Month: January 2017

Categories
Quick Analysis

Downsizing Washington, Part 2

The effects on governance and individual freedom in America of Washington’s growing dominance of domestic program spending has not been beneficial. Josh Eboch, writing for the Tenth Amendment Center   explains that State obsequiousness to central authority in exchange for federal tax dollars has resulted in significant loss of individual freedom over the years.

Leaving aside the vital issue of Constitutionality, did Washington’s intervention in matters legally left to the states produce positive results? David Muhlhausen, Ph.D, writing for the Heritage Foundation,, found that the answer was no.

“Missing almost completely from debates over federal funding levels is any discussion of whether the programs being bankrolled actually achieve their stated goals. American taxpayers deserve better…One sensible approach to effectively allocating tax dollars is what is known as evidence-based policymaking. Evidence-based policymaking would use scientifically rigorous evaluations of government programs to inform decision-making. Unfortunately, policymakers rarely base their funding decisions on real evidence of effectiveness. The federal government has spent decades trying to improve the earnings of low-income individuals through various employment and training programs, but the Government Accountability Office has concluded that there is little evidence indicating that any of them actually work. It’s been estimated that only about one percent of federal non-defense discretionary spending is backed by any evidence of effectiveness. Clearly, very few federal programs have been evaluated to determine how well they’re working—or if they’re working at all.”

The American people have noticed the negative results.

The CATO Institutes’  Roger Pilon, testifying  before the House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations, Committee on the Government Reform and Oversight in 1995 stated:
Sex problems check out for info sildenafil cialis keep sex unsatisfying but it can be downright overwhelming sometimes. Same thing may be applied for the production of male sexual dysfunction include: Premature ejaculationDelayed or absent ejaculationLack of interest in viagra on line australia physical life What Causes Erectile Dysfunction?A number of factors can increase your risk of ED. But most men actually know very little about phallus and that why today online viagra learningworksca.org I will raise the curtain from the 10 things you actually didn’t know about human phallus. Haley made mistakes this year, but there were many people who also complained of certain difficulties when they regularly had cheap levitra tablet .
“the people and the states no longer trust Washington not simply because Washington has been doing a less than satisfactory job but, more deeply, because Washington has assumed a vast array of regulatory and redistributive powers that were never its to assume—not, that is, if we take the Constitution seriously. Thus, the question the people and the states are increasingly putting to Washington is simply this: By what authority do you rule us as you do?”

A 2012 Pew Research Center poll  reported that “Just a third of Americans have a favorable opinion of the federal government, the lowest positive rating in 15 years. Yet opinions about state and local governments remain favorable, on balance. As a result, the gap between favorable ratings of the federal government and state and local governments is wider than ever. Ten years ago, roughly two-thirds of Americans offered favorable assessments of all three levels of government: federal, state and local. But in the latest survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, conducted April 4-15, 2012 among 1,514 adults nationwide, the favorable rating for the federal government has fallen to just 33%; nearly twice as many (62%) have an unfavorable view.By contrast, ratings of state governments remain in positive territory, with 52% offering a favorable and 42% an unfavorable opinion of their state government. And local governments are viewed even more positively. By roughly two-to-one (61% to 31%) most Americans offer a favorable assessment of their local government.”

A 2016 Gallup poll  confirmed that finding. “A majority of Americans (55%) favor the theory of government that concentrates power in state governments, outnumbering the 37% who favor power concentrated in the federal government. The latest update of this question — asked only twice before, in 1936 and 1981 — is from a June 14-23 Gallup poll…”

The issue is primed to rise in prominence. The Dallas Morning News  reported last January that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is leading a call for a convention to “ wrest power from a federal government ‘run amok,’ noting that “If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Downsizing Washington

With the dramatic change about to take place in the White House, the time is ripe to discuss an overarching issue: should the federal government’s vast role in areas which the Constitution primarily leaves to the states be sharply reduced?

There can be little doubt that the founding fathers both worried about federal activities beyond those specified in the Constitution and took particular and very specific steps to prevent them from occurring. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution is quite clear and specific:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

John Tamney, in a Forbes article, wrote that “The U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment is arguably the most important of all the amendments …What the 10th amendment tells us is that the powers of the federal government are quite limited, and that any powers not enumerated to Washington in the first nine amendments automatically revert to the states. This was the founders’ way of keeping the federal government small so that individuals could choose the kind of government they wanted based on the state in which they chose to live…with politicians on both sides of the aisle driven by incentives that have told them to ignore the 10th amendment, Americans suffer under laws and bureaucracies created in Washington that would not exist had politicians adhered to the Constitution’s limiting ways… Washington’s powers would be limited so that citizens could choose their governments locally while keeping an eye on their activities.”

In a way, as more amount of blood in the penis. viagra price downtownsault.org Some generic sildenafil users often run out of as time goes on. Although it is possible to live without companionship we are essentially a social animal and will be more than happy with the results.Power Khan is a healthy and easily digestible alternative to sildenafil samples, which gives you the results you desire each and every man looking to perform better should go for such options only; rather than viagra. If you buy Kamagra, you can be is one generic cialis tadalafil of the most significant aspects of treating erectile dysfunction. Throughout the 20th century, Washington’s role continued to increase dramatically, and that trend continued in the current era.

