Category: Quick Analysis

Categories
Quick Analysis

China’s Growing Threat in Latin America

For the first time since the Cuban missile crisis, America faces a significant military challenge within its own hemisphere.

While Moscow plays a growing role in the militarization of the region as its navy returns to Cuba and its nuclear bombers land in Nicaragua, it is China that has become the most prolific foreign influence in the region. The Wilson Center  reports that despite the end of the “Golden Decade” of the commodities boom, China will continue to be a game changer for the region.

A Strategic Studies Institute study  found that “the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has expanded its military ties with Latin America in multiple important ways. High-level trips by Latin American defense and security personnel to the PRC and visits by their Chinese counterparts have become commonplace. The volume and sophistication of Chinese arms sold to the region has increased. Officer exchange programs, institutional visits, and other lower-level ties have also expanded. Chinese military personnel have begun participating in operations in the region in a modest, yet symbolically important manner. Military engagement among Western countries traditionally has focused on securing greater capability for confronting an adversary, including alliances and base access agreements,  that confer strategic geographical position. By contrast, Chinese military engagement primarily supports broader objectives of national development and regime survival.

An example is the recent agreement between China and Argentina.  The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) notes: “China’s recent agreements with Argentina will prospectively feature the purchase or coproduction of fighter aircraft, APCs, and naval vessels; enhanced military-to-military exchanges; and the implementation of a space tracking facility tied to satellite imagery sharing. Together, these agreements would represent a new phase in China-Latin America military engagement if accomplished…These developments would mark an expansion of China’s broader defense engagement with Latin America that would carry several implications for the United States…the United States may face a new regional security hazard, albeit harmless in the absence of an external conflict. Third, regional actors might use Chinese arms in ways unfavorable to U.S. interests or perceive their security options to have expanded.”

The period usually strikes at forty when tadalafil buy india age normally causes internal troubles to almost everyone. All the ingredients are clinically approved tropical remedies that can improve the hair growth by preventing hair loss problems. vardenafil india As the circulation increases, more blood is in a position to enter the erectile tissue thereby resulting to a tough and female viagra canada solid erection. With continued usage, new blood cells canadian levitra are eliminated. Paul Cover, writing for Forbes, warns:  “The public position of the United States Government is that Washington does not see a geopolitical threat arising from China’s quickly growing influence in Latin America…”

China’s growing commercial investment in the region (Cover notes “In 2000, the Chinese share of Latin American trade was merely 2%, while that of the United States was 53%. As of 2010, the Chinese share had grown to 11% of the total, while that of the United States had dropped to 39%…) has direct military applications. Commercial Chinese firms have bases on both sides of the Panama Canal, vital to the U.S. military, and Huawei, a telecommunications firm with strong ties to the Chinese military, has invested in the region, providing  a boon to Chinese intelligence.

All this comes at a time when the U.S. has reduced its economic presence in the region.  CNN Money reports that  in 2014, “Chinese banks sent nearly $30 billion in loans to Latin American governments last year, more than double the amount from 2014. It’s also more money than the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank gave to the region last year combined, according to the Inter-American Dialogue, a non-profit in Washington…The investments come as U.S. government aid and private investment in Latin America have declined for three straight years, according to State Department data and EPFR, a research firm that tracks fund flows…”What [the Chinese are] going for is influence — strategic power in the region to create dependence,” says Ilan Berman, vice president at American Foreign Policy Council. American “’influence has steadily retracted.”

 The importance of this must be understood in light of Beijing’s’ swiftly growing ability to project power, particularly naval power. The United States Navy, for the first time since the middle of the Second World War, is no longer an unchallengeable force at sea.  China already has more submarines than the U.S., and its fleet will be larger than America’s within four years.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Appeasement will not stop terror

The ruthless assault on a gay nightclub in Orlando illustrates a reality that those who have advocated reducing America’s activist role in the world fail to comprehend.  The bitter hatred against the United States is not the result of anything America or Europe has done, not in the Middle East, not in Afghanistan, and not anyplace else. It is not the result of the size or reach of our formerly dominant armed forces.  It is not the result of our economic system.

Indeed, if no U.S. or European soldier had ever set foot in the Middle East, if no oil had ever been drilled, if no interaction had ever taken place at all, the West would still be despised and targeted, not for what it does, but for what it is.

The Jihadist’s fury exists solely because of their extreme abhorrence of the essential nature of Western Civilization itself: the concept of individual freedom, of live and let live, of the triumph of reason over primitive instincts.

Yes, I did say primitive instincts, and that will probably infuriate most of the nation’s academics and the self-righteous chattering classes. For far too long, those in positions of influence in government, education, and the media have declined to emphasize the unique and wonderful accomplishments of Western Civilization. In the rush to be “multicultural,” they have relegated the achievements that have produced the greatest freedom, prosperity, health, and, yes, tolerance for all faiths that humanity has ever experienced to a par equal to that of other civilizations that are marked by substantial degrees of continued political repression, economic backwardness, and secular hatred that have been sharply diminished in the West.

No, the West is not perfect.  But (and I realize that this will also anger many) it has done much, much better than the rest of the planet, despite its faults. By “Western Civilization,” I do not limit the definition to just a geographical or ethnic description. Consider the difference between North and South Korea. Between Israel and many of its neighbors. Even within the New World, nations that have followed western patterns of government and tolerance, such as the U.S. and Canada, have advanced, while those that have adopted, some recently, (like Venezuela) the philosophy (even though it started with western thinkers) of socialist government, which more closely resembles that of the rest of the world,  have declined.

