state governments have or are considering the adoption of new restrictions on funeral protests to protect families and the bereaved. Just this week South Dakota and Wisconsin enacted legislation to restrict funeral protests. Such an action creates conflicting loyalties, between those who are advocates for free speech and freedom of expression, as are we, and those who abhor the obvious intrusion such acts, as those committed by the Westboro hate squad, create.

The Wisconsin law, for example, bans protests within 500 feet of a funeral before, during and after the service. Its debatable whether or not this is a reasonable restriction as it can be argued that within such a range is not a public forum and thus speech and other activities can be regulated. Phelps for his part, says he will challenge such laws in court and there is a distinct possibility that the purveyor of hate may win. Freedom of speech is one of this country’s most cherished rights and we should be wary of attempts to restrict it, even in a case such as this.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-02-24-funeral-protests_x.htm

Long before the war in Iraq, long before 9/11, long before the countless hijackings and bombings of the 1970s and 80s, America had a problem with terrorism of a different color, literally. This terror movement emerged from the ashes of the Civil War, reaching its zenith in the 1920s with over 4 million members. The movement was resurgent during the 1950s and 60s with the birth of the civil rights movement, but it has never been completely dormant.

The Ku Klux Klan is America’s answer to Al Qaeda. First led by Civil War General Nathan Bedford Forrest, the Klan adopted terror as its primary weapon in the war against Blacks, Jews, Catholics and all non-whites. The KKK is a terror organization that has outlasted all rivals in terms of longevity. Indeed, Al Qaeda can’t hold a candle to the KKK when it comes to its reigns of terror. The Klan has been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans across the country.

Recently, CNN’s Alina Cho, reported on the growth of the Klan in the 21st century. According to Cho, who interviewed a prominent Klan leader in Ohio. The movement is not dead and is alive and well on the internet, using the medium to recruit new members. Who knew such people could operate a computer, much less post information on the web? As Cho noted, the Klan is growing and is attracting a younger demographic. During Cho’s interview with Jarred Hensley, a Grand Poobah of the Klan in Ohio, Hensley noted that the Klan seeks to build a White America and even told Cho (and Asian American) she should return to her country of origin. Somehow we doubt Hensley is an American Indian, but he claims first rights to this land. Somehow we equally doubt Hensley has anything beyond a high school education, if that.

As a terror group, the KKK has far more in common with Al Qaeda than a propensity for violence. Both organizations feed off the ignorance and idleness of those failures in society. If one were to scan the membership roles of the local Klan, it his highly unlikely that among its ranks one would find, doctors, lawyers, scientists, businessmen and women, authors, school teachers, engineers or any other profession of merit. One would find, ditch diggers, fast food workers, day laborers and heavy lifters. The reason being that Klansmen and their neo-Nazi allies represent the dredges of society, those who seek to blame others for their failures as individuals, like radical Islamists, they carry out their aggression on others, rather than blaming themselves for their station in life. These drags on society are traitors who honor the likes of Adolf Hitler (a man who’s ultimate aim it was to destroy America), rather than Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln.
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2006/02/klansman-told-me-to-get-out-of-america.html

Iraq is teetering on the edge of Civil War, just days after a terror attack on a prominent Shia Mosque, known as the Golden Mosque, reprisal attacks against the minority Sunnis have increased significantly. Scores of people have been killed throughout the country, especially in Baghdad, outpacing the ability of the Iraqi government or the US led coalition to control.

So what does this mean? Those with long memories may think back to Lebanon when rival factions destroyed what was once a vibrant Arab nation, leaving only devastation and turmoil in its wake. The same fate now awaits Iraq. The rival Iraqi factions have proven themselves incapable of forming a national unity government. While a large number of Sunnis oppose any level of compromise, which results in a reduction in their level of influence as experienced during the Saddam era. Other Sunnis, who participated in recent elections, resorted to mob violence when the results didn’t turn their way, evidence to their willingness to abandon civility and the rule of law at the drop of a hat. While the majority of the Shia have committed themselves to a democratic Iraq, a sizable number have taken to acts of reprisals, sowing the seeds of continued violence in the country.

Other factors like Iraq’s neighbors have also contributed to growing unrest, with Iran working behind the scenes to create a Shia dominated government and Syria allowing free reign for Islamic radicals pouring across the border. In the wake of the mosque attack, Iran’s tyrannical president called the act the work of the US and Israel. "They invade the shrine and bomb there because they oppose God and justice," President Ahmadinejad said. Naturally his accusations are without merit; nonetheless, his captive audience in Iran, immune to the truth, will accept Ahmadinejad’s words as gospel. There is one reality, however, that being the growing threat of all out civil war in neighboring Iraq. The US must relinquish authority to an autonomous Iraqi government and must remove itself from this simmering pot before it boils over.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/23/D8FUMST00.html

P&O, recently acquired by Dubai Ports World, is one of only a handful of organizations that have the expertise to operative major port facilities in the United States, or so we have been told by the advocates of the UAE port deal. Furthermore, it has been argued, no US firms are capable of such a monumental task as the operation of 6 major US ports.

Are we to believe such nonsense? The UAE deal involves several major eastern ports including: the ports of New York and New Jersey, Miami, New Orleans, Baltimore and Philadelphia. Understandably, this deal, recently announced by the Bush administration, has sparked outrage on both the left and the right and placing the Bush administration in a distinctly untenable position. The president contends that such an arrangement poses no security threat to the United States; such an argument is dubious given the UAE’s questionable past with regard to terrorism. UAE was a financial and operational jumping off point for the 9/11 hijackers; to make matters worse UAE was one of only a handful of countries to recognize the terror supporting Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. Even Iran didn’t recognize the Taliban.

