Displaying posts published in

February 2014

TOM ROGAN: THE AUDACITY OF NOT HOPE- HUBRIS

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/372094/print
President Obama rejects risk out of arrogance.

‘The price of greatness,” Winston Churchill once said, “is responsibility.”

There can no longer be any doubt that President Obama is unwilling to pay that tariff.

In a world defined by uncertainty and ever-stronger enemies, the president’s administration announced this week that American armed forces would be cut to historically low levels. But the sad farce doesn’t end there.

Last Thursday, we also learned that the president’s new budget won’t include a minor but useful reform he’d proposed last year to trim entitlement spending. The rejection of these changes — ones that every citizen capable of basic arithmetic should know are necessary to save America’s pension program — is telling.

After ten years of war, that is, the military gets gutted while civilian entitlements remain sacred.

This is a White House in which short-term ideological calculations always rule the roost.

Less than a month ago, the president spoke of “working together” with Congress — now he is calling for an end to the era of austerity. (Did it ever begin?) The president’s budget next year proposes increased spending on favorite (wasteful) programs. This is playing to the favorite liberal myth that austerity doesn’t work, that only continued binging can end the hangover. The president knows that the U.S.’s fiscal position remains tenuous, and knows that ballooning deficits will make recoveries much harder in the future.

Waking Up to Defense Cuts By Shoshana Bryen

http://americanthinker.com/assets/3rd_party/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/02/waking_up_to_defense_cuts.html

If you are surprised by this week’s announcement of major manpower cuts to the U.S. Army, you haven’t been paying attention. For a long time. There are two components to understanding America’s defense spending choices — the political and the budgetary; they are not the same. The Administration has made the political case clear.

Beginning in 2011, President Obama pronounced himself committed to “ending the wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan “responsibly.”
The president committed to a turn inward, beginning with a 2011 statement that “the nation we need to build is our own,” coupled with the promise to cut troops deployed abroad in half.
The refrain “no boots on the ground,” is the mantra of many administration officials, resurrected again last weekend by Susan Rice regarding limits to U.S. support of rebels in Syria — although no one appears to have suggested so much as a huarache.
Secretary Kerry’s visit to Indonesia prompted him to declare global “climate change” as big a threat in Asia as “terrorism, poverty and WMDs.” He skipped China’s increasingly bold assertions of hegemony in Asian waters and increasingly large defense budget (still miniscule compared to ours, but one heads one way, the other the other way).

It really doesn’t matter that none of those things are true, meaningful, or helpful in terms of American national security policy. The president’s political message has been consistent and expedient — except for the large, not-very-truthful explanation of the war in Libya and its aftermath — and resonates with an American public that is “war wary” (if not “war weary”), creepingly (if not yet creepily) isolationist, and happy with a presidential plan to “save money” after years of rise in the national debt.

NORMAN SIMMS: OF ARMIES AND LIBRARIES AND THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/of-armies-and-libraries-the-end-of-western-civilization?f=puball

Two items of news have flashed across my eyes in the last few days that appall me. One is that the United States plans to reduce its armed forces, the men and women who protect all of us from enemies all around the globe, to pre-World War II levels. The second is that New York City was planning to transform the big Public Library on Fifth Avenue-the one with the lions in front-into a lending library and somewhat glorified internet café-the seven stories of ancient and modern books, one of the greatest research collections in the world-to be sent into cold storage in far-off New Jersey.

We all should know from history that a principal reason why the United States did not react to the threats increasingly manifest to its security and that of its closest allies during the 1930s-and why it took so long to get into action properly after Pearl Harbor at the end of 1941-was that the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines were woefully undermanned and lacking in adequate arms. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan took advantage of American inability to defend itself. Today, as the Putin threaten another Crimean War, the Middle East (for all its vaunted Arab Spring) is more unsteady and volatile than ever, North Korea and Iran posture and pose real dangers as nuclear powers, Syria commits atrocities beyond imagining and falls into the hands of Al-Qaida–and thus all around the strategic map where there is a need for flexibility rather than total reliance on huge technological systems and miniature unmanned drone-like weapons. We have known that for a long time that the United Nations has become worse than a farcical house of racist palaver: it is a source of potential-and often enough, very real-provocations to anti-American, anti-Western and anti-Israeli actions. The European Union, Nato and other international alliances are stymied by their own petty squabbles and mental blocks. Without a strong, alert and multi-layered United States military, what hope is there in the world?

And so to the New York Public Library, though this is a story that seems t6o have broken in 2012 and was settled in the next year, the very diea remains a possibility-and this is what frightens me. In the days of electronic-readers reductivity of books to mere information and digital technology, surely the breakdown of one major collection would be a sign of the collapse of knowledge, study and understanding as it has been built up for the past several millennia. What comes next, the closing down of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Museum of Modern Art, the Bronx Zoo, the Botanical Gardens-in brief, the end of New York as one of, if not the, greatest city in the world…that history has ever known? This would be the triumph of Philistinism, managerial and sociological jargons and political know-nothingism, and the phantasmagoria of celebrity and narcissism that is popular culture.