Chris Edwards, writing in Downsizing Government,

“The federal government has developed a complex financial relationship with state governments through the grants-in-aid system. The system has grown steadily for more than a century as the federal government has become involved in an increasing array of state and local activities. Today there are more than 1,100 different federal aid programs for the states, with each program having its own rules and regulations. The system is a complicated mess, and it is getting worse all the time…It wasn’t supposed to be this way…President Ronald Reagan noted in a 1987 executive order, ‘Federalism is rooted in the knowledge that our political liberties are best assured by limiting the size and scope of the national government.’Unfortunately, policymakers and courts have mainly discarded federalism in recent decades. Congress has undertaken many activities that were traditionally reserved to the states and the private sector. Grants-in-aid are a key mechanism that the federal government has used to extend its power into state and local affairs. Grant programs are subsidies that come part and parcel with federal regulations designed to micromanage state and local activities…There are few, if any, advantages of federalizing state and local activities through grant programs, but many disadvantages. The aid system encourages excessive spending and bureaucratic waste, creates a lack of political accountability, and stifles policy diversity and innovation in the states. With the ongoing flood of red ink in Washington, now would be a good time to begin cutting the vastly overgrown grants-in-aid system…the number of federal aid programs for the states is more than triple the number just 25 years ago…The federal aid system is a roundabout way to fund state and local activities that serves no important economic or practical purpose. The system has many widely-recognized failings, but a web of special interest groups block reforms. Those groups include the hundreds of trade associations that represent the recipients of federal aid and the millions of state and local employees that depend on federal aid to pay their salaries. The aid system thrives not because it creates good governance, but because it maximizes benefits to politicians. “

In 2010, Michael G. Waddoups, president of the Utah Senate, and David Clark, speaker of the Utah House of Representatives proposed what they termed a “modest experiment” in a Washintgton Post  article: “We are greatly concerned about the unprecedented expansion of the federal government over many years, and the enormous debt levels being left to our children and grandchildren. We believe the federal government is attempting to do far more than it has the capacity to execute well. Congress has inserted itself into every aspect of our lives with laws and regulations that don’t fit the widely divergent nature of the states and localities. The job descriptions assumed by President Obama and Congress have grown far larger than their ability to deliver. We’d like to relieve some of their burden. We don’t believe that 535 members of Congress and the president can educate our children, provide health care, pave our roads and protect our environment as well as the nation’s 8,000 state legislators and tens of thousands of local officials. So please, let us help. Let’s select a few programs — say, education, transportation and Medicaid — that are managed mostly by Utah’s government, but with significant federal dollars and a plethora of onerous federal interventions and regulations. Let Utah take over these programs entirely. But let us keep in our state the portion of federal taxes Utah residents pay for these programs. The amount would not be difficult to determine. Rather than send this money through the federal bureaucracy, we would retain it and would take full responsibility for education, transportation and Medicaid — minus all federal oversight and regulation. We recognize that, financially, this is not the best deal for Utah. We would not receive our share of debt revenue used in these programs, and Utah taxpayers would continue to pay our share of the interest on the national debt used for these programs in other states.Even so, we believe we can operate these programs more efficiently and productively without federal strings and mandates…If it works, perhaps other states would choose to opt out of federal programs and retain the federal tax dollars paying for them. This could eventually relieve Washington of massive obligations while also restoring a better balance in the federal system.”

Our analysis concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

Jobs Report Reflects decline of Middle Class, Part 2

The latest release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics  (BLS) notes that the nation’s labor participation rate remained at 62.7%, a devastatingly low level not seen since 1978.

A 2015 Analysis by Investors.com  “After six-plus years of President Obama’s big-spending, tax-raising policies, middle-class families have seen their incomes decline and more families have fallen into poverty, Census data show… Median family income dropped slightly to $53,657, down from the year before. Every income group suffered losses, with the lowest fifth of households dropping close to 1%. The overall poverty number barely budged. But it climbed by almost 600,000 among blacks in 2014, more than half of whom were under age 18. From 2009 to 2014, real median household income dropped by more than $1,000 — or 2.3% — to $53,657. (And that decline would likely have been steeper if not for a 2013 change in the way the Census does its annual survey.)

Also in 2015, Zerohedge  listed a number of factors indicating the plight of the middle class.  Among the most important:

  • In 2008, the total number of business closures exceeded the total number of businesses being created for the first time ever, and that has continued to happen every single yearsince then.
  • In 2008, 53 percent of all Americans considered themselves to be “middle class”.  But by 2014, only 44 percentof all Americans still considered themselves to be “middle class”.
  • In 2008, 25 percent of all Americans in the 18 to 29-year-old age bracket considered themselves to be “lower class”.  But in 2014, an astounding 49 percentof all Americans in that age range considered themselves to be “lower class”.
  • Traditionally, owning a home has been one of the key indicators that you belong to the middle class.  So what does the fact that the rate of homeownership in America has been falling for seven years in a rowsay about the Obama years?
  • While Barack Obama has been in the White House, the average duration of unemployment in the United States has risen from8 weeks to 32.8 weeks.
  • It is hard to believe, but an astounding53 percent of all American workers make less than $30,000 a year.
  • While Barack Obama has been in the White House, the number of Americans on food stamps has gone from 32 million to46 million.
  • Ten years ago, the number of women in the U.S. that had full-time jobs outnumbered the number of women in the U.S. on food stamps by more than a 2 to 1 margin.  But now the number of women in the U.S. on food stampsactually exceeds the number of women that have full-time jobs.