The supposition that only Dubai Ports World has the technical expertise to run these US ports is utterly absurd. There are several major ports in the US, operating at peak efficiency under US based management. Of the 15 largest ports* in America, only 2 (New York/New Jersey and Miami) are included in this UAE deal. If DP World is the only firm with the expertise to handle such operations then how is it that Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Charleston, Hampton Roads (VA), Tacoma, Seattle, Savannah, San Juan, Houston, Honolulu, Jacksonville and Port Everglades manage to function with out the worldly insight of the esteemed company from the United Arab Emirates? The president is fighting a loosing battle if he hopes to convince the American people that this arrangement is in the best interest of the United States.

*Port rankings are based on "TEUs," or 20-foot equivalent units, the standard measure for containers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4737940.stm

Since the end of the Second World War, the United States has patrolled distant seas and guarded far away lands under the auspices of maintaining stability in strategic regions of the world. This policy, a remnant of the Cold War, has led to the basing of troops in garrisons across Europe and Asia.

During the height of the Cold War, when the threat of invasion from the Soviets and their allies was very real, this was a prudent move. Today, however, defending the likes of Germany and South Korea defies logic. These countries are more than capable of mounting a vigorous defense in the unlikely event of an attack. Indeed, with today’s advances in military technology, the stationing of troops in far off lands seems almost counter productive.

In many such cases, be it Germany, Japan or South Korea, the citizens of these countries oppose our presence, just as we would oppose the stationing of foreign troops on our soil. According to a recent poll in South Korea, many residents would side with the North over their supposed ally in the event of a conflict. So why are we expending valuable resources in defense of such ingrates?

South Korea is a far cry from its backwater past. Today, the South is one of the most advanced countries in the world, with a solid democratic tradition. The South also has a strong, well-equipped military force and is more than capable of defending itself, perhaps its time they should.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/21/D8FTU7HO2.html

Ali Hosseinitash is the Iranian nuclear negotiator who recently left Moscow after two days of inconclusive talks with Soviet Russian officials.

While the average American high school student wouldn't know him from Adam's house cat, Saburo Kurusu is well known among students of WWII history. Kurusu was the Japanese Special Envoy to the United States, ostensibly, sent to Washington to arrive at a "diplomatic" solution to the conflict in Asia.

Hosseinitash’s task, like that of Kurusu 60 years earlier, is one of distraction, a reality even the Russians could not ignore. The Iranians are intent to develop an indigenous nuclear program. Any negotiations short of that ultimate objective serve only as a delaying tactic.

Nominally, Iranian officials were in Moscow to discuss a Russian proposal calling for uranium enrichment in Russian territory, allowing Iran to pursue “nuclear energy” without giving Iran the capability to develop WMDs. After 2 days of presumably intense negotiations, the talks concluded with out result. Publicly, Russian officials have expressed frustration with the Iranians, noting their negotiating strategy is more akin to the strategy of a delaying action rather than genuine diplomatic openness.

The Iranians will not rest until they have developed a working offensive nuclear device, just as Japan was determined to create a “new order in Asia.” The Iranians too, have the goal of a new order, a radical Islamic order, in which the West is brought to its knees. Iran, like imperial Japan must be stopped. If we again fall victim to the ruse of “negotiations.” We will soon awaken one Sunday morning to another day of infamy, from which there is no retreat or escape.
http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2006/02/22/003.html

President Bush is so determined to wedge his foot squarely in his mouth, that he may give himself a hernia in the process. Today, the president threatened to veto any legislation, which holds up the UAE port deal. The president’s advisor, must be drunk, dead, stupid or self destructive if they have recommended this course of action. The president is well known for the fact that once he stakes out a position he is unyielding and unwavering, but is this a matter he should chose to make a point?

The port deal is wrong, pure and simple. The president argued that it was inappropriate to hold a mid-east company to a different standard than a London based company. We beg to differ, this state owned firm in the UAE, is a fruit of a very different color. The UAE is no more an ally in the war on terror than is Saudi Arabia, contrary to the ramblings of this administration. They give nominal support to the cause, meanwhile turning a blind eye to Al Qaeda members operating under their very nose, and do nothing as UAE banks funnel money to finance terror operations.

Sadly the port deal wasn’t Bush’s only misstep today. Earlier we noted how the president gave a grandiose speech about the need for renewable and alternative energy sources just days after key researchers working on that very subject were given their walking papers. Bush argued the layoffs were a mistake and the result of mixed signals. The workers were restored to their jobs shortly before the president visited the facility. Yes, there were mixed signals and they came from the president himself. The president and his administration have spoken at length about pursuing alternatives but this has been tantamount to lip service as we have wasted one opportunity after another to match our words with deeds. If one didn’t know better, one would swear the president was secretly conspiring with the Democrats to sabotage GOP chances in the next election.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/21/D8FTNQ400.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-21-bush-energy_x.htm

For some time now we have been asking the question: why? Why can’t the US cast off the shackles of energy dependence? For over 30 years, politicians, business leaders and community activists have spoken of the ills of dependence on foreign oil, all the while that dependence has only increased. Have we learned nothing from the energy crises of the 1970s? Apparently not. Even in the wake of constant threats from Islamic radicals, Venezuelan tyrants, Russian demagogues and Nigerian turmoil, we continue to turn a blind eye from the inexorable reality of our very real vulnerability.

