Listening to "our" President tonight, I reached the boiling point.
The man who has amassed more debt than every President in American History combined, who passed the ultimate government TRILLION dollar boondoggle, who has grown government by more than 30% in TWO YEARS, now says debt is our problem!!!!!
But here's the chutzpah. The budget was due more than a year ago. The President never submitted it. When he FINALLY did, it was rejected, UNANIMOUSLY. That means his own party, STILL the majority in the Senate, rejected it.
What is also forgotten, is that the President demanded a straight up or down vote on raising the debt limit. This was also overwhelmingly rejected by his party.
Never before has there been a President who so consistently insults the intelligence of the American Public. And what's worse is that I fear he will get away with it.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Saturday, July 23, 2011
What we can all learn from Thomas Voeckler
Some background, and yes, this post will serve a larger message.
For the few of you left who have been reading me for a while, you know that, despite my baseball background, the Tour de France is my favorite sporting event in the world.
I first fell in love with it the year that Greg LeMond burst on the scene. Not the first American to ride the Tour (Jonathon Boyer was, LeMond, really the second) he was the first to ride on a powerhouse French team, La Vie Claire, and of course the first to win.
In his first great year, the first American team rode (7 Eleven), and on that team was Eric Heiden (now Dr. Eric Heiden) who had shattered every speed skating record in the world, and won every speed skating medal in the 1980 Lake Placid Olympics. If you don't know him, it is hard to describe just how much of a sporting giant Heiden was. His victories are the equivalent of the man who wins the 100 meters, also winning the Olympic marathon.
Well, the first year Heiden raced, LeMond won, and Heiden couldn't even finish. This giant couldn't make it up the mountains and said, at the time, that nothing he had ever done could compare to the Tour. That was enough to reel me in.
Flash forward to this year. It was generally regarded that the Tour would be between Andy Schleck of Luxembourg, who was second the last two years, and Alberto Contador, the 3 time defending champion.
Also given some consideration was Cadel Evans, an Aussie who had also been the runner up twice in the past but who made the Tour his entire focus this year.
Others mentioned were Ivan Basso, the 2 time winner of the Giro d'Italia, the Italian equivalent of the tour, and perhaps an even harder race; Frank Schleck, Andy's older brother; Samuel Sanchez, the Olympic Road racing champion; Chris Horner, an American on the powerful Radio Shack team who had just won the Tour of California; Bradley Wiggins another multiple Olympic track champion on his best all time form; Jurgen Van den Broeck, a Belgian, and a few others.
In the tour, the winner has the best combined time over 21 stages, 3 weeks of racing an average of about 125-150 miles a day including all sorts of climbing, sprints, individual time trials, etc.
Generally, the best climbers start their careers as climbing specialists and develop their time trialing skills to become overall winners.
The lesser riders will go all out, sacrificing their bodies for one day, to try and win ONE stage of the race (each stage is considered a separate race by the international cycling organizations).
French cycling has suffered greatly since LeMond's mentor turned foe, Bernard Hinault, last won the tour in 1985.
Early in the race, Thomas Voeckler of the French Europcar team, went on a breakaway, and took the "yellow jersey", the maillot jeune, the race lead.
It's not unusual for a lesser rider to lead the race early on as the favorites actually don't WANT to lead, because of the greater responsibility it places on them.
Voeckler has been a journeyman pro for 10 years or so. His most famous moments came as a young cyclist, when, in a similar situation he held the yellow jersey over Lance Armstrong. In that year, 2000, however, there were no imaginings of victory and he held the jersey during stages that were flat, when everyone finishes together. On the one mountain stage, the famed "Plateau de Beille" in the Pyrenees, he lost more than 5 minutes to Armstrong (more than a miles ride on flat ground).
This year, a similar thing happened. Voeckler went on a breakaway in the 9th stage of the Tour. That was the stage in which the most horrific crash took place, with a TV car hitting two of the other breakaway cyclists.