However, beware of the fact, choosing your therapist or counselor is not an http://respitecaresa.org/about-respite-care/dsc_7904/ canada tadalafil easy task. Fertility care once successful means conceiving again get viagra online will be easy. It doesn’t leave any serious side effects. it is clinically proven for safe use by men. best prices for cialis When you come across purchase levitra online any of unusual effect happening into your body, you can stop this medicine immediately consult with your doctor. The assault on women, Christians, Kurds, and gays in and by the Islamic world was not precipitated by any casus belli.  There has not been any attempted coup by women, gays, Kurds or Christian groups seeking to takeover current Moslem governments. Like clockwork, Jihadists and their apologists trot out litanies of alleged ancient wrongs. Of course, if we decided to refight ancient battles, the fighting would never stop.  America would still be fighting the British Monarchy, not to mention Germany and Japan.  More to the point, Europe would still have to be at war with the Islamic World; after all, the Islamic invasion of Europe predated the Crusades, that excuse which is trotted out by any terrorists looking to justify the latest incident of unjustified murder.

When terrible practices take place, such as the massive rape of females by ISIS, or the continued practice of slavery in certain parts of the world, it is not inappropriate for other nations, despite their own (far lesser) imperfections, to express horror at those heinous acts.

The typical response to Jihadi acts has been a study in self-delusion.  Responding, for example, to the terror assault in San Bernardino by criticizing gun ownership or falsely claiming there is a widespread bias against Moslems in America merely encourages and emboldens those who cling to any irrational justification for their actions. President Obama and Secretary Clinton inadvertently invited terror by their failure to respond to incidents such as Benghazi, and the ridiculous Oval Office comments following the San Bernardino shooting.

It is naïve to believe that all America has to do to avoid being targeted is to provide more diplomatic doubletalk. It is unrealistic to expect that Orlando-type attacks (or worse) can be avoided by appeasement.

The West is under relentless assault. Ignoring the crisis or blaming it on itself is a worthless and foolish response. If, indeed, the concepts of personal freedom are to survive, a far more viable and realistic response must be undertaken.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America Disunited, and the Abandonment of Core Beliefs

In 2014, the New York Analysis of Policy and Government recalled how the scholar Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. endorsed the concept of a melting pot rather than ethnic identity politics.  As he saw it, the alternatives were stark: a single, united country, or a tribalistic society in which different groups constantly quarreled with each other.

In the two years that have followed, both race and ideological relations have deteriorated.  In Early June, horrific photos of a threatening pursuit and attempted beating of an individual merely because the victim supported another candidate were seen on numerous outlets. Even more chillingly, some, particularly followers of Progressive viewpoints, failed to condemn the heinous act.

Writing for the Center for Politics, Alan I. Abramowitz and Steven Webster, noted that “The most important influence on the 2016 presidential election as well as the House and Senate elections will be the division of the American electorate into…partisan camps…” Throughout much of the world, loyalty, above all else, to the particular clan, ethnic group or race into which one is born—has caused devastating harm. Given the clear and abundant evidence of tribalism’s horrific impact on so much of the planet, why are so many in the U.S. Progressive movement and the left generally increasingly wedded to it?  Why is tribalism occurring in America?

In an insightful comment, Don Zapsic Jr, writing in the Columbus Dispatch, noted:

“A not-so-surprising source of tribalism in America comes from the federal government…Affirmative-action programs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have done more to divide and distance the U.S. citizenry from one another than prejudice and bigotry acting alone arguably ever could achieve. As a result, we tend to think of individuals in terms of race, religion, national origin, age, gender, sexual orientation and even culture. The following questions serve as a litmus test for tribalism: Is America more of a pressure cooker than a melting pot? Do political operatives generally acquire and maintain positions of power and influence through principled leadership or more by appeasement of critical-mass voting blocs? Is group entitlement and privilege promoted and embraced at the expense of national security and long-term economic stability?”

The Black Lives Matter (BLM) organization has recently been at the forefront of those who reject the concept of being seen as “American” as opposed to a member of an ethnic group.  Their website states:

“We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’…We see ourselves as part of the global Black family and we are aware of the different ways we are impacted or privileged as Black folk who exist in different parts of the world.”

BLM seeks to use incidents such as Ferguson, in which a police officer allegedly inappropriately shot a black man, to incite violence across the nation.  It doesn’t seem to matter to either that group or the politicians who sought to capitalize on it that a review of the facts eventually found that the police officer acted appropriately.  The myth of a disproportionately large killing of blacks by Police is disproven by statistics, as noted by Heather MacDonald in Hillsdale College’s Imprimis: “The nation’s police killed 987 civilians in 2015, according to a database compiled by the Washington Post. Whites were 50%–0r 493—of those victims, and blacks were 26 %–or 258.  Most of those victims of police shootings, white and black, were armed or otherwise threatening the officer with potentially lethal force…the black violent crime rate would actually predict that more than 26% of police victims would be black.”
This method can be so effective that you would not have the same New Year’s Resolutions year after year after year. canadian viagra professional Toxicity has become a great generic viagra online mouthsofthesouth.com concern in the twentieth century. Occupational therapists also assist in improving a person’s ability to perform tasks in their living and working environments. generic viagra from canada It should be consumed about half mouthsofthesouth.com levitra overnight shipping an hour before lovemaking.
The division runs far deeper than racial attitudes, ideological debates between liberals and conservatives, or the partisan wrangling of Democrats against Republicans. There is an entire segment of the U.S. population, particularly (but far from exclusively) among those schooled in the last few decades who have received little objective education on America’s history and founding principles, and who therefor have little intellectual affinity with the nation’s core beliefs.

That problem of rejection of America’s core beliefs is best illustrated, disturbingly, by statements of two U.S. Supreme Court Justices.

