Why is Michelle Obama starving our children?

The rather ill-conceived 'Let's Move' campaign crafted by our dear Czarina has finally been ensconced in Federal Regulation, and our kids are not happy about it. We are being regaled with stories of school children who are still hungry after consuming the required 'healthy' lunches in the cafeteria. It should be clear to everyone by now that the whole effort has been a dismal failure.

I herewith enumerate the mistakes made by Empress M (who, by the way, is busy swigging homemade honey brewskies and snarfing down hot wings and 2-crust apple pies at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave):

• believing that whole-grains, fruits, vegetables, and fiber are important parts to the healthy nutrition of teenagers
• that mac 'n cheese and chocolate chip cookies have no place in a healthy, teen meal
• that limiting the consumption of carbs and protein is a good idea
• not understanding that fat, cholesterol, carbs, and protein are important to teens trying to grow into an adult body
• not knowing that eating pepperoni pizza instead of whole-wheat pita veggie sandwiches is not making them fat
• thinking that our teeny-boppers are actually going to eat different colored veggies on different days of the week
• underfeeding our kids is going to solve the obesity epidemic
• assuming that a diet suitable for a middle-aged, beer-bellied desk jockey is just as suitable for growing youngsters

Anyone with even a modicum of dignity would, at this point: admit defeat, 86 the whole affair, and modestly move on. This is precisely why it will not happen.

Question for the First Lady: are you truly concerned about the health and well-being of our schoolchildren, or more interested in hefting upon them your personal credo, because you think that you know better?

Japan and Red China make war – with water pistols?

Surrender, Hu Jintao.

When I first heard this story, I fell out of my chair with laughter. See, Communist China is trying to claim that they own the Senkaku Islands. These are tiny, insignificant rocks sticking out of the ocean. Why on earth should anyone really care, other than as a bit of nationalistic PR to benefit the incumbent governments on both sides?

It Is All About Oil

Both countries have substantial economies that run on oil, and both import huge amounts. See, just off the coast of these rocks are substantial oil reserves just waiting for the first country to set up drilling rigs. Hence, both countries are willing to spend significant treasury to control these resources.

They Legally Belong to Japan

A bit of history. The Senkakus are part of the Okinawa archipelagos. During WWII, the United States conquered all of Okinawa, and gave them back to Japan as part of the armistice. I do not wish to hear ridiculous stories that a Han Chinese Emperor planted a persimmon tree on one of the Senkakus 636 years ago, and that therefore Communist China has a legitimate claim. The United States, before arrival of the Puritans, was controlled by Hopi, Cherokee, Abenaki, et al. This does not therefore give American Indians legal rights to their previous lands. Sorry 'bout that, folks.

Fight, Fight!

Japan and Red China, in recent weeks, have been posturing over control of said islands. OK, making a big show for the folks at home without any real intention of a serious confrontation. I get that. So, I found it profoundly funny that Coast Guard ships from both sides fired water cannons at each other. I am reasonably sure that both sides have naval guns and ship-to-ship missiles that can sink the other side. It would be interesting to explore if Japan has the military capability to send Red China's nascent blue water navy down to Davy Jones' Locker. Perhaps the Politburo Standing Committee should give up now, before they get into truly deep naval/military doo-doo. Somehow, I have doubts that they truly understand the geopolitical consequences of what they are doing.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/taiwan/9564421/Japanese-water-cannon-attack-on-Taiwanese-fishing-boats-over-Senkaku-dispute.html

Obama Foreign Policy Meltdown?

I have been carefully watching the actions of our current CIC, State Department, and SecState, as they are being confronted by one of the biggest foreign policy crisis since WWII. In particular, I note the rather unusual behavior of the CIC:

• he skipped the daily intelligence briefing the morning after the assassination of Ambassador Stevens, but was certainly present for the highly visible photo-op when the flag-draped coffin of same was returned home
• he has yet to utter any of these words: Muslim, Islam, Koran, Jihad, global caliphate, sharia law, terrorist, al-Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood
• he has deliberately opened a very wide, very visible, and unheard of rift with one of our strongest allies: Israel, who could be the key to extinguishing anti-American brush fires spreading in North Africa and the Middle East
• he has yet to close his hand of friendship and clench it into a fist
• he is acting like one who is genuinely flummoxed

In particular, I am happy to note that the last bullet point is congruent with what John Bolton has recently stated.

Question

Are the above actions those of one who is constructed of 'presidential timber'?