From the beginning of his days in the yellow, Voeckler said he had no chance to win the race. More than that, he said that, with the upcoming Pyrenees, he would hold the yellow only a day or two.
And then a funny thing happened. He tried. There is an old saying in the Tour, the yellow jersey makes you ride like two men.
Well, Voekler not only stayed with the storied climbers over the iconic Col de Tourmalet, the Col d'aubisque but this time he was right there on the Plateau de Beille, where he had lost 5 minutes to Armstrong.
Every day, he assured the now crazed French that he could not win the race, but that he would honor the Yellow Jersey.
And he continued to fight.
They had said he could not do it in the Pyrenees. In fact, to the commentators, it was almost a joke. There were new reasons every day why he still wore the yellow. And every day, Thomas Voekler got on his bike and pushed himself to do things he didn't think he could.
And every day, he did.
They said that, of course, he made it through the steeper, but shorter climbs of the Pyrenees, but that the monsters of the Alps would destroy him. The leading commentator, Phil Liggett, who I love, actually said "When the Tour is over, you'll need binoculars to see Voeckler"
Yesterday's stage was called the queen of stages. The hardest stage in the history of this more than 100 year old race. 3 "Hor's Category Climbs" meaning so long and steep as to not be able to be classified by the international standards.
Starting with the absurd Col D'ignol, and ending with the iconic Col de Galibier.
And yet, there was Thomas, to the cries of "Allez Thomas" (Go Thomas) from the French crowds, literally grinding his way up, evening dropping the 3 time champion, Alberto Contador, on the last climb up the Galibier.
When the stage ended, he had maintained a 15 second lead and his face was wracked with pain.
Finally, today, on the final stage in the Alps, back over the Galibier and the even more famous Alpe D'Huez (where LeMond had made his name) bad luck came his way. I won't get into the racing strategy but he lost the lead and is now in fourth place.
The last time a French rider was as high as fourth in the Tour, was 1996, 15 year ago.
Voeckler, like the little engine that could, won over the hearts of the entire nation of France, and the entire cycling community. Even as one of his teammates and a fellow Frenchman, won the stage, Voeckler received the loudest cheers. It was said by the French, in their highest compliment, that he had defended the jersey with panache.
But more importantly, he won himself over. Every day he seemed as amazed as everyone else that he was able to match up with all of the prerace favorites.
There will be no trophy for Thomas Voeckler, at the end of the Tour de France, but there will be something more important.
In this day and age, we give trophies for everything. You finished 22d in the spelling bee in school? Here's your ribbon and certificate of achievement. Your little league team finished 9th? Take that trophy young man!
But Voeckler showed us all that it is the effort to achieve, the journey to success that is it's own reward. No trophy is necessary when you find that you can exceed even your own limitations simply by making the effort. When you aim for the best, and make your best efforts, you are always rewarded. It is the effort that matters. Eventually, the victories in life come.
ALLEZ THOMAS!
For the few of you left who have been reading me for a while, you know that, despite my baseball background, the Tour de France is my favorite sporting event in the world.
I first fell in love with it the year that Greg LeMond burst on the scene. Not the first American to ride the Tour (Jonathon Boyer was, LeMond, really the second) he was the first to ride on a powerhouse French team, La Vie Claire, and of course the first to win.
In his first great year, the first American team rode (7 Eleven), and on that team was Eric Heiden (now Dr. Eric Heiden) who had shattered every speed skating record in the world, and won every speed skating medal in the 1980 Lake Placid Olympics. If you don't know him, it is hard to describe just how much of a sporting giant Heiden was. His victories are the equivalent of the man who wins the 100 meters, also winning the Olympic marathon.
Well, the first year Heiden raced, LeMond won, and Heiden couldn't even finish. This giant couldn't make it up the mountains and said, at the time, that nothing he had ever done could compare to the Tour. That was enough to reel me in.
Flash forward to this year. It was generally regarded that the Tour would be between Andy Schleck of Luxembourg, who was second the last two years, and Alberto Contador, the 3 time defending champion.