Only yesterday, President Bush spoke of the dangers of foreign oil and the reality of foreign turmoil and the dangerous stranglehold foreign dictators have over the US economy. Sadly we have heard such language before. We heard it from Clinton, we heard it from Bush’s father, Reagan and Carter and to date, nothing has been done to reduce energy dependence by even the slightest. In fact, this government has done everything to encourage our subservience to absolute monarchs, tyrants and radical mullahs. During the president’s speech, he spoke of an energy breakthrough, making use of revolutionary new technologies, which quite frankly aren’t all that new. In fact, much of what the president promised could have been realized 40 years ago, if not earlier. Bush has been “promoting” renewable energy since he came to office. In his speeches there is tacit recognition of a looming energy crisis. Yet the president’s words have not been met with deeds. As Forbes magazine, hardly a leftist rag, pointed out:

Two weeks ago, 32 workers, including eight researchers, were laid off at the Energy Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden. The lab helps develop the very renewable energy technologies the president is promoting.

Then, over the weekend, just before Bush's planned visit to the lab on Tuesday, the government restored the jobs.

This further demonstrates the dishwatery support the president and his administration have given to alternative energy. Meantime, the government pours unjustifiable billions into New Orleans or loses an equally astonishing sum on “reconstruction” in Iraq. If this president or any previous president was truly interested in taking action, it would have been done long ago, but as we have seen this administration lacks any semblance of forward thinking whatsoever, which is regrettable, given the president’s supposed commitment to national security.

The fact of the matter is, there are a plethora of readily available alternatives to foreign oil dependence, including bio-fuels, hydrogen and fuel cell powered technologies, something NASA has used to power spacecraft since the 1960s. There are synthetic liquid fuels, used on a large scale as early as the 1930s and of course hybrid technology, which radically improves fuel efficiency, yet America continues to languish in the backwater of energy dependence. While most of the western world pursues a similar course, only to fall victim to tyrants like Vladimir Putin, when they seek to use oil as a weapon.

Not all nations are following the lead (or lack there of) of the US, Brazil has developed an extensive alternative energy infrastructure relying on the domestic production of ethanol, derived from sugar cane. In fact over ¾ of all cars sold in Brazil are capable of running on ethanol or gasoline and due to the increased cost of petroleum, ethanol is the preferred fuel of most Brazilian consumers. Ethanol is widely available in this country of over 180 million people. Brazil’s ethanol business has become such a boon for the country’s economy, that Brazil now exports ethanol to the developed world, significantly improving its balance of trade. Supplementing the nation’s energy needs has not inhibited the nation’s sugar industry by any means as the vast majority of cane continues to be refined into sugar.

Is ethanol the answer for America’s energy needs? Quite possibly, the costs of producing ethanol-powered engines is miniscule, compared to hybrid, fuel cell or hydrogen vehicles. The US, as one of the world’s largest corn producers, could also produce a sizable share (if not all) of its ethanol needs in any given year. A genuine support for alternative energy research and development would give American industry and consumers the impetus for change. Incentives should be provided for industries to develop alternatives and consumers should be equally rewarding for embracing such alternatives. Ethanol is only one option, through diversification using ethanol and other energy alternatives, the US could completely eliminate its dependence on the Hugo Chavezs of the world. Only time will tell if the president’s commitment is genuine this time around.
http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/02/21/ap2540205.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4715332.stm

The backlash over the administration’s approval of a port deal with an Arab company continues, and rightly so. The president can offer no satisfactory justification for turning over port operations at several major east coast ports to a company based in the UAE, any more than FDR could have justified turning over operations in LA or San Francisco to a Japanese company in the midst of the Second World War, or Reagan turning over port facilities to a Soviet group. The UAE is known as a nation supportive to Al Qaeda, even serving as a banking center for radical Islam’s terror operations. This fact, in and of itself is reason enough to nix any such deal.

This decision was in error and clearly demonstrates the lack of any forward thinking in this administration, one might as well entrust the operation of this country to a team of 6 year olds. Democratic Senators in Congress, including Hilary Clinton, have proposed legislation barring foreign control of US port facilities. While their motives may be disingenuous, the president has again brought this situation upon himself. Why is it that we place ownership restriction on US media and not on crucial port facilities? Exactly which is the greater threat? We balk at the sale of key industries to Chinese companies but give carte blanche to Arab ones, exactly who is the greater threat?

To their credit, the GOP governors of Maryland and New York have announced that they will pursue alternative means to void the deal. It would be surprising if the president won the day on this issue. The president must accept the fact that this decision was a mistake and retreat from the abyss.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-19-port-steps_x.htm

The Bush administration just announced a deal giving an Arab company, based in UAE, management over six major U.S. seaports. The ports include: New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, and New Orleans. The announcement, naturally has sparked outraged amongst the left and the right.

In yet another example of the gross incompetence on the part of the Bush administration, the President has allowed the Democrats to seize another opportunity to lambaste him in the press. Without hesitation, the likes of Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton have been given a golden opportunity to champion themselves as tough on terror. While their motives may be questionable, the objections of Democrats and Republicans alike are no-less valid. How could the president engage in such a risky maneuver that so blatantly compromises US Security? Only this very morning, the president referred to this region of the world as volatile with governments hostile to the United States.

On the flip side, proponents of the deal have argued that opposition to the deal is nothing more than politics and accuse opponents of racism. Is it racism, no, but it is pragmatic. When it comes to global terror, the vast majority of its perpetrators are either Arab or Muslim, indeed one of the 9/11 hijackers hailed from the UAE. Further more, UAE citizens have been implicated in numerous terrorist acts and Al Qaeda has been known to operate in the country.