Benghazi = Obama's Waterloo?

The current administration, State Dept, media, et al, hailed and supported the so-called 'Arab Spring' as akin to the American Revolution: a breath of fresh air, a genesis of freedom and liberty in portion of the globe that traditionally has none. By now, I hope that everyone realizes that in reality, it is the exact opposite and has now back-fired in Mr. O's face.

Even so, I have watched with curiosity the actions of Mr. O's person:

• his initial address was oddly brief, cursory, and emotionless, lacking criticism of the Muslim murderers
• he refused to answer questions; even Romney took questions
• his only strong statement was to criticize his election opponent and not the Muslim Brotherhood
• faced with the biggest international crisis since 1979, he has flown to Las Vegas for a fundraiser, rather than hunkering down in the Situation Room with a scowl on his face as other Presidents have done
• he has refused to allow the State Department to brief the House Foreign Affairs Committee, unheard of in times of crisis such as now

I note these very interesting tidbits so far:

• even after Benghazi and Cairo, security for other American Embassies were not cranked up, as the Yemen Embassy was equally overrun
• the Marines guarding the Cairo Embassy were ordered not to carry loaded weapons or defend against intruders
• the Libyan ambassador was not killed by an outraged, impromptu mob but rather was lured into a trap, ambushed, raped, and assassinated by a sophisticated military operation
• several top-secret documents relating to informants working with the US are missing from the Consulate and Safehouse in Libya
• the Muslim Brotherhood is trying to organize a huge, anti-American riot in Cairo tomorrow, hoping that the participants will number in excess of one million
• the events so far seem to have an al-qaeda connection, and we can expect many more such attacks on our embassies and consulates up to the election in November. Our problems have just begun
• it is increasingly obvious that no one has seen the so-called offensive, anti-Mohammed video supposedly on YouTube
• our enemies are very happy and doing the traditional end zone dance
• Mr. O can longer claim to have kept us safe from Muslim terrorists

It's Deja Vu All Over Again

The current Middle East emergency bears an eerie resemblance to Jimmy Carter, 1979, Iranian Hostage Crisis, and the American Embassy in Tehran. You young 'uns who have no idea what I am talking about owe it to yourself to become informed.

It Ain't Over Till The Fat Lady Sings

Review the information that I have presented. Do you still have confidence in the Commander-In-Chief? You know that you are in trouble when you read a newswire story hoping that the foreign policy crisis will blow over, so that the economy will dominate the election.  

Getting to Know You, Getting to Like You (fiscal cliff)...

Let us review: unless both sides of the aisle in Congress can agree, federal taxes will go up and federal spending will go down starting on the first day of 2013. There is great fear that this will send the economy into a tailspin, another recession, and yet more unemployment.

Given election year posturing, it is unlikely that Congress and the Prez will agree to do anything.

Look Before You Leap

There are 2 important documents you should read before passing judgment:

• Ryan Plan
• Simpson Bowles Report

Both of the above websites have links where you can download the full PDF for each proposal.

Both Are Failures

Although rather different, both tackle the same problem: cutting government spending and reducing the fiscal deficit. Both also fail to have enough detail to be of any practical value (y'know: the devil is in the details). Both also have a zero chance. The former has been demonized by Ryan's own party, and the latter, although commissioned by the Prez himself, was immediately tossed into the circular file.

The 'Fiscal Cliff' Actually Works

Both sides agreed to dance with the Devil: if they cannot come to agreement, the fiscal cliff automatically kicks in. Since gridlock is the watchword these days, that outcome is not entirely out of the question (yes, I know that if the R's sweep both Houses and the White House, the calculus changes). This is already law. Even better: our deficit will actually be reduced (hallelujah).

Nasty Medicine

As it has in Greece, our economy will suffer. However, if we can tolerate the pain for a couple of years, our fiscal house will magically be in order. Jobs and the economy will begin to grow and thrive as in yesteryear. Sadly, it is more likely that the actors will come up with more wanky, kick-the-can-down-the-road meadow-muffins.

Internal Iranian Politics for Dummies

We cannot defeat our enemy if we do not understand them. Many view Tehran much like we used to view the 'Iron Curtain': opaque and inscrutable. Perhaps, but there are a few things that we can say.