DIANA WEST: IT’S NOT SCAREMONGERING- IT’S LOVE OF COUNTRY

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/its-not-scaremongering-its-love-of-country

On Feb. 9, 50.3 percent of Swiss voters passed a referendum to cap immigration from the EU. In the course of a (very hostile) Spiegel Online interview with Christoph Blocher, leader of the Swiss People’s Party, the impetus becomes clear. The EU’s so-called freedom of movement — read: untrammeled immigration into decreasingly sovereign states — has approached a crisis for Swiss nationhood.

“Some 23.8 percent of Switzerland’s population is comprised of foreigners, and almost 15 percent are first-generation naturalized Swiss citizens,” Blocher said. “No similar European state has anything like that.”

Once the shocking fact that nearly one in four people in Switzerland are foreigners sinks in, it seems logicial to conclude, as Galliawatch does, that many if not most non-native voters probably opposed the immigration cap. That means that the outcome among native Swiss was likely a more resounding majority than 50.3 percent indicates.

For now, then, the Swiss have affirmed they are still a nation, a culture — rather an amazing feat given these demographics. Spiegel puts it down to “scaremongering.”

SPIEGEL: In your campaign for the referendum, SWP drafted horror scenarios of an overflowing Switzerland, a country that has become a cement jungle. The truth is that your country is doing better than ever before. Why the scaremongering?

Blocher: It’s not scaremongering. If things continue, we will surpass the 10-million mark in 2033. By 2061, we will have 16 million inhabitants, more than half of whom will be foreigners.

Bravo, Blocher, for at least halting the slide.

Tax Reform for Growth Rep. Dave Camp’s (R- Michigan District 4) Plan Would Yield $700 Billion in Extra ‘Dynamic’ Revenue.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304255604579407112591695536?mod=Opinion_newsreel_4

The smarter Republicans are trying to reclaim the mantle of economic opportunity, and on Wednesday Dave Camp climbed into this phone booth by proposing a detailed tax reform. The Chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee wants to lower tax rates and create a fairer, more efficient code, and his plan ought to shift the debate over taxes to growth from redistribution.

The American tax system has changed for the worse since the last reform in 1986, and Mr. Camp has spent three years learning about the dispiriting specifics, including more than 30 hearings. The Michigan Republican is a serious legislator who cares about policy, and his effort shows. We disagree with many details in his 979-page bill, but overall his direction is right. Even if his bill doesn’t pass this year, its legwork will inform any future reform.
***

The heart of the Camp plan would collapse today’s seven income tax brackets into three, with about 99% of taxpayers paying 10% or 25%. The top statutory marginal rate would fall to 35% from 39.6% for individuals earning wage income over $400,000 ($450,000 for joint filers).

KARL ROVE: THE ENDLESS BENGHAZI COVER-UP

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304709904579406784236827274?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop&mg=reno64-wsj

Susan Rice’s latest claims about the attacks are no more credible than the ones she made in 2012.

The worst part of National Security Adviser Susan Rice’s comments on Sunday’s “Meet The Press” was that she expressed no regret for saying that the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on U.S. outposts in Benghazi were “absolutely” the result of protests against a “very hateful, very offensive video that has offended many people around the world.” (She made these comments while she was ambassador to the United Nations, less than a week after four Americans were killed.)

Almost as bad was Ms. Rice’s statement that she was merely sharing “the best information that we had at the time.” That is a contemptible falsehood. The government knew long before Ms. Rice went on five Sunday television shows that the assaults were carefully planned terrorist attacks unconnected to a video.

Gen. Carter Ham, then head of Africa Command, knew “this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack” within minutes of learning about the assault, according to testimony he gave last June to the House Armed Services Committee that was declassified this month. Gen. Ham almost immediately informed Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey before their previously scheduled Oval Office meeting with President Obama. Mr. Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee last year that he informed Mr. Obama of the attack. “There was no question in my mind this was a terrorist attack,”

THE TEA PARTY TURNS FIVE: JASON RILEY….SEE NOTE PLEASE

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304255604579406962384624906?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLESecond&mg=reno64-wsj

MORE TRASHING OF THE TEA PARTY….THE WSJ “CONSERVATIVES” ARE GETTING BORING ON THE SUBJECT….THE TEA PARTY IS A LEGITIMATE GROUP WITH LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AND STATE RIGHTS AND THE FREEDOMS GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION…..IT IS AMAZING TO ME HOW MANY REPUBLICANS SHUN THE TEA PARTY BUT ARE WILLING TO “WORK ACROSS THE AISLE” WITH HARRY REID….RSK

The tea party certainly isn’t over, but after nearly five years is it starting to die down?