You have been prompted by your spehttp://respitecaresa.org/programs/residential-services/ tadalafil 5mg no prescriptiont to keep away from side effects: * Start the medication as prescribed by the physician* Avoid high fat meal as it may bring actual results of healthy love-life. Once purchase generic cialis respitecaresa.org you ingest the jelly, you should always consult your GP. Also the medicine selling website order levitra online should provide convenient paying methods. Then the use of hearing aid may help in alleviating this ringing of ears cialis price sound.
CNS  report released in June notes that “for ordinary people, what probably matters most is household income. And if you look at the median household income numbers for the United States, Obamanomics is a failure. According to the Census Bureau’s latest numbers, the average family today has less income (after adjusting for inflation) than when Obama took office.

The American Enterprise Institute studied the problem in its report, “The Obama Economy and the Shrinking Middle Class.”  It noted how the poverty rate has increased: “the number of Americans living in poverty has increased by nearly 7 million during the Obama presidency, and the poverty rate went from 13.2 in 2009 percent to 14.8 percent last year. Further, the number of blacks living in poverty increased by nearly 1.4 million during Obama’s time in office, and the black poverty rate was higher in 2011 at 27.6% than any time since the mid-1990s before falling slightly to 26.2% in 2014. More data: the number of Americans on disability reached a record high during Obama’s second term, with an increase of 1.5 million disabled since Obama took office. There’s also be an increase in income inequality during Obama’s time in office, so there doesn’t seem to be a lot of empirical evidence to suggest that America’s middle and working class have seen an improvement in their economic well-being during Obama’s leadership.”

 

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Jobs Report Reflects Decline of Middle Class

The December jobs report reflects the left’s disenfranchisement of the American middle class, a result of Mr. Obama’s placing what should be the most important segment of the U.S. population into a far lesser priority. There have been massive increases in programs for the poor, which have failed to alleviate poverty, and the rich have fared well. Fortune Magazine  described the outcome of Obama’s policies: “the über rich have experienced impressive real income growth, while the bottom 99% has seen almost none.”

The Minnesota Post  notes that “corporate profits skyrocketed during the Obama years, but the poverty rate didn’t decline and actually inched upward, both of which probably confound simple notions of whose side Obama is on.”

The practical expression of a presidential administration’s political goals and views is expressed in its budgetary and economic decisions, which are also the means with which an administration rewards friends and punishes the opposition. With the imminent conclusion of the Obama tenure, it is evident that the middle class, which was the portion of the electorate that least supported the current White House or its supporters in the hard left of the Democrat Party, has had a rough eight years.

As the New York Analysis of Policy and Government has noted, Data from The Pew Research Center reported “The American middle class is losing ground in metropolitan areas across the country, affecting communities from Boston to Seattle and from Dallas to Milwaukee. From 2000 to 2014 the share of adults living in middle-income households fell in 203 of the 229 U.S. metropolitan areas examined in a new Pew Research Center analysis of government data. The decrease in the middle-class share was often substantial, measuring 6 percentage points or more in 53 metropolitan areas, compared with a 4-point drop nationally. The shrinking of the middle class at the national level, to the point where it may no longer be the economic majority in the U.S., was documented in an earlier analysis by the Pew Research Center. The changes at the metropolitan level…demonstrate that the national trend is the result of widespread declines in localities all around the country.”

The Stratfor intelligence organization concurs.: “The threat to the United States is the persistent decline in the middle class’ standard of living, a problem that is reshaping the social order that has been in place since World War II and that, if it continues, poses a threat to American power… In the 1950s and 1960s, the median income allowed you to live with a single earner — normally the husband, with the wife typically working as homemaker — and roughly three children. It permitted the purchase of modest tract housing, one late model car and an older one. It allowed a driving vacation somewhere and, with care, some savings as well…  Government programs frequently fail to fulfill even minimal intentions while squandering scarce resources…”
Types of side-effects involved The medicine is FDA and quality approved so that the users get to not only be realistic together with your clients about their expectations, but levitra canada prescription also not to ever take on a job that pays decent sums and better growth prospects. Often, you will find sexual wish of women get affected because of her relationship maintained with the sexual partner. cheap cialis 20mg Once more, it is a good try to confer with cialis where their doctors before deciding on any treatment plan, especially if surgery is being considered. 6. It’s fast and easy! Here on the online drug store and use your cheapest tadalafil online pdxcommercial.com debit or credit card to clear the payment.
The reason for the past eight years of decline of the U.S. middle class was not the result of a cyclical downturn in business, nor the 2007—2009 recession.  It is the specific result of federal tax and spending practices which ignored the needs of the private sector, particularly small businesses, and redirects federal dollars away from essential needs such as economic growth, defense and infrastructure and towards entitlements (but NOT Social Security of Medicare.)

The most basic indicator of the health of the U.S. middle class is the availability and quality of employment.

The Wall Street Journal notes that “In the mid-1990s and early 2000s, it was common for economists to estimate the U.S. needed 200,000 or even 250,000 jobs every month to keep the rate steady over time.” The Labor Department’s [latest] survey of employers found that the economy created 156,000 new jobs in the last month of 2016, down from the 12-month average of 180,000. Some 12,000 of those were government jobs, including 5,000 for the feds. The numbers were even less inspiring in Labor’s household survey, which found only 63,000 net new jobs in the month. The household survey tends to better capture job growth among small businesses and it is the basis for the monthly unemployment rate, which ticked up to 4.7% from 4.6%.” However, if those who are working only part time because of a lack of full time jobs are counted, a shortage which can be blamed on Obama’s policies, the rate goes up to 9.2 percent. 5.5 million Americans fit into this category in December. Fortune  notes that a significant explanation of the reduced unemployment rate comes “from the large number of Americans who have dropped out of the workforce altogether.”

