By  Willie Soon and Paul Driessen

Newly proposed air pollution rules impose exorbitant costs for illusory health benefits.

In December 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency released new Clean Air Act “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.” Once again, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson touted the supposedly huge benefits of controlling emissions of mercury (Hg) and other air toxics from U.S. coal- and oil-fired power plants (or electric generating units, EGUs).

The people of Idaho may welcome this new rule, since EPA’s miraculous modeling machine has promised to prevent “six premature deaths” and create “up to $54 million” in health benefits by 2016 – even though not one coal-fired EGU in Idaho fits the EPA’s final rules. Even the District of Columbia, which has only one oil-fired unit, will somehow, magically realize “up to $120 million” in health benefits, presumably from new restrictions on coal-fired units in Maryland or Virginia.

The average U.S. citizen, however, can be excused for no longer being willing to be penalized by EPA – the Extreme Punishment Authority – for such minimal, imaginary and manufactured benefits.

In fact, the final rule may be the most expensive one ever devised by EPA. And yet, even EPA admits, the alleged “hazards to public health” from mercury and non-mercury emissions from American EGUs are “anticipated to remain after imposition” of the new regulations.

As to benefits, EPA computer models claim Hg emission cuts will reduce average per person “avoided IQ loss” by an undetectable “0.00209 IQ points,” with estimated “total nationwide benefits” of $500,000 to $6.1 million by 2016. For the electric utility sector, says EPA, net job creation from the rules will be “not statistically different from zero” and could be between minus 15,000 and plus 30,000 jobs.

In fact, the new regulations will likely eliminate tens of thousands of jobs annually, especially in energy-intensive industries that rely on low-cost electricity to survive and face growing competition from foreign companies that pay far less for energy, labor and raw materials. Small businesses will also get hammered.

“EPA cannot certify that there will be no SISNOSE from this rule,” the agency admits. “SISNOSE” is EPA-speak for “significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities.” In other words, the rules are likely to inflict significant economic harm on small businesses, and thus on the health and welfare of numerous (former) small business owners, employees and families. The agency failed to explain why it has once again ignored the adverse impacts on human health and welfare caused by its rules.

EPA also confessed that U.S. power plants actually contribute a mere 3% of the total mercury deposited in computer-modeled American watersheds, and thus in fish tissue. Citizens will justifiably wonder where the other 97% comes from, and why we should spend so much money for so little benefit. (The “missing” mercury comes from foreign sources and from volcanoes, subsea vents and other natural sources.)

To see how extreme EPA’s scenarios are, consider five more egregious errors in the final regulations. First, EPA admitted it could “calculate risk” for only 3,100 (4%) of the continental USA’s 88,000 watersheds.

Second, for over 60% of the 3,100 watersheds it did model, EPA took only one or two fish mercury measurements – making it virtually impossible to adopt even valid 75th-percentile fish mercury values. There is a breaking point where extremely poor statistical sampling renders EPA’s pretentious number crunching, conclusions and rules invalid. That breaking point has clearly been reached.

Third, the agency’s estimates for mercury exposure risks are solely for “hypothetical female subsistence consumers” who daily eat almost a pound of fish that they themselves catch in U.S. streams, rivers, and lakes over a 70-year lifetime. That’s less than 1% of U.S. women. For the rest of American women (who eat mostly ocean fish, purchased at a grocery, on a far less regular basis), EPA’s rules are irrelevant.

Fourth, EPA admits that only 22 to 29% of its computer-modeled watersheds are “at risk” from EGU mercury, even when it erroneously assumed that at least 5% of total Hg deposition into the watersheds came from U.S. power plants. If the modeling criteria were tweaked only slightly – to reflect average freshwater fish consumption rates for American women, and require that at least 15% of total mercury deposition be attributable to EGUs – not one U.S. watershed would be at risk.

Finally, EPA ignores the presence of selenium in nearly all fish. Its strong attraction to mercury molecules protects fish and people against buildups of methylmercury (MeHg), mercury’s biologically active and more toxic form.

Combining any series of small probability scenarios results in a near-zero likelihood that the events will actually happen. If each of five scenarios has only a 20% chance of happening, the likelihood that all five will happen is 0.032 percent.

As the preceding analysis suggests, the probability that all the EPA’s improbable scenarios will actually happen is virtually zero; the likelihood that its new regulations will benefit human health is also zero.

However, EPA still stubbornly “disagrees that [mercury] exposure levels in the U.S. are lower than those in the Faroe Islands.” Exposure to MeHg in the U.S. is “the same” as in the Faroe Islands, EPA insists.

The agency is simply wrong.

Extensive medical and scientific studies demonstrate that average Americans are exposed to at least 5 to 10 times less MeHg than average Faroe Islanders. The islanders consume large quantities of pilot whale meat and blubber – which is high in methylmercury, high in PCBs and low in selenium. As a result, their blood mercury concentrations can be up to 350 times higher than the mean blood mercury levels measured by the Centers for Disease Control for average American women.

The Faroe Islands study is irrelevant to mercury exposure risk for average Americans. EPA’s use of that study is deceptive. American women and children are safe from any likely threats from mercury.

To top it off, EPA itself proclaims: “The emissions limits in today’s rule are technology-based … and do not need to be justified based on their ability to protect public health.”

In other words, if the technology exists to eliminate these pollutants, the agency will impose the new regulations – regardless of their cost, their effect on electricity prices and reliability, their impact on factory and other jobs, and whether the rules actually do little or nothing to improve human health.

It has become increasingly obvious that EPA’s real goal is to assert its authority over ever-increasing segments of our economy; reinterpret medical and scientific studies to fit its regulatory agenda; and replace as many coal-fired power plants as possible with costly, unreliable renewable energy systems.

American voters, elected officials and courts need to challenge these radical, unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, demand an end to EPA’s distortion of science and reality – and reverse these flawed rules.

Willie Soon is a natural scientist with strong interest in mercury and public health issues. Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Congress of Racial Equality.