Tea party supporters will mark the movement’s fifth anniversary in Washington on Thursday. Scheduled speakers include politicians like Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, as well as conservative media stars such as Sean Hannity and Mark Levin.

Karlyn Bowman and Jennifer Marsico, two American Enterprise Institute scholars who study public opinion, write at Forbes.com that the tea party’s national popularity has held steady by some measures and waned by others. “But as more Americans have come to know the Tea Party movement, unfavorable views have risen sharply,” they write.

THE NEW WAR ON ISRAEL: COMMENTARY MAGAZINE’S E-BOOK

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2014/02/26/the-new-war-on-israel-our-e-book/

Just out from COMMENTARY is our first topical e-book, The New War on Israel—and How to Fight Back. Over the past year especially, efforts to delegitimate the Jewish state have taken on a new urgency and force, much of it from liberals and leftists who are using their own Jewishness as a weapon. We have assembled several of our best articles and blog posts in a coherent whole to expose the hollowness and injustice of the arguments and the highly problematic nature of the way in which they are conducted. The ebook features pieces by me, Joshua Muravchik, Jonathan Tobin, Rick Richman, Ben Cohen, Adam Kredo, and others. It is essential reading. You can purchase it here.

Will Israel Be the Next Energy Superpower? Arthur Herman

They will feast on the abundance of the seas, and on the treasures of the sands.

—Deuteronomy 33:19

Tamar sits 56 miles off the coast of Israel, an offshore gas platform rising up from the Mediterranean like a white steel beacon whose roots reach down 1,000 feet to the seabed. Named for the natural-gas field beneath the sea floor, Tamar is the symbol of a bright future for Israel if Israel is ready for it: as the newest energy producer and exporter in the Middle East, and potentially the most important.

A classic quip since the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 has been that Moses brought his people out of Egypt to the one spot in the Middle East that didn’t have oil. “We proved that joke to be wrong,” says Gideon Tadmor, chairman of the Delek Group, one of a consortium of companies that built the Tamar platform. Delek and its partners began extracting gas from Tamar in March 2013 and has been doing so with the natural gas from three other fields as well. Ten years ago, Israel was a country 80 percent powered by coal, with the remaining 20 percent from oil—all of which had to be imported. Now, natural gas supplies half those energy needs. The known fields could contain more than 900 billion cubic meters of natural gas. In global terms, that’s not much—roughly the amount the United States consumes in a year. But for a country of only 8 million people, it’s an energy bonanza. And, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, the Levant basin in which Israel’s fields sit may contain a total of 3.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—about half the reserves in the United States with a fraction of the demand.

Nor is that all. Even before the first discoveries of natural gas in 1999, geologists had determined there were huge oil-shale fields stretching along Israel’s coastal plain. Those fields contained recoverable reserves, according to the latest estimate, of up to 250 billion barrels—almost equal to Saudi Arabia’s.

In short, Israel is poised not only for future energy independence, but for becoming a major regional energy player—maybe even, if it uses its resources wisely, the next energy superpower. The looming question, however, is not whether the world is ready for Israel to be the next Texas. It’s whether the Israelis are ready.

I got my introduction to the Tamar platform, and to Israel’s adventure in becoming an energy player, even before my wife, Beth, and I arrived in Israel, on the plane from Newark bound for Tel Aviv. The passenger sitting next to us looked as if he was headed for a country-music festival. He wore a baseball cap with the logo of Noble Energy—one of the key players in the natural-gas revolution. We learned he had spent 30 years in the oil and gas business as a platform operator, including in West Africa and Thailand, before Noble had sent him out to Israel. Now he works on the Tamar platform. After 28 days there, he’ll head home to Louisiana for four weeks to see his family and kids; they will be able to afford college thanks to the money he’s earned working for Noble in Israel.

He also pointed out his fellow workers on the plane scattered among the Orthodox and Hasidic passengers—“roughnecks” (members of a drilling crew), “tool pushers,” and mechanics. They all hailed from Texas, Oklahoma, and his native Louisiana, and one or two wore baseball caps with Hebrew lettering. These are the migrant laborers of Israel’s newest industry, and proof of how much Israel depends on the United States for exploring, drilling, and developing its new-found energy resources. That may change as Israel’s talent for innovation gets focused on energy technologies; Israelis themselves may accelerate the transition to faster, more efficient, and environmentally safer exploitation of both deep-water gas reserves and what are called the “unconventional oil sources,” meaning oil shale and oil sands.

Indeed, it is in oil shale that the story of Israel’s energy revolution really begins.

