Wednesday, November 18, 2009 this thing on?

I quote President Barack Obama from what he said yesterday.
"It is important though to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession."
I have to ask, did he keep a straight face when he said this? Yes President Bush left a deficit, when he left office. This is a fact that cannot be disputed. But President Obama came in and TRIPLED the deficit. T-R-I-P-L-E-D it. Now he says that adding more to the debt could weaken the economy? But he wants a universal health care plan that according to current estimates will cost 1.3 trillion over 10 years. And given the fact that Medicare has cost roughly 9 times more than originally estimated, this monster could easily cost 10 trillion dollars. And there are rumblings from congress that another "stimulus" package is needed. MORE DEBT.

Does Obama really mean what he said here? He keeps spending more and more money and the debt is so huge that it is practically unfathomable.

I actually agree with his statement, but how can can he say it with a straight face? His policies have set up this house of cards to fall. The dollar is weak and there is nothing being done to strengthen it. Inflation is coming. There is so much money sitting out there not being spent, that when it is, the economy could overheat causing massive inflation. If (in my opinion it is a matter of when) this happens say goodbye to the minuscule growth that is happening right now, and this depression (yes I think it is a depression) will worsen.

I think I have seen this movie before.

Friday, November 13, 2009

The Fundamental Problem with Liberal and economics.

It is quite simple really. Liberals believe the purpose of a business is to employ people. Therefore regulating said business to force it to provide higher wages, better employee benefits, etc. for its workforce is not only the right thing to do, but is a moral imperative. This thinking however is fundamentally flawed. People start and run businesses to make money. From the little mom and pop store in a strip mall to the largest corporations in the world, their purpose is to make money and for the owners, CEO's and executives to become wealthy. A company that does not turn a profit will go out of business. Jobs that are created are a result of said company's quest for profits.

To raise taxes or to create more regulations that cost businesses more money is to essentially kill jobs. Consider the entrepreneur who opens his dream restaurant. After paying for food and operating costs, wages and other expenses the entrepreneur hopes to take what profits, if any are left, so that he or she will be able to provide for him or herself and hopefully get ahead financially. If, because of regulations or taxes, the business's profit margin is reduced or begins to lose money, the owner has two choices: 1) make cut backs to remain profitable or 2) go out of business.

Its really simple. If you cut taxes and reduce regulations on business, businesses will be able to expand, hire more people, turn greater profits and thus pay more taxes on said profits.

"In this present crisis, government is not the answer to the problem. Government IS THE PROBLEM." Ronald Reagan.

Monday, November 09, 2009

Political Correctness caused the massacre at Ft. Hood

Despite all the warning signs including the fact that investigators found out that Nidal Hassan had tried to contact people associated with Al Qaeda in the recent past, The US Army failed to act. I believe they did not act for one reason: fear being accused of racial profiling and racism.

President Obama has said that we should not "jump to any conclusions" and has said little else about this massacre. Here is what investigators know so far about this man and the attack at Ft. Hood.

  1. Hassan went around saying goodbye to his neighbors in the days before the attack.
  2. He had been passing out Korans to people.
  3. Dr. Hassan was disciplined and reprimanded for attempting to convert his patients to Islam.
  4. He was known by his associate to have radical views and was opposed to the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
  5. Hassan was known to be sympathetic toward the very people that the US was fighting.
  6. Multiple witnesses have stated Hassan yelled Allah u Akbar before opening fire, and during the rampage was reported to be calm and calculating during the shooting.
  7. The place he chose for his rampage was a pre-deployment center for soldiers going to Iraq or Afghanistan.
Put all this together and it is pretty hard not to draw the conclusion that this was done by a radical Muslim, intent on killing Americans.

Sounds like an act of terrorism to me.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Harsh Interrogation vs Tortue

I am really having a hard time wrapping my head around this whole debate. I have read the memo that was released by the White House that gave details to the types of "harsh interrogation" that were used on high value prisoners like Khalid Sheikh Mohamed. My first reaction was, "Is that it?" This is the "torture" that the left was screaming about? But what I really don't get is why would the Obama Administration do this other than to appease the left wing of his party? But what is worse is that now Obama has opened the door for the justice department to prosecute Officials in the Bush Administration who wrote opinions and recommendations as to what interrogation techniques were acceptable.