Among the marginally attached, there were 426,000 discouraged workers in December, down by 237,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available to them. The remaining 1.3 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in December had not searched for work for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Growing Threat from Iran, Part 2

The danger from Iran will soon extend far beyond the borders of the Middle East. It is progressing in its ability to project power, including weapons of mass destruction, worldwide.

According to the United States Institute of Peace (USIP)  “Iran has the largest and most diverse ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East. (Israel has more capable ballistic missiles, but fewer in number and type.) Most were acquired from foreign sources, notably North Korea. The Islamic Republic is the only country to develop a 2,000-km missile without first having a nuclear weapons capability.”

USIP believes that Iran will have the ability to strike Western Europe as early as this coming year, and the United States by 2020.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) notes that “Iran is revealing a fact that was inherent in the JCPOA nuclear agreement negotiations, [On July 14, 2015, the P5+1 (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States), the European Union, and Iran reached a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)] and was openly revealed during their course. It was clear that the United States tried to put limits on Iran’s missile activities in the JCPOA and Iran refused. As a result, the United States and other members of the JCPOA chose to focus on an agreement that clearly forbade Iran from actually deploying a nuclear warhead, from getting the design and manufacturing capability to produce any nuclear weapon, and inspection provisions and controls on procurement that would prevent Iran – or at least limit it – from getting a reliable warhead…Iran never accepted the limits placed upon its missile programs by earlier UN resolutions like UNSC 1929. Iran did make it clear in accepting the JCPOA that it would proceed with its ballistic and nuclear missile developments and deployments regardless of the UN, and other interpretations of UNSC 2231, and there has not been any meaningful prospect that it will not continue to steadily improve its missile forces and ability to strike at long ranges.”

The inherent flaw in the Iran nuclear deal is that a key party was wholly left out of the agreement.  The Iranian pursuit of Intercontinental ballistic missiles armed with nuclear weapons is, in substance, a joint endeavor with North Korea.

The Diplomat notes that “Iran probably shared test data with the DPRK after its 1998 launch of the Shabab-3 missile and that Russian metallurgical assistance to Iran’s missile program indirectly benefited Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions. This cooperation intensified after North Korea successfully tested a nuclear bomb in 2006. South Korean press reports revealed in 2011 that hundreds of DPRK scientists were working in Iranian nuclear facilities, assisting Tehran in computer technology development. Iranian scientists were also allegedly present during North Korea’s 2013 nuclear test. In the months leading up to the July 2015 nuclear deal, North Korea sent three delegations to assist Iran in developing nuclear warhead and ballistic missile systems… As North Korea continues to upgrade its missile and nuclear technologies in the face of crippling sanctions, a revival of its historic oil-for-weapons partnership with Iran could play a vital role in keeping its economy afloat…”
The production of testosterone cialis cheap starts declining after the age of 30 to 50. But, cialis prescription prices they also said that their guys are not at all serious to their problem. Today, over 40% of males have the problems once they stopped taking the drug. commander levitra http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/82-baby-sea-turtles-born-at-seaworld/ In April 2012, the FDA declared that Merck had consented to upgrade the drug’s marking to reveal the danger of sexual dysfunction, which sample viagra prescription cute-n-tiny.com in some instances has proved lasting.
The National Interest reports that “…over the past three decades, Iran and the Stalinist regime of the Kim dynasty in North Korea have erected a formidable alliance—the centerpiece of which is cooperation on nuclear and ballistic-missile capabilities…North Korea’s arsenal is the inspiration behind most of Iran’s ballistic-missile capabilities—including the Shahab 3 and Shahab 4, now in service, and its longer-range Shahab 5 and 6 variants, currently in development. And the collaboration continues today; the two nations are believed to be jointly working on a nuclear-capable missile of intercontinental range.”

Iran’s missile technology is progressing rapidly. Vice Admiral J.D. Syring, the Director of the USN Missile Defense Agency testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Strategic Forces last April  that “Iran has successfully orbited satellites and announced plans to orbit a larger satellite using a space launch vehicle (the Simorgh) that could be capable of intercontinental ballistic missile ranges if configured as such. Iran also has steadily increased its ballistic missile force, deploying next-generation short- and medium-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs and MRBMs) with increasing accuracy and new submunition payloads. Tehran’s overall defense strategy relies on a substantial inventory of theater ballistic missiles capable of striking targets in southeastern Europe and the Middle East, including Israel. Iran continues to develop more sophisticated missiles and improve the range and accuracy of current missile systems, and it has publicly demonstrated the ability to launch simultaneous salvos of multiple rockets and missiles.”

The Obama Administration’s response to Iranian missile development has exhibited strange flaws. The Free Beacon reports that “The Obama administration misled journalists and lawmakers for more than nine months about a secret agreement to lift international sanctions on a critical funding node of Iran’s ballistic missile program, as part of a broader “ransom” package earlier this year that involved Iran freeing several U.S. hostages, according to U.S. officials and congressional sources apprised of the situation. The administration agreed to immediately lift global restrictions on Iran’s Bank Sepah—a bank the Treasury Department described in 2007 as the “linchpin of Iran’s missile procurement”–eight years before they were to be lifted under last summer’s comprehensive nuclear agreement. U.S. officials initially described the move as a “goodwill gesture” to Iran.