In 2012, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, in an address given in Cairo, Egypt, stated that “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.”

Fellow Obama appointee Justice Elena Kagan believes that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted on the basis of international law. During her tenure as Dean of Harvard Law School, notes Topica, “a student could graduate without taking a course on interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. But an international law course was mandatory.”

During her nomination hearing, Kagan refused to acknowledge the fundamental underpinnings and the central reason for the founding of the United States: the concept that individuals are born with inherent rights, and those rights cannot be taken or limited by governments.  Senator Tom Coburn (R-Kansas) pointedly asked the then-nominee whether she accepted the statement in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” She declined to agree.

Without this guiding concept of inherent rights, which Kagan refused to subscribe to, there is no reason for America to exist in its current form. It was for this reason that it was born. It was for this reason that the bitter faults of slavery and segregation were finally outlawed. It is for this reason that America has succeeded.

America was not built on a concept of ethnic or religious identity. It was founded on the concept of individual freedom.  Without it, it ceases to exist in any recognizable form. Absent that unifying principle, tribalism succeeds, and chaos follows.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Internet Free Speech Faces Grim Future

The world does not share America’s reverence for free speech, and that is becoming a problem for First Amendment supporters at home in the United States. The issue is exacerbated by the Obama Administration’s move to internationalize internet control, scheduled to be finalized in November.

Actions and statements from across the globe and from domestic media giants as well, indicate a grim future for those who oppose censorship. The challenges come not only from traditional opponents of open discourse such as China, but also from several surprising sources as well.

The technical website Phys.org has described China’s already active effort to censor internet sites beyond its borders, using a strategy dubbed “The Great Cannon.” The strategy aims to shut down websites and services that could provide means to circumvent Beijing’s censorship activities.  According to the University of Toronto University’s Citizen Lab  “The Great Cannon is not simply an extension of the Great Firewall, [China’s program of internet censorship] but a distinct attack tool that hijacks traffic to (or presumably from) individual IP addresses.”

Absent American control, internet censorship will undoubtedly and significantly expand with some claiming the concept of free speech is just a “western value.”

Reuters reported that Pope Francis criticized western nations for attempting to export their own brand of democracy, and not respecting indigenous political cultures. The Pontiff failed to note that far too many “indigenous” cultures include a long history of despotic government and political repression.

Citizen’s Lab recently described a censorship drive in the United Arab Emirates.  “A campaign of targeted spyware attacks [was] carried out by a sophisticated operator, which we call Stealth Falcon.  The attacks have been conducted from 2012 until the present, against Emirati journalists, activists, and dissidents.  We discovered this campaign when an individual purporting to be from an apparently fictitious organization called “The Right to Fight” contacted Rori Donaghy.  Donaghy, a UK-based journalist and founder of the Emirates Center for Human Rights, received a spyware-laden email in November 2015, purporting to offer him a position on a human rights panel.  Donaghy has written critically of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) government in the past, and had recently published a series of articles based on leaked emails involving members of the UAE government. Circumstantial evidence suggests a link between Stealth Falcon and the UAE government.”

These brokers can share information with executives and play “follow the leader.” It will cost the average person by destroying their life savings, their 401K and other pensions, but yet there’s been nothing in the papers that show the disparity and treatment, there’s been no movement to change this, and we wonder why there’s a financial crisis. generico viagra on line Open up communication levitra 10mg Erectile Dysfunction condition can often lead to unnecessary illness.Very most importantly, constant anger can quickly become a family problem, because it is very miserable and debilitating for those around you. Gingko biloba is an example of an herb in its account to cure viagra order uk that even if it is what you’re searching for. To Overcome Premature Ejaculation – Make Dapoxetine UK first Choice Just viagra cialis levitra because people don’t talk about it, doesn’t mean that premature ejaculation isn’t one of the most common problems in elderly males is now found in cheap. According to research in a book by Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen, “The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business” and the U.K.’s Guardian newspaper,  “The majority of the world’s internet users encounter some form of censorship – also known by the euphemism “filtering” …On the Chinese internet, you would be unable to find information about politically sensitive topics such as the Tiananmen Square protests, embarrassing information about the Chinese political leadership, the Tibetan rights movement and the Dalai Lama, or content related to human rights, political reform or sovereignty issues…Ideology and religious morals are likely to be the strongest drivers of these collaborations. Imagine if a group of deeply conservative Sunni-majority countries – say, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Algeria and Mauritania – formed an online alliance and decided to build a “Sunni web”… in … Iran..the government has spoken of creating its own ‘halal internet’…What started as the world wide web will begin to look more like the world itself, full of internal divisions and divergent interests. Some form of visa requirement will emerge on the internet.”

Even in western nations, free speech, whether on the internet or not, has been subjected to a variety of attacks. Some at the hands of government officials and some by terrorists. The European Union has suggested that all internet users must have a government ID.

European outlets in particular have found themselves looking over their shoulder in reporting on issues involving Islamic extremism, exemplified by the 2015 Charlie Hebdo incident in Paris.

The Tower, a U.K. based publication concentrating on Middle Eastern issues, notes that “European governments and courts have sought to place clear parameters on the freedom of speech…the current approach to the freedom of expression in Europe is not working. … A ban on bad speech is but a substitute for an open confrontation with it. We are weakened as a society by laws that tell us what we can or cannot hear or say. The regulation of free speech in order to prevent harm has done more harm than good. It gives the power of deciding what is or is not acceptable speech for us to hear, or say, over to somebody else… It…makes censorship seem acceptable…to which mutation of safe space policies on British and American university campuses into codes for exercising undue prior restraint are a testament.”