Israel has had a long and bitter history of looking for oil and finding none. Beginning in 1953, the National Oil Industry began launching a series of exploratory drilling holes. In just over 33 years, it sank more than 410 wells—and found exactly five gas fields and three oil fields. The country’s most productive oil field is near Helez, and it wasn’t even discovered by Israel; Iraq Petroleum found it before 1948 and then sealed it up when Israel achieved its independence. Since the Israelis opened it again in 1955, Helez has produced 17.2 million barrels—an amount that would power Israel’s current economy for only five weeks. In 1986, the Israeli government finally gave up and suspended its three-decade ritual of frustration.

Then, just two years later, the ground shifted, almost literally, under the government’s feet. The very first comprehensive geological survey of Israel, including the coastal plain, revealed the existence of large deposits of oil shale, or kerogen.

Kerogen is a pre-petroleum organic compound of dead algae from long-extinct bodies of water. It is, in effect, a precursor to oil. Under great pressure and heat, kerogen can turn into the same kind of hydrocarbon compound as conventional petroleum. Rich kerogen deposits are found all over the world, from the Green River formation in Colorado to the Jordan River valley, including Israel.

Once the discovery was confirmed in 2006, the Israeli government began looking for partners in the United States. American companies had been wildcatting in Israel for decades. But while most knew how to drill, they were clueless about where. Instead, like Zion Oil’s John Brown, they were managed by Christian fundamentalists who were literally relying on the Word of God as their guide. One wildcatter in the 1960s was led by a passage from Deuteronomy to conclude there was oil located somewhere on the ancient lands of the tribe of Asher, on “the foot of Asher” between Haifa and Caesarea. No luck.

In 2007 the search for an American partner brought an Israel Petroleum Authority official to Houston and the offices of Shell Oil. It was a smart choice. Shell had been making breakthrough discoveries in how to produce oil from shale rock, thanks to its chief scientist, Harold Vinegar. He had modified a process, developed by the Swedes during World War II, of distilling kerogen into a usable fuel—an innovation that made the extraction of oil shale in Colorado’s Green River formation feasible and economical.

Vinegar had been working in Colorado when he learned about the rich kerogen deposits in Israel that extended into Jordan. Shell had already partnered with Jordan’s King Abdullah—and Vinegar, a Jew, was unhappy that the project didn’t include Israel, especially since the best shale rock was known to be on the Israeli side of the border. But he also knew that Shell, like all the other major oil companies, feared offending the Saudis by involving itself in Israeli oil speculation. Vinegar knew the Israeli official was on a fool’s errand.

EDWARD CLINE:”Transformation” via “Rehabilitation”

http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/2014/02/transformation-via-rehabilitation.html
Americans, says the deconstructionist Left, need to be rehabilitated. They need to get their minds right. If they won’t do it themselves, voluntarily, then legislation, courts, lawsuits, civil rights laws, “social pressure,” public demonization, social harassment, marginalization, and even physical or death threats, must do it for them.
The “rehabilitation” won’t be as physically agonizing as that which Winston Smith underwent in George Orwell’s dystopian novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, but the consequences would be the same: a mind tortured out of its sovereignty, and, in effect, deconstructed to conform and defer to the power of the State.
Americans need to be deconstructed and put back together again, just as American history has been deconstructed in government-approved textbooks, and the concept of marriage, and freedom of association, and business ownership, and gender itself, are being deconstructed, reconstructed, and revised to reflect the new political and social realities. Some Americans, once deconstructed, like Humpty Dumpty, won’t be able to be put back together again, and that’s too bad. They, the advance guard of deconstruction and mandatory rehabilitation, won’t miss them. They, the waves of the future, just wish that constitutional reprobates and political recidivists would do them the courtesy and drop dead and save them the trouble of taking real action against them.
Hard but promising, conciliatory cases have a choice between classroom reeducation in a local community college, or rehabilitation in a Nevada desert camp or an Alaskan labor center.
All they’re asking is that Americans be just like them: deconstructed. Cases in point:
You have no right to refuse to deal with anyone, says the government, regardless of your convictions, religious or not, and especially not if the people you refuse to deal with are gay. In “Judge Rules Colorado Bakery Discriminated Against Gay Couple,” Ashby Jones wrote in the Wall Street Journal on December 6th, 2013:
Two gay men in Colorado won discrimination claims against a bakery that refused to sell them a wedding cake, beating back the business owner’s argument that he had the constitutional right to decline service to a gay couple for religious reasons.
In a ruling issued Friday, an administrative law judge in Denver, Robert Spencer, ruled that by rebuffing the couple’s attempt to buy a cake, Masterpiece Cakeshop violated a state law bagging discrimination in a public place on grounds of sexual orientation.
The baker, Jack Phillips, had argued that applying the antidiscrimination law in this context violated his First Amendment free-speech and freedom-of-religion rights….
But Judge Spencer shot down the constitutional arguments, noting that the Supreme Court has “repeatedly found” that those engaged in commercial activity are subject to state discrimination laws, regardless of their religious beliefs.