Lighthouse Patriot Journal

QUAERE VERITAS IN SALUM SUBJECTIO

Government Watch: Media Bias, Obama File

News blacked out in mainstream, Obama media: Protestors amounting to about 500 carry signs depicting the Obama financial crisis policy, with the help of the Sociocrat controlled Congress. So far protests have occurred in Seattle, Denver, and Mesa. The various protest signs read:

Obama – I wanna 65″ plasma TV
I Need a beach front condo, Mr. President
Henrietta Got A House – All I want is a swimming pool
I want a free Harvard education
I get extra credit and I don’t have to be at school!
Gimme $
I want a House, A Car – A president with ethics
I will be paying your bills the rest of my life!
I need a new car
Stimulate the economy and buy me a new Lexus – my old one ran out of gas
Stimulate the economy – tax refund for non-taxpayers
He’s No Messiah
Hail King Obama
Stimulate the economy – give me a tummy-tuck

Here are some headlines and article titles:

The Next Anti-Porkulus Protest: Mesa, Arizona
Next Pork Spending Protest – Mesa, Arizona
More Scenes from Mesa: “I need a beachfront condo, Mr. President!”
More Than 500 Protest Obama’s Arrival
Anti-Obama Stimulus Protest in Mesa Arizona

A special thanks to Joan B., Illinois who sent FYI email concerning this protest complete with photos.

You won’t find this news coverage in the New York Times or blogs like Huffington Post or Daily Kos.

Some quotes that depict the atmosphere concerning the Obama administration’s policy to end the economic crisis – specifically to spend more money and America getting deeper in debt …

RNC Chairman Michael Steele (February 2nd, 2009):

And first off the government doesn’t create jobs. Let’s get this notion out of our heads that the government creates jobs. Not in the history of mankind has the government ever created a job. Small business owners do, small enterprises do. Not the government.

Senator Saxby Chamblis, R-GA, January 21st, 2009:

When it comes to slow-moving government spending programs, it’s clear that it doesn’t create the jobs or preserve the jobs that need to happen.

And while the spending continues in the Obama administration for social programs and “stimulus” and “incentives” – our defense contracts are being cut. The original order for the F-22 Raptor fighter/bomber aircraft has been cut from a production of 381 planes to 187, which is currently the number in the inventory. When it comes to Congress and its contracting services and production for military hardware, there is an avenue where jobs are created by the government; however, overall, it is the private sector that creates jobs and that is the way it should be. At the present rate we will be soon reaching a number of the population that works for the government at 50%, which also is a stimulus for Big Government phenomenon continuing its present escalation status. It also means that liberties and freedoms will disappear at a faster rate than before. The last three administrations (including Obama) have not done anything to downsize bureaucracy and make government more efficient. All three administrations have totally ignored the fact that our government is utilizing an unconstitutional tax system – a tax that is direct in the form of taking what they decide is enough out of your paycheck before you receive your wages earned. Any direct tax is expressly forbidden in the US Constitution. A new tax system must be put into place, not just a flat income tax, but a flat consumption tax, for reasons explained here and elsewhere for over two years. The Clinton, GW Bush and Obama administration has ignored this plea from Americans, and some Americans want the change (and that number increases), but too many have the attitude that it will never happen – giving the government elite a carte’ blanche in legislating away our liberties.

Those of you who read LPJ regularly know what my take is on that.

Our government was set up For the People and By the People and not intended for our government to make itself the inept nanny who wants to be in control of our private lives in return for false promises of security and the Utopian dream of economic equality (socialism). However, if the People do not perform their duties as citizens, as people who want freedom – they must keep a watchful eye on those who we elect to govern and responsible for the business of state. We should expect those elected to be knowledgeable about constitutional law and how our government was created, as well as what they can and cannot do. Since the Great Depression, out of fear of that catastrophe, have allowed our government to gain power over personal lives from cradle to grave – and welcome it by asking for more and more. As the second-in-chief of the Obama administration stated – the Democrats feed on crisis. And, as in the case of the global warming hoax, will create crisis to make people believe we cannot survive on our own without government direction. Capitalism represents the private sector and socialists hate this. The private sector represents individual freedom versus the collective, and socialists despise this. And we can see, whether the individual in charge is a Democrat or Republican, that solidarity, American independence from outside influences, et cetera mean nothing if they can institute policy and legislation that increases their power. To them the US Constitution is merely a guideline, a flexible document and not a contract between government and the American people. To them, ignoring the government’s own immigration laws, set in place for a reason, is not a problem because it increases their voting base by creating instant citizens from those who disregard the laws of immigration. They cannot or will not see that it has been part of the instrument that led to economic problems – and California should be a perfect example of this phenomenon.