Also given some consideration was Cadel Evans, an Aussie who had also been the runner up twice in the past but who made the Tour his entire focus this year.
Others mentioned were Ivan Basso, the 2 time winner of the Giro d'Italia, the Italian equivalent of the tour, and perhaps an even harder race; Frank Schleck, Andy's older brother; Samuel Sanchez, the Olympic Road racing champion; Chris Horner, an American on the powerful Radio Shack team who had just won the Tour of California; Bradley Wiggins another multiple Olympic track champion on his best all time form; Jurgen Van den Broeck, a Belgian, and a few others.
In the tour, the winner has the best combined time over 21 stages, 3 weeks of racing an average of about 125-150 miles a day including all sorts of climbing, sprints, individual time trials, etc.
Generally, the best climbers start their careers as climbing specialists and develop their time trialing skills to become overall winners.
The lesser riders will go all out, sacrificing their bodies for one day, to try and win ONE stage of the race (each stage is considered a separate race by the international cycling organizations).
French cycling has suffered greatly since LeMond's mentor turned foe, Bernard Hinault, last won the tour in 1985.
Early in the race, Thomas Voeckler of the French Europcar team, went on a breakaway, and took the "yellow jersey", the maillot jeune, the race lead.
It's not unusual for a lesser rider to lead the race early on as the favorites actually don't WANT to lead, because of the greater responsibility it places on them.
Voeckler has been a journeyman pro for 10 years or so. His most famous moments came as a young cyclist, when, in a similar situation he held the yellow jersey over Lance Armstrong. In that year, 2000, however, there were no imaginings of victory and he held the jersey during stages that were flat, when everyone finishes together. On the one mountain stage, the famed "Plateau de Beille" in the Pyrenees, he lost more than 5 minutes to Armstrong (more than a miles ride on flat ground).
This year, a similar thing happened. Voeckler went on a breakaway in the 9th stage of the Tour. That was the stage in which the most horrific crash took place, with a TV car hitting two of the other breakaway cyclists.
From the beginning of his days in the yellow, Voeckler said he had no chance to win the race. More than that, he said that, with the upcoming Pyrenees, he would hold the yellow only a day or two.
And then a funny thing happened. He tried. There is an old saying in the Tour, the yellow jersey makes you ride like two men.
Well, Voekler not only stayed with the storied climbers over the iconic Col de Tourmalet, the Col d'aubisque but this time he was right there on the Plateau de Beille, where he had lost 5 minutes to Armstrong.
Every day, he assured the now crazed French that he could not win the race, but that he would honor the Yellow Jersey.
And he continued to fight.
They had said he could not do it in the Pyrenees. In fact, to the commentators, it was almost a joke. There were new reasons every day why he still wore the yellow. And every day, Thomas Voekler got on his bike and pushed himself to do things he didn't think he could.
And every day, he did.
They said that, of course, he made it through the steeper, but shorter climbs of the Pyrenees, but that the monsters of the Alps would destroy him. The leading commentator, Phil Liggett, who I love, actually said "When the Tour is over, you'll need binoculars to see Voeckler"
Yesterday's stage was called the queen of stages. The hardest stage in the history of this more than 100 year old race. 3 "Hor's Category Climbs" meaning so long and steep as to not be able to be classified by the international standards.
Starting with the absurd Col D'ignol, and ending with the iconic Col de Galibier.
And yet, there was Thomas, to the cries of "Allez Thomas" (Go Thomas) from the French crowds, literally grinding his way up, evening dropping the 3 time champion, Alberto Contador, on the last climb up the Galibier.
When the stage ended, he had maintained a 15 second lead and his face was wracked with pain.
Finally, today, on the final stage in the Alps, back over the Galibier and the even more famous Alpe D'Huez (where LeMond had made his name) bad luck came his way. I won't get into the racing strategy but he lost the lead and is now in fourth place.
The last time a French rider was as high as fourth in the Tour, was 1996, 15 year ago.