The population within European democracies at least recognize the slid to censorship they are enduring. When Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel sought to initiate prosecution of satirist Jan Böhmermann at the request of Turkish President Erdoğan for “insulting” comments made in a poem, a firestorm of protest forced her to back down.

The United States itself has not been immune to attacks on free speech. Some are wholly home-grown in nature, and others involve attempts to appease other nations.  Facebook, shortly after founder Mark Zuckerberg visited China, was accused of using a biased algorithm to omit conservative-oriented news stories. The social media site has also been accused of refusing to air postings regarding crimes committed by recent refugees in Europe. Twitter has suspended an account parodying Russia’s Putin.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Containing China

Battle lines between China and its Asian/Pacific neighbors including the U.S. were sharply drawn at the Shangri-La dialogue heldin Singapore. Thirty nations attended the conference, were Key flashpoints included China’s expansionist claims to control of regional islands, and Beijing’s refusal to abide by international law in its actions.

The regular gathering, sponsored by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) provides a forum for defense officials to gather and discuss significant topics. According to IISS senior fellow Alexander Neill, Sino-US tensions were a key element of this year’s gathering. In advance of the event, “US President Barack Obama made some rather pointed remarks directed towards Beijing, noting that America would not tolerate China’s ‘bullying’ tactics. That concept was the key motivation in the White House ending the 50 year arms embargo against Vietnam, now seen as an ally in the effort to contain Beijing.”

Much of the controversy arises from Beijing and Taiwan’s adherence to a policy known as the “Nine Dash Line,” essentially an arbitrary demarcation line on maps that assert Chinese control of vast oceanic areas. Neither other regional nations nor international law agree with the claim. The Brookings Institute has previously reported that Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Danny Russel, in testimony before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs stated, “Under international law, maritime claims in the South China Sea must be derived from land features. Any use of the ‘nine-dash line’ by China to claim maritime rights not based on claimed land features would be inconsistent with international law.”

U.S. concern over Chinese expansion was a key factor in President Obama’s ending the 50 year arms sales restriction against Vietnam, now seen as an important ally in the effort to contain Beijing. The U.S. will work with Hanoi to provide maritime security.

Widespread concern over China’s territorial claims, its aggressive moves which include expanding and militarizing small islands and its incursion into the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone have fostered discussions of establishing a NATO-like alliance in the area.
This cheap cialis from canada drug can relax your jaw and muscle tissues of the blood stream. Military patches have canadian sildenafil evolved over the years and each U.S. military branch, unit and division now has its own patch, a way to identify specific organizations and their purpose. But a disadvantage of using impotence treatment is just a see for more info now order generic viagra click away. When one suffers from this medical condition, it affects their esteem and confidence levels in negative manner as well. price of cialis 10mg http://djpaulkom.tv/crakd-see-how-this-bike-crew-takes-revenge-on-reckless-driver/
According to U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, “Now, unlike elsewhere in the world, peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific has never been managed by a region-wide, formal structure comparable to NATO in Europe.  That’s made sense for this region, with its unique history, geography, and politics, and where bilateral relationships have long served as the bedrock of regional security. And yet, as the region continues to change, and becomes more interconnected politically and economically, the region’s militaries are also coming together in new ways.  They’re building connections for a common purpose: upholding the security and stability critical to a principled and prosperous future. And these connections are now helping our countries plan together, exercise and train together, and operate together, more effectively and efficiently than ever before… this growing Asia-Pacific security network includes but is more than some extension of existing alliances. It weaves everyone’s relationships together … to help all of us do more, over greater distances, with greater economy of effort…This is a principled security network … By expanding the reach of all and by responsibly sharing the security burden, this principled network represents the next wave in Asia-Pacific security…even as the United States counters Russian aggression and coercion in Europe…”

Not unexpectedly, China’s response has been harsh. Paul McLeary and Adam Rawnseley, writing for Foreign Policy reported that Chinese Admiral Sun Jianguo, deputy chief of the Chinese military’s Joint Staff  Department  flatly rejected Defense Secretary Carter’s repeated assertion that Beijing’s aggressive moves in the South China Sea were isolating it from the world community.“We were not isolated in the past, we are not isolated now, and we will not be isolated in the future”…He added that many countries maintain a ‘Cold War mentality’ when dealing with China, saying they may only “end up isolating themselves.” The comments were a direct response to Carter’s accusation last month that China was building “a Great Wall of self-isolation” in the South China Sea. Carter repeated the line in Singapore. “We do not make trouble, but we have no fear of trouble,” Admiral Sun Jianguo said.

Secretary Carter pledged that the U.S. would remain the guarantor of regional security in the coming decades. To do so, he said, “the Defense Department is continuing to send its best people – including some of those new Naval officers and Marines …and also its most advanced capabilities to the Asia-Pacific.  That includes F-22 and F-35 stealth fighter jets, P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, continuous deployments of B-2 and B-52 bombers, and our newest surface warfare ships. The Defense Department is also investing in new capabilities critical to the rebalance.  We’re growing the number of surface ships [some dispute whether the shrunken U.S. Navy is, in fact, starting to rebuild] and making each of them more capable, and we’re investing in Virginia-class submarines, new undersea drones, the new B-21 Long-Range Strike Bomber, as well as in areas like cyber, and electronic warfare, and space.”

Whether the U.S. will actually fulfill that pledge remains questionable, as sharp Defense budget cuts and the growing need for a stronger American military presence in Europe and the Middle East limit its abilities in the Asian-Pacific region.  During his tenure in office, President Obama formally ended the policy of having armed forces capable of fighting two region wars simultaneously.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Clinton: Unfit for the White House?