Once again the president has a lot of explaining to do. Never before in history has an administration been more self-destructive than George W. Bush
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/20/port.security/index.html

China has long said that it favors a “diplomatic” solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis. In short, China wants to avoid conflict at all costs. Unlike, France, China is not overtly fearful of conflict or loss. China would gladly sacrifice 20 million of its countrymen in pursuit of its own strategic interests. History proves that to be the case.

China is uninterested in challenging Iran on the nuclear question for two primary reasons: In the first place Iran poses no immediate threat to China. China has managed to become a global superpower without ruffling any feathers. China, however, is a non-Muslim country and therefore an ultimate target of radical Islam, for the time being the radical Islam’s principle enemy is the West. In the second place, the ongoing conflict between Iran and the West affords China an economic windfall. China has been a major trading partner with Iran for sometime and its vast oil and natural gas reserves provide ready fuel for China’s economic engines.

Under a deal now being negotiated between the mullahs of Tehran and the tyrants of Beijing, Iran would become the principle supplier of oil to China. The $100 billion deal would certainly offset any harm imposed by western sanctions. Thus we can safely conclude that China will do nothing to prevent a nuclear Iran.

China, however, should be forewarned. Though they may not be a target today, they most certainly will be tomorrow. As the Martin Niemoller poem about Nazi tyranny points out: “…then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left…” In the take no prisoners world view of radical Islam, all are destined to submit, convert or die, including the Chinese.
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/06/front2453787.0493055554.html

According to a slew of scientists speaking at an annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), world starvation rates are on the rise. So much so, in fact, that by 2015, 100 million more people will face starvation. Most speakers argued that the key to reducing this number is greater financial investment, new technology and improving agriculture.

All of these strategies have been employed for decades with no discernable benefits whatsoever, billions upon billions have been poured in to technology assistance, technology transfer and investment programs throughout the developing world, yet mass poverty and mass starvation remain everyday facts of life for a growing number of people. While not implicit from the AAAS speeches, hidden below the surface is the familiar tone of blame. Blame for the west for “exploiting” the developing world. Blame for the west, especially America, for not giving more in foreign aid. Blame for not reducing trade restrictions. But one group, conveniently, is never blamed, that group being those who created such conditions in the first place.

Yes improvements in technology and investment can improve agricultural yields, but this only attacks a symptom, it does not strike at the root cause of global hunger across the developing world. These countries continue to grapple with devastating poverty and hunger because its citizens and government lack personal responsibility. If these scientists were truly interested in reducing the increase in the number of people starving, perhaps they would ask themselves why will there be 100 million more people in the grips of poverty by 2015. It might have something to do with the fact that many countries in the developing world have astronomically high birth rates. There is nothing more irresponsible than to bring a child into a world of poverty and despair. Are these people so in need of sexual gratification that they will do so at the risk of creating a new generation of malnourished victims of bad decision-making? Apparently so, as the cycle continues unabated.

During this meeting, speakers highlighted China and Vietnam as proof that progress can be made in improving the lot of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people. In lighting the examples of China and Vietnam however, they further disprove their supposed solutions to the problem of hunger. Neither China nor Vietnam improved their peoples’ lives by begging for handouts. Foreign aid and technology transfer will not solve the problem of hunger, just as social welfare programs don’t lift people out of poverty in the developed world. If they did, the problem of poverty would no longer exist in America or any other western nation. Poverty is eliminated through hard work, personal responsibility and the rule of law. Countries where people continue to have children without letup are destined to remain in poverty. Nations that are plagued with persistent violence and turmoil will never remove the yoke of starvation.

Who’s to blame for 3rd world poverty? The 3rd world is to blame. No nation that emerged from the shadow of the third world has done so through foreign aid, when it was not coupled with a commitment to taking control of one’s own destiny. If any nation is to overcome such conditions they must set aside petty violence, class warfare and civil war. They must embrace personal responsibility, which includes a commitment to hard work and responsible family planning. Above all, stop having children you can’t afford to take care of.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4724282.stm

As any frequent reader of The Phalanx can attest, Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez is a popular topic of discussion, for the simple fact that Chavez is a model for leftist strategy in America. Chavez is a typical demagogue who plays on the fears of the weak minded, who champions himself as a hero to the down trodden, who blames others for the woes of his countrymen, and makes outlandish claims and promises in order to curry favor with his target audience. In so doing, Chavez, in typical Mussolini fashion, distracts his compatriots from the reality of his growing dictatorship. Indeed, no politician alive today is more adept at pulling a Mussolini, than Hugo Chavez. As Chavez has castigated the US as the enemy of freedom, Chavez has clamped down on the media and any political opposition to his rule. He has oppressed religious and charity organizations that refuse to spew the party line and has solidified his hold on power.

Chavez’s strategy has made him the darling of the American left and a model to emulate for leftists around the world. After all, his strategy seems to pan. With each passing day Chavez grows in power and influence. His political supporters now hold 100% of the seats in the Venezuelan legislature, ensuring his ability to rule without any democratic checks on his power. Indeed, using his weekly television and radio show, seen by millions on state television, Chavez is able to expand is base through an expert wielding of political propaganda, rivaled only by Joseph Goebbles in his prime.