Above all however, I feel that these actions and new policies enacted by the Obama Adminstration do absolutely nothing to strengthen our defense against potential terrorist attacks, and in actuallity rolls back our handling terror threats to a pre-9/11 mentality.

Forget the fact that using interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, helped to thwart terroist attacks on US cities. Does Obama really think that by telling our enemies that we will no longer use these techniques, which inflicted no bodily harm on these terror suspects, will somehow endear us to the terrorists all over the world. Does he think by doing this that the next time an American journalist (not even a solider or operative) is taken captive by these evil people, that they will show mercy and not decapitate their prisoners head.

But a bigger question must be asked? Hypothetically speaking lets postulate that in the future the CIA or NSA picks up chatter, backed up by intel that another terrorist attack err "man caused disaster" is imminent. Around this time they capture a terrorist who they know was involved in the planning and possible participation of this or a similar imminent attack, or they are fairly certain that he has information about an upcoming attack. Does the current administration really think that just by asking nicely or even harshly, that this person will give up the information. Is this despicable man's dignity or civil rights more important than the lives of thousands of Americans that might be killed if an attack is not stopped?

If you think I am exaggerating about something like this, look into what happened to Khalid Sheikh Mohamed. He had been captured. The US knew he was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and when interrogators were questioning him, he told them of another attack coming by saying "you will find out" but was otherwise defiant and uncooperative. The interrogators used waterboarding and he gave up information which helped to break up a terror cell in Asia that was planning an attack, like 9/11 on a bulding in Los Angeles. "Enhanced interrogation" on this dispicable exuse for a human being saved thousands of lives.

The Obama adminstration, with its policy changes and actions is signaling to the terrorists of the world that it is more important to spare the diginity of a terrorist or detainee than to save the lives of thousands of Americans. I suspect Bin Laden and the other leaders of Al Qaeda are laughing. We won't be laughing if we are hit again by these animals.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

The Phoenix Arizona Tea Party Protest

I took the opportunity to go to my first (but probably not last) protest in my life. It was a fun experience. I took my 5 year old, Jessica with me, conning her into going with the promise of a train ride (light rail). We drove to the light rail station in Mesa and then took the train downtown and then walked about a mile to the State Capital building, where the protest was. Jessica was a trooper and had no trouble with the walk until the last 500 yards or so when she got tired. There were several people on the train doing the same thing. Taking the train was a good idea as we did not have to fight any traffic or have to search for parking.

The protest was probably one of the calmest protests that I have ever seen(of course the only ones I have seen until yesterday were on TV). People from all walks of life, and all ethnic groups were there holding up signs and chanting as the speakers (most of which were from KFYI) revved up the crowd. I estimated there had to be between 4 to 7 thousand people at this protest, and the Arizona Republic said that there was about 5 thousand people there.
The only complaint that I had was that I was not really able to hear what was being said. The PA system set up was not that great nor did it do much good if you were very far from where the speakers were. Critics of the tea party protests said that these protests were not spontaneous grass-roots organizations, but were GOP organized protests. If it was the GOP that organized them, then they did a very poor job with logistics. But it was not. I did not really care to hear what was said since i consider myself pretty well informed and new that since this was a grass roots protest that at least at this point there would not have been a whole lot said that would have been truly profound.

What I hope is that this is the beginning of something, that the silent majority has been stirred from a deep slumber. The move away from a constitutional republic really began long ago (FDR's New Deal was the beginning), and so many of us have for so long sat by while our freedoms have been slowly eroded and our free market system has been attacked and damaged from people within our own government. We can no longer sit by and say we are too busy to do anything about what is happening to our government. Not only do we need to wake up, but we need to wake up our friends and neighbors.

Often I think people look at me and wonder why I am so politically minded and passionate about these things. I am passionate about these things because the political system is the mechanism by which our rights and freedoms are maintained. It is the Constitution and that protects all of us and allows us to worship God according to the dictates of our conscience.
But the Constitution is under assault. There are those at the head of our government now, who believe that the Constitution is a flawed document and that because of that our country is hoplessly flawed and is in need of radical change. They are using the cover of an economic crisis to enact these changes to remake America. The changes that are being proposed will limit freedom in the name of fairness. Instead of liberty, we will have a soft tyranny.
I am passionate because I grew up loving this country. The American dream was available to all. I have people in my very family who have made their fortune because they took a risk and were rewarded for their hard work, timing and work ethic. I am passionate because I fear that what I see coming from those in power will disable the engines of prosperity that have made this country the greatest on Earth.