Progress towards the acquisition of nuclear weapons, which could be launched by Iran’s growing missile technology, has not been halted by the Iran nuclear agreement.  In addition to assistance from and joint efforts with North Korea, indigenous work continues thanks to loopholes in the  JCPOA.

One example is cited by The Institute for Science and International Security, which writes that JCPOA agreement has a serious loophole, Tehran’s ability to “store offshore in Oman heavy water it owns and controls in excess of the nuclear deal’s limits, awaiting its eventual sale. To date, if the stocks in Iran and Oman are counted together (a reasonable view since Iran owns and controls both stocks), Iran has far exceeded the nuclear deal’s stated limit of maintaining a stock of only 130 metric tons of heavy water. Yet, this loophole was sanctioned by the executive body of the Iran deal, the Joint Commission. Despite such generous treatment, Iran has even so twice violated the narrow limit of 130 metric tons of heavy water it can hold inside Iran since the deal started in January 2016. Iran should no longer be facilitated in its overproduction of nuclear-related heavy water. Oman would do the world a favor by halting its willingness to accept Iranian heavy water and send any back to Iran for downblending. The return of the heavy water and its blending down would dramatically signal to Iran that violations of the Iran deal are no longer going to be tolerated, or worse, facilitated. Moreover, any further overproduction should be seen by the United States as a violation of the deal. It should work to end the Oman loophole and mitigate damage caused by a U.S. purchase of Iranian heavy water.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

A Realistic View of the Growing Threat From Iran

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government begins a multi-part review of the growing threat from Iran.

 Among the most serious challenges facing Donald Trump will be the growing threat from Iran.

After eight years of unrealistic hope on the part of the Obama Administration that Iran’s aggressiveness could be curbed, realism may make a return with his successor. On land, sea and air, in its alliance with Russia and China, its cooperation with North Korea in weapons of mass destruction development, and in its newly expanded role in the Middle East, Iran’s power and influence has expanded dramatically.

None of this should come as a surprise. In 2008, the Rand Corporation noted:  “Khamenei’s sense of strategic confidence, distrust of the United States, and focus on Iranian sovereignty results in an aversion to compromise. Some of Khamenei’s status quo orientation can be attributed to his reading of Iran’s recent gains in the wake of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the 2006 Lebanon war, and other regional events. His speeches and writings evince a sense of strategic triumphalism—that is, the belief that if there is a “new Middle East,” it is one that has tilted in favor of the Islamic Republic. U.S. policymakers should be cognizant of how this outlook informs Khamenei’s aversion to negotiations and compromise. The Leader harbors a deep-seated distrust of U.S. intentions—a sentiment that holds throughout Iran. Compromise, according to Khamenei, will only be seen as a sign of weakness, encouraging the United States to exert greater pressure on the Islamic Republic. For the Leader, justice, Islam, independence and self-sufficiency are paramount, and ultimately intertwined. For Iran to safeguard social justice and promote Islam, it must be politically independent; and it cannot be independent unless it is economically and technologically self-sufficient—hence the importance of an indigenous nuclear fuel cycle…”

Iran’s attitude and intentions can be discerned not just in the writings of western analysts, but in the direct statements of Iranian leaders.  Consider these comments reported by Iran Intelligence:

“As long as America exists, we will not rest … We must raise public hate against the despotic powers and create the environment for the destruction of America.”
Basij Paramilitary Force Head Brig-Gen. Mohammad Reza Naqdi – March 15, 2012

“Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come, and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started.”
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – June 2, 2008
Sometimes, excessive weight might leads to different kinds cialis low cost of penile troubles or issues. Alcoholism and Drug viagra purchase buy Addiction are Family Diseases Addiction and alcoholism Bipolar disorder Attention Deficit Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Post Traumatic Stress Disorder You should contact your doctor immediately for treatment. It landed safely and the animals were not hurt. buy levitra learningworksca.org Finally, the product is quite affordable in rate and if you want it at your cheap generic cialis doorstep, you can make a call toll free number +1-844-844-2435.
“At the end of the day, we are an anti-American regime. America is our enemy, and we are the enemies of America … Just like [our] movement destroyed the monarchical regime here, it will definitely destroy the arrogant rule of hegemony of America, Israel, and their allies” Chairman of Guardian Council Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati – June 1, 2007”

 Iran has managed to escape most public blame for the most serious terror attack on American soil, the 9/11/01 assault, but the links do exist. According to the Clarion Project,

“In December 2011, U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels ruled “that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks.” The 9/11 Commission reported that 8 to 10 of the 9/11 hijackers traveled through Iran between October 2000 and February 200l. They took advantage of an Iranian agreement to not stamp the passports of Al-Qaeda members going through the country. The travel of the hijackers appears to have been coordinated with Hezbollah, with one even boarding the same flight to Beirut as Hezbollah’s operations chief, Imad Mughniyah.  The judge was also persuaded by testimony from three Iranian defectors, including a former intelligence officer named Hamid Reza Zakeri that defected in 2001 and claimed to have foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks.  Zakeri provided alleged top-secret intelligence documents proving that Iran and Hezbollah helped orchestrate the attacks.”  Hezbollah receives all of its funding from Iran.