To ensure that the Chavez era doesn’t end any time soon, the Latin American Mussolini has begun to float the idea of constitutional change that will allow him to remain in power indefinitely, the tell tale sign of a true dictator. Chavez, who is up for re-election later this year, has no real opposition. Opposition parties in Venezuela, such as they are, have been fractured and demoralized and are in no position to challenge Chavez, whose allies control the media, the military, the police and the “independent” election oversight authority, thereby ensuring the long term continuance of the Chavez “presidency.” According to Chavez, he is entertaining the notion of a national plebiscite calling for a constitutional change that would allow him to run again in 2012. There is little doubt what the results of such a referendum would be.

Chavez went on to taunt the US and Secretary of State Rice in particular, who call Chavez an obstacle to democracy in Latin America. According to Chavez, America is the aggressor, a popular tag line for the Mussolini of the South.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4731742.stm

This week President Bush asked Congress for an additional $72 billion to fund combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through September (through September?!?), bringing the total costs of these wars to $500 billion. The war on terror has been a long and difficult struggle against rogue tyrants and radical mullahs, determined to impose their will on others. This fight, therefore, is absolutely necessary and in fact hasd been ongoing for nearly 40 years. But when such conflicts approach the ½ trillion dollar mark, the time has come to re-evaluate our strategy.

The president has warned, on many occasions, that the war against terror is to be a long one, it is one of the few messages he has been consistent in delivering, nonetheless, ½ trillion dollars seems to have bought little in the way of long term security for this nation or stability in Iraq. By contrast nearly a decade in Vietnam only costs 300 billion in today’s dollars. WWII, which required a massive mobilization of men and materials, not to mention a complete reconfiguration of the domestic economy and over 15 million Americans in arms cost $2 trillion, yet that war led to the defeat of a considerably more dangerous and well organized foe in Europe and Asia. The war in Iraq, however, drags on and on. Will Iraq reach the $2 trillion mark?

Why are Americans still shouldering the burden for a fight that belongs to the Iraqis? Why are we relying primarily on conventional strategies to defeat a non-conventional enemy? Where have billions in reconstruction dollars gone? Such questions need to be answered. There is no question that Iraq was a threat and there is no doubt that Saddam and company did possess weapons of mass destruction, but one must question a war strategy that cost $500 billion to implement, with no measurable and discernable results. Yes Iraq has made political and even economic progress, militarily, however, the war is no different than it was in the fall of 2003.

The Bush administration is not exclusively to blame for this turn of events. Indeed, if not for the complicity of the left in this and other countries it is conceivable that the radical insurgents in Iraq would have long been defeated. The insurgents, however, understand the consequence s of their actions, realizing that with every new attack, they feed a growing anti-war movement amongst the American left. The left has and will continue to exploit such events for their own political purposes and in a sense they have grown to rely on the insurgents to implement their political strategy. Such chicanery by the left, does not absolve the Bush administration for outrageous cost overruns, poor post-war planning and failing to be consistent in their messaging to the American people.
http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060216-044828-2780r

While there is no question that the media uproar about Cheney and the shooting of his hunting partner is much ado about nothing, the fact remains that the media wants nothing more than to bring down this administration. Bush, unlike any GOP president since Richard Nixon, inspires unbridled hate and bitterness on the part of the left and the media. Unlike Nixon, however, much of the suspicions and distrust of Bush are unwarranted.

We have noted on numerous occasions how the president has allowed the left to set the tone of debate in this country. The president stays silent as his rivals sow the seeds of doubt about the war in Iraq or terrorism in general. Mums the word for the White House when the left attacks the US economy. Silence is the credo when the left suggests that his plans only benefit the rich. As Joseph Goebbles can attest, when a lie is shouted often enough and loud enough it will gradually come to be accepted as fact, especially when it goes unchallenged, as the lies of the left have been. It is for this reason that public support for Bush continues to languish in the doldrums.

Given such an environment, the president simply can’t afford incidents like the latest Aaron Burr-esque escapade involving Vice President Cheney. Regardless off fault, the Cheney incident has been handled poorly by this administration further reflecting their complete and total naiveté with regard to the media. No administration in history has done a worse job at sending messages or communicating with the public than the administration of George W. Bush. It is very likely that this administration will go done in history as a failure, not so much because of failed policies but do to its inability to communicate ideas. Whereas Reagan was known as the Great communicator, Bush, and his White House cronies, is the Great Non-communicator.

Knowing these failures, how the White House could allow this hunting incident to eclipse news of a nuclear Iran is beyond the mental capacity of most Nobel laureates to understand. The president simply can’t afford any further distractions. Realizing, as he must, that the left will exploit any opportunity to distract the public from the pressing issues confronting this nation, the Bush administration should have anticipated such an up-roar and planned accordingly. The left has been calling for Cheney’s head for some time now, how could such a consequence not be understood. Exactly who is running things in the White House?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-15-cheney-tv_x.htm

When France expresses concern about global stability and the threat of nuclear war, that’s when you know the world is in dire straits. From the onset, Iran has assured the world that its nuclear program was for peaceful purposes, designed simply to meet the burgeoning nation’s energy needs. Such a premise has never held much water with the United States for the simple reason that the facts do not add up.

Today, in a distinctly un-French like move, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said Iran's nuclear program is nothing more than a clandestine nuclear weapons program. This is something Iran has and continues to categorically deny, asserting they have no need for nuclear weapons. If this is indeed the case then why did Iran conceal its nuclear research program in its entirety, only to be exposed by disgruntled Iranian dissidents? Why would Iran, which possess one of the world’s greatest reserves of oil and natural gas, pursue expensive research meet non-existent energy needs?

For a nation with little investment, high unemployment and stagnant economic growth, nuclear energy research seems like a poor investment for oil rich Iran. As the French foreign minister accurately pointed out, "No civilian nuclear program can explain the Iranian nuclear program. It is a clandestine military nuclear program." This statement by Douste-Blazy reflects a growing mood of not only exasperation but also desperation on the part of the Europeans. Sadly, the EU3 have only themselves to blame for this unquestioned failure of diplomacy. It is not unlike a parent who fails to impart values or discipline in their child as a youngster, only to lament the child’s wayward actions in their teens and twenties.

Iran was coddled and frequently appeased for the entirety of Europe’s negotiations with the mullahs of Tehran, all the while Iran was emboldened by a weak and vacillating opponent. Meanwhile the US stubbornly refused to engage the Iranians, a further signal that Iran would not be vigorously opposed for its nuclear ambitions. Now it seems the tide is quickly moving in favor of Iran. The Iranians have again announced their full on intention to enrich uranium unabated. After one false promise after another the Europeans have finally awoken to the reality of Iran’s deception. In so doing they have endorsed UN Security Council action, which amounts to nothing more than an open discussion of sanctions. Sanctions, however, have never successfully cooled the ambitions of a tyrant.

Once Iran becomes a nuclear power its only a matter of time before Al Qaeda and other militants gain nuclear weaponry to foment nuclear terror around the world. In failing to act in a determined fashion the US and the EU have refused to entertain the one strategy that will deter an aggressor: force. The fate of the world now rests in the hands of the UN, as Saddam Hussein can attest, the world has much to fear.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/16/iran.france.ap/index.html

Isn’t it sad that one of the first independent countries in the Americas, after the United States, continues to falter when it comes to forming a stable representative government? The Republic of Haiti, and we use the term lightly, gained its independence from Napoleonic France in 1804. Since that time the nation has been ruled by tin pan dictators, military tyrants and everything in between. Like other failed states around the world, the consequences of such tyranny are easy to see. Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world. Its citizens lack basic resources, quality education is non-existent and rule of law is a joke.

Haiti is rich in vegetation and has a host of natural resources, but dictatorship, coups and failed democratic elections have rendered these resources useless.

Only this week, has Haiti become embroiled in yet another election controversy with accusations of fraud and vote rigging. The government, such as it is, has ordered a review of the election results, but regardless of the outcome violence can be expected. After over 200 years of mob rule, the people of Haiti aren’t likely to accept any result, which they oppose without their trademark rioting and mob violence.

According to UN officials, who have been providing security as well as monitoring the election results, there is no evidence of election fraud. Such a pronouncement will not sit will with opposition leaders, who like tyrants around the globe will stir the pot of protest in the hope of winning the desired result.

Can Haiti ever be reformed? That’s anybody’s guess, its been tried countless times. Both the US and the UN have tried to create working representative forms of government on the island nation, but to no avail. Unless Haitians embrace the rule of law and renounce mob violence Haiti will remain a backward poverty stricken dump, overlooked by foreign businesses as a means for investment.
Link to article @ Canada.com

When it comes to radical Islam, its advocates need little excuse to go on the rampage and it doesn’t matter the target. Today in Pakistan, radicals, still seeming over the Muhammad cartoons, first published in Denmark and papers in other European countries, attacked western interest in the Pakistani city of Lahore. Aside from the fact that such violence highlights the savagery of radical Islam and contempt for freedom of expression, even if it is offensive.

These radicals primarily directed their anger at American interests, the one western country that did not publish the cartoons. Indeed, even a news organ in Jordan published the Muhammad cartoons but it is not Jordan’s flag they burn in the streets. The fact of the matter is these radicals look for any excuse to parade around like scoundrels burning buildings and killing the innocent, as they have done today. Exactly what did those murdered in Lahore have to do with cartoons published in Denmark.

If the radicals were truly enraged about these cartoons, why target the US? Because Denmark as a small country is a insignificant target. Its difficult to motivate and indoctrinate the masses on their contempt for Denmark a country, most uneducated radicals have never heard of and probably can’t find on a map, but they certainly have heard of the US and after all one western country is no different from another, besides, the US, as a model for economic and political success is a prime target for the petty jealousies of radical Islamists.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/14/pakistan.cartoons.ap/index.html

In the latest chapter of the re-branding of ex-President Clinton, the former president has announced a plan to combat obesity in young children. At least he’s not traveling to Saudi Arabia on the dime of the Bin laden family to trash the US government and spread lies about mass abuse of Arabs in the US. Clinton’s plan, in cooperation with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (we never heard of them either) calls for a vigorous campaign to fight obesity in children through improved school lunches and of course more physical exercise in the schools. For its efforts, the Johnson Foundation put up an $8 million grant to support the obesity initiative. In addition to school lunches and physical fitness, the plan also calls for teachers to serve as healthy role models for children.

Regardless of Clinton’s intentions, the fact remains that childhood obesity is a serious problem. According to the Johnson foundation millions of children are considered obese, with rates increasing exponentially. As most health officials point out this trend will have adverse affects on the nation as the next generation of Americans live shorter and less healthy lives.

It certainly can’t hurt that these organizations are willing to donate funds to support healthy lifestyles for children, but the fact that they focus their attention on government sponsored public schools highlights a perception of the diminished responsibility or role for parents in the rearing of their children. Whether or not a teacher is a healthy role model for children has a marginal impact, at best, on the lifestyles of children, but rest assured if you visit the home of an obese child you will certainly find an obese mom or dad. Parental influence plays the biggest role in the future choices and decision making of children. Parents who exhibit a healthy lifestyle choice will have children who do the same.

