Sunday, October 12, 2008

In Times of Crisis, Turn to Socialism?

Do our political & financial leaders believe in free market capitalism?

The recent financial meltdown has been met with calls for unprecedented governmental intervention--taking stakes in the leading banks and ownership of financial institutions, short-term regulatory quick fixes, and the transfer of unlimited taxpayer dollars to the Treasury with no oversight.

In the depths of a crisis, the first instinct of our supposedly free enterprise-loving leaders is to stampede headlong in the direction of socialism as the answer to our gravest problems. Clearly, they don't believe in capitalism, and governmental interference is contributing to the panic.

Syncronized with the declining financial values on Wall Street are John McCain's political fortunes. Just as the stock market began its precipitous fall, so did McCain's poll numbers.

Barack Obama is the closest thing to a socialist in the political race, and he is the beneficiary of the turmoil. So not only our governmental leaders turn to socialism in a time of crisis, but apparently the American public and voters do as well. McCain has favored the bailout as well, but the socialism candidate in this race is Obama, not McCain, and socialism is winning handily at this point in time.

The liberal Congress is expected to become even more liberal after the November elections. Socialism is yawping on the horizon.

Why the sudden eagerness to jettison free enterprise? Hasn't it given us the greatest country on earth, with millions and millions attempting to move here legally and otherwise? And hasn't socialism proven to be a terminally failed idea that hasn't succeeded anywhere?

What is the attraction to an idea that is in the trashcan of history? Does anyone really expect anything good to come of it?

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Gitmo Terrorists Next Door

One of the strongest arguments against giving the terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay their day in court and the same rights as anyone else, is the prospect that the legal evidence against them might not be sufficient. Therefore, they might get to walk and go back to their terrorists ways--as previous Gitmo inmates have done.

But I doubt few considered that our legal system might not only set some of the Gitmo terrorists free, but allow them to live free in the United States!

The Wall Street Journal has a story on this likely scenario--courtesy of the US Supreme Court and Justice Anthony Kennedy.

The onus is now on Congress to legislate a solution preventing "the terrorists next door." But will this Congress have any interest in doing so? A liberal Congress perhaps joined by a socialist president, Barack Obama? Seems absurdly unlikely to me, as their opinions would coincide with Kennedy's judgment.

Wall Street isn't the only American institution suffering a meltdown; it is joined by our legal and legislative branches of government as well. Once we've "turned ourselves upside down" and seen the other side, then what?

Wall Street Shudders at First Socialist President

Barack Obama is the likely next President of the United States, based on the opinion polls, and Wall Street knows what that means: A socialist president and the end of American capitalism.

Investor's Business Daily published an editorial stating this as the reason why the stock markets in the US and around the world are crashing. And I find it a plausible theory.

Obama and his minions can try to market him as a moderate to the general electorate and succeed, but those who aren't so easily led know the truth. Not only is Obama the most liberal senator in the Senate, he is in truth a socialist with a socialist agenda that will manifest itself and become clear to all after the November election.

The prospect of Obama raising taxes across the board as the start of a redistribution of wealth agenda has caused 100 economists, including Nobel winners, to warn of a deepening economic crisis if his ideas are implemented.

Yet the general public has bought into the idea of Obama as the messiah of a positive kind of social change with little discernible effect on the type of government we have. Most who vote for Obama appear oblivious that they are voting against themselves and their way of life that surpasses that of any other nation on the earth.

Meanwhile the questions continue to be raised on Wall Street: What is the true source of the problem, and is it different this time?

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

FBI Warning on Suicide Attacks

The FBI has recently notified law enforcement agencies that al Qaeda could use suicide bombers to blow up public buildings.

This is always a possibility but I would imagine al Qaeda wants to destroy very high profile buildings that are guarded better than most (I would hope).

What interested me about the story was the point made by the terrorists that many publicly accessible buildings have poorly trained or unarmed security guards. And it reminded me of local shopping malls and the security guards I see there. Looking them over with a critical eye, they don't make me feel secure at all; quite the opposite. I imagine if real terrorists attacked, they would be in big trouble and so would the customers, such as myself.

Al Qaeda could have done something like this by now but they haven't. It isn't such a desirable scenario for them.

New Poll: Boot All Congressmen

A new poll says 60% of voters want to boot out all Members of Congress and elect an entirely new Congress.

Do you believe that will happen this November? I don't.

If this is true, at least 60% of incumbents up for re-election will be defeated. But we know that in every election, over 90% of incumbents are re-elected. This is because voters don't do their job and merely vote by name recognition or party affiliation regardless of how incompetent the incumbent may be. 90% re-elected every time! Those are Soviet "election" numbers. Are our Members of Congress so fantastic that they deserve automatic re-election? Obviously not. Approval ratings of congressmen are at historic lows.

But now, I'm supposed to believe the voters are really mad this time and will vote for new blood in Congress. In November, we can forget that 90% re-election statistic. Historic "change" is coming and most of the incumbents will be voted out, right? Or is it just temporary anger with business as usual from the voters once again?

Cofer Black: 9/11 Couldn't Be Averted

Cofer Black, former head of the CIA's counterterrorism division, said in a new interview that nothing could have been done to avert 9/11. He said he can't think of a thing "we could have done that would have changed anything."

It's a ridiculous statement with the apparent intention of exculpating himself from any blame for the 2001 terrorist attacks. Somehow, I don't think anyone will go for it. There is plenty of blame to go around and Black should accept that he deserves some of it.

If he could have done nothing, then that is an indictment of his tenure in that job at the CIA. Why are you in the counterterrorism business if you really can't think of anything you could have done to prevent 9/11? Aren't you in the wrong business if you really believe that?

Shouldn't the CIA hire people who know very well that something could have been done to avert 9/11 and know very well what those actions were?