Voeckler, like the little engine that could, won over the hearts of the entire nation of France, and the entire cycling community. Even as one of his teammates and a fellow Frenchman, won the stage, Voeckler received the loudest cheers. It was said by the French, in their highest compliment, that he had defended the jersey with panache.
But more importantly, he won himself over. Every day he seemed as amazed as everyone else that he was able to match up with all of the prerace favorites.
There will be no trophy for Thomas Voeckler, at the end of the Tour de France, but there will be something more important.
In this day and age, we give trophies for everything. You finished 22d in the spelling bee in school? Here's your ribbon and certificate of achievement. Your little league team finished 9th? Take that trophy young man!
But Voeckler showed us all that it is the effort to achieve, the journey to success that is it's own reward. No trophy is necessary when you find that you can exceed even your own limitations simply by making the effort. When you aim for the best, and make your best efforts, you are always rewarded. It is the effort that matters. Eventually, the victories in life come.
ALLEZ THOMAS!
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Ikhwan, Ikhwan, we got an Ikhwan
The Tipping Point: Embracing the Muslim Brotherhood
By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
The Obama administration chose the eve of the holiday marking our Nation's birth to acknowledge publicly behavior in which it has long been stealthily engaged to the United States' extreme detriment: Its officials now admit that they are embracing the Muslim Brotherhood (MB or Ikhwan in Arabic). That would be the same international Islamist organization that has the destruction of the United States, Israel and all other parts of the Free World as its explicit objective.
On Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to downplay the momentousness of this major policy shift by portraying it during a stopover in Budapest as follows: "The Obama administration is continuing the approach of limited contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood that have existed on and off for about five or six years." In fact, as former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy points out in a characteristically brilliant, and scathing, dissection of this announcement, Team Obama's official, open legitimation of the Brotherhood marks a dramatic break from the U.S. government's historical refusal to deal formally with the Ikhwan.
To understand why the Obama administration's embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood is so ominous, consider three insights into the organization's nature and ambitions:
First, here's the MB's creed: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." (Source: Husain Haqqani and Hillel Fradkin, "Islamist Parties: Going Back to the Origins.")
Second, here's the Ikwhan's mission in America:
"A kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within, sabotaging its miserable house with their [i.e., Americans'] hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." (Source: Muslim Brotherhood's "Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goals of the Group," entered into evidence by the Department of Justice in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-finance trial. Archived at the NEFA Foundation.)
Third, here are excerpts from the Muslim Brotherhood's "phased plan" for accomplishing that mission:
Phase One: Discreet and secret establishment of leadership.
Phase Two: Phase of gradual appearance on the public scene and exercising and utilizing various public activities. It greatly succeeded in implementing this stage. It also succeeded in achieving a great deal of its important goals, such as infiltrating various sectors of the Government.
Phase Three: Escalation phase, prior to conflict and confrontation with the rulers, through utilizing mass media. Currently in progress.
Phase Four: Open public confrontation with the Government through exercising the political pressure approach. It is aggressively implementing the above-mentioned approach. Training on the use of weapons domestically and overseas in anticipation of zero-hour. It has noticeable activities in this regard.
Phase Five: Seizing power to establish their Islamic Nation under which all parties and Islamic groups are united. (Source: Undated Muslim Brotherhood Paper entitled, "Phases of the World Underground Movement Plan." Archived at Shariah: The Threat to America.)
In short, the Muslim Brotherhood is deadly serious about waging what it calls "civilization jihad" against the United States and other freedom-loving nations in order to secure their submission to the Islamic totalitarian political-military-legal doctrine called shariah. The MB's goal in this country is to replace our Constitution with theirs, namely the Koran. And they regard this task as one commanded by none other than Allah. (For more details on the nature, ambitions and modus operandi of the Ikhwan, see the Team B II Report, Shariah: The Threat to America). To this end, as Andy McCarthy notes in the aforementioned essay, the MB's senior official, Supreme Guide Muhammad Badi, has effectively declared war on the United States.