If Clinton, Part II and the Johnson Foundation want to stop obesity, they would be well advised to forget about schools and teachers and focus of the negative indoctrination they receive everyday at the hands of their tub of lard parents, that’s were they should focus their volunteer efforts, but then again since it takes a “village” to raise a child perhaps they have intentionally bypassed parents.
Link to Reuters article

This weekend Dick Cheney became only the 2nd Vice President since Aaron Burr to shoot a man. Aaron Burr, however, killed Alexander Hamilton intentionally. To hear the media spin, however, not only was Cheney’s hunting accident intentional but a deliberate cover-up on the part of the White House.

Over the weekend, Cheney and friend Harry Whittington were on a hunting trip in South Texas. During the hunt Whittington found himself in the line of fire as Cheney fired on nearby quail. Whittington was peppered with birdshot in the face in chest. According to doctors, Whittington’s injuries are minor and he is in stable condition. Nonetheless, the fact that the public was not informed of this mishap for 24hrs has given rise to suggestions of a cover-up. As White House spokesman, Scott McClellan pointed out, Cheney was not traveling with the press corps during his trip and informing the press was not his highest priority as they sought treatment for Whittington.

Certainly its not everyday that the Vice President of the United States guns down a man, but is the press fury warranted? It is difficult to palate a suggestion of cover-up when Cheney and company immediately sought medical attention for their wounded friend. Something which could not be easily concealed even if it had been attempted, which it certainly wasn’t. Is the Vice president under some legal or moral obligation to issue a press release after an accident irrelevant to his duties as Vice President?

The press uproar surrounding this unfortunate accident is much ado about nothing, highlighting an ongoing campaign by the left leaning press to taint the administration by any and all possible means. Fortunately for Cheney, Whittington’s injuries were minor, had that not been the case, Cheney would have far more in common with Aaron Burr.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2039094,00.html

Over 6 months ago, a devastating Hurricane struck the Gulf Coast, ravaging cities and towns from Louisiana to Alabama. In the aftermath of that hurricane, thousands of families were left homeless, when their homes were destroyed by wind or flood waters. Since that time, the government has promised some 80 billion dollars to rebuild New Orleans, more than Germany’s total cost of rearmament prior to WWII.

Indeed, the amount pledged to rebuild the city of New Orleans exceeds the estimated cost of the damages sustained by several billion dollars. In addition to this outlandish outlay of taxpayer’s dollars, which absolves citizens of personal responsibility, such as private insurance, the federal government has been paying the hotel bills of thousands of families since early September.

Many families have taken advantage of this short-term respite to rebuild their lives, finding permanent homes and employment. Some families, however, looked upon FEMA’s support services as an entitlement program and now after many months these Katrina refugees have come to rely upon FEMA to permanently support their new lives. Even those who no longer receive free hotel stays, still receive rent assistance from FEMA, nonetheless an advocacy group has filed a motion to stop the evictions once FEMA ends its hotel entitlement program. This latest episode highlights the inherent failure of entitlement programs in general.

Such handouts have a poor track record in transitioning families to self sufficiency, as a result, generations of Americans lack even the basic semblance of a work ethic and would be hard pressed to support themselves if called upon to do so. Entitlement programs are simply serfdom to the state and with each passing day that the government continues to spoon feed these individuals, they loose any hope of sustaining their own lives. Its time the Katrina evacuees, find, jobs, find homes and become productive contributors to society, rather than pigs at the public trough.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-02-12-katrina-evictions_x.htm


UPDATE: In spite of an attempt by Katrina evacuees to forestall the inevitable. A federal judge has given FEMA the go ahead to cut off those Katrina evacuees still milling at the public trough. Those evacuees still dependent upon the federal government to foot the bill for their housing needs will now have to turn elsewhere. Perhaps they could start by turning to the want ads, rather than looking for handouts? There simply is no excuse for someone not to have a job, 6 months after Katrina, unless they have a physical defect preventing them from working. There are a plethora of available jobs for those willing to work.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060213/D8FOCU2O0.html

As the left is so fond of reporting, the president’s approval ratings remain consistently low. According to a recent AP poll, the public gives the president low marks on his handling of the economy. Overall, Bush approval rating hovers around 40%, while his handling of the economy fairs even poorer. The poll also showed that less than half of the population approves of Bush’s Iraq and counter-terrorism policies.

This poll reveals beyond question that Mussolini style indoctrination does indeed work. From the moment Bush took office in 2001, the left has worked overtime in its efforts to portray the president’s policies as failures, even when they were unquestioned successes. They have convinced a sizeable portion of the population that the president’s tax cuts only benefited the rich (anyone who actually works for a living is rich in the eyes of the left). They have convinced the overall population that the economy is floundering, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In fact the US economy is performing at or above levels during the Clinton presidency, but such realities are obscured by the left. The left has also convinced us that Saddam Hussein was innocent in not possessing weapons of mass destruction, again in spite of overwhelming logic and contradictory evidence.