All of us need to be passionate about this country or we will be lulled to sleep; And when we wake up, the America we once loved will be no more.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Happy Tax Day!

It is interesting to hear all of these liberals bad mouth the Tax Day tea parties that are going on all over the country. They are calling those who are attending a bunch of red necked backwards thinking hay seed hicks. But what they fail to do is to consider the real reasons and ideas behind these tea parties.

People are angry and scared. They fear for the future of their country. America was founded on the principles of limited government, rugged individualism, and the idea of American exceptionalism. These ideals, coupled with capitalism, is what has made this country the most successful and prosperous country in the world. President Barack Obama's ideas and policies that he wants to impliment are not only destined to fail, but will lead America down a path that it was not meant to go down.

But what the real crime here is that The Obama administration is implementing these policies without a single regard for fiscal responsibility. The fact that America does not have the money for all of these programs and bailouts. The amount of debt being amassed could cause such massive inflation that it will destroy the value of the dollar as a world currency. The debt we are heaping on our children and grandchildren is horribly crippling.

But worst of all, the proposals by this administration could spell the end of capitalism, which is the end of freedom. The American dream is that anyone can come here (legally) and try to make their fortune, and pursue happiness. Is it a perfect system? No! But it is the only one that works and gives people true freedom.

As people consider what this President is doing, trying to take control of the economy, health care and education, I want you to respond to this question.

Name for five things(excluding the military) that the government does well .

Now tell those of us diggin in our heals about this stuff that you really honestly think that that government can do it better(whatever "it" may be)!

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

Obama says the US is not at war with Islam...

...and he is right. We are not at war with the entire Islamic world, but it is Islamo-fascists who have been using all of their resources to fight the Western World for more than 30 years. It certainly wasn't Christian fundamentalists who flew passenger jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. It was not Radical Jews who tried to sink the USS Cole. It was not some faction of Hindus who were the cause of the bloodshed in Somalia. And I don't remember Buhdists being at the center of the fight in Bosnia.

Make no mistake about it. It is RADICAL ISLAM that is at the center this war. It is Osama Bin Laden who has declared Jihad against the United States and other Western Countries. What is Obama going to say when Al Qaida attacks America again. Will Obama condemn what these evil people do. Or will he blame America as he seems to really enjoy doing.

Monday, April 06, 2009

No Company is TOO LARGE TO FAIL!

The argument that companies like AIG and GM are too large to fail, has to be one of the biggest lies ever perpetrated by American Politicians in an attempt to grab control of large parts of the American economy.

As I kept hearing so many of the ruling class continually spew out this rhetoric, I started to think to myself, "Why are these companies too big to fail?" and Why should they be saved in the first place?" It does not make sense. Why should the government bail out these companies when they have been running their own businesses into the ground.

In the case of AIG, did anyone force them to go out on a massive limb and offer the credit default swaps to all of these financial institutions? Why would a company put all of its eggs into a basket that was in reality a ticking time bomb? I'm no business or economics expert, but I have heard many times that one should always diversify. It seems to me that what got a lot of banks and financial institutions into so much was that they had too much of one investment on their balance sheet and did not spread their investments around enough in case that one of these investments went in the tank.

In the case of GM? Who's fault is it that they went with a short term business plan and put all of their eggs into the SUV basket? Why was GM so short sided? Lets face it. Why would anyone buy an American mid sized car, from Ford, GM or Chrystler, when they can get a better car from a Japanese manufacturer for roughly the same price? But the biggest question is, why did these companies sign such ridiculous labor contracts with the UAW? It has been obvious that the Detroit car model has been flawed for years. Many of the so-called Japanese cars are made or assembled in America anyway. The Big 3 has been dying on the vine for years because they have refused to change their business model.

But why then would the government bail out these companies that have made so many bad decisions? Why would the government infuse these companies with piles of money. In both cases the businesses are failing. They are hemorrhaging money. Throwing money at these big companies has done very little. Now these companies keep coming back for more but continue to engage in the same business practices that got them into the mess they were in in the first place.

So why would the government do it? I suspect it has nothing to do with the economy, but rather these amount to massive quid pro quos. In the case of Detroit, it is payback to the union. In the case of was a way to help out a bunch of executives that gave money to the right causes or right candidates...and also to funnel money to banks outside of the US. Whatever the real reason, the evidence supports that we should have just allowed these companies to fail (bankruptcy) and let the chips fall where they may. At least we wouldn't have mortaged the future of our country and its economic stability in the name "saving" companies that really did not deserve saving.

The free market corrects itself. This crisis has happened because so many in the industry did not look at the long ter, but rather only paid attention to the short term. The companies that were being prudent would still be around, and other companies would rise up and take place of the failed ones.

Friday, April 03, 2009

What are the benefits of illegal immigration?

I am trying to figure out how anyone can honestly argue in favor of illegal immigration in the United States of America today. I cannot for the life of me figure out any of the arguments.

Government leaders like Nancy Pelosi make some sort of human rights argument in throwing their support at illegal immigration. I suspect that their reasons for supporting illegal immigration are much more sinister. These libs pander to illegal immigrants and their legal relatives who reside in the United States. If they can get these people amnesty and eventually citizenship, formerly illegal immigrants will be much more likely to vote for these democrats who in my opinion really only want these people in the country so that they will be a paid form of slave labor, not to mention a voting block that will blindly vote for liberals and keep them in power.

Call me cold or hard hearted, but I just don't see any positives for Americans when it comes to allowing illegal immigration, when the negatives are so serious and are a prime causes for state budget shortfalls across the nation and especially in border states like Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Why Steriods hurt Baseball more than other sports!

I have been watching with sadness the fall of Baseball as our National Pastime. I grew up a fan. My father played high school ball with a future hall of famer (Harmon Killebrew). I started going to games when I was 5 years old. I have always loved the sport. My favorite players as a kid included, Fred Lynn, Kirk Gibson, Reggie Jackson, and others. I loved watching the game. For decades, Baseball was king. It was our national past time. It was a sport born in America and played at its best in America. It was so huge that the Little League World Series has been shown on Network Television for decades.

However, over the past twenty years Baseball has fallen from its place as America's pasttime. But they only have themselves to blame. Owners held players hostage until free agency changed everything. Free Agency and ballooning salaries led to strikes and works stoppages, with the 1994 strike and cancellation of the World Series being the low point or so we thought. But then in 1998 Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa saved baseball, as they both chased Roger Marris through the summer. America watched with the help of ESPN, as each man went to the plate to chase history. It was magic. I can still remember McGuire's 62nd home run, a low line drive that just cleared the wall in left. It was a magical moment.

It was a fraud. It turns out that both players were juicing, along with half the league (by some estimates) and that this season was not played out on the field but rather created in a lab. Marris's record was not broken fairly, but instead players used performance enhancing drugs to augment their already amazing skill to pursue one of the most hallowed records in all of American Sports. Since then the other huge record, Hank Aaron's all time home run record was broken by another cheater Barry Bonds. While we speculate about Sosa and McGuire, we know for a fact that Bonds cheated. He is now out of baseball and most likely will be convicted of purgury for lying about his use of steriods.

Steriods hurts all sports. Performance Enhancing Drugs (PED's) like steriods, HGH and blood doping agents have been tearing at the fabric of all sports. At each Olympics I wonder if the men and women winning Gold and glory are cheating. And there is recourse. In the Olympics people who are caught cheating are rightfully stripped of their gold medals and the records they may have set when winning said medal are wipped from the record books. But PED's hurt because it tugs at our sense of fair play. Sports is supposed to be the place where there are no politics. Sports is supposed to the place where people can root passionately for their favorite player or team and fear nothing except the possiblity of loss.

And while PED's hurts all sports, it is destroying baseball. Why? Because baseball, unlike any other American sport is statistically driven. It is a part of the fabric the sport. Most people know the big names in the different sports. But very few know the statistics of those players. Most basketball fans could tell you for instance that John Stocton is the all time assist leader in the NBA, but how many can tell you how many assists he had. Growing up I always knew who the Home Run king was (Hank Aaron), but I could just as easily tell you how many home runs he hit (755). Baseball is a game of stats. Men get into the Hall of Fame, not just because of reputation, but also because of their stats. Harmon Killebrew (5th on the home run list at the time), made the hall, but not on the first ballot. Why? because he has the third lowest batting average in the hall of fame. Despite the fact that only 4 other men hit more homers than he, his election into the hall was not guaranteed.