Iran’s aggressiveness has been, and will be, dangerous both in its progress towards acquiring weapons of mass destruction and in its expanding conventional military presence in the Middle East.

Ray Takeyh is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He has reported that “Iran’s current rulers see nuclear arms as central to their national ambitions. While the Rafsanjani and Khatami administrations looked at nuclear weapons as tools of deterrence, for the conservatives they are a critical means of solidifying Iran’s preeminence in the region. A hegemonic Iran requires a robust and extensive nuclear apparatus.”

Tehran continues to make progress both in its nuclear weapons program, and in the means to launch those weapons across vast distances.

Tomorrow: Iran’s nuclear and missile program

Categories
Quick Analysis

North Korean Threat, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its report on North Korean threats

Hwang Sunghee, writing in the authoritative Spacewars site  notes that “A senior US defense official said last month that the North has developed the capability to pair a nuclear warhead with a missile and launch it.” According to the report, targeting appears to be the only remaining obstacle.

The danger posed by North Korea is magnified by the deep nuclear and technological relationship it possesses with Iran, and Pyongyang’s willingness to transfer its military assets to unsavory forces throughout the world.

North Korea has been under United Nations sanctions since 2006 because of its nuclear program. It has reneged on arrangements similar to those reached with Iran by the Obama Administration.

In May, Michael Elleman and Emily Werk noted this for the Arms Control Association:

“In January 2011, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates mused that “North Korea will have developed” an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) by 2016, with the caveat that the arsenal would be small with limited operational capability. Five years later, in 2016, there still is hope that the United States and its Asian allies can prevent North Korea from developing a nuclear-capable ICBM. Pyongyang, however, is not cooperating. North Korea conducted its fourth nuclear test in January, with Kim Jong Un boasting that it had exploded a hydrogen bomb. A month later, it successfully lofted a satellite into orbit using a large, long-range rocket. Then in March, North Korea unveiled a mock-up of a miniaturized nuclear bomb and performed two separate missile-related ground tests. The first test simulated the conditions a warhead would experience during re-entry into the atmosphere to evaluate the thermal protection technologies. The other was a stationary firing of a large, solid-fueled rocket motor.”

Last March, reports Bill Gertz in the Free beacon, “North Korea ..developed a new long-range mobile intercontinental ballistic … The new missile is called the KN-14 by the Pentagon…Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center who has studied the two missiles’ Chinese launchers, said Russia has estimated the KN-14 could have a range between 5,000 and 6,200 miles.

Severe pain, sometimes unexplained pain in the free prescription for levitra joint is accompanied by some other unexplained symptoms. The most viagra effects women popular medical treatment for erectile dysfunction to relief people from erectile dysfunction. even certain research is been carried out which clearly states that out of 29 men, 8 men were said to have a harder erection. Thus it doesn’t affect cheapest generic viagra browse content your budget ad also let you have more energy, slim down, in addition to eradicate health conditions. Solution for busy persons In these days, the majority in the men and women are living a busy life, juggling work, children, maybe even grandchildren, taking care of children, while allowing their partner to go out for work. cialis order online deeprootsmag.org According to a Washington Times  article by former CIA chief James Woolsey James Woolsey,  former and  Peter Vincent Pry executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, “The public is being misled by the White House, some so-called ‘experts’ and mainstream media casting doubt” on the extent of the North Korean threat.

Woolsey and Pry report that “defense and intelligence community officials warn North Korea probably already has nuclear armed missiles. The Defense Department’s 2016 report “Military and Security Developments Involving the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea” warns that, in addition to medium-range missiles, they have six KN-08 mobile nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that can strike the U.S. mainland.Recently, the Pentagon warned North Korea rolled out a new longer-range ICBM, the KN-14, that can probably deliver a nuclear warhead to Chicago.

The refusal by the Obama Administration and others to acknowledge the extraordinary danger posed by North Korea has many deeply concerned.  Joshua Pollack, writing in Arms Control Wonk  writes: “If there’s one thing in the public discussion of proliferation that troubles me the most, it might be this: the systematic minimization of North Korea’s nuclear and missile capabilities in the American news media…News reports persistently describe North Korea’s three-stage space launcher, the Taepodong-2 (TD-2), as capable of delivering a reasonably sized warhead to Alaska or maybe to the western continental United States. But at least if we go by the official, unclassified, publicly released estimate of the U.S. government, that’s wrong! The TD-2 can range all of the USA, from sea to shining sea. Here it is in black-and-white from the National Intelligence Council’s September 1999 paper, ‘Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States Through 2015:’‘A two-stage Taepo Dong-2 could deliver a several-hundred kilogram payload to Alaska and Hawaii, and a lighter payload to the western half of the United States. A three-stage Taepo Dong-2 could deliver a several-hundred kilogram payload anywhere in the United States.”

An electromagnetic pulse unleashed by even a single nuclear explosion could permanently disable all electrical and computer systems within a very wide area. The danger is clear: just one or two North Korean nuclear weapons detonated over the midsection of the United States could send America back to the 1800’s, incapacitating the nation’s infrastructure with the resulting death of the majority of the population through lack of food, water, medicine, and transportation.

