Category: Quick Analysis

Categories
Quick Analysis

Debunking the myth of western colonialism as an excuse for Islamic terrorism

Muslim extremists frequently attempt to justify their numerous atrocities and acts of aggression by citing alleged past injuries at the hands of foreign powers. The actual historic record tends to indicate that, since the fall of the Roman Empire, aggression at the hands of Arab powers has been far more prevalent than the reverse.

James Arlandson, writing in the American Thinker, disputes the European colonialism excuse

“Historical facts say that Islam has been imperialistic—and would still like to be, if only for religious reasons. Many Muslim clerics, scholars, and activists, for example, would like to impose Islamic law  around the world. Historical facts say that Islam, including Muhammad, launched their own Crusades against Christianity long before the European Crusades.”

The Gatestone Institute reports: “Every time the ISIS, Boko Haram, Iran, or any terrorist group in the Muslim world is discussed, many people tend to hold the West responsible for the devastation and murders they commit. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Blaming the failures in the Muslim world on Western nations is simply bigotry and an attempt to shift the blame and to prevent us from understanding the real root cause of the problem.”

Sources not aligned with the United States or its NATO allies agree. The Russian news source rt.com  notes: “Muslims must stop blaming Western foreign policy, Islamophobia and online grooming for radicalization and should start taking responsibility for their community, according to the chairman of the Muslim Forum.”

A Redstate  analysis reveals:

You tell yourself that maybe it was always that way – viagra without prescription the car is, after all, no longer new. Scientists and medics have been working on developing the highly innovative, next generation cheapest cialis india pills is known to have a rejuvenating effect on your liver. Remember, these factors are necessary but may not sildenafil cheapest price be sufficient space for one-on-one activities with a class of medications known as Pde5 inhibitors. One such pill is Kamagra, which helps you boost your flow of blood and release semen’s that would help you enjoy powerful orgasms. buy cialis http://www.midwayfire.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Approved-Minutes-2-21-17.pdf “…when Islam first arose, much of what we think of today as Islamic ‘territory’ in Anatolia, the Levant and North Africa was Christian until conquered by the heirs of Muhammad, such that speaking of one side’s incursions into the other’s territory requires you to ignore how that territory was seized in the first place. That entire region had been part of the Roman and later Byzantine empires, and was culturally part of the West until it was conquered by Muslim arms – Rome is closer geographically to Tripoli than to London, Madrid is closer to Casablanca than to Berlin, Athens is closer to Damascus than to Paris.

“All that said, it’s worth remembering that the Crusades arose in the late Eleventh Century only after four centuries of relentless Islamic efforts to conquer Europe, and the Christians of the Crusading era cannot be evaluated without that crucial context…

“Starting in the middle of the Seventh Century, when Islam was still mostly united under a single political entity, you begin to see Islamic incursions into Europe (including Constantinople, which was effectively one of the leading European cities at the time) – and from there, the conquests and attempted conquests marched on. If you look on a map over this period, you see an almost continuous line of advance on Europe from all sides but the north – from Spain and France in the west to Italy in the center to Constantinople in the east to the frontiers of Georgia in the Caucasus, with the islands of the Mediterranean on the front lines…”

What of the much-discussed period of modern European colonialism in the region? According to The Gatestone Institute:

“European Empires — the British, French and Italians — had a short-lived presence in North Africa and the Middle East compared with the Ottoman Empire, which ruled over that region for more than 500 years,” said the historian Niall Ferguson.…Muslim states continue to occupy and colonize various territories — including Kurdistan, Baluchistan and the northern part of Cyprus, an EU member state.”One of the most tragic consequences of the 1974 Turkish invasion [of Cyprus] ,” according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cyprus, “and the subsequent illegal occupation of 36.2% of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus, is the violent and systematic destruction of the cultural and religious heritage in the occupied areas.”

There are no justifiable excuses for atrocities or aggression. The Muslim extremist excuse of western colonialism bears the further handicap of being historically inaccurate.

Categories
Quick Analysis

How to deal with Russia

On June 23, the Chair of the House Armed Services Committee,  Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tx)  delivered a major address to the Atlantic Council outlining how the United States should deal with Russia. The following are the key points.