The stat book is hallowed ground in baseball. Lovers of the sport can tell you almost any stat of almost any great player. As a kid, as soon as I got a baseball card, after looking at the picture, I turned it over and studied the stats. They were all there. It was cool. As players retired, true fans compared their favorite players stats to those who made the hall of fame to see if their favorite players measured up.

But the fabric of baseball is torn. 1998 is no longer talked about. Barry Bonds's record is a joke. Despite the fact that Bonds was a great player, he will probably never get in the hall because he broke the most hallowed record in American sports while cheating. Or at least many of the home runs he hit were hit while he was on steroids. As fans try to wrap their heads around these things they don't quite know how to handle it. Those names are still in the record books, but should they be? Babe Ruth hit 714 HR's with a beer belly. Hank Aaron broke that record, without ever hiting 50 home runs in a single season. And both of these players did it with out PED's.

It always hurts when our heros fall from grace. But when they undermine the very foundation of the sport that propped them up, it does more than hurt. It is destructive. As the world grows more cynical, people need places where they can focus their passions. But as players are continually caught cheating, further eroding our faith in the goodness of integrity, it kills us all a little bit at a time.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Bipartisan? Not if it means always capitulating.

I get so tired of the overused word "bipartisan" when people talk about what is happening in the government. True bipartisanship really does not happen very often. Given the fact that the two sides are so far apart on so much ideologically bipartisanship very seldom happens.

The question that should be asked is what exactly defines the word bipartisan or being bipartisan? When using the word in a sentence such as "President Obama was looking for bipartisan support for his stimulus package" it probably means that he gets support from both sides of the political isle when the aforementioned bill gets voted on in the house. So if one republican had voted for the bill, would this have constituted what one would call bipartisan? To be intellectually honest one would have to get at least a group of senators or congressmen in order for it to be true bipartisanship.

What is silly here is that while Obama and even some members of House gave lip service to the idea of bipartisanship, very little was done to build a coalition among House Republicans and Democrats. In fact, when the President met with the Republican leadership, his response to some very good ideas to include in the stimulus packgage included some real tax cuts (not the ones that give money back to people who don't pay any in the first place) was "I won." He was polite about it, but basically he was saying that he and the Dems won the election and therefore really don't have to listen to the Republicans on much of anything. That is not what I would call bipartisan.

This is obvious when one considers that not one House Republican voted for the Stimulus bill. 0, zip, nada. Why did this happen? I think the answer is more simple than one might realize. While I would like to believe that every Republican finally found their conservative principles, and grew a pair, I think there were some who just did not vote to yes, because they were not included in negotations when the bill was in committee. Surely some feel released from the shackles of a moderate President (Bush) and are learning what it means to be the "loyal opposition." But this is essentially the same group that voted for TARP, which was umpopular and did little to help the banking industry. I am happy nonetheless that this did happen, because this so called stimulus package will do nothing to stimulate the economy, but is a pork laden, socialistic piece of garbage.

Since the Democrats did not even listen to a single thing that the Republicans had to say when fashioning this bill, it is obvious that to a Democrat bipartisanship is when the Republicans abandoned their principles, and just capitulate and vote for whatever the Democrats want.

Which brings up the question. Why does Obama want or need Republican support? He as enough votes in the House and only needs a couple moderate senators to switch to get cloture on a bill, and put the bill up for a vote which would then be passed since the Dems have a majority in the Senate as well. If he is so sure that his so-called stimulus bill will work, then he should see this as an opportunity to score some huge political points and further entrench the Democrats power in Congress. Republicans opposing such a measure during such a horrible economic time that turns out to work is tanemount to political sucide. So again, why does he then need Republican support. The answer seems simple. He wants political cover if this doesn't work. If Republicans vote for this package and it fails and the economy worsens, he can spread the blame on the GOP and deflect the blame away from the Democrats. Essentialy Obama is gambling huge and he is trying to get GOP support to hedge his bet.