Ignore the Man Behind the Curtain

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is often demonized in the Western press, but his job is kinda like Jay Carney or Hillary Clinton. He is, at best, a mouthpiece who does not exercise independent power. His official title is 'President'. Ali Khamenei ('The Supreme Leader'), with the support of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp, wields the real power. He is the real Wizard of Oz.

Tower of Babel

Observe carefully the rather peculiar machinations of the Chinese Communist Party Politburo, where the court nobles vie for power and influence to become the next king. Thus it is in Tehran. There are many Mullahs, and some do not agree with the current regime and also wish to be Supreme Leader. There are, according to rumor, some who do not think that possession of nuclear weapons is in accordance with the Koran.

Iranian Spring, abandoned...

The Hungarian Revolution of 1956, The Prague Spring of 1968, and now the Iranian Spring of June 2009. All failed, because the United States of America did not come to the aid of freedom-seeking peoples. Perhaps Mr. O abandoned them because he did not wish to anger the Supreme Leader and the IRGC. I remind you, however, that the original overthrow of the Shah occurred in 1979 thanks largely to a national uprising demanding change.

In Conclusion

Take all this with a rather large grain of salt. How might this effect US foreign policy? Dunno. Suggest you seek the wise counsel of John Bolton.  

9/11 – Never Forget – this is why

Because our task is not yet finished.

Our embassies and consulates are being attacked and our diplomats killed by radical Muslims in countries recently overtaken by the 'Arab Spring' over a supposed video on YouTube that may or may not exist. Fog of war still, yes, but:

• Start of an anti-Coptic Jihad?
• Carefully planned?
• Muslim Brotherhood?
• Nod and a wink from Morsi?
• 2 separate apologies by the State Department to the Muslims? (explicit Oval Office approval is beside the point)

We shall see.

Peace? Certainly not...

I heard even a smart person like the late-great Tony Snow proclaim on the air that 'Koran' means 'peace'. Not even close, as he and many others have been hoodwinked over this. Literally translated, it means 'surrender', as in 'surrender to the will of Allah' as defined by Mohammed and the Mullahs. Not quite the same thing, observe the events of the past 24 hours.

Who is more presidential?

After carefully observing the behavior of both D and R candidates, I choose the latter, media reaction to the contrary not withstanding.  

Mr. Rove – sit down and be quiet

There is no doubt, I hope, that the current economic and social conditions of the United States of America is in very bad straights. There is nothing inevitable about our current condition, because life is full of possibilities. The President has a wide horizon of actions that he can take. Mr. Obama has made his choices.

Our nation is in bad condition, and as such, we are told that replacing the current occupant of the Executive Office is a slam dunk. Really? We Republicans have a milquetoast, moderate, Country-Club, plain vanilla politician as our nominee for President in a moment in history where we need an Abraham Lincoln and not a Snicker's Bar.

What is the biggest obstacle to having the occupant of the White House having an 'R' after his name? You guessed correctly: Karl Rove and the Bushies. If you simply talk to the voters honestly, you cannot lose. You will lose if you tilt at windmills and fine tune your message to the latest Fox News trend and try to 'moderate' your political party's beliefs. This is a lesson that Mr Rove does not seem to understand. The more Republicans obey Rove, the more it is likely that Republicans will lose, and lose rather badly (yes, I know: he controls nearly a billion $$$ of super-PAC money).

Illegal Immigrants

Just the mention of the above term makes one a pariah by the Bushies. For me, this is a shibboleth. We absolutely cannot permit these kinds of peoples a 'get out of jail card' for free. The American ideal is complete equality, your family history and perceived previous political repression not withstanding. There are many worthy people in line who desperately want to become a citizen of the United States of America. Shoving illegals who broke the rules up to the front of the line is simply not fair.

Note to Rubio

Truth and fairness is the touchstone of our great country. No one lords it over another because of his/her privilege/race/history/family-provenance. Can you understand that, Mr. Rubio? Can you understand that protecting a special group and giving them amnesty is wrong, even if it is your own group?

Final Thought

Unless Republicans have the huevos to discard the influence of the likes of the Bushies and Rove and Rubio, January 2013 will not be a happy day. The reason why they are pushing amnesty so hard among the Republicans is that they have seen the demographic charts and graphs, and know that the Hispanic % of the population (who traditionally vote D) will sky-rocket in coming years. They figure that if the R's go for amnesty, they will be grateful and vote R. The real way to gain their support is to be loudly and proudly and prominently and unwaveringly pro-life. See, they are mostly Catholic, and that is how we will win their hearts and votes.