 

WesternFront America

Obama insists he doesn’t want our energy needs linked to unstable parts of the world.  Service to do anything about the Occupy beatniks laying siege to a number of parks in Washington, DC?

Why should it be portrayed as a greater tragedy when a “single mother” loses her job rather than a man with a wife that stays at home?  Seems both domestic arrangements are in similar positions without income.

In calling for a single source for the unemployed to seek information on training opportunities, doesn’t that involve the federal government assuming more control over education?

Obama insists it should be illegal for students to drop out of school before they are 18.  Why should this be a matter of federal interference and what will the punishment be for those leaving prior to that age?

If no country is better than any other according to multiculturalist dogma, then why should foreign students be allowed to remain here after graduation?

If women are to earn equal pay for equal work, then make them lug the same weight around the stockroom or warehouse without having to seek masculine assistance to do so.

If lightweight vests are being developed by federal researchers that can stop any bullet, will such protective garments be made available to civilians as well or do we have an obligation to be shot by law enforcement?

Interesting how it was mentioned derisively about a company that at one time only produced yachts.

If it should be impermissible for insurance companies to charge more for women’s health coverage, then why should men have to pay more for motor vehicle policies?

Obama claimed politics is not about clinging to rigid ideologies.  So why is it conservatives that must always surrender their basic ideals and ideas?

Obama claimed that government ought to only do what people are unable to do for themselves.  Thing of it is, given his Frau’s desire to manipulate and meddle in your dietary intake, the First Couple doesn’t think you are really capable of doing anything for yourself.

Obama wants to grant tax credits to businesses hiring veterans.  Why should the military status of a business’s employees be any business of the federal government?

The best way to insure opportunities for veterans, as well as all other Americans, is for the federal government to know the least amount possible regarding the nation’s workforce.

If it doesn’t matter in the military what color or gender you are, as Obama insists, why are certain standards lowered for females seeking advancement and White males held back because of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character.  If color has no bearing in the military, why are we often reminded that Colin Powell was the first Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as if that is suppose to immunize him against all criticism and scrutiny?

Would Bob Gates have been kept on as Secretary of Defense had he been a solid conservative Republican rather than an ardent establishmentarian compromiser?

Obama admonished the American people to look at what the nation could accomplish if the people were organized along military lines.  However, the purpose of the military is to defend democracy, not practice it.  In a civilian state, the average person is allowed to question the decrees and decisions of leaders elected, appointed, and bureaucratic.  Such bottom up scrutiny is not allowed in the military and is punished severely.

This analyst tabulated approximately 80 rounds of applause in the 2012 State of the Union Address.

by Frederick Meekins

 

WesternFront America

“The Miami Herald reports that Sen. Rubio’s ‘sweeping’ immigration speech took swipes at both Republicans and Democrats for playing politics with an issue so crucial to Hispanics, calling for a compassionate approach for dealing with the issue of illegal immigration.”

http://conservativebyte.com/2012/01/the-marco-rubio-speech-on-immigration-that-everyone%e2%80%99s-talking-about/

In Answer to Senator Rubio

Nobody is “playing politics here,” except those who want the United States of America to fundamentally transform its institutions; law; culture and dominant racial composition.

Hispanic political darlings and “La Raza” need to “get a grip” on reality.

This message of Sen. Rubio is hardly “sweeping” in scope and I would wager to say the whale of inspiration Rubio feels, hardly makes a flutter in the oceanic consciousness of the American people, as to being any kind of national priority.

Anyone who talks of a “compassionate approach” toward our porous borders and those who breach them, is in truth, soft-in-the-head and that individual should be put out to pasture with a nose bag, by the deliberate resolve of voters in this country.

One has to ask why this issue is so “crucial” to Hispanics, especially in light of the fact that what should be the topic of conversation here, is what is crucial to those who identify themselves as Americans.

The real crux of the issue is that this nation belongs to the American people and no one special interest group, based exclusively on a racial identification.

People who identify themselves as “Latinos” first, are NOT really Americans and their opinions should be discounted as nothing more than part of a concerted effort to undermine the Anglo-Saxon foundation of this republic.

America does NOT belong to the world and it is NOT a mini- United Nations, where the people “henceforth” pledge their allegiance to the New World Order of the international bankers and their “tangle of squabbling nationalities.”

America must not play Santa Claus to the world, nor should it surrender its national self-determination to the hostile foreign power of Mexico.

As the state of our Union currently stands; an illegal alien usurper occupies the White House, to impose his tyranny over the American people. Of course he wants to remove all obstacles to his own personal power and glory and ensure his reelection, by opening the floodgates of Fortress America, to the third world incursion.

The nation cannot afford to allow Barack Hussein Obama to miscast himself in the role of Abraham Lincoln, while tolerating a Mexican occupation army, engaged in full annexation of American territory.

Resident Obama does not hold the best interests of the American people at heart, for his degenerate policies and abject failure to enforce the border, would allow alien cultures to run roughshod over the American landscape, to wreak their havoc with impunity.

The largest contingent of Hispanics is coming from Mexico, to prosecute “La Reconquista,” through a blatant race war, predicated on the so-called “anchor baby.”

Americans feel that they are under no compulsion to adopt the Mexican Lebensborn movement, by incubating Mexican hatchlings in the nest of the American Eagle, nor do they feel honor-bound to correct the mistakes of interlopers, no matter how long they have been here.

Now that the children of these Mexican nationals have grown to college age, these interlopers expect massive concessions to be extended to their offspring, when they came to this country with full knowledge and intent to fundamentally transform America into Mexico, as evidenced by the entitlement mentality they display.

Those who speak of a “comprehensive immigration reform,” are parroting a broken record, which finds no resonance with the American people. This is because those who mouth this mealy mantra have NO fundamental grasp of what is at stake for the future survival of America, under a Marxist “multicultural” paradigm.

America is under no compulsion to adopt the wretched citizens of alien cultures, who would impose their weltanschauung over the deliberate American people.

True recognition of the problem lies with exactly what is meant by a “comprehensive” approach to the attempted annexation of American territory for Mexico, by “redistricting” through sheer demographics.

The American people define “comprehensive immigration reform,” as a hollow political slogan, designed to perpetuate the Marxist “politically correct” mythology that any person in the world can just come here and start making demands, in the form of his alleged “civil rights.”

Moreover, the American people are expected to suffer the spectacle of seeing Los Angeles and other American cities occupied by armies of “guest workers” marching 500,000 strong, while raising the Mexican banner over buildings and federal installations in an overt act of war.

Further, this faux ideology decrees that America should just “snap to attention” to better serve as a safety valve for failed nations and those who come here in the name of conquest, whether it be named “jihad,” Sharia law, or “La Reconquista.”

Those who adhere to this half-baked political theory, harbor the fantastic notion that Americans–who stand up to defend the territorial integrity and racial make-up of our nation– be labeled as “cowards” in the discussion of race matters, or be dismissed as “racists,” by degenerate lawmakers and media personalities. These elites have no clue as to the real meaning of words.

While there is a certain ethnocentrism involved with maintaining cultural balance, it hardly behooves the discerning mind to capitulate to the idea that Americans should just hand over their country to those bent on cultural genocide against the unwitting host nation.

The “unhappy campers” who come here to “squat and drop,” are not content to follow the failed national paradigm and social proposition imposed over America by the bankers who weave the fiction, that our nation is a so-called “melting pot.”

These alleged “immigrants” disavow the title, except when it suits their nefarious purpose. The rest of the time, they proclaim themselves the “lawful owners” of North America, while at the same time demanding that the Anglo-Saxon presence return to Europe.

They rend the fabric of American society with acts of lawlessness and chaos, diametrically opposed to the established order and balance of Western Civilization.

The plain truth is that the border did not cross these individuals—as they maintain—but they broke into our national house and now they must leave, because they are enemy combatants who came to eclipse the Anglo-Saxon race in its own homeland.

As it turns out; the real “coward” in racial matters, is Attorney General Eric H. Holder, who has failed to enforce the laws which protect our nation from invasion.

What is behind this misconception by lawmakers, of societal obligation which comes under the rubric “compassionate conservatism?” Does it mean that this nation must turn the other side of its throat to the Mexican Deguello, during a time of war for our national survival?

The plain truth is, that our politicians do not recognize the face of The Second Mexican War and this telegraphs a dangerous message of weakness and lack of national resolve, to all adversaries of this great nation.

The real litmus test of national survival is to define a nation by its borders and not subscribe to the failed theory of a Marxist usurper that America be redefined by a “sense of fairness,” in submitting to wholesale invasion of our shores by intruders who come from every corner of the globe.

Nor does this test decree that everyone must pay his “fair share” of danegeld payment to the Federal Reserve Bank, which extorts trillions of dollars from a people enslaved to the chains of usury, at the hands of a central molesting bank.

Definitions are most important, when drafting grand plans of social engineering or defining a problem for our national perusal and consideration—not hollow political slogans, like “Built to last.”

Just what is exactly meant by the so-called “comprehensive immigration reform,” which keeps turning up like a bad penny, every time it is swatted down by the American people?

Does it really mean that America must accommodate the hostile foreign power of Mexico in its delusions of grandeur and conquest of America? Does it involve solving Mexico’s social ills, to the exclusion of the God-given right of the American people to secure their country and political process from infiltration by those who would bring this republic to its knees and eclipse our national self-determination?

These matters must come under closer scrutiny and discussion which enlightens degenerate politicians as to what exactly the American people will or will NOT tolerate– especially in light of the glaring fact that these alien cultures are inassimilable to the national body, as evidenced by the crimes they commit after gaining admission to our shores.

Our country has unwittingly served to incubate the eggs of a parasitic agenda, of the deadliest hostility to the national security interests of the United States of America.

This failure to hold politicians accountable for saying exactly what they mean and who they represent and stand for, is the great task for which the American people must be the architects of a solid structural foundation, based on reality they convey to their “leaders.”

“La Raza” is that alien entity, which seeks to subvert the American political process with “Latino civil rights.”

The glaring reality which now confronts Americans, is the open race war prosecuted against our dominant Anglo-Saxon culture by those minorities which feel entitled to eclipse the white race, by employing baby-making as a strategy of war.

“You don’t speak for me,” is the mantra and name of an organization of Hispanics, who beg to differ with the fiction in the Mexican mind—as openly expressed by a long line of Mexican presidents—that the borders of Mexico extend into the United States of America.

The position of the American people is that there will be NO sappy sentimentality, nor will there be a “compassionate” approach to the hostile overtures coming from Mexico and the ten Central and South American countries, which set the outrageous precedent of filing legal suit against the state of Arizona, for alleged “racism.”

“To survive as an independent nation, America must discriminate. America must exclude, and no longer tolerate its enemies. America must be prejudiced.”

Dr. David A. Yeagley

http://www.badeagle.com/2011/03/03/amercia-must-discriminate/

“Today in the United States, 70 million immigrants later and pouring in at 2.3 million annually–both legal and illegal–our nation shudders from San Francisco to New York and from Chicago to Miami. We rose from 200 million to nearly 300 million in three decades. What was once a benefit to our country is now a full-scale overpopulation and societal crisis.”

Frosty Wooldridge

http://www.frostywooldridge.com/articles/art_titanic_united_states_2003dec.html

Politicians will not like to hear that “true comprehensive immigration reform” means defining the word “immigration,” to mean a euphemism for war. It is offered as the “Newspeak” of Big Brother oligarchy, which employs the so-called “guest worker” as an unwitting third world corporate shock troop, designed by the corporations to subvert the autonomy of the nation-state concept.

The true definition of CIR, means holding Mexico accountable for prosecuting a race war of cultural extinction against the American people.

There can be NO toleration of a Marxist “dual citizenship” paradigm, which comes under the guise of poor, hapless Mexican peasants just wanting a better life…at the expense of the American people, who are resolved on maintaining the cultural integrity of their nation.