The introduction of the middle class in America’s economic structure has created a more opportunistic America for anyone willing to apply themselves. Both Democrats and Republicans have initiated and are now pushing a global government and monetary system, modeled in part from the European Union concept. GW Bush initiated the concept of a North American Union in staging the global scenario, publicly denouncing that there was such a thing. Never trust a government that holds meetings that concern public affairs and not national security behind closed doors. The Obama administration is now pursuing the same policy/agenda despite their demonization of the GW Bush administration. In foreign affairs, the Obama administration has made the United States seem weak in policy, and while stating that the Iraq War was immoral have realized that the Iraqi must gain enough strength to make it on our own. Concerning the war against Islamic Fascism, Obama chooses his words carefully and doesn’t recognize it as a global threat or a war against free nations, declared by enemies of the United States represented by terrorist organizations. Instead, President Obama makes the same mistake President Clinton did and views the problem as criminal instead of war that is both physical and ideological. Yet, President Obama increases the troop level in Afghanistan by 4,000 with more to arrive there before the end of this year. The Obama administration increases the problem of obtaining crude oil from the very regions that are making money in order to support the Islamic Fascist movement and its organizations. South of the border, in Mexico, we have the problem of the drug cartels, which now infiltrates the infrastructure of the United States thanks to weak immigration enforcement and policy. This administration, as the last, is ignoring what leading, reputable economists have been advising, and in the first 100 days have produced more damage than fixing the problems at hand – again, certainly not a change from the last administration, except making the economic problem a larger scale. This administration has joined the United Nations in the global warming scam, which will also have a negative economic effect upon America – despite thousands of scientists around the world denouncing the theory. Responsible government, responsible environment policy, responsible immigration policy, responsible national security policy, et cetera is not appearing on the horizon. Neither is government reform. This will most likely not happen unless American voters turn away from the established political entities that represent the two traditional political parties of America, one all but giving itself a descriptive name of socialism and the other going with the flow instead of standing up for established principle set decades ago.

The mainstream media has become a tool of politics instead of a source of objective information. If the news is against what they are presently advocating, then it is not made public; but too often national security issues and classified information to prevent the enemies of America and the free world from its knowledge are printed and exposed in the name of free press, but not caring for the welfare of America as a nation or the safety of those who fight against enemies of free nations (and those people that wish for freedom) abroad.

A community organizer could be an effective and responsible President of the United States – but not with ideologies of socialism and associations with terrorists, criminals, devious business entities and unethical politicians. Ironically, the political rhetoric emanating from the Democrats do not match their actions – and haven’t for some time. The Republicans choose their candidates and members in a “good-old-boy” fashion and have stained the political platform that made them successful in the first place – when Democrats (majority) advocated racial inequality and other transgressions and the so-called aristocratic political entity, Republicans were for civil rights and the concept that all are created equal and thus should remain so under a just government. And part of that divine right, whether one is religious or not, is the concept of freedom of choice – where some people have a problem with this because they cannot accept the responsibility that goes along with it.

I don’t want “free” stuff from the government – I want a fair and unobtrusive tax system, return of the original liberties granted by the Founders, return of respect for constitutional law and the People and an increased standard of education so that Americans are armed with knowledge – because knowledge IS power, and it should never be given just to a selected segment of any civilization.