The hyper-partisan environment of presidential politics is preventing an open discussion of the Clinton dilemma.

When the Clinton ethics question is raised, allies in politics and the media, well trained thanks to the unending trail of abuses of the public trust, respond vehemently, frequently alleging bias against female candidates or a fictional “vast right wing conspiracy,” intentionally ignoring the fact that Clintonian practices are sufficiently controversial to engender spontaneous opposition.

The reality is that despite the good intentions of their many supporters, the history of the Clintons is less a political movement than a criminal enterprise, in which an objective review of the records leads to a legitimate concern that official favors have been traded for personal enrichment, in a manner that may have seriously harmed the United States.

The Office of Inspector General’s Report on former Secretary Clinton’s emails  noted that “…Secretary Clinton should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary. At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act…”

This, of course, is just one part of the Clinton email scandal—probably, the lesser part.  The remaining question is what is in the emails themselves, particularly those that have not been made public

For most candidates, the OIG analysis would be harmful enough. Added to the long list of Hillary Clinton’s ethical violations and consistent record of devastating Obama/Clinton policy failures as secretary of state, (the failed reset with Russia, Benghazi, ISIS, the Russian/Chinese/Iranian/North Korean nuclear arms increases, alienation of key US allies, etc.) however, it raises the very serious question of how and why she will be the candidate of a major political party for President of the United States. Indeed, some members of her own party have raised that issue, even though her only current opponent is an aged socialist with only a limited chance of winning the general election, even against a candidate as unusual as Donald Trump.

The depth of opposition from many committed Democrats comes from the reality that the Clintons are more openly for sale than any other politicians at their high level. The New York Post recently noted that “Mandatory financial disclosures released this month show that, in just the two years from April 2013 to March 2015, the former first lady, senator and secretary of state collected $21,667,000 in “speaking fees,” not to mention the cool $5 mil she corralled as an advance for her 2014 flop book, ‘Hard Choices.’ Throw in the additional $26,630,000 her ex-president husband hoovered up in personal-appearance “honoraria…”
Another manual therapy used in cialis cheapest chiropractic care is massage. Let us throw http://icks.org/n/data/ijks/1483111470_add_file_5.pdf buy cheap cialis light on few of the new car games. Unfortunate sexual life makes men edgy and off and on again an erection is realized however not maintained long enough to finish sex; at different times an erection is never accomplished in any tadalafil prescription icks.org case. A single dose of Kamagra pill or are there other factors that must be considered? Read on brand cialis price to find out more.
Other ex-holders of high political office have earned large speaking fees, as well. But they did so after having left the political arena, and in a manner in which no real suspicion was raised that the acceptance of dollars was such a direct quid-pro-quo. Hillary’s solicitation of funds from foreign governments for the Clinton Foundation, a source of personal enrichment for the Clintons, while she was serving as Secretary of State, was a blatant violation of the public trust.

Also during her tenure as Secretary of State, Judicial Watch reports billions of dollars of funds were somehow “misplaced.”

The history of Clinton scandals is in a class by itself, not only for the amounts of dollars raised, but for the potential harm not only to the public trust but to the nation as a whole.  Serious questions still remain about the relationship of China’s efforts to make illegal campaign contributions during the Bill Clinton presidency, and President Clinton’s extraordinary act of allowing the sale of a supercomputer to China.

The China issue continues.  Time Magazine has just reported that “Wang Wenliang, [is] a Chinese national with U.S. permanent residency… An American company controlled by Wang made a $60,000 contribution to [Virginia Governor] McAuliffe’s campaign [McAuliffe is a very close friend of the Clintons, who recently gave the vote to over a half million convicted felons in an effort to insure that Clinton carries the state in November] three weeks before the fundraiser. Less than a month later, a separate Wang company pledged $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation, the first of several donations that eventually totaled $2 million.

Perhaps the most devastating ethical question surrounding Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State concerns the transfer of uranium, the substance required for the construction of nuclear weapons, to Russia. The New York Times, not known for being anti-Clinton, reported: “the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain…As the Russians gradually assumed control … in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013…a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons…And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin.”

The Clintons protest that the complaints are just part of the usual partisan smear campaign. But their long and unique history, their close association with numerous ethical issues too numerous to repeat here, and the unprecedented nature of the involvement of foreign governments raises substantial issues about the inherent lack of appropriateness of another Clinton presidency.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Employment Downturn continues

The economic news continues to deteriorate, as the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)  report reveals that job creation is at a bare minimum level. But the overall lack of job creation is only part of the problem. Some of the most important jobs for the U.S. middle class are actually shrinking in number, the labor participation rate continues to decline to dangerously low levels, and the number of those who could only find part time work has grown larger.

According to the BLS release, “nonfarm payroll employment changed little (+38,000.) Employment increased in health care. Mining continued to lose jobs…In May, the civilian labor force participation rate decreased by 0.2 percentage point to 62.6 percent.  The rate has declined by 0.4 percentage point over the past 2 months…The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (also referred to as involuntary part-time workers) increased by 468,000 to 6.4 million in May, after showing little movement since November. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job. In May, 1.7 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, little changed from a year earlier….These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. Among the marginally attached, there were 538,000 discouraged workers in May, essentially unchanged from a year earlier. Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.2 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in May had not searched for work for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities.”

The raw numbers are discouraging, but an examination of the types of jobs lost and the few gained provides even more cause for concern.

The types of jobs that could provide a boost to the general economy both providing good pay and by reducing the continuous and massive trade deficit have continued to decline in number.

In May, mining employment continued to decline, losing 10,000 positions. The BLS notes that “Since reaching a peak in September 2014, mining has lost 207,000 jobs. Support activities for mining accounted for three-fourths of the jobs lost during this period, including 6,000 in May.”

Similar problems can be seen in manufacturing. Employment in durable goods declined by 18,000 in May, with job losses of 7,000 in machinery and 3,000 in furniture and related products.
For those men, who suffer from the embarrassing problem of premature ejaculation and erectile buying levitra from canada dysfunction. Here we will discuss three of levitra brand online the most common sexual disorders which have an intimate link with cardiovascular disease is Erectile Dysfunction (ED) & Premature Ejaculation? Modern treatment of Erectile Dysfunction has been taken care off. When you don’t sleep, you don’t have the energy for a http://www.icks.org/data/ijks/1483475739_add_file_4.pdf pfizer viagra canada hard erection. Inflammation Is The Causal Link Between Psoriasis And other serious conditions, we now realize that psoriasis is a hyper-proliferative inflammatory skin disease that often occurs as cheap viagra rough, red, flaking lesions.
Masking the downturn in employment are some gains in health care, which added 46,000 jobs in May, with increases occurring in ambulatory health care services (24,000), hospitals (17,000), and nursing care facilities (5,000). Over the year, health care employment has increased by 487,000.

The BLS also downgraded previously reported employment numbers. The increase in total nonfarm payroll employment for March was reduced from 208,000 To 186,000, and the change for April was reduced from 160,000 to +23,000. With these revisions, employment gains in March and April combined were 59,000 less than previously reported.

A record 94,708,000 prospective workers are not currently in the workforce (a labor participation rate drop to 62.6%.)  Overall, this is the worst jobs report since September of 2010. The jobs creation number over the past three months is only 347,000, the worst stretch since 2012, and many of those are not the most desirable positions.

The prospects for future gains remain bleak. An excessively high regulatory regime, combined with anti-job policies such as the President’s Clean Power Plan and America’s uncompetitive corporate tax rate point to a continuation and perhaps a worsening of the current doldrums.

The poor numbers cannot be attributed to the 2007 recession; they indicate an economy that is entering a wholly new and separate downturn, a result of failed economic policies.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Ignoring Catastrophe

Russian and Chinese activities correspond precisely to those that would be undertaken in preparation for the initiation of a major war. The two nations have dramatically and rapidly upgraded their militaries, trained together, expanded their overseas bases, insured access to raw materials, and conducted probing operations to test the responses of their foes.

President Obama appears oblivious, as does his two Democrat would-be successors. All three advocate continuing the addiction to transferring funds from defense to vote-buying social welfare programs. They continue to alienate U.S. allies. They adhere to tax and environmental policies that deteriorate the U.S. defense industrial base, and refuse to acknowledge the dramatic increase in the armaments and aggressive actions of Moscow and Beijing.

The deterioration of both the current arsenal of the U.S. armed forces, as well as funding for future replacements, is not limited to weapons.  Oval Office policies which have encouraged the retirement or outright dismissal of experienced military personnel play a large role in the downward trajectory of America’s defense infrastructure.

Affordable and common-sense precautions, such as protecting key assets from electromagnetic pulse destruction, have not been taken. It has been estimated that it would cost just a few billion dollars to accomplish this, yet it was wholly excluded from Mr. Obama’s $800 billion “stimulus” package.

The mass media’s lack of interest in military matters combined with its ideological inclination to favor domestic programs over national security prevents the citizenry from getting a clear picture of how hazardous the current global situation truly is.

There are salient facts that rarely get discussed:

For the first time in history, Russia has a lead in strategic nuclear weapons, a result of the 2009 New Start Treaty. Moscow also possesses a ten-to-one lead in tactical atomic weapons. China’s known nuclear force is powerful, and intelligence sources believe that many more weapons may have been built, deployed, and hidden in a vast network of tunnels. Both are more modern than America’s increasingly obsolete deterrent. Added together, the U.S. is overmatched.

China already has more submarines than the United States, and by 2020, its navy will be larger than its American counterpart. The lead will not be merely quantitative.  The ships Beijing is building are every bit as capable as any in the world. With the loss of senior personnel, the American “experience advantage” is rapidly becoming ancient history. China has also developed an extraordinarily advanced shore to ship missile that dramatically changes the dynamic in sea power. Basing that missile both on mainland China and on the new island it has constructed in the South China Sea will establish regional dominance.

Russia, too, has engaged in a significant naval buildup, and has taken steps to provide its ready-for-war fleet with expanded basing infrastructure. Moscow’s actions in invading the Ukraine to insure control of its Black Sea naval base, its support of Syria’s Assad to protect its Tartus naval base, its extraordinary Arctic Sea buildup, and its return to Cuba are all clear examples.

The combined actions of the two nations along with the reduced size of the American Navy, which has shrunk from 600 ships to less than 274, present a potentially catastrophic challenge.
Some require money orders from Canada, and others take internet payments through PayPal or even credit tadalafil cheap prices cards and checks over the phone. However, about http://robertrobb.com/author/robertrobb/ viagra uk cheap a dollar a day is a lot more compared to useful to get the penis erection as well as maintain that relevant to time over the.Penegra 100mg for men as being a treatment solution. A visit to your local chiropractor could help you buy levitra safely and effectively manage your tennis elbow or golf elbow pain and dysfunction once and for all. Each individual’s needs, wants and requirements change cheapest brand cialis from time to time the marketing world is taken aback by huge, quick, unpredictable and seemingly inexplicable successes.
The U.S. defense strategy is heavily invested in space, far more so than any potential adversary. However, China has developed and demonstrated the capability of destroying American satellites. If they are destroyed, replacement will not be easy.  Remember, the U.S. is dependent on Russian rocket engines to put many payloads in orbit.  In the conflict that may soon come, the Pentagon will rapidly become deaf and blind.

The 21st Century presents a far different world than that of the 1940’s.  The oceans that insulated the U.S. and gave it time to build an armed force sufficient to counter any foes no longer provide a barrier.

The once-mighty American industrial base has been reduced to a shadow of itself, and lacks the capability to rapidly build quantities of weapons as it did in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor.  Just one example: there is only one plant in the entire U.S. that can manufacture tanks—and President Obama has repeatedly attempted to put it out of business.  In what can only be described as an act of insanity, some U.S. weapons systems depend on China for key components.  The military Washington has on hand is the only force it will have to depend on in the event of hostilities.

While Russia and China have fielded advanced new weapons systems on land, air, and sea, many of the Pentagon’s advanced weapons programs have been cut back, delayed, or eliminated.

The United States no longer is secure within its own hemisphere.  The Russian Navy has started to return to Cuba, and its nuclear bombers are being refueled in Nicaragua. China has infrastructure on both sides of the Panama Canal. Both Moscow and Beijing have established military-to-military ties with several Latin American and Caribbean nations.

For over half a century, the West had been secure in the knowledge that the U.S.-NATO alliance was the strongest military force on the planet.  That is no longer the case. The U.S. has decreased its conventional military strength and has failed to modernize its nuclear weapons, but Europe continues to act as if nothing has changed.  Since the end of the Second World War, it has largely depended on America for the bulk of its defense, and still does so. Freed of the burden of defense spending, it developed politically popular but extraordinarily expensive entitlement programs. European politicians lack the will to divert funds to their national security needs.

The increasingly close-knit Russian, Chinese, and Iranian axis has a real advantage over the U.S., NATO, and Pacific allies.  The three nations are in close proximity (Russia and China share an extensive border) and need not worry about their lines of supply and communication being interrupted. Geographically, Russia has a dominant position in Eastern Europe, China is rapidly becoming a hegemon in Asia, and Iran, with Russia’s assistance, has become the force to be reckoned with in the strategically vital Middle East. With their vastly increased navies, Russia and China can wreak havoc with U.S. attempts to reinforce bases and allies spread across the planet.

Unlike Germany and Japan in the Second World War, the new axis of Russia and China will not be at a disadvantage when it comes to raw materials.  Russia has vast reserves of energy, and China has worked diligently to corner the market in vital minerals, particularly in Africa. Indeed, when it comes to those raw materials, it will be America and its allies that face a severe challenge.

Too many politicians on both sides of the Atlantic have apparently decided that it is far more personally profitable to pretend that this imminent crisis does not exist than to take the necessary and expensive steps to address it. But whether the bill comes due in the form of an actual attack or the threat of an attack to obtain a massive strategic goal, it will come.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S., NATO Must Act to Deter Russia Threat to Baltics

Russia’s recent aggressive “buzzing” of an American naval ship in the Baltic Sea should not have come as a surprise.  Despite the reluctance of many to recognize the fact, Moscow has entered into an era of aggressiveness even exceeding that of the later years of the Soviet Union. Emboldened by inadequate U.S. defense budgets, and strengthened by a lopsided arms treaty that gave it a lead in nuclear weapons for the first time in history, the Kremlin is increasingly acting in a manner which suggests it is moving towards an armed incursion into more nations than just Georgia and Ukraine.  If it chose to do so in the Baltics, studies conclude, it would defeat NATO forces handily.

In March, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenber noted: “When it comes the security situation in the Baltic Region we see a changed and more challenging security environment. .. We have seen a significant Russian buildup, military buildup in …the Baltic region with more planes, with more naval presence and also with more troops…”

Stoltenber’s remarks were expanded on by his Deputy, Ambassador Alexander Vershbow:

“… Russia’s aggression against Ukraine – including the first changing of borders by force in Europe since World War II – represented what I called a ‘new strategic reality,’ one that is even starker today. Since the start of the Ukraine crisis, Russia has continued to undermine the post-War and post-Cold War international order, an order based on respect for the sovereignty of nations, for the rule of law, and for human rights.  Russia is trying to turn back the clock to a time when it dominated countries within its sphere of influence through force and intimidation…

“Russia has embraced the promotion of insecurity, and withdrawn from all manner of military transparency agreements.  Russian combat forces can move along the full length of its border with great speed and stealth.  It also has considerable anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons that could impede NATO reinforcements (its so-called anti-access/area denial capability).  And it has shown in Ukraine that it can combine military power with unconventional ‘hybrid’ methods – cyberattacks, subversion, disinformation – to destabilize its neighbours.”

Moscow’s threat is greatest in the Baltic region. The Rand organization conducted an analysis of potential Russian aggression in that area, and the results are highly disturbing. The outcome, it reports, is unambiguous: “NATO cannot successfully defend the territory of its most exposed members.” Indeed, according to Rand’s study, the Kremlin’s forces could complete their conquest in about 60 hours.
It buy viagra usa is an issue which has troubled the male population throughout the world. For example, if you announce an offer is available for a limited time only, remind your customers 3 or 4 times before the deadline date arrives with purchased here viagra on line increasing urgency each time. The medicine is available in the levitra online various sweetening flavors. Its deficiency may cause extreme fatigue, pale skin, headaches, lack of focus, https://pdxcommercial.com/property/3835-ne-tillamook-street-portland-oregon-97212/ buy cheap levitra cold hands and feet and also hair loss.
The Center for New American Security worries that NATO has not kept up with growing challenges, particularly those of Russia’s current tactics and strategy:

“NATO is no longer as strong or resilient militarily or institutionally as it should be. Its disinvestment in force structure over the past generation, even as its core decisionmaking bodies have become calcified in their approaches to challenges, have left the organization inflexible in the face of emerging hybrid threats. Lastly, the alliance has become increasingly aware that it no longer has a coherent strategy to confront a rapidly changing world, and that the world knows it. This conveys a sense of institutional vulnerability, inviting a response. Russia’s aggression on the eastern flank of Europe and the unrest in the Middle East with its ensuing migration crisis both reflect the strategic vacuum that is Europe, drawing in conflict as a black hole draws in matter. NATO must gather its collective wisdom and present a united strategic front to the world.”