The motivation for the left is clear, they seek a return to power and if they can successfully convince the populace of Bush’s failure, their success is complete. Fortunately, the left has a willing accomplice in the media, who is more than happy to ignore the blatant hypocrisy in the words and deeds of the left. The media, however, isn’t the only accomplice of the left. Bush, too has done nothing to advance is agenda or trumpet the reality of his successes. Unlike his predecessors, Bush has allowed his political opponents to set the agenda. Bush has done nothing to spotlight the reality of the US economy’s unparalleled growth or the unquestioned need to crush radical Islam. As a result of Bush’s timid approach to confronting the reality of his presidency, its is all but certain that the left will gain control of one or both houses of Congress and unless the president quickly awakens from his slumber, a leftist in the White House is a very real possibility for 2008.
http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/02/10/ap2516937.html

Recently, Hugo Chavez, who champions himself as an anti-American lynchpin in South America, has warned that the US is planning to invade Iran. Though Chavez’s argument has little in common with the truth, such as warning is not ludicrous in concept. Iran is a dangerous enemy with an unrivaled nuclear ambition and a determination to lead an Islamic war against the west. 40 years of radical Islam teaches us that this is a very real reality. Regardless of Chavez’s new leap from fantasy to reality, he has made such claims before. The Tin pan tyrant has frequently argued that a US invasion of Venezuela was imminent, after repeated the claim on and off for a number of years, even Chavez realized that continuing the farce would no longer fool his sheep like supporters.

Harry Belafonte and Julian Bond aren’t the only leftists out there who like to play fast and loose with the Hitler references (or the truth for that matter). Hugo Chavez, on several recent occasions, remarked that President Bush was worse than Hitler. A comparison, which is laughable to say the least. Such a comparison doesn’t warrant refuting. Anyone foolish enough to even remotely entertain such an argument is too far gone to be saved without extraordinary means.

It is important, however, to understand why people like Bush and leftist activist in the US make such comparisons. There goal is not to win converts to their side. Their goal is not to engage their political, ideological and economic rivals in a spirited debate. To do so would reveal the left’s one strategic weakness: a propensity for ignoring fact in pursuit of an argument. Leftists like Chavez are Mussolini-esque in their need to distract their intended audience. For Chavez, he must constantly beat the drum of anti-Americanism as an ever present distraction to the fact that he, NOT Bush bares the striking similarity to Hitler in his opposition to democratic freedom, his suppression of freedom of the press and his crushing of representative democracy in Venezuela. Chavez, must also distract from the fact that his 7 years in power has seen a string of failed promises as the disparity between rich and poor has increased, job creation has floundered and the economy as a whole remains stagnant.

The Mussolini of Latin America, in his crafty art of distraction is not unlike the tired old leftist of North America. Men like Belafonte and Bond, who’s brand of racial division feeds off of their need to vilify certain people, namely Bush as they seek out a position of relevance in a world where the battle for civil rights has been largely won.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3649182.html

Every once in a while, the media discusses polls which have nothing to do with politics or the president’s approval rating. Recently a survey was released highlighting a significant divide with regard to education when it comes to parents and teachers. According to data gleaned from the survey, Parents look to teachers to challenge and reward their kids. Teachers look to parents to instill manners, respect and motivation. Sounds like a natural partnership. Not always.

Many teachers have reported that they have been approached by unabashed parents asking that their child’s grade be changed, regardless of merit. Many teachers also lament the growing problem of child discipline, something parents seemingly dismiss out of hand.

In reality neither parents nor teachers are solely responsible for the dismal nature of education in America. There are quite a few teachers in this country, who hardly qualify as educators. Sadly, many colleges of education fail to impart more than a basic understanding of science, math, literature and the social sciences. Indeed, many teachers are not even certified in the subjects they teach.

Some critics, complain that education in America is in such a state because of a disproportionate allocation of resources. This, however, is a poor excuse for paltry performance in today’s schools. Education and financing have very little in common. As we have noted on several previous occasions, the US spends close to $400 billion annually to fund public education. In America over $7700 per pupil is spent every year to make sure today’s students receive a quality education. For all that money spent, this country has little to show for it in the way of academic progress.

The US spends far more on education than almost every other country in the world, this includes: Japan, the UK, or France. In spite of this huge outlay of expenses, America continues to lag behind most industrialized nations and even many developing ones. In terms of mathematical skill, US children ranked behind Hong Kong, Finland, South Korea, the Netherlands, Liechtenstein, Japan, Canada, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, Czech Republic, Iceland, Denmark, France, Sweden, Austria, Germany, Ireland, Slovak Republic, Norway, Luxembourg, Poland, Hungary, Spain, and Latvia. In terms of reading and science the US faired far behind most of the developed world in Europe and Asia.

The long of the short of it is this: resources have little impact on the quality of education. The major deficiency in American education are parents themselves, who look to schools as weigh stations and clearly houses for their children. Ultimately parents shoulder the preponderance of the burden for their child’s education. Children who succeed in school have parents who are committed to their education. Parents who place a low value in education have children with a similar outlook. Today’s parents take little if any responsibility for the actions of their children, much as society at large fails to take responsibility for their trespasses.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-02-08-poll-education_x.htm

Today, the president highlighted the fact that US and allied intelligence forces have thwarted numerous terror attacks since September 11, 2001. These attacks include several attempted hijackings and attacks on historic sites and prominent buildings on the east and west coast as well as in other parts of the world. Contrary to the leftists in this country and around the world. The terror threat has not subsided with the passing of 9/11.

The forces of radical Islam are as committed today as they were in 1972, 1982, 2002 or 622 for that matter. Their goal is the subjugation and/or destruction of non-Muslims. There are numerous examples of this each and every day. There is no doubt that the many thwarted terror attacks Bush outlined is only the tip of the iceberg. These radicals have made it clear, that they are committed to carrying out armed struggle against the forces of freedom and all those who differ from themselves. The ongoing furor over the highly accurate Muhammad cartoon is symbolic of that threat.

Radical Islam’s contempt for freedom is such that these thugs have rampaged across the Middle E