Were there any doubt that legitimacy is what the Ikhwan is taking away from this gambit, consider this assessment from an expert in Islamic groups, Ammar Ali Hassan, cited by Associated Press: "...The Brotherhood will likely try to float ‘conditions' or ‘reservations' on any dialogue to avoid a perception that it is allowing the U.S. to meddle in Egypt's internal affairs. But in the end, the talks will give a boost to the group, he said, by easing worries some in the Brotherhood and the public have of a backlash if the Brotherhood becomes the dominant player in Egypt. ‘Now the Muslim Brotherhood will not have to worry [about] moving forward toward taking over power,' Hassan said."
Unfortunately, the U.S. government's dangerous outreach to the Ikhwan is not confined to Egypt but is systematically practiced inside the United States, as well. For example:
Muslim-American organizations identified in court by the U.S. government - and, in many cases, by the Muslim Brotherhood itself - as MB fronts are routinely cultivated by federal, state and local officials. Representatives of homeland security, Pentagon, intelligence and law enforcement agencies frequently meet with and attend functions sponsored by such groups.
MB-associated individuals are sent as our country's "goodwill ambassadors" to foreign Muslim nations and communities. MB-favored initiatives to insinuate shariah into the United States - notably, the Ground Zero Mosque and shariah-compliant finance, conscientious objector status for Muslim servicemen and stifling of free speech in accordance with shariah "blasphemy" laws - are endorsed and/or enabled by official institutions.
A blind eye is turned to the presence across the country of shariah-adherent mosques that incubate jihadism. A peer-reviewed study published last month in Middle East Quarterly determined that 81% of a random sample of 100 mosques exhibited such qualities - constituting an infrastructure for recruitment, indoctrination and training consistent with the Brotherhood's phased plan.
Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, individuals with family and other ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have actually given senior government positions. The most recent of these to come to light is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin (who also happens to be former Rep. Anthony Weiner's wife).
It seems a safe bet tha t, as Team Obama legitimates Muslim Brotherhood organizations and groups overseas, it will feel ever less constrained about further empowering their counterparts in the United States. If so, the MB will come to exercise even greater influence over what our government does and does not do about the threat posed by shariah, both abroad and here.
The absolutely predictable effect will be to undermine U.S. interests and allies in the Middle East and further catalyze the Brotherhood's campaign to insinuate shariah in the United States and, ultimately, to supplant the Constitution with Islamic law. Consequently, the Obama administration's efforts to "engage" the Muslim Brotherhood are not just reckless. They are wholly incompatible with the President's oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" and the similar commitment made by his subordinates.
These officials' now-open embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood constitutes a geo-strategic tipping point, one that must catalyze an urgent national debate on this question: Does such conduct violate their oath of office by endangering the Constitution they have undertaken to uphold?
At a minimum, such a debate would afford a much-needed opportunity to examine alternatives to the administration's present course - as well as the real risks associated with that its intensifying pursuit. For instance, one of the most astute American authorities on the Middle East in general and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular, Dr. Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute:
Rather than embrace the Brotherhood, the Obama administration should be seeking to ensure that the group cannot dominate Egypt. Most analysts agree that the Muslim Brotherhood is by far the best organized group in Egypt, but that it only enjoys perhaps 25 or 30 percent support. The secular opposition remains weak and fractured. If the Obama administration wishes to remain engaged in Egypt's future and shape the best possible outcome for both U.S. national security and the Egyptian people, it should be pushing for electoral reform to change Egypt's dysfunctional system to a proportional representation model in which the secular majority can form a coalition to check a Muslim Brotherhood minority for which true democracy is anathema.
The same goes for the enemy within. Instead of relying upon - let alone hiring - Muslim Brotherhood operatives and associates, the United States government should be shutting down their fronts, shariah-adherent, jihad-incubating "community centers" and insidious influence operations in America. By recognizing these enterprises for what they are, namely vehicles for fulfilling the seditious goals of the MB's civilization jihad, they can and must be treated as prosecutable subversive enterprises, not protected religious ones under the U.S. Constitution.
Let the debate begin.
By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
The Obama administration chose the eve of the holiday marking our Nation's birth to acknowledge publicly behavior in which it has long been stealthily engaged to the United States' extreme detriment: Its officials now admit that they are embracing the Muslim Brotherhood (MB or Ikhwan in Arabic). That would be the same international Islamist organization that has the destruction of the United States, Israel and all other parts of the Free World as its explicit objective.
On Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to downplay the momentousness of this major policy shift by portraying it during a stopover in Budapest as follows: "The Obama administration is continuing the approach of limited contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood that have existed on and off for about five or six years." In fact, as former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy points out in a characteristically brilliant, and scathing, dissection of this announcement, Team Obama's official, open legitimation of the Brotherhood marks a dramatic break from the U.S. government's historical refusal to deal formally with the Ikhwan.
To understand why the Obama administration's embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood is so ominous, consider three insights into the organization's nature and ambitions:
First, here's the MB's creed: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." (Source: Husain Haqqani and Hillel Fradkin, "Islamist Parties: Going Back to the Origins.")
Second, here's the Ikwhan's mission in America:
"A kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within, sabotaging its miserable house with their [i.e., Americans'] hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." (Source: Muslim Brotherhood's "Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goals of the Group," entered into evidence by the Department of Justice in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-finance trial. Archived at the NEFA Foundation.)
Third, here are excerpts from the Muslim Brotherhood's "phased plan" for accomplishing that mission:
Phase One: Discreet and secret establishment of leadership.
Phase Two: Phase of gradual appearance on the public scene and exercising and utilizing various public activities. It greatly succeeded in implementing this stage. It also succeeded in achieving a great deal of its important goals, such as infiltrating various sectors of the Government.
Phase Three: Escalation phase, prior to conflict and confrontation with the rulers, through utilizing mass media. Currently in progress.
Phase Four: Open public confrontation with the Government through exercising the political pressure approach. It is aggressively implementing the above-mentioned approach. Training on the use of weapons domestically and overseas in anticipation of zero-hour. It has noticeable activities in this regard.
Phase Five: Seizing power to establish their Islamic Nation under which all parties and Islamic groups are united. (Source: Undated Muslim Brotherhood Paper entitled, "Phases of the World Underground Movement Plan." Archived at Shariah: The Threat to America.)
In short, the Muslim Brotherhood is deadly serious about waging what it calls "civilization jihad" against the United States and other freedom-loving nations in order to secure their submission to the Islamic totalitarian political-military-legal doctrine called shariah. The MB's goal in this country is to replace our Constitution with theirs, namely the Koran. And they regard this task as one commanded by none other than Allah. (For more details on the nature, ambitions and modus operandi of the Ikhwan, see the Team B II Report, Shariah: The Threat to America). To this end, as Andy McCarthy notes in the aforementioned essay, the MB's senior official, Supreme Guide Muhammad Badi, has effectively declared war on the United States.
Were there any doubt that legitimacy is what the Ikhwan is taking away from this gambit, consider this assessment from an expert in Islamic groups, Ammar Ali Hassan, cited by Associated Press: "...The Brotherhood will likely try to float ‘conditions' or ‘reservations' on any dialogue to avoid a perception that it is allowing the U.S. to meddle in Egypt's internal affairs. But in the end, the talks will give a boost to the group, he said, by easing worries some in the Brotherhood and the public have of a backlash if the Brotherhood becomes the dominant player in Egypt. ‘Now the Muslim Brotherhood will not have to worry [about] moving forward toward taking over power,' Hassan said."
Unfortunately, the U.S. government's dangerous outreach to the Ikhwan is not confined to Egypt but is systematically practiced inside the United States, as well. For example:
Muslim-American organizations identified in court by the U.S. government - and, in many cases, by the Muslim Brotherhood itself - as MB fronts are routinely cultivated by federal, state and local officials. Representatives of homeland security, Pentagon, intelligence and law enforcement agencies frequently meet with and attend functions sponsored by such groups.
MB-associated individuals are sent as our country's "goodwill ambassadors" to foreign Muslim nations and communities. MB-favored initiatives to insinuate shariah into the United States - notably, the Ground Zero Mosque and shariah-compliant finance, conscientious objector status for Muslim servicemen and stifling of free speech in accordance with shariah "blasphemy" laws - are endorsed and/or enabled by official institutions.
A blind eye is turned to the presence across the country of shariah-adherent mosques that incubate jihadism. A peer-reviewed study published last month in Middle East Quarterly determined that 81% of a random sample of 100 mosques exhibited such qualities - constituting an infrastructure for recruitment, indoctrination and training consistent with the Brotherhood's phased plan.
Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, individuals with family and other ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have actually given senior government positions. The most recent of these to come to light is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin (who also happens to be former Rep. Anthony Weiner's wife).
It seems a safe bet tha t, as Team Obama legitimates Muslim Brotherhood organizations and groups overseas, it will feel ever less constrained about further empowering their counterparts in the United States. If so, the MB will come to exercise even greater influence over what our government does and does not do about the threat posed by shariah, both abroad and here.
The absolutely predictable effect will be to undermine U.S. interests and allies in the Middle East and further catalyze the Brotherhood's campaign to insinuate shariah in the United States and, ultimately, to supplant the Constitution with Islamic law. Consequently, the Obama administration's efforts to "engage" the Muslim Brotherhood are not just reckless. They are wholly incompatible with the President's oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" and the similar commitment made by his subordinates.
These officials' now-open embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood constitutes a geo-strategic tipping point, one that must catalyze an urgent national debate on this question: Does such conduct violate their oath of office by endangering the Constitution they have undertaken to uphold?
At a minimum, such a debate would afford a much-needed opportunity to examine alternatives to the administration's present course - as well as the real risks associated with that its intensifying pursuit. For instance, one of the most astute American authorities on the Middle East in general and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular, Dr. Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute:
Rather than embrace the Brotherhood, the Obama administration should be seeking to ensure that the group cannot dominate Egypt. Most analysts agree that the Muslim Brotherhood is by far the best organized group in Egypt, but that it only enjoys perhaps 25 or 30 percent support. The secular opposition remains weak and fractured. If the Obama administration wishes to remain engaged in Egypt's future and shape the best possible outcome for both U.S. national security and the Egyptian people, it should be pushing for electoral reform to change Egypt's dysfunctional system to a proportional representation model in which the secular majority can form a coalition to check a Muslim Brotherhood minority for which true democracy is anathema.
The same goes for the enemy within. Instead of relying upon - let alone hiring - Muslim Brotherhood operatives and associates, the United States government should be shutting down their fronts, shariah-adherent, jihad-incubating "community centers" and insidious influence operations in America. By recognizing these enterprises for what they are, namely vehicles for fulfilling the seditious goals of the MB's civilization jihad, they can and must be treated as prosecutable subversive enterprises, not protected religious ones under the U.S. Constitution.
Let the debate begin.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Freedom House ranks the least (and most) free countries in the world
The Least Free, according to Freedom House?
Belarus
Burma
Chad
China
Côte d’Ivoire
Cuba
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Laos
Libya
North Korea
Saudi Arabia
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Tibet
South Ossetia
Western Sahara
Of the other middle East nations, all of them are ranked in the LOWEST category of "NOT FREE" except Lebanon which manages "Partly Free" largely because of it's acceptance of Christianity.
As for Israel? Suprise, it achieves the highest status of "Free" with a 1 (the highest and the same as the US) for political rights.
Oh, and in case you may wonder, the board of Freedom House is comprised of a wide variety of people, and a huge number of Arabs, so bias is not a question.
Belarus
Burma
Chad
China
Côte d’Ivoire
Cuba
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Laos
Libya
North Korea
Saudi Arabia
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Tibet
South Ossetia
Western Sahara
Of the other middle East nations, all of them are ranked in the LOWEST category of "NOT FREE" except Lebanon which manages "Partly Free" largely because of it's acceptance of Christianity.
As for Israel? Suprise, it achieves the highest status of "Free" with a 1 (the highest and the same as the US) for political rights.
Oh, and in case you may wonder, the board of Freedom House is comprised of a wide variety of people, and a huge number of Arabs, so bias is not a question.
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Does Glenn Beck know something we don't?
Nope, this isn't going to be what you think it is.
Here in NY we have some experience with a media personality leaving the conventional "system".
Actually 2 of them. The first was, famously, Howard Stern.
His show was syndicated all over but he broadcast from WXRK here in NY. Stern was a regular in the gossip columns, regularly appeared on Letterman and other NY shows.
Next was Chris Russo of WFAN, the sports talk station. Russo spent 15 years as the co-host of the "Mike and the Mad Dog" show. He and co-host Mike Francessa are credited with being really the popularizers of the sports talk format.
Both left commercial radio and signed highly publicized deals with Sirrus satellite radio.
After much publicity on their moves, they have both largely disappeared from public consciousness. When was the last time you saw either of them on a talk show, or with a book on the best seller list.
So, I was fascinated when Beck decided to leave Fox (or mutually decided - despite reports, I doubt, with his ratings, that he was fired.).
But he may have hit the mother lode. Why or how you ask?
Simple. He is starting his own internet broadcast.
That in and of itself, is something no one else has really done.
But more than that, he is charging only $4.95/month for his show.
That amount is low enough as to be no "barrier to entry" for the overwhelming majority of people. And barriers to entry are the first thing people look at when trying to decide the viability of a business.
It's such a low price that I can see people saying 'what the heck' I'll give it a try. And like so many automatic credit card charges, people tend to get lazy and let them keep going, particularly when it's that cheap.
So, why is he right? I honestly think he has hit a home run here.
If you think about the numbers, he averaged about 1.4 million viewers a day. If he merely holds on to 5% of that, the numbers are this, 70,000 viewers at $5/mo. (If they sign up for his higher level program of $9.99 you can double some the #'s) adds up to $350,000 a month. 4.2 million a year.
If he holds onto 10% of this audience, than he's REALLY doing well.
I think he may really be at the forefront of a new media. Even a pioneer.
Here in NY we have some experience with a media personality leaving the conventional "system".
Actually 2 of them. The first was, famously, Howard Stern.
His show was syndicated all over but he broadcast from WXRK here in NY. Stern was a regular in the gossip columns, regularly appeared on Letterman and other NY shows.
Next was Chris Russo of WFAN, the sports talk station. Russo spent 15 years as the co-host of the "Mike and the Mad Dog" show. He and co-host Mike Francessa are credited with being really the popularizers of the sports talk format.
Both left commercial radio and signed highly publicized deals with Sirrus satellite radio.
After much publicity on their moves, they have both largely disappeared from public consciousness. When was the last time you saw either of them on a talk show, or with a book on the best seller list.
So, I was fascinated when Beck decided to leave Fox (or mutually decided - despite reports, I doubt, with his ratings, that he was fired.).
But he may have hit the mother lode. Why or how you ask?
Simple. He is starting his own internet broadcast.
That in and of itself, is something no one else has really done.
But more than that, he is charging only $4.95/month for his show.
That amount is low enough as to be no "barrier to entry" for the overwhelming majority of people. And barriers to entry are the first thing people look at when trying to decide the viability of a business.
It's such a low price that I can see people saying 'what the heck' I'll give it a try. And like so many automatic credit card charges, people tend to get lazy and let them keep going, particularly when it's that cheap.
So, why is he right? I honestly think he has hit a home run here.
If you think about the numbers, he averaged about 1.4 million viewers a day. If he merely holds on to 5% of that, the numbers are this, 70,000 viewers at $5/mo. (If they sign up for his higher level program of $9.99 you can double some the #'s) adds up to $350,000 a month. 4.2 million a year.
If he holds onto 10% of this audience, than he's REALLY doing well.
I think he may really be at the forefront of a new media. Even a pioneer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