America—along with the rest of the globe—finds itself in the midst of worldwide depression, with nations falling like dominoes to the wiles of the international bankers.

These banking swindlers are the dream weavers who impose the “multicultural” model, in the vain hope America will be destroyed by a mish-mash of peoples.

Despite this planetary crisis, the alleged “president” of the United States—who cannot provide a paper trail, as to his identity and qualifications—is importing hundreds of thousands of Muslims, citizens of El Salvador and other nations, into what has become Zoo America and a Tower of Babel.

This transparent subversion of our economy, coming from an obvious quisling, must be met by the firm assertion of the American people that Hispanic concerns are NOT American concerns, especially in light of the fact that every facet of American life has now been infiltrated by an alien influence—which comes at the behest of the international bankers.

The White House and Department of Justice have colluded with the Mexican incursion and must be met toe-to-toe by the American people, who will wag their collective finger in the face of our usurper, Marxist “president.”

The Obama administration has foolishly imagined that it can winnow-out the state of Arizona, for “special handling,” never realizing in its supreme folly that the states are indivisible.

The entire country will back Arizona’s play against federal tyranny.

An attack on one state, is an attack on all of the American people, and will be firmly met by the outrage of the entire country.

The Department of Justice has opted to selectively enforce the law, under color of authority.

Attorney General, Eric H. Holder, was too lazy to even read SB 1070, before coming to the conclusion that Arizona was “racist.” This failure on Holder’s part, illustrates his complete incompetence as a lawmaker, as evidenced by his coming to a judgment, without first examining the facts of a legal case.

The Obama administration has comported itself as a fifth column and despot over the American people.

As things currently stand; a guest worker program for Mexico would definitely be to the benefit of both nations, but it must have certain prerequisites, before it can be enacted—among them; the formal signature of Mexico in abandoning all claims within the United States of America, as defined by the international border.

Mexico must understand that there will be NO reconquest of American territory for Mexico and that the host/parasite arrangement between our two nations has come to an end.

Any concessions made to Mexico must include the fundamental understanding that America is NOT Santa Claus, in gifting American citizenship to the world, nor is it a safety valve for failed nations.

The alleged “president” who fashions himself a “Citizen of the World,” has failed to fathom this fundamental concept. That is because he is an illegal alien.

Mexico must pay for the welfare of its own citizens while they are true “guests” in this country and the American people are in no way obligated to provide a social safety net for Mexican nationals—or perks of American citizenship, for that matter.

In short, Mexico will pick up the tab for building housing and educational centers for Mexican workers while they are in this country. Mexico will also provide social security benefits, medical care, food bank assistance for underemployed Mexican workers and all the other amenities and hallmarks of a civilized society, which they have historically failed to provide for their own people.

Such things are not the obligation of America.

Mexico is fantastically wealthy in natural resources, tourist beaches and Indian temples. That nation can well afford to pay its own way with silver, Mexican oil and agricultural products, without having to comport itself as a parasitic leech on the United States of America.

Mexico must understand that should it fail to come into alignment with the demands of the American people, the border will be sealed and the lid allowed to boil off the pot in Mexico City, for the Second Mexican Revolution.

The violence coming from the drug war spilling across the border, may actually necessitate a U.S. military occupation of Mexico.

Due to the millions upon millions of unemployed Americans; Mexican nationals will only be allowed to work in the agricultural industry and possibly the equestrian industry, where their special talents are badly needed. This must be a defining parameter of any new treaty, based on real friendship and mutual consideration, between our two countries.

All other American jobs will be off limits, as there are too many Americans wandering the streets, homeless, dirty and hungry—who can use the landscaping and other jobs currently held by Mexican nationals and other foreigners.

America abandoned slavery during the Lincoln administration, so the American people naturally want to see the Mexican people succeed and prosper, just so long as it is not at the expense of Americans and their cultural identity.

Americans must have the political self-determination as to who comes here and for how long they can stay, rather than having an unwanted Mexican occupation army forced on them, along with the responsibility of its care and feeding.

This writer read the story of two Mexican men, who walked across a fiery desert, bare-footed, in order to save their shoes for employment. Americans admire this kind of resolve and would truly prefer to be a “welcoming nation” for those who really want to improve themselves and provide for their families.

These Mexican nationals would be honored guests and treated with the utmost respect, by a generous American people. But as things now stand, our two nations are in a state of race war.

What politicians must understand, is that Americans are generous-to-a-fault, but that generosity does not extend to giving our nation away to the Mexican invasion and its attendant crime wave, which currently runs rampant over the Southwestern states of our Union.

It also means that the American people will NOT be seduced by hollow political slogans, which are sound and fury—signifying nothing, but capitulation, in this Second Mexican War.

The message here for Senator Rubio, is that the American people too, “have the courage and bravery to raise their voices” as well as the children of Mexican nationals.

Let us hope that the resolute message of the American people, is not lost on those who have thus far failed to differentiate their constituents from bold interlopers.

© Thor H. Asgardson

 

WesternFront America

Sen. Rand Paul (R–KY) made the news Monday when he declined to get up close and personal with TSA guards at the Nashville, TN airport. Paul entered the security line; dumped his belt, glasses, wallet, shoes, cell phone and pocket change in the attractive plastic bin and walked passively through the full–body scanner.

Unfortunately while his chromosomes were enjoying this brief radiation bath, the scanner set off a “random” alarm that sent the crack TSA Grope Group into action. In Paul’s words, “TSA also wanted my dignity” and he refused their demand that he submit to a full–body latex massage.

Channeling years of innocent flyers before him, Paul showed them his leg (evidently something about this limb aroused, no pun intended, the suspicions of the Guardians of the Airways), said he was a frequent flyer and asked to be rescanned.

TSA replied no grope, no hope.

When Paul again refused, he was detained in a holding area. Laboring under the mistaken belief he still had a few rights, the senator called the office to say he would not make his scheduled speech.