Looking back from the perspective of 70 years, two well-known warnings of 1946 were amazingly perceptive and prescient, and I believe that they can continue to enlighten us today in our struggle with one of the new faces of tyranny that we confront.

George Kennan had clashed with superiors who were not ready to hear the realities driving Soviet Russia. In response to inquiries from the Treasury and State Departments, he sent back a cable discussing what lay underneath Soviet actions and motivations in the famous Long Telegram on February 22, 1946. He wrote, “At bottom of Kremlin’s neurotic view of world affairs is traditional and instinctive Russian sense of insecurity.” . . . And they have learned to seek security only in patient but deadly struggle for total destruction of rival power, never in compacts and compromises with it.” Less than two weeks later, on March 5, 1946, a foreign politician then in opposition gave a speech which shook up public opinion about our wartime ally. Winston Churchill told an audience in Fulton, Missouri, which included President Truman, “I do not believe that Soviet Russia desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines.” “From what I have seen of our Russian friends and Allies during the war, I am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less respect than for weakness, especially military weakness.” These insights, among others, helped guide our approach to dealing with the Soviet Union until its collapse…

… But, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, most of us thought and hoped that without the ideology of communism, Russia would enter the community of nations as a responsible, constructive participant. Just as Churchill and Roosevelt were misled by Stalin, we have been disappointed. Perhaps we underestimated something deeper in the Russian psyche, which Kennan pointed out pretty clearly.

Despite the growing warning signs, by the time the Obama Administration took office, it followed a very different approach toward Russia than one guided by the insights of Kennan and Churchill. Within the first month, Vice President Biden said it was “time to press the reset button” with Russia, and shortly Secretary of State Clinton was off to deliver an actual, if mistranslated, button. Later that year, the President canceled the Third Site missile defense plan, surprising our allies, the Poles and Czechs. The next year, the President announced that he had concluded that “the situation in Georgia need no longer be considered an obstacle” to reaching agreements with the Russians. Among other milestones was the famous microphone that picked up the President telling Russian President Medvedev, that “all these issues, but particularly missile defense, can be solved, but it’s important for him [Putin] to give me space. . . . After my election I have more flexibility.”

We saw that flexibility later as the U.S. backed away a second time from missile defense plans that aggravated Moscow.

We also, at that time, began to cut our defense spending. Meanwhile a new government in Ukraine did not want to live under Moscow’s thumb, leading to the invasion and annexation of Crimea, then invasion and occupation of portions of eastern Ukraine. It is in many ways the most significant breach of European borders since the end of World War II. Our response has been primarily economic sanctions and additional training exercises.

But the Administration, along with some of our European allies, has so far refused to provide the weapons the Ukrainians need to defend themselves. Lenin is often quoted as saying, “Probe with bayonets. If you encounter mush, proceed; if you encounter steel, withdraw.” It seems that Mr. Putin and those around him do not see economic sanctions as steel.

How stand things today? The Russian defense budget is increasing about 10% despite the economic sanctions with most of the money going to procurement. While the limits on “strategic” launchers and warheads are equal for us under the New Start treaty, Russia is modernizing both, including 2 new land-based ICBM’s, 2 new submarine launched ballistic missiles, a new class of SSBN’s, a new long range cruise missile, with other ICBMs and cruise missiles in development.

All the while, they continue to manufacture new nuclear warheads and maintain roughly 10 times the number of tactical nuclear warheads that we do. The Russian military openly discusses doctrinal changes which have broadened the circumstances under which they would use nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, they are in violation of the INF treaty, as well as other international agreements. Ukraine is not the only place we see aggressive, confrontational behavior as Russian aircraft and ships conduct provocative maneuvers rarely seen even at the height of the Cold War. In no area are they more aggressive than in propaganda, both internally and with neighboring countries.

Visiting Eastern Europe, one hears a lot about the massive, relentless misinformation campaign coming from Moscow. And when it comes to Ukraine, there seems no limit to the lies and extensive efforts to cover up the truth of direct Russian military involvement. Even on the political front media reports evidence that Russia helps finance green protest and anti-fracking movements in Europe, while providing employment for former European officeholders. The dominant topic of the Munich Security Conference this year was hybrid warfare, which refers to a variety of tactics and deceptions to advance a nation’s goals and to complicate any response from the other side. The Russians are not the only adversary using these tactics, but they pose special challenges, especially when some allies are all too willing to look for excuses not to act…

So in summary, the next President will have sitting on his or her desk a situation in which the one country that could pose an existential threat to the United States has growing military capabilities, a growing willingness to use them, a string of provocative actions and outright aggression, along with brazen deception as a matter of government policy without much of an effective response.

And that it just one of the many national security threats and challenges facing the U.S. What should we do? 535 Members of Congress cannot devise or implement national security strategy. What we can do is help clarify thinking, enlighten public opinion, and ensure that the next President will have the tools he or she needs to defend the country and protect our interests.

I suggest 5 elements are key, not only to deal with the growing Russian threat, but also with the other challenges we face:

  1. Speak the truth. Historic changes after World War II came about because Kennan, Churchill, and others were willing to speak the truth. Domestic political calculations and spin are too often the enemy of the truth. Americans and others need to know the facts of Russian involvement in Ukraine. I think we Americans tend to undervalue the battle of ideas. We took it seriously during the Cold War. But whether it is the struggle against radical Islam or against European aggression, the fight for the truth to be heard and believed is especially important in a networked world. Among other benefits, it lets our allies know that they are not alone. We need the organizations, capability, and political will to fight on that battlefield.

 

  1. Strengthen our defense, which starts with how much we spend. Next year’s budget is subject of confusing political maneuvering right now between Capitol Hill and the White House. Both the House and Senate passed Budget Resolutions and now Defense Authorization Bills at the level of defense funding requested by the President. It is the level that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dempsey called the “lower ragged edge” of what it takes to defend the country. Yet the President has threatened to veto either the authorization or appropriations bills or both at his requested level unless Congress agrees to spend more money on domestic agencies, such as the IRS and EPA. Just last Friday, the President repeated his warning to a group of mayors, saying “I will not sign bills that seek to increase defense spending before addressing any of our needs here at home.”

 
Some foreign pharmacies and regencygrandenursing.com levitra 60 mg some online pharmacies are delivering the medicine after getting the proper order from the patient party. Some people wait until they have used the last one in regencygrandenursing.com online cialis no prescription order to make the order. Therefore, they can reduce shedding, moisturize dry coat and heal levitra in india price flaking skin. It cannot be used by men who take nitrate drugs for chest pain, also referred to as angina, should not take any dose without consulting a healthcare professional. usa cheap viagra
I note that history has a way of turning irony into tragedy as today Secretary Carter is in Europe working to bolster our NATO allies’ commitment to the alliance, increase their defense budgets, and stiffen spines against Russia. He does that just as the President is holding the defense bills hostage here at home for his own political ends. Nothing would better underscore Secretary Carter’s message than the President’s prompt signature on a bill that funds our military, aids Ukraine, and adds resources to our posture in Eastern Europe. Increasing money to the Overseas Contingency Account is not the ideal way to fund defense, and I agree that we very much need higher, consistent, predictable funding. But holding defense hostage for higher EPA funding will not achieve that goal, and it certainly will not make our nation safer. The fact is that our defense spending has been cut 21% counting the effects of inflation over the last four years, and the world is not 21% safer. As Charles Krauthammer has famously noted, “Decline is a choice.”

 

We have a choice right now to meet the “lower ragged edge” of what is needed to defend the country or to play politics and end up with significantly less than is required. The choice we make may well prove to be a significant milestone on what the next 70 years will look like. As far as how we spend that money to strengthen our defenses, our nuclear deterrent requires special attention. This week our Committee will have several events on the topic. It is the foundation for all of our defense efforts, yet we have taken it for granted, neglecting the systems, the infrastructure, and the people involved in making sure those complex machines are safe, reliable and effective. The weapons and the delivery systems are all aging out about the same time, and maintaining a credible nuclear deterrent will have to be a major priority for the next administration and Congress. In tight budgets, it is tempting to shave off research and development funding. Tight budgets also cause institutional interests to be more protective of what they have. Neither of those temptations will help