Bibliography:

The Financial New World Order: Towards a Global Currency and World Government by Andrew Marshall (article)
CFR Unveils Global Governance Agenda by Daniel Taylor (article)
Pentagon: Beijing Boosts Cyberwarfare - Washington Times
Chinese Spy Who Defected Tells All - Washington Times
Global Warming Facts - Heartland Institute
Racing Past the Constitution by George Will (article)
Unions Can’t Move the World by Michael Barone
Useful Idiots Caucus by Mona Charen
CBC: Congressional Bootlickers for Castro by Michelle Malkin
Bruce Jacobs and JD Hayworth: KFYI Obama Protest - YouTube video
The Immigration Blog

April 13, 2009 - Posted by Keith Lehman | American Media, Barack H. Obama, Culture & Society, Economy & Budgeting, Government Watch, Illegal Immigration, National Security, War Against Islamic Facism | | 3 Comments

3 Comments »

  1. Just a couple of observations that may be worth consideration.

    First, while I think I agree with Michael Steele’s larger point, it is absurd to say that government does not create jobs. Your mail didn’t get beamed to your mailbox this morning, nor did the Tooth Fairy take out the three Somali pirates over the weekend. Government does create jobs but they are not the kind of jobs we should be aiming to expand beyond those necessary to provide the services we require. To remain competitive in the world economy, we have to develop private sector jobs that can compete in that economy.

    Second, however, both he and Chambliss are dead wrong if they think that government does not have a proper role in that economy. Its foremost and essential role is to establish the rules for competition so that it is fair for all competitors. It is the failure of necessary regulation that is at the heart of much of our financial crisis today.

    But beyond that, government can stimulate additional economic activity through a variety of methods. President Obama’s stimulus program is one, designed to replace demand when consumers, exporters and investors are not spending. Even more important are government investments in projects that are too large for the private sector or do not produce immediate private sector economic returns, like spending on defense, insfrastructure and education / research. While the president’s current stimulus program is the right thing to do in a recession caused by a shortage of demand, my own preference would have been to spend much more money on those three items that actually create private economic activity: defense, infrastructure and education / research.

    That’s why I have been scratching my head over Chambliss’ rant last week about cuts in defense spending. He vocally criticized Obama’s stimulus program, claiming it wasn’t going to create jobs. Yet he also went ballistic over “cutbacks” in the defense budget, claiming that reducing expenditures on questionable weapons systems produced in his district was exactly the wrong thing to do. In other words, government spending doesn’t produce economic activity unless it is government spending on defense.

    This is clearly absurd. A dollar spent on defense and one spent on a new bridge, road or hydroelectric power facility are both stimulative to the economy. I would actually argue that a dollar spent on basic research through the National Institute of Health, to use one example, is going to create more economc stimulation than one spent on an M1-A1 tank since it can create entire industries based on science and technology.

    But let’s be clear about precisely what is going on here.

    Although you would not believe it to read some of the screaming and hysterics, Obama isn’t cutting the defense budget. We are spending $513 billion on defense this year and Obama has proposed to spend $534 billion next year. My math teacher would have called that an increase, not a cut. A 4% increase, to be exact.

    What he has proposed to do, in close consultation with the Joint Chiefs and Secretary Gates, is to shift some spending within the budget away from questionable, over-budget and off-mission programs, like the F-22 and the Future Combat System, and put the money into additional personnel, training and equipment for the kinds of counterinsurgency wars we are fighting today and are likely to fight in the future. It makes perfect sense but, in a great illustration of the decay of our politics, it may turn out to be the most ambitious and politically difficult task Obama has undertaken.

    These big defense contracts have become some of the most sought-after perks in the entire world of congressional pork. If nothing is as permanent as a temporary government program, no temporary program is as permanent as a defense contract. It matters little whether the program works or not, whether it is necessary or not, or whether it is relevant to our current combat missions. A weapons system, once authorized, becomes something a congressman or senator will defend to their last campaign dollar.

    Although some Democrats will be screaming about these changes in our defense orientation, most will be Republicans. The reason is because the lion’s share of defense contracts have shifted to the South in the last 15 years, the only area of the country where Republicans have retained their strength.

    And many of the contracts being threatened are for the very kinds of wweapons systems that are designed to combat threats we are unlikely to face in today’s world. The F-22, for example, which is so overdesigned with speed, maneuverability and advanced avionics that it has few threats to face. The one thing it cannot do well is to provide close support to troops on the ground, which is what we need fighters to do these days. The Future Combat System (FCS) is another overbudget system that has yet to prove its utility on the battlefield.