This angered the TSA drone that informed Paul he should not have used his phone to call for help. There the situation remained until the TSA director appeared and allowed him to re–enter the scanner and take a later flight.

The difference here is that for the rest of us the director would not have appeared to save the day and most likely we would have been arrested for refusing the scan and trying to leave, as Mr. Don’t Touch My Junk learned.

Now Paul knows what the rest of the flying public has learned: TSA is a law unto itself and is designed to intimidate the public and insulate its employees from outside accountability.

When I buy BVDs and open the package I learn that “Inspector #38” has approved my drawers. But when I get home after a trip and discover some TSA minion has been rummaging through the unmentionables, all I have is a standardized notification with no indication of who actually did the inspection.

Consequently I’ve discovered surprises while unpacking. A TSA guard, who was too stupid to squeeze the plastic catch, cut through a luggage strap and deposited the unusable remains inside my bag. I’ve had thirsty TSA personnel open a sealed liquor bottle and sample the contents. In each instance I called the number on the form (1–800–Don’tHoldYourBreath), left a message and had the complaint ignored.

Compare this with a traffic stop. A motorist has the name and badge number of the officer and local number to call if there’s a complaint. If worse comes to worst, often you have the video from the dashboard camera to review.

TSA has none of this.

TSA employees have assumed the trappings of law enforcement without any of the training or responsibility. Consider the evolution of TSA uniforms. From the original white shirt with no badge we now have a blue uniform with a shiny gold badge, indistinguishable from that of a real police officer. Yet TSA guards lack the training of even a rural policeman.

For his part, Paul did not demand special treatment; although he got it shortly after the TSA figured out it was a member of the US Senate they were detaining. I’m sure Paul’s photo will be posted in the Nashville TSA break room with a ‘Do Not Grope’ order attached and he will have no future problems there.

The simple, obvious and wrong solution would be to exempt federal elected officials from TSA screening. If I had my way they would have to be screened twice just to show them what the rest of us put up with on a daily basis.

One of the many problems with the porcine, pervasive government we enjoy today is that elected officials who pass the laws and the bureaucrats that implement the laws don’t have to suffer the effects of the laws.

If more elected officials were forced to undergo the same red tape and petty harassments the people who pay their salaries do, there would be one of two outcomes. Less government interference with individual liberty or — what I’m afraid would happen — more exemptions for our betters, since everyone knows they aren’t a terrorist, bank robber, embezzler or fill–in–the–blank. Either way, voters would know and be able to adjust voting behavior accordingly.

You may know you’re not a terrorist either, but try telling that to the TSA when you want to take 5 ounces of shampoo on your next flight.

Michael R. Shannon
MANDATE: Message, Media & Public Relations
703-583-6277
571-969-1995 Google Voice
http://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelrshannon
http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-washington-dc/michael-shannon

 

WesternFront America

If the US Constitution was still in effect, was still an operational document, was still the law of the land, then the Transportation Security Administration would be in very deep trouble today. However, as we have all come to know all too well, the constitution is all but totally ignored today, especially under the administration of the Obama Regime.

When Obama was sworn in, the constitution was considered, found to be inconvenient for his socialist agenda, and ignored.

The latest blatant violation of the US Constitution was the much-publicized “detainment” of Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky — while he was enroute to Washington, DC to exercise his duties in the US Senate. That “detainment” was totally unconstitutional … period.

You see, Senators and Representatives cannot be arrested for a crime, except for treason, felony, or breach of peace, while meeting in Congress or while traveling to or from a meeting of Congress.

If Senator Paul was detained, then he was arrested. Consider this: “(v) Arrest is the action by which a person is stopped from his normal activities by virtue of a legal authority or sanction, either by detaining him or by stopping his external accesses.” (SOURCE)

Don’t believe me?

Read it for yourself:

Article 1, Section 6 … US Constitution:

1:  The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.⁶ They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Now, THAT’S the wording from the text of the US Constitution … the law of the land.

I do not particularly agree with that portion of the US law, but it DOESN’T MATTER. It is THE LAW! Until such time as there is an amendment to the constitution affecting Article one, Section six to change or remove those few words, it remains the law of the United States.

There has been much bloviating in the press and in the blogosphere since the incident happened. So I don’t expect my opinion to make much difference, at all.

However, on the outside chance that you might care, allow me, please, to point out, once again, that our government, as it is currently constituted, is NOT following the law of the land. We have, in my opinion, a rogue government in place in Washington, DC.

The Transportation Security Administration is just another government agency out of control. It is a power hungry bully; full of itself, and — in the real world — it does more to restrict freedom of movement in this country than it does to ensure it.

On the TSA’s website they say: “We are 50,000 security officers, inspectors, directors, air marshals and managers who protect the nation’s transportation systems so you and your family can travel safely.” (SOURCE) I dare say the “volk” of the Gestapo, in 1930’s Germany, thought of themselves in much the same manner.

I have been offering commentaries for decades and there has been a common thread running through the millions of words of opinion I have shared. It is this: We Americans are voluntarily giving up our freedom.

Have you noticed how we whine and complain when the Congress is tied up in knots and unable to legislate? We seem to have forgotten that to legislate is to pass laws.

Every time a law is passed some of us lose a little bit more of our freedom. Eventually, ALL of us lose small portions of our freedom, until one day, we finally stop and take stock of our current liberties — and we find we are in deficit. Our freedom is gone and we are in hock to the government.

It seems to me that pretty much sums up our current situation.

Freedom, once lost, is almost impossible to reclaim. Much like an ocean liner,  it takes a very long time to stop a government with the momentum of the US government.

Back in 2010 we sent a new batch of conservatives Senators and Congresspersons to Congress with a clear mission to bring the Congress to a halt and keep it static until the Obama Regime could be ended in November — and we could gain control of enough of the national legislature to begin the process of returning sanity to our government.

Both the left and right wings of the American political spectrum have reviled them. Even so, they have done a fair job at slowing the Congress down.

Somehow, Americans have lost their love of the freedom and liberty for which our forefathers gave their lives and fortunes.