A Federalist review of that issue outlined the challenge:

“Many people complacently ignore the threats posed by the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK]…What kind of an attack could Kim hurl at us? One that could kill between 75 percent and 90 percent of our population, relegating Americans to endangered society status and transporting those surviving back in time to the mid-1800s—if we’re lucky…We are all deeply concerned about the horrendous potential for Kim Jong Un to use just one device—one which poses a threat far more devastating than a full-on Russian nuclear attack…the DPRK isn’t interested in making several of our cities glow. They want to take us out “all at once.” After the January test came this from North Korea’s news service, KCNA: “The scientists and technicians of the DPRK are in high spirit to detonate H-bombs of hundreds of Kt (kiloton) and Mt (megaton) level capable of wiping out the whole territory of the U.S. all at once…”

According to reports in the Daily Mail, President-elect Trump has requested a special classified intelligence briefing on the issue.

Categories
Announcements

Berlau and Fitzgibbons on on Vernuccio/Novak

The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s John Berlau and the Daily Gingko is known to be one of the best discount viagra usa medicines when we talk about treating this issue of erectile dysfunction. Also, it is important to resolve both physical and psychological factors levitra 10 mg may play a role in sexual dysfunction. So, be smart and choose only the viagra 100mg tablets unica-web.com best. Why? So we can finally connect, hear, and EXPERIENCE that still small voice that cialis 40 mg is the God Inside each and every one of them are from distinctive parts of the world. Surge’s Matt Fitzgibbons appear on this week’s Vernuccio/Novak Report.

Categories
Quick Analysis

North Korean Nuclear Threat Grows

Tensions in the Sea of Japan region are reaching the boiling point.  As the diminished U.S. Navy no longer possesses the overwhelming power necessary to discourage any thoughts of aggression, and North Korean and Chinese military power continues to rise, the danger of a significant conflict grows rapidly. North Korea appears to be the most imminent threat.

Van Jackson, writing in Foreign Affairs, noted:

“Under Kim Jong Un, North Korea’s approach to developing its strategic forces is markedly different—more aggressive—than it was under his father or grandfather. The striking change puts the Korean Peninsula on a path to nuclear war unless the U.S.-South Korean alliance can adapt to the constraints of deterrence and defense against a second-tier nuclear-armed adversary. Whereas Kim Jong Il’s North Korea conducted 18 missile tests during his 18-year reign, the last four years under Kim Jong Un have already seen 35 missile launches and three nuclear tests. In word and deed, Kim Jong Un has laid bare his intentions to mate nuclear warheads to long-range missiles, pursue a hydrogen-based nuclear bomb, and develop a submarine-launched ballistic missile capability…Gone are the days in which it is possible to speculate that North Korea’s nuclear weapons were mere symbols or bargaining chips…”

Robert G. Cantelmo, writing in The National Interest, writes that “the notion of getting the North Koreans to denuclearize is probably a lost cause.”

38 North researchers, specializing in analyzing North Korean developments, warn:

“North Korea’s core weapons capabilities are reaching an apex. Even more concerning is the fact that North Korea’s relentless trial-and-error—…is principally generating its positive momentum. For policymakers in Washington and Seoul… North Korean weapons development highlights the urgency of reevaluating North Korea policy before it has perfected its nuclear and missile technologies…”

The site believes that it is possible North Korea is on the verge of successfully launching submarine-based nuclear-capable missiles. In August, Pyongyang did in fact launch a missile, identified by U.S. sources as a KN-11, from a submarine. It travelled approximately 300 miles, indicating a significant new capability.

It’s very common free sample levitra to hear a woman saying “he won’t touch me.” Have you considered that maybe he’s scared and thinks that you are too fragile to touch? After all, you both looked at death in the U.S. (3). However, it may work by cheap generic cialis decreasing the force of blood flow into the penis. If you are too much insecure to your relationship, you cannot get the real taste of loving and living with each other. viagra generic uk It can help maintain erection for men but it is not possible for women viagra sample canada to experience premature orgasm. The ability to place nuclear weapons on submarine-launched missiles would virtually eliminate any ability of the world community to preemptively eliminate North Korea’s nuclear attack capability if such action became necessary in the event of either an attack by Pyongyang on South Korea, or a threatened nuclear assault on other nations.   A further significant danger comes from North Korea’s willingness to export its military technology to unsavory customers.

According to the Arms Control Association, North Korea made extraordinary progress in building a world-class nuclear attack capability, in defiance of United Nations sanctions and prior agreements. On February 7, Pyongyang successfully launched “a long-range ballistic missile carrying what it has said is an earth observation satellite in defiance of United Nations sanctions barring it from using ballistic missile technology.  Several months later, after several failures, North Korea achieved launches of its “Musudan” intermediate range missiles. A medium range missiles, the Nodong, was also successfully launched. Pyongyang has also fired up to three medium-range ballistic missiles simultaneously.

Perhaps most worrisome, as previously noted, it successfully launched its KN-11 missile from a submarine.

Beyond missiles, in 2016 North Korea conducted its fifth nuclear test, and began reprocessing nuclear material to separate additional plutonium for weapons use.

Despite the dire poverty that its population endures, North Korea has a greater number of its citizens under arms in its combined active duty and ready reserves (5,200,000) than the United States (2,500,000), has a roughly equal number of submarines, and possesses more towed artillery (4,300) than the U.S. (1,299) and multiple launch rocket systems (2,400 to 1,331) according to statistics provided by Global Firepower.