Back to the word bipartisan, the only thing that was bipartisan about this bill was that 11 Democrats voted against this bill. So one could argue that there was no bipartisan support for the bill and a little bipartisan opposition to the bill.

Here's hoping that the Senate stands strong and forces the pork out of this bill, or better yet stops it all together. If the Republican Senators stay unified they can. Moderates in the Senate need to know that they cannot give cover to the Obama as he takes our country down the road of Socialism. The conservative talk-show hosts are right. Put this on the dems. Let them ride this to their doom.

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Obama's first words as President....

"My fellow citizens..." I got news for you, Mr. President. You are President of the United States, not Supreme Leader of the World.

His inaugural address was the most naive piece of garbage that I have ever heard. We are in trouble America. This country will most likely turn to socialism. This country will be less safe. We are in serous trouble. Mark my words.

Monday, January 12, 2009

A bit about the Arizona Cardinals

As I watch what has unfolded in the Valley of the Sun with regards to the Arizona Cardinals, the feeling of the fans and the play of the team, the events and fan enthusiasm seems to be very similar to the '02 Angels and their road to their World Series title.

I have been a life-long Angels fan. I grew up just 20 minutes from Anaheim Stadium, began going to Angels games when I was a little boy. I was in the stadium when the Angels clinched the division in 1986 (the year Dave Henderson ripped our hearts out). I saw Wally Joyner's first major league home run. I saw Jim Abbott's first shut-out (against Roger Clements and the Red Sox). I died with the Angels in 95 when they blew a 12 game lead. When the Angels finally made it to the World Series in 2002, I was awestruck by how rabid the Angel fans were. This is a fan base that often would arrive late to the game and leave early to beat traffic. Not this year. We all were nuts. It was 40 years of frustrations, that were bottled up. We had come so close in the past, but endured so many years of frustration. I cannot imagine what it will be like when the Cubbies finally break their draught.

Arizona fans are experiencing the same thing. I was able to attend the Wild Card game against the Atlanta Falcons. I was struck by the intensity and enthusiasm by Cardinal fans as they cheered their team to victory. On the way out as we walked down this multi-level ramp, the crowd spontaneously kept erupting into cheers, as they walked out to their cars. It was very cool to watch and listen to. I could feel the electricity in the air throughout the game. It was amazing.

I don't know if the Cardinals can win it all, but the fact that they get to play the NFC championship game at home in front of their demon exercising fans, I think they have a good chance. At the very least, the Arizona Cardinal fans will be screaming for their team and hopefully they will help the Cardinals to victory.

Friday, January 09, 2009

It's been a while!

It has been quite a while since I last posted. It is simple. There is so much to write about, I do not know where to start. I am sickened by the lack of fiscal responsibility within government these days. We have a faltering economy, states (including my home state of Arizona) are running out of money. The federal budget deficit for the year 2009 could be more than a trillion dollars. Let me write that out. $1,000,000,000,000. I think that number is so high that we just cannot comprehend it. Now this number is not accumulated debt. This number is the deficit for the year. This is so scary it is hard to describe. It sounds great. Spend money on public works. Build infrastructure. But there are serious downsides to this.

The notion that spending our way out of a recession is ridiculous. They happen whether government tries to avoid them or not. In fact they are necessary. A recession is a correction. Yes it is difficult for everyone, but it is necessary. The alternative is to live in the perpetual poverty of communism, or in other words to lower the standard of living for everyone.

One might argue that this is more fair, but one has to remember, the upper class will never be eliminated. Those at the top will simply move from wealth to the leaders of the bureaucracy. The genius of capitalism is that everyone can participate. The chief flaw of communism and socialism is that it inherently puts a very small group of people in charge of everyone else. These people at the top are deemed smarter, and more capable than the rest of us. What is worse is that these people really believe this and think that they are going to save us from ourselves.

We are in some serious trouble people. Many are willing to give up their liberty for a few bucks or free health care. Too many people are starting to think that the government's job is to eliminate all pain and suffering. Read the Constitution. Remember the Preamble.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It does not say provide general welfare. It says promote. But above all it says, "secure the blessings of Liberty." If we are not careful, we will be doing just the oposite. Wake up America.

No, there is no anti-Israel Bias at the NY Times.

Recently the New York Times published an Op-Ed of a Palestinian who describes the deplorable conditions that he says exist in Israeli prison...