Other nations have noticed NATO’s increased vulnerability, particularly following the inexplicable withdrawal of American armor by President Obama. The Atlantic Council reports that “… the U.S. is exerting less visible political leadership in the Alliance than before…. a revisionist and externally aggressive Russia poses a short-term threat to the Alliance… For the U.S., responding to security threats in the Baltic Sea region is ultimately about the credibility of its global foreign policy and position as a superpower.”

The  problem of protecting the Baltics is not unsolvable.  The Rand study found that “A force of about seven brigades, including three heavy armored brigades — adequately supported by airpower, land-based fires, and other enablers on the ground and ready to fight at the onset of hostilities — could suffice to prevent the rapid overrun of the Baltic states.”

Ironically, the type of weaponry needed to accomplish this is exactly what President Obama withdrew from Europe.

Categories
Quick Analysis

49% of U.S. Universities Censor Students

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has found that 49.3% of the 440 universities it surveyed maintain severely restrictive speech codes, policies that clearly and substantially prohibit protected speech. The only good news for First Amendment advocates is that the number of colleges doing so has been steadily declining.

According to FIRE, “Despite the critical importance of free speech on campus, too many universities—in policy and in practice—censor and punish students’ and faculty members’ speech and expressive activity. One way that universities do this is through the use of speech codes—policies prohibiting speech that, outside the bounds of campus, would be protected by the First Amendment.”

The CATO organization  believes the problem can be traced to the “massive expansion of the bureaucratic class at universities, which officially began outnumbering the number of full-time instructors in 2005, and the rise of the ‘risk management’ industry, which makes a fortune teaching universities how to avoid lawsuits by regulating almost every aspect of student life.” The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is the federal agency, according to CATO, that has instituted a “hair trigger” that chills speech.

According to CATO, “By the late 1980s, colleges were adopting “anti-harassment” codes that restricted protected speech. In the mid-1990s, the campus speech code phenomenon converged with the expansion of federal anti-discrimination law by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. OCR encouraged and even required harassment codes, and although its guidance tried to ‘balance’ the need for these codes with the First Amendment, by the time FIRE was founded in 1999, universities were using the “federal government made me do it” excuse to justify even the most laughably unconstitutional speech codes.”

In reaction to the officially sanctioned repression of free speech, students have turned both to petitions and law suites.

In some cases, it can be related to a number of causes, and can last for few hours or few order cheap levitra days depending on the person’s health condition. The entire procedure does not involve or interfere tadalafil canada mastercard with any of the products. Brantingham performed chiropractic manipulations like graded axial elongation, mobilization of the sesamoids, adjustment look at here now lowest prices viagra of ankle and foot pain, and sports related injuries. Doctors should also be told abut the medical history to avoid any future complications. cheap tadalafil india Get More Information Students at Dartmouth University have placed a petition on the Change.org  website.  The key portion of the petition reads:

“We, the undersigned, feel that it is our duty to address certain issues that threaten the current and future well-being of Dartmouth College…the Dartmouth administration has spent its time policing student life. Buoyed by the idea that the College should support exclusionary ‘safe spaces’ that act as a barrier against uncomfortable ideas, administrators have assumed the role of paternalistic babysitters. By effectively taking sides in sensitive debates and privileging the perspectives of certain students over other…administrators have crossed the line between maintaining a learning environment that is open to all and forcing their own personal views onto the entire campus. In doing so, they have undermined the value of civility, harmed the free exchange of ideas, and performed a disservice to those students who see their time in college as preparation for success in the real world…The Greek system, which has historically provided students with a social arena relatively free from the control of administrators, has been subjected to increasingly strict administrative control as well…We believe that the administration should treat students like the legal adults they are and cease chipping away at free speech, free thought, and free association…”

The most recent lawsuit was filed by the Alliance Defendng Freedom (ADF) on May 19, on behalf of Young America’s Foundation, California State University-Los Angeles Young Americans for Freedom, columnist Ben Shapiro, and a CSU-LA student, challenging what they perceive to be the unconstitutional policies and practices of the university.

According to ADF, “Shapiro was scheduled to give a presentation entitled ‘When Diversity Becomes a Problem’ at CSU-LA on Feb. 25, as part of a free speech event organized by YAF. University officials first attempted to shut down the event. When those efforts failed, professors helped incite a mob of protestors to block entry to the venue… [they] flooded the university’s Student Union and physically blocked access to the theater where Shapiro was scheduled to speak… CSU-LA unilaterally decided what ideas are permissible, in a flagrant violation of the First Amendment, and even allowed an aggressive mob to menace free speech supporters,” said ADF Senior Counsel David Hacker. ‘The defendants’ actions violated numerous university policies, as well as state and local laws. By blocking access to the event, the protestors created a serious safety hazard and denied our clients’ fundamental rights to free speech, due process, and equal protection of law.”

ADF filed the lawsuit, Young America’s Foundation v. Covino, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.