Now, if you think I am being overly dramatic here, I ask you to look again at what a government agency did to a US Senator and ask yourself, if they can do that to one of the most powerful men in the country, WHAT can they do to me?

J. D. Longstreet

***********************************
VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012
***********************************
Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

It is the crime of the century that America, home to some of the world’s greatest reserves of coal, natural gas and oil, is being deliberately destroyed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior as they do everything in their power to restrict access and drive energy producers out of business.

It is common sense that a nation that cannot produce sufficient electricity to turn on its lights and power its manufacturing sector will be destroyed if current Obama administration regulations and actions continue. Our vital transportation sector and all others that utilize petroleum-based products will suffer, too.

While President Obama babbles about millionaires and billionaires, everyone will be impoverished by the loss of jobs and revenue our energy sector produces now and can produce in the future.

This isn’t an “energy policy.” It’s a “no-energy policy” and it is a guarantee of economic disaster.

Obama’s decision to reject a permit for Canada’s XL Keystone pipeline is just one example. It is a job-killer and a revenue-killer. There are thousands of pipelines serving America’s energy needs and the XL Keystone pipeline would ensure that Canada’s own vast energy reserves would flow to America. It is one of our key trade partners and Obama has slapped it in the face.

In early January, Ken Salazar, the Secretary of the Interior, announced a new 20-year, million-acre ban on uranium mining for federal lands in Arizona, despite the fact that these lands hold the highest-grade of known uranium deposits in the United States. It is an outrage that a new GOP-Congress will have to overturn if the nation is to be assured of sufficient uranium to power its nuclear plants and for weapons development. If the ban remains, these uranium resources would be inaccessible until 2023!

Tom Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research said that Salazar’s announcement “further compounds a man-made energy crisis that has been planned and executed in Washington, D.C.”

At the same time we are learning of enormous natural gas discoveries that can reduce our energy bills and turn sleeping little towns into boomtowns, environmental organizations have launched a vast propaganda campaign against “fracking”, a technology that has been safely used for more than fifty years. Their claims about dangers to the nation’s supply of fresh water are baseless. Their claims that fracking has caused earthquakes in Ohio are absurd.

Need it be said that the Environmental Protection Agency has turned its eyes on fracking and is working on a report due later this year that will likely call for harsh crackdowns on its use and more regulations to throttle the expansion of natural gas extraction?

The EPA has just released a report of those power plants that top the list of its regulation of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. There is no basis in science to justify the reduction of CO2. Indeed, since it is a gas on which all vegetation depends, much as oxygen is vital to all animal life, reducing it would impair great crop yields and healthier forests.

These regulations are based on the global warming hoax that blamed CO2 for warming the earth. That is utterly false. The Earth is currently in a perfectly natural cooling cycle and the climate of the Earth is almost entirely based on the Sun—solar radiation—along with the actions of oceans, clouds, and even volcanic activity that spews tons of particulates into the atmosphere.

Coal-fired power plants account for fifty percent of all the electricity generated in the United States. Fifty percent! And yet the EPA is determined to shut down dozens of them providing that vital factor in the lives of all Americans and the economy, nor does this take into account the billions that energy producers have spent to upgrade their technology to reduce emissions.

The Obama administration fuel economy agenda, a call for 54.5 miles per gallon ignores simple physics. There is a finite amount of energy a gallon of gas can generate. If you dilute it with ethanol as is currently required, you get even less mileage. The administration is trying to circumvent Congress by issuing standards based on regulating “greenhouse gas emissions”, but there is no need for this. It is a false argument. The Center for Automotive Research says that the proposed new standards would cause the retail price of average motor vehicles to increase by more than $11,000.

Americans and the nation’s future are being victimized by Obama administration policies. The 18th annual Index of Economic Freedom, was released on January 12th by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal, measures the many factors that contribute to the economic health of a nation—things like property rights, regulatory efficiency, open markets, free trade and labor policies.

Economic freedom is declining worldwide as governments try to spend their way out of the global recession. The United States fell to 10th place. In 2009 it ranked 6th, in 2010 it was 8th, and in 2011, it was 9th.

We are witnessing the deliberate murder of a superpower.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

 

WesternFront America

“Si vis pacem, para bellum.” If you want peace, plan for war. The adage is attributed to the 4th or 5th century Latin author Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus’s tract De Re Militari book 3. This fundamental wisdom is being ignored by President Obama, one of two recent Commanders-in-Chief who never spent a day in uniform, let alone under fire.

In a recent American Thinker commentary by Jim Yardley, he said, “It is apparent that the president, in developing his strategy, used the same extensive knowledge, his superior intellect, and worldly wealth of experience that he brought to his strategy for his $800-billion stimulus, his strategy for providing cost-free health care to millions of Americans, and his strategy for using ‘smart diplomacy’ to defuse not spots around the world.”

Perhaps receiving the Nobel Peace Prize barely months into his first year as President has convinced Obama that he is the man to get all our enemies to join hands and sing Kumbaya. Obama accepted the prize that has gone to other seekers of peace like Yassir Arafat, founder of the Palestinian Liberation Organization or co-winners, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore. The IPCC and Gore have led the greatest hoax of the modern era, global warming, and Arafat rejected every effort at peace offered by Israel by going back on his word and using terrorism to achieve his goals.

There is no question that the announced cuts to the U.S. military budget are, in part, the result of the domestic run up of debt and borrowing the followed the financial crisis of 2008; itself the result of bad government policies regarding the wholesale granting of mortgages to people who could not afford homes, then bundling those bad mortgages and selling them as assets to the banks.

While the economy is showing some small signs of regaining its footing, the government is still borrowing forty cents of every dollar it spends and has shown no real intent to reduce spending.

While this is occurring we have a President who has made clear his antipathy of the role of the military. A recent Wall Street Journal editorial noted that “The Pentagon shouldn’t be immune to fiscal scrutiny, yet this Administration has targeted defense from its earliest days and has kept on squeezing. The White House last year settled with Congress on $450 billion in military budget cuts through 2012, on top of the $350 billion in weapons programs killed earlier,” adding “Taken altogether, the budget could shrink by over 30% in the next decade.”

Following a 1993 attempt to destroy the World Trade Center Osama bin Laden, a still largely obscure Islamic fanatic, declared war on the United States in 1996. In 2001, al Qaeda succeeded, killing nearly 3,000. To underestimate the intent of his successors to destroy the nation would be a grave error. To think that his assassination along with the killing of a relative handfull of other al Qaeda leaders has ended the threat is wishful thinking.

To think that the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq will not at some point result in the possible breakup of that nation or the withdrawal from Afghanistan will rid us of the threat of Islamic fanaticsim is still more wishful thinking.

Right now and ever since 1979, the threat of Iran is the largest facing the Middle East and the West. Its leaders have never made a secret of its intent to acquire nuclear weapons, to threaten all other Middle Eastern nations, as well as Europe and America is on a par with the threat the rise of Nazism posed in Germany in the 1930s.

After World War Two, America emerged as a superpower and it took on the role of global policeman. No military prescience predicted the attack on South Korea by North Korea, nor was our strategy in Vietnam successful. We had earlier failed to anticipate the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor despite efforts to keep out of the war that had begun in 1939.

The lesson that should have been learned is that overwhelming military strength contributes greatly to avoiding wars.

President Obama is ignoring that. It is not, however, to say that he is taking Iran lightly. In early January, thousands of U.S. troops were deployed to Israel and senior U.S. military sources say they anticipate they will remain through the year. Obstensively, they are there to participate in joint U.S.-Israeli war games. They will be joined by a U.S. aircraft carrier and, as we know, we have a task force in place in the event the Iranians try to close the Strait of Hormuz through which passes one sixth of the world’s oil supplies.
The U.S. could be energy independent in a decade if the Administration and Congress would remove the obstacles to accessing our enormous reserves of coal, oil and natural gas, but that remains unlikely as this is written.

The decision to reduce the size of our military to 490,000 troops from 570,000 could not come at a worse time. Air and naval assets, we’re told, will be maintained. Holding evacuated or captured territory requires “boots on the ground.” The decision of former President Bush to “surge” in Iraq by increasing troop strength turned a potential defeat into a success. A war-weary America and the current Iraqi regime wanted us out and we are out.

Meanwhile Egypt that underwent “the Arab Spring” has fallen into the hands of a militant, anti-American and anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood. Turkey has joined the Islamic frenzy, the future of Syria remains unknown, so anyone who thinks that military action anywhere, but especially in Iran, is not a real potential is not paying attention.

President Obama’s claim that “the tide of war is receding” is likely to rank with British PM Neville Chamberlains claim of “peace in our time” after a visit with Hitler.

It is wishful thinking or worse. It is the deliberate effort to ignore the dangers in the world. Shifting military personnel and assets to Asia acknowledges China’s rising power, but U.S. military leaders have warned against a war in Asia for decades. It is doubtful the Chinese want one.

What is not in doubt is that this is the wrong time to reduce our military strength and capabilities. We did that after World War One and paid a price for it. President Obama’s policies put us in the same peril.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

 

WesternFront America

First, allow me to explain that, yes, I know it is not popular, today, to point out the obvious. Ok. Maybe I should have phrased that this way: “…to point out what SHOULD be obvious.”

Before I proceed, I’d like to encourage my readers to browse the websites of foreign news services. If I have learned anything at all (since Al Gore invented the Internet) it is this: The US mainstream media cannot be trusted. They have an agenda and that agenda does not necessarily include dissemination of the truth. As a card-carrying member of the press for many years, I have always been aware of the left-leaning bias of the US media. That is not to say the same leftist bias does not exist in overseas media because it most certainly does.

Having said that – were you aware that right at the moment the Obama Administration is announcing plans to cut the US defense budget the US is preparing for another war in the Middle East? Did you know that we have been quietly building an armada of naval assets in the Gulf of Oman just off the shores of Iran? Did you know this naval armada consists of warships from the US, the UK, France, Israel, and others?

Looking west a bit we see US, French, and British warships, standing off the Syrian coast, facing off with Russian warships including a Russian aircraft carrier task force.

My regional newspaper is printed in a military town, home to one of the largest military bases in the US, and yet, I see very little information in it’s pages concerning this build-up of military might in the waters of the Middle East. Why?

I’ll make the answer as straight forward and simple as I possibly can. There re two parts to the complete answer: 1) Obama is seeking reelection. 2) Obama is seeking to reduce the military budget to gain more money to spend on his leftist agenda for America.

At the risk of being called an “alarmist” allow be to make it plain: I AM alarmed.

So when will this war begin. Well, let me put it this way: The Iranians should carefully watch Obama’s poll numbers. If those numbers continue their slide downwards, the Iranians are going get the heck bombed out of them.

Americans are extremely reluctant to change Presidents in the middle of a war. Obama knows this and is expected to act accordingly.

Some conservative writers and commentators expect that war in the Middle East is currently scheduled for October 2012. That would be the famed “October Surprise.”

On the other hand, those in my camp believe the Iranians, in all their hyped-up passion, will do something stupid like firing on a tanker or a US warship or aircraft, or even worse, make an attempt to close the Straits of Hormuz by sewing it with mines and other hazards to maritime traffic. That would be the spark that would bring down the considerable wrath of that naval armada lying off their shores.

Then there are the Israelis. They have had enough of Iran’s threats and Iran’s war on Israel by proxy. Israel’s secret war of sabotage in Iran can only deliver limited success at delaying and derailing Iran’s race to build or acquire a nuclear bomb. Israel could decide, at any moment, that enough is enough and launch their fighter-bombers and cruise missiles at Iran’s nuclear facilities. Even if it only buys a few months or a couple of years of breathing space for Israel, it is becoming clear there is no other way to effectively deter Iran from building their coveted Islam Bomb.

The situation in the Middle East today is far, far, more dangerous than the US media is reporting. A single spark will ignite a devastating war that will affect practically every nation on earth to some degree or other.

Those of us who continue to sound the warning bell of a huge war in the Middle East are being compared to the boy Peter in the story of “Peter and the Wolf.” An article at Haaretz.com noted that those who make such public comparisons seem always to leave out the end of Aesop’s famous tale of the boy who called wolf too much. In the end, the wolf actually DID come — and the sheep were slaughtered. (SOURCE)

So, with that ending in mind, I have no concern about continually pointing to those dark, foreboding, clouds gathering in the east. Since the mainstream media seems to be ignoring a certain war to protect Obama’s prospects in the coming election, someone must stand as a watchman on the ramparts and sound the alarm when clouds of dust from the approaching armies of the enemy is sighted and when the sound of distant war drums is heard.

Today those dust clouds are clearly seen over the horizon and the pounding of the drums can be heard in the distance — and we are sounding the alarm.

J. D. Longstreet
***********************************
VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012
***********************************
Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

This is one of the most important columns I’ll ever write and I’ve written several thousand over the years.

While millions were guzzling the booze, the usurper, Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, decided to sign the National Defense Authorization Act on New Year’s eve while playing in Hawaii on borrowed taxpayer dollars.

As millions who are informed about the internal destruction of this country read the language of S. 1867 and the house version, H.R. 1540, controversy arose over several sections (1021, 1022 and in the senate bill 1032); in particular the word requirement.

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY continues over to page 362:

(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS. The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

 

WesternFront America

The Founding Fathers, authors of the Constitution, were obsessed with any form of government that could become too powerful, too willing to use force to oppress citizens. They had cause. They had fought a long war against the greatest power of their age, ruled by a king with nearly absolute power. They fashioned an instrument designed to ensure that the President could not rule by edict and defused power among three branches of government.

We have a President currently running for reelection against Congress, Wall Street, Republicans, and the right of citizens to be free of an overly intrusive government.

Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution says: All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in the Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

All appointments of the President must be approved by the Senate while it is in session and the Senate, even over the Christmas and New Year’s vacation has remained in session, if only in a pro forma, technical manner. Every three days it has been convened to assert its powers.

Even so, President Obama has announced several “recess” appointments, all clearly a challenge to the Senate and all clearly a tyrannical power grab. He appointed Richard Cordray as the first director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a new function that puts government between the lender and the citizen. In theory, all loans in the future will be subject to government approval. This is Communism, not Capitalism.

In addition, he appointed three members to the National Labor Relations Board, intended to arbitrate disputes between unions and corporations. None of them have appeared before a Senate committee for vetting. It was this board that demanded Boeing shut down its new factory in South Carolina, one of many “right to work” states that empower workers with the right to determine whether they want to join a union or not.

Neither Obama, nor any president who preceded him can make appointments without the “advice and consent” of the Senate. (Article II, Section 2). As recently as the first week of the year, referring to the Senate, Obama asserted that “I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them.” He has no such obligation. Those are the words of an incipient tyrant.

These actions put me in mind of Niccolo Machiavelli, famed as the author of “The Prince”, a book of advice to Lorenzo de Medici who was the ruler of the former republic of Florence, one of many city states in Italy. Born in 1469 and died in 1527, Machiavelli living during the early years of the Renaissance, a period that saw the flowering of literature, science, art, religion and politics. Historians consider it a bridge between the Middle Ages and the modern era.

The renaissance was a period of social and political upheaval, one in which the various princes ruled so long as they could protect their principalities against wars by others seeking to expand their powers. “The Prince” is largely seen as advice on how a prince may have to resort to the methodical use of brute force and deceit to hold onto power, but it was more than that. It was a guide to ruling people with a minimum of oppression.

“It should be borne in mind,” Machiavelli wrote, “that there is nothing more difficult to handle, more doubtful of success, and more dangerous to carry through than initiating changes in a state’s constitution.” Obama is engaged in an attack on the U.S. Constitution.

Of princely power, Machiavelli wrote, “The people are everywhere anxious not be dominated or oppressed by the nobles, and the nobles are out to dominate and oppress the people. These opposed ambitions bring about one of three results; a principality, a free city, or anarchy.” The Constitution ensures a free nation with limited federal powers and is a guard against anarchy.

Evidence of Obama’s narcissism and drive for complete power is ample. He is on record as saying the Constitution is composed of “negative” limits on power. Others regard the Constitution as the ultimate protection against the unlawful use of power. This is particularly evident in the Bill of Rights which was appended to the Constitution because several of the first States would not ratify without it.

In his advice to Lorenzo de Medici, Machiavelli raised the question of “whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse. Within the context of the time, he said, “it is far better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both.” In the run up to Christmas, Americans bought guns in record numbers which suggests there is considerable fear of Obama and the results of his policies over the past three years.

We have witnessed and been victimized by a Democrat-controlled Congress that forced Obamacare on an unwilling public. We have seen the rise of Islamic fanaticism as the result of his failed policies toward Iran and the Middle East. We have had record breaking debt imposed on us by his failed “stimulus” policies. We have seen continued efforts to reduce our military power and to thwart access to our ample energy resources of oil, natural gas, and coal.

It is a long list of usurpations of power that endanger the nation domestically and internationally. Whether it was done out of stupidity or a deliberate effort to harm the nation can be debated, but the most outstanding attribute of Obama has been his continual lying and Machiavelli notes that “the deceiver will always find someone ready to be deceived.”

In this effort, Obama has been greatly aided by the mainstream media with a few notable exceptions. The trust that once reposed in the nation’s print and broadcast media has been eroded and will be hard to regain. The trust given Obama is long gone by all but a few ignorant and lazy citizens content to have their lives ruled by an over-reaching executive branch of government.

The election process will rid us of Obama and likely many of those Democrat legislators who have supported his policies. The House is controlled by the Republicans and the Senate is likely to follow.

Meanwhile, we must guard against the present occupant of the White House. Americans waged a war against oppression in the past and will, if necessary, do so again.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

 

WesternFront America