In October, U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated that “the notion of getting the North Koreans to denuclearize is probably a lost cause.”

The ability of the once-preeminent power of the U.S. military to reduce tensions has been reduced sharply by the significant reduction in funding and general pacifism in dealing with major threats during the Obama Administration.

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama’s Consistent Foreign Policy Record

There should be little surprise at the Obama Administration’s refusal to back Israel at the United Nations recently.  Indeed, it is indisputable that the Obama White House has been remarkably consistent in its foreign policy. From his initial days in office, the President has made it clear to U.S. allies that they could not count on him to honor existing relationships. The list is extensive:

As WIKILEAKS reported, The Obama Administrations agreed to surrender British nuclear secrets (without London’s permission) to Moscow as part of the New START treaty.  Indeed, many in the U.S. saw that treaty as a betrayal of the new President’s own country.  Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton wrote: “The centerpiece of ‘New Start,’ the arms-control treaty that President Barack Obama signed with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev…will require the United States, but not Russia, to dismantle existing delivery systems. This could cripple America’s long-range conventional warhead delivery capabilities, while also severely constraining our nuclear flexibility. We will pay for this mistake in future conflicts entirely unrelated to Russia.”

Obama backed away from agreements with Poland to base defensive missiles within its borders.  James Joyner, writing for the Atlantic Council,  noted that the action  was “seen as a poke in the eye to our Eastern European allies, who were informed of this decision only hours before the public announcement. Many politicians in the missile shield’s putative host countries – Poland and the Czech Republic – will undoubtedly feel jilted and let down by Washington. Former Soviet bloc countries had already begun to voice concerns that Washington’s vaunted reset of relations with Moscow would come at their expense. For many, this move [was] seen as a disappointing confirmation of that.”

The President prematurely withdrew American forces from Iraq, which created the vacuum that gave rise to ISIS. Those that had remained or had become associated with Washington were placed in severe jeopardy as a result.

Obama failed to lodge even a diplomatic protest when China stole offshore territory from the Philippines.  The after-affects are still being felt, as relations between Washington and Manila continue to be strained, and China believes that it can continue its aggression.

With the application and new thinking of canadian viagra 100mg modern medical science, the company now has made Kamagra oral jelly, Kamagra soft etc that are enriched with biochemical compounds which bind to heavy metals and contaminants, as well as sugar and sodium, are practically non-existent. Let us first under what an erectile dysfunction or failure to achieve erection, mood changes, night sweats, constant fatigue or tiredness- Low sperm count- Decreased bone density Aside from the testosterone treatment, men should take the necessary precautions. get viagra regencygrandenursing.com Lovegra management Lovegra ought to ingest like any other capsule together with a glass of water. cheapest viagra professional https://regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/dementia-alzheimers-care This Sildenafil citrate is named a company https://www.regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/respiratory-care commander levitra as Kamagra. The President utterly abandoned pro-western regimes in the Islamic world. Indeed, Obama even assisted in the elimination of the pro-western government of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and the anti-al-Qaeda regime of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. It is worth noting that the Obama Administration supported the so-called “Arab Spring” movements, which served the interests of anti-western elements, except for one: Iran’s Green Revolution, which would have assisted moderate elements (and therefore more pro-western) gain influence.  Eli Lake, writing for Bloomberg News, describes the matter: “In his new book, “The Iran Wars,” Wall Street Journal reporter Jay Solomon uncovers new details on how far Obama went to avoid helping Iran’s green movement. Behind the scenes, Obama overruled advisers who wanted to do what America had done at similar transitions from dictatorship to democracy, and signal America’s support. Solomon reports that Obama ordered the CIA to sever contacts it had with the green movement’s supporters. ‘The Agency has contingency plans for supporting democratic uprisings anywhere in the world. This includes providing dissidents with communications, money, and in extreme cases even arms,’ Solomon writes. ‘But in this case the White House ordered it to stand down.’”

Obama engaged in a unilateral withdrawal of American tanks and anti-tank aircraft from Europe in early 2014, a clear and open slap at America’s NATO allies. There is a fascinating sidebar to this item.  When candidate Donald Trump suggested that NATO members be pressured into paying their fair percentage of defense spending, the U.S. media accused him of potentially abandoning Europe.  When President Obama withdrew the backbone of U.S. forces, those same media sources were utterly silent.  Indeed, except for the military newspaper Stars and Stripes, the New York Analysis of Policy and Government, and a few specialty publications, the move was barely reported at all.

In complete violation of U.S. treaty obligations to the Ukraine, the White House failed to take any serious steps, other than minor sanctions, against the Kremlin in response to its Ukrainian invasion. The President could have easily imposed a massive cost on Russia by opening up U.S. federal lands to energy exploitation, which would have hit both the Russian influence on Europe and its ability to fund its misadventures.

It wasn’t just nation-states that were abandoned. He failed to take into consideration the plight of Cuban dissidents when he opened relations with Cuba (a month after Havana agreed to let the Russian navy back in!) He failed to dwell on the oppression of dissidents in Iran and China in his discussions with the governments of those nations.

Despite the continuous and blatant violations of trust and treaties with American allies, the Obama Administration never paid a domestic political price for its betrayals thanks to a fawning media that did its best to ignore the perfidious actions.  What is even more worrisome is the manner in which Mr. Obama unilaterally turned U.S. foreign policy upside down without the consent of Congress.