    Another system being cut marginally is missile defense. It has also had serious operational problems. Although it has shown in carefully controlled trials that it can sometimes shoot down a missile on a clear day, its reliability is in serious question. If an adversary is so diabolical as to lauch a missle at night or when its cloudy, we’re sunk. Maybe its a fair match, though, for the North Koreans. We can have a missile defense system that doesn’t work to combat North Korean missiles that don’t work to deliver nuclear weapons that don’t work either.

    Gates and Obama are doing the right thing to shift some of this money into the type of systems, like MRAPs, drones and close support aircraft, that will help us in the wars we are fighting today and are likely to fight in the foreseeable future. We aren’t likely to face Soviet tanks pouring through the Fulda Gap anytime soon. We are likely to face asymmetrical threats, guerilla wars and terrorists and our efforts to combat them will be helped by what Obama and Gates are trying to do to modernize and reorient our forces. Our troops in harm’s way deserve this kind of support.

    Comment by Ken in Tenn | April 13, 2009

  2. Ken:
    Maybe Michael Steele should have been more specific – government cannot create jobs without growing its bureaucracy. And as far as Chamblis – well, that was a counter statement he made against another. The real concern defense spending is simply that we cannot afford to stay in the lead of technology, China certainly isn’t. The object of defense spending should not be creating jobs, but national defense measures the best way and the least costly as possible. As far as the F-22, an Air Force general recently wrote an article explaining that the F-22 was only there until the F-35 could be finished to full production. It is a way to keep ahead of world technology and keeping national defense strong, as well as having the best equipment to take care of military operations – the reason why it only took 100 hours to send Saddam’s army back to Baghdad out of Kuwait, and the reason why it didn’t take too long to topple Saddam’s regime that was once the third largest and best equipped army in the world.
    You are wrong that the equipment like the F-22 is not needed – apparently you haven’t read the specs on it. And the F-35 is even better. The object of national defense is what the US military does best – have what is needed when needed. With all the sword rattling from rogue nations, how in the devil can you make such a statement? Nonsense.
    It is true that drones and similar technology will soon be a common thing on the battlefield, and has already been used in Afghanistan; however, canceling out the anti-tank aircraft that Congress almost did, the Marine hover jet is not the thing to do. Traditionally, something is not cancelled out until something replaces it. The decision concerning the F-22 is understandable as long as the F-35 is ready for production and use, as the Air Force general explained.
    Our military today is designed to react to sudden hot spots, and because I was there during the transition of the military from Cold War defense to what we see today, I understand. America must always ensure that its military, the troops, have what they need to win, to win as quickly as possible. Obama and Gates are not changing the infrastructure of the military – it has already been done, starting in the second term of Ronald Reagan and ending with Clinton. Clinton cut back so drastically that when the world terrorist problem was recognized and addressed, GW Bush didn’t even have enough flak jackets for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The logistics was hurt badly in the Clinton administration because he used Patriot missiles, for example, and didn’t ensure they were replaced – and with those cuts and others, he convinced Americans who didn’t know better, along with members of Congress, that the government had surplus funding. ET cetera, et cetera.
    And, you are also wrong about the North Korean missiles not working at night or cloudy days. This is not World War II and the event at Bastogne. First of all, if they did their homework, they are going to want to burst it at a high altitude which will cause extensive and far-ranging EMP damage – which is far better than making landscape radioactive. Do some research on that and check out the link I provided in an article concerning EMP. That goes for Iran and China as well; however, in regards to the Chinese, they are more interested in putting us into an economic hole that we can’t dig out of.
    All of this is too long to discuss briefly here.
    Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts and hope you had quality time with your family over the Easter weekend.

    Comment by Keith Lehman | April 14, 2009

  3. As I point out in my editorial on SpecialOpsAndNews.com, this entire “race” card issue – now anointed by Jimmy Carter – is part of the liberal plan to distract the American people from the failing Obama health care bill – which will cost Obama serious political clout when it’s finally taken off of liberal life support.

    Comment by Randy Wyles | September 17, 2009


Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »