Showing posts with label US. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Prager University

I attended the "Obama the First 100 Days" tonight featuring Bill Bennett, Dennis Prager, and Hugh Hewitt. There were a lot of interesting topics discussed, and I think I got a few ideas for future posts.

At the end of the night, Dennis Prager asked everyone to check out a new project of his called Prager University. It's on You Tube. I looked at it when I got home and was impressed with the first course. I don't typically listen to Prager, but I still found this very interesting. The clip is five minutes long, and I am keeping this post short so you will have time to watch it. Enjoy!


Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Book Review: American Sphinx

Over the last few months I have become more and more interested in the "Revolutionary Generation". I blame David McCullough's 1776 and John Adams, along with the HBO adaptation for this. But another author, Joseph J. Ellis, also deserves some of the blame. I read Founding Brothers a few months back and really enjoyed his section on John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. I thought I would try another one of his books to attempt to get a better understanding of the writer of the Declaration of Independence and the third President of the United States.



American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson is a very unique biography. It is not written in a linear since. Dr. Ellis examines five key moments in Jefferson's life, and discusses them. For example, the first chapter starts with Jefferson arriving in Philadelphia in June of 1775 as a delegate to the Continental Congress. He briefly mentions some of the events leading up to that, but there is no discussion of his birth or any hardships he endured growing up. I haven't seen this type of biography before, and really enjoyed it. Instead of being weighed down with a general biographical sketch, Dr. Ellis was free to talk about the key moments in depth. In addition, the version I bought is the "Vintage" edition, which has been updated since the 1996 edition. Why is this important? Many of the DNA evidence surrounding Sally Heming's decedents came out after Ellis wrote his first version. For the "Vintage" edition, he updated portions of his book, and includes an appendix with his thoughts on the probable sexual relationship between Jefferson and the slave Sally Hemings.



One other difference was that American Sphinx is not an apologist book. It is also not a book written by a professor trying to make a name by trashing a popular historical figure. Until the last chapter, which has a "conclusions" feel to it, it is hard to pin down Ellis' position on Jefferson. Ellis is critical of parts of Jefferson's life we should be critical of, and celebrates many things about Jefferson worth celebrating.



Finally, American Sphinx made me re-examine how I view what our founding fathers would have thought on issues of the day. Dr. Ellis points out that trying to apply Adam's, Jefferson's, or Washington's views to today's issues are dangerous because the world is a different place. American Sphinx is a good book about a god like figure in American Politics. It is worth the read, and might make you reexamine your own views on some of today's issues.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Government 101 – Me and My Soap box

I have been spending some time this week reading up on the economic crisis. I have been struggling with the question of if I believe our Congress should give the Executive branch a $700 Billion check. Proponents say if we don't do it, then our economy (and the economy of the rest of the world) will collapse. Opponents say that bailing out the market is irresponsible, will saddle taxpayers with a huge debt, will devalue our dollar further (thus hurting our economy and the world's), and may not fix the problem. Some have argued for other solutions such as suspending the capital gains tax for two years. They argue that there is private capital out there waiting for the right price to jump in. Warren Buffets infusion to the market of $5 Billion yesterday sure seems to give this argument some weight. What is the right answer? Honestly, I think all of the arguments have their strong points and their weak points. The bailout check would be used to buy up bad mortgages. Managed correctly (which I don't know if the government can do) this could actually return a profit to the government and to taxpayers. I am always a fan of removing taxes and getting private capital flowing, but is suspending the capital gains tax for two years enough to get that money moving? If we have learned nothing from the Great Depression, we should have learned two lessons. First, business and the market hate uncertainty. It scares them. Businesses will hold on to money, and not invest, until they are sure what the government plans to do. Second, passing laws just to pass laws can sometimes make matters worse. What if giving the Fed's a $700 billion check simply delays a much worse crash?



My wife made me watch Glenn Beck last night. If you didn't see it, you should go look for it on CNN or YouTube. I found the transcript for the show here. If I am recommending you view a CNN program, you really should sit up and take note. Glenn Beck had former Shell Oil executive John Hofmeister on and asked viewers to call in to ask any question they wanted of Mr. Hofmeister. Mr. Hofmeister has a new organization called Citizens for Affordable Energy. While watching that episode, and talking to my wife about the economic crisis and the energy crisis I realized we haven't come up with the correct solution yet because we haven't asked the right question yet. The right question is: When are we going to start legislating like adults, and not like children who just want to feel good?



Go look for articles on the economic crisis. Most of them blame it on the "Sub prime mortgages" or "bad mortgages" or "questionable lending". This is code speak for "loans that were given to people who should have never gotten a loan in the first place." Congress encouraged / forced banks to give loans to people who wouldn't have qualified for them. They did it under the guise of "making homes affordable for everyone." This is the problem. Any sane adult should be able to take a step back and look at the world and realize there are people in this world who will never be able to afford a home. There are charities that have as their goal fixing this. This is a noble goal. However, it isn't a realistic one, and it isn't one our government should be legislating to fix.



Another example is Polar Bears. How? Simple. Recently our government, under the evil George Bush, placed Polar Bears on the threatened species list. Bear in mind (no pun intended) that the worldwide Polar bear populations are at a high point. There are now more Polar Bears in the world than at any point in the twentieth century. Why did they get placed on the threatened species list? Because it "felt good".



We can't drill in water closer than 50 to 100 miles from our shores. Even though the most productive oil rigs are within the 50 mile mark, congress has decided we shouldn't drill there. Why? Sun bathers don't like to see oil rigs. What if there is an accident? Who will protect the birds? The safety record of the oil industry is actually pretty impressive. You have heard of a few spills, but by and large, oil is moved around this country every day and the only time we hear about it is when our gas prices go up. For those of you who think we can get rid of oil and replace it with solar or wind power, you are living in a pipe dream. If you think political environmentalist are going to let you construct wind and solar energy "plants" you haven't been paying attention. Already there are concerns with wind mills killing migratory birds. Sane adults can pass a comprehensive energy plan that uses oil, coal, nuclear, solar, wind, hydro and anything else we can safely squeeze energy out of.



What about our tax code? Here is a colossal waste. We have a cumbersome tax code that is designed to make the wealthiest people in the United States give their money to the "poor". Think Robin Hood with a gun and the federal government. We don't tax business and individuals to keep the government running and for the government to do those things the Constitution gives it power to do. We tax to try and earn votes, and because it "feels good" to stick it to the wealthy and to Big Business. What this really does is to drive businesses over seas and to take money from the people who might be able to bail us out of our current financial troubles.



I have great faith in the American people. At some point, Americans are going to wake up and tell their representatives to start passing laws like adults and not like 60's era hippies. When that happens, you will see a real energy policy, a tax code that makes sense, and as Glenn Beck would say, the few surviving hippies running for the hills while the rest of us chase them there with torches, cell phones, and SUV's.

Monday, July 21, 2008

Book Review: In Defense of America

There is a special place in my heart for foreign written books that defend the United States. Mark Steyn's America Alone is a good example, and so is In Defense of America by Bronwen Maddox. I happened upon this book purely by accident. I read the book jacket, and decided to read the rest of the book. It is a small book (about 216 pages long). I read it in one day. I highly recommend it.



A word of caution: This isn't a defense of everything that the United States has ever done. Ms. Maddox and I disagree on some pretty significant points (such as the war in Iraq). Ms. Maddox also takes the United States to task for issues she feels we got wrong. However, she also points out that the United States has done many good things, and that our country is founded on some very incredible ideas. The ideas set forth in our founding document are foreign to most of the rest of the world. Ms. Maddox says, "The American enterprise can appear anachronistic at a time when countries are shedding fractious provinces or breaking into pieces entirely. But it still represents a profoundly civilized goal: to overcome ethnic and religious differences in uniting people willingly into one country."



She points out that while it is commonly held that we have lost our image internationally, there were many criticisms of the United States during the Clinton administration. She also points out that Europe would be naïve to expect a dramatic change in U.S. foreign policy with the next President, even if it is Senator Obama. Most in Europe don't understand the fundamental way our government works. I would argue that many within the United States don't understand the basics of our Constitution, let alone our Government. The power to run our government is divided among the different branches of government. The President cannot do everything. Many things (like the use of troops) require Congressional approval. Because of this, a stark, dramatic change, is very hard to accomplish in America.



Finally, In Defense of America contains recommendations for the United States going forward, and a few cautions for our international critics. Many in today's world hope that the United States is reluctant to become involved in international events after Iraq. We may be cautious to use our military, or to even criticize other nations after the twists and turns we have faced in Iraq. This would be bad for the world as a whole. There are many times that the United States is the only one with a military able to defend other nations, and the will power to defend those nations. We also tend to send more aid to problem areas than many groups of countries. A world with a Untied States that "minds its own business" could become a very dark, and very scary world.



I recommend this book to all of my readers. It is a quick read. I promise you will find points that you disagree with. I also promise that the arguments that Ms. Maddox sets forth will be very thought provoking, and worth your attention.

Friday, October 05, 2007

Book Review: Why We Fight

I posted the dedication fromWhy We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism a few days ago. I thought the opening dedication was very moving, and was equally impressed with the rest of the book. I just finished the book and immediately sat down to write this review. It is a short book (less than 200 pages in the paperback edition), however many of the points are very powerful and are very powerfully made.


This is not a book for someone who believes America is no better or worse than any other nation on the planet, and doesn't want to hear anything to the contrary. Dr. Bennett writes of patriotism, right and wrong, and the undeniable truth that some things really are worth fighting for.


The original edition of this book was released in 2002. The paperback edition that I stumbled across at a used bookstore is an updated version. It includes a new introduction entitled “Blaming America First”. Dr. Bennett explains why this mentality is so deadly to our country. The original introduction (“A Moment of Clarity”) is also included in the paperback edition.


I thought many of Dr. Bennett's arguments were well laid out and hard to counter. Dr. Bennett uses this book to discuss patriotism and the anti-America movement since September 11th. He examines the pacifist movement. This book is also interesting because it makes a case for our action in Afghanistan and Iraq before we entered Iraq. Don't open this book expecting to see a lot of talk about WMD's. Many forget there were other reasons to go into Iraq. The epilogue should be required reading. Dr. Bennett uses it to lay out the case for removal of Saddam Hussein.


On a larger scale, Why We Fight seeks to shine a light on the anti-America movement that has been in this country since the 1930’s. It also argues why Patriotism is something we should be instilling in our children along with a fundamental understating of what it means to be an American. How can we hope to survive when reports look at our government with suspicion, but take petty dictators and tyrants at their word? Dr. Bennett makes the case for Israel and our continued support of that nation.


This book should be required reading for high school students, and for anyone who thinks patriotism is something to be avoided. For those of us who believe being a patriot is a good thing, this book is a welcome reinforcement of that belief.

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Book Review: America the Last Best Hope

In 1921, the English writer G.K. Chesterton came to America to travel and speak. He, like other foreigners I mention in Volume I …saw us better, in many ways, than we saw ourselves. What he saw here, what he found here, is a reaffirmation of what I attempt to recapture about our country – describing it as Abraham Lincoln did: “the last best hope on earth.”


This passage is how Dr. William “Bill” Bennett opens America, the Last Best Hope Volume II. This volume covers U.S. History from 1914 to 1989 (or from a World at War to the Triumph of Freedom as the book is subtitled.) I think Dr. Bennett does a good job of capturing that essence Chesterton saw in America and that Lincoln described.


I chose to start in the middle of Dr. Bennett’s series because it covers a time period that I wasn’t taught much about in high school or college. Most of what I know about our own history since World War I is because of my own reading. I thought this would be a great way to expand on that knowledge. What I found was Dr. Bennett covered such a wealth of material that calling it “expanding my knowledge” probably doesn’t do it justice.


Dr. Bennett devotes a lot of time to the different Presidents and their policies from WW I to the Cold War. One would expect that in a history book, but Dr. Bennett does a good job of examining each President critically. He points out the success of each President, and also illustrates their failures. However, far from dwelling on our countries failures (of which we have our share) he spends an equal amount of time on those things our country should celebrate (of which there are many).


Dr. Bennett has argued in other venues that we must build up our history program in our school system. He states in this book, “It is sad but true that American students know less about American history than any other subject they study.” Dr. Bennett describes American history as the “glory and romance” of our nations story. The quote comes from the National Archives: The glory and romance of our history are here preserved in the chronicles of those who conceived and built the structure of our nation. Dr. Bennett’s book is the type of patriotic examination of our history that should be used in schools to teach American history. His book lends a romantic feel to our history.


I would recommend America the Last Best Hope to schools but also to anyone who is curious about our history. Dr. Bennett breaks the topics in his book along major time periods in our history and provides a good overview to each chapter. I enjoyed reading it from cover to cover, but it would also serve as a useful reference book to someone who was writing about prohibition, FDR, World War II, Vietnam, or the Cold War. Finally, anyone who wants to know more about America would benefit from reading America, the Last Best Hope.

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Time to Ban Chinese Products?

In what seems to be a daily happening, there has been another major safety warning issued for a product made in China. As of this writing, there hasn't been a recall on the product. The new recall involves vinyl baby bibs that have been found to contain three times the amount of lead that is allowed in paint. While there hasn't been a true recall, parents have been warned that if they have these bibs and they are damaged or torn, they should be thrown away.


This "non-recall" comes on the heel of a number of other recent recalls on items and products from China. Recently an assortment of toys have been recalled because of the lead in their paint and toothpaste and dog food have been recalled because of toxic ingredients that have been found in them. Whether this list of recalls is directly because of the Chinese government or not, the government does have its share of blame in this. Just as our government passes standards for products made in the U.S.A, the Chinese government has a responsibility to provide an assurance that the products from it's country won't kill consumers in other countries.


When the recalls started, many news agencies wrote of the "open secret" in China. It seems it was well known that certain industries were replacing ingredients with ingredients that could hurt the consumer. While I have never been to China, if this is true, then the Chinese government is as much at fault as those businesses that made the products that are now being recalled.


It is time to discuss a possible ban on Chinese imports. A government's role is to protect its constituents first and foremost. It is time for the United States to consider what it needs to do to guarantee citizens can buy products without fear they may kill them. China has been preparing itself for an eventual war with the United States for some time. Many argue that China has already started this war on the economic front. It was a travesty for the United Nations to award this communist nation with an Olympics. We shouldn't be worried about hurting the feelings of the Chinese regime. We should be concerned with the well being of our citizens. If China can't promise their products are safe, maybe the United States should ensure no one here will die from those same products.

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Time for Action against Iran

There are two interesting news articles today that I thought might represent a good departure from the global warming debate. With the temperatures of some of my readers getting high enough to force certain “Anonymous” readers away from my blog, I thought it might be worth discussing something that is more likely to destroy the world than global warming. What is this terror that Al Gore is ignoring? Iran.


I have written previous post on this site arguing that Iran represents a clear and present danger to the United States. I am for the use of the military in Iran if we decide it is the only way to prevent a nuclear Iran. With the mindset of the rulers of Iran what it currently is, I believe Iran would not hesitate to use a nuclear warhead if it was able to get one. Mutually assured destruction means next to nothing if you believe you are preordained to usher in a new world order.


Iran has been at war with the United States and Europe since at least 1979. The latest salvo appears to be the use of the Iranian military to place bombs in Iraq. This story has been reported inThe Sun Online. This is still a developing story as I haven’t seen it reported anywhere else yet. The Sun sites an intelligence source as saying that British forces have seen Iranian helicopters ferrying soldiers into Iraq so they can place IED’s. The Sun says this claim is backed up by, “…very senior military sources.” However, the Sun is the only place reporting this story. Is this enough to go to war with Iran over? No. Unfortunately, this isn’t the only piece of evidence that Iran is at war with the West.


Peter Schweizer has a very good piece in USA Today outlining some of the other marks against Iran. Among other things, Iran is providing military equipment and funding to our enemies in Iraq. They captured British sailors and continue to hold 4 United States citizens. The Iranian President has stated more than once his intention to wipe Israel off the face of the map. I am inclined to take people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at their word. If he wants to destroy the Little Satan because he says he can win a war of attrition between Jews and Muslims, the West should be very concerned.


As I said earlier, I am for a military strike in Iran to keep them from acquiring a nuke. However, Mr. Schweizer lays out an economic war that I could support. He believes in a two prong assault, the first is a full gasoline embargo. This would be enforced by the United States Navy Fifth Fleet. Mr. Schweizer says that Iran imports almost half of its gasoline and is particularly vulnerable in this area. Secondly, he argues that the United States should begin counterfeiting Iranian currency. As I stated in another post attacking China for this very ploy, counterfeiting another nation’s currency is an act of war. However, in this case, Iran has been at war with the United States for decades. We can stick our head in the sand and hope the bully leaves us alone, or we can fight and stand up to these bullies.


The other very interesting part of this article is that Mr. Schweizer never once calls for aid or approval from the United Nations. Whether this course of action is taken or not, Mr. Schweizer should be applauded for this. It is time the United States shows that she is willing to stand up to those who would kill us, and we are willing to do it without international approval. The United States is the lone Superpower in the world. It is time we started acting like it.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Terrorist Operating Charities in Boston

Floyd Abrams wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal a few days ago that has not gotten the attention it deserves. In his article, Mr. Abrams explains that suing someone in court isn’t always the smartest course of action. “Be Careful What You Sue For” provides a few examples of cases where parties sued in court for things said about them only to have the suit bite them in the proverbial rear end.


The latest example, and a case Mr. Abrams was part of, is what I wish to direct this post towards. Recently, the Islamic Society of Boston sued 17 assorted individuals for libel. The Society had obtained a piece of property from the Boston Redevelopment Authority for a price far below its market value. Numerous parties including Mr. Abrams client, terrorist expert Steve Emerson, raised concerns about the transaction. Mr. Emerson and others urged, “…Boston authorities to reconsider their decision to provide the land on such favorable terms…to an organization whose present or former leaders had close connections with or who had otherwise supported terrorist organizations.” Remember, we are talking about a charity operating in the United States and dealing with a local government.


As the court case began to unfold, things started looking bad for the Islamic Society of Boston. The founder of the Society, Abdurahman Alamoudi, “…had been indicted in 2003 for his role in a terrorism financing scheme, pleaded guilty, and had been sentenced to a 23-year prison term.” But really, can we judge one charity based on the founder being a terrorist? Not so quick…


One of the members of the board of trustees, Yusef Al-Qaradawi, also had a few skeletons. Al-Qaradawi has been identified by the US Treasury as a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Al-Qaradawi also endorsed the killing of Americans in Iraq and Jews everywhere. Is this enough to be suspicious of the Society…


Walid Fitaihi, a director of the Islamic Society of Boston, had written endorsing the killing of Jews for their, “oppression, murder and rape of the worshipers of Allah.” He had also accused the Jews of committing the “worst of evils” and of bringing “…the worst corruption to the earth.” And in case you still have any doubts, bank records revealed that the Society had raised funds for the Holy Land Foundation and the Benevolance International Foundation. Both of these charities have been identified as groups that raise money for Hamas (in the case of the Holy Land Fund) and Al-Queda (the Benevolance International Foundation).


At the end of the article, Mr. Abrams points out the lessons to be learned from this and similar cases. The first is that individuals or groups suing for libel should carefully consider what may happen if they sue. Secondly, counsel fees should be awarded to the winning side in cases similar to this. Both of these lessons are important, but I think Mr. Abrams misses the bigger lesson, a charity was shown to have terrorist ties in a court of law.


These are details that were brought as the case was pursued. An Islamic Charity is operating in the United States, and continues to operate in the US that has been proven to have terrorist ties. While I am not surprised this isn’t getting more coverage, I am greatly troubled that it isn’t. How can we even be debating some of the issues in Congress right now, when we allow a group to raise funds and associate with terrorist in our own backyard? Boston has plans for this group to give lectures regarding Islam to the local community. Do we really want to provide a venue for terrorist to teach the public here in our home towns?

Monday, May 21, 2007

The Flag Folding Ceremony

Today my wife attended a luncheon that included a Flag Folding Ceremony. While my wife does keep up with politics, and is in many ways smarter than I, she rarely provides inspiration for my blog. Today was an exception. She was quite impressed with the Flag Folding Ceremony. While talking to me about it, she said, “Anyone who doesn’t believe religion played a large part in our countries foundation is simply wrong.”


I tend to agree with her. Many of our documents our country was founded on contain references to God and to a Judeo-Christian creed. I will concede that there were important figures in our history that were either openly atheist, or questioned God’s existence. I think the ability to do either in our society is one of the things that makes our nation great.


My wife encouraged me to go look for the Ceremony online. I did a quick Google search for “Flag Folding Ceremony” and found many links. The rest of my information is taken from the USA Patriotism website. I encourage everyone to read the link to the meaning of the 13 folds of our flag. It is a very solemn and religious ceremony. Every website I looked at today had a disclaimer that this ceremony (while performed by an assortment of military units at different times) was not official military policy. This ceremony respects and honors life, God, veterans, mothers, fathers, and others. If the military if going to have policies like “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” would it be such a terrible thing if we adopted this ceremony as an official ceremony?


The Ceremony honors and glorifies the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. My understanding is that Islam honors Abraham and Issac, Christianity and Judaism honor all three. The Ceremony reminds us of those who have gone before to protect our rights. I encourage everyone to take a few minutes and read through the ceremony. I would especially like to point out what the fifth fold represents (taken from USA Patriotism):


“The fifth fold is a tribute to our country, for in the words of Stephen Decatur, ‘Our country, in dealing with other countries, may she always be right; but it is still our country, right or wrong.’”


If we as Democrats, Republicans, and all others can agree on this, maybe we can solve many of the issues facing our nation today. May God bless America.

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

A Call for an Islamic Reformation

A plot by six foreign borne Muslims to kill as many soldiers as they could at Ft. Dix was stopped today. The FBI attributed the victory to a video store clerk. The clerk was asked by one of the men to copy a video that showed many of the conspirators firing weapons and talking about jihad. The clerk contacted the FBI. Three of the Muslims were illegal immigrants and two had green cards. The plot had been in the works for some time, and the six had acquired a map of Ft. Dix and were purchasing weapons for their attack. Based on the detailed complaint filed by the FBI, there is no doubt these men thought they were acting in accordance with Islamic Jihad.


Most articles I have read end with the following paragraph:


"If these people did something, then they deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law," said Sohail Mohammed, a lawyer who represented scores of detainees after the 2001 attacks. "But when the government says `Islamic militants,' it sends a message to the public that Islam and militancy are synonymous."


"Don't equate actions with religion," he said.


Not all Muslims wish harm to the United States and her citizens. I reviewed a book in February entitled American Islam which discusses how different Muslims in America see themselves and their faith. It also discuses how their lives have changed since 9/11. However, to ignore the violence that some Muslims in the world feel Islam dictates they use in the name of Allah is to ignore world events today. It does not help that many feel unable to safely discuss Islam without being labeled a racist or being painted as a target by certain Muslim groups. However, if Islam and the West are going to continue to co-exist, there must be a Reformation within Islam.


Is Islam a religion that endorses violence against Israel, Judaism, Americans, or even other sects of Islam, or is it a religion that has simply been misunderstood and manipulated? Muslims must come to terms with how they wish their religion to go forward. Will Islam continue to be used to kill untold numbers, silence dissent, kill and beat women under the term “honor killing”? Will Islam become the true religion of peace where Mohammad’s message can be taught and discussed without fear of violence? I can not answer these questions; this is a Reformation that must be lead by Muslims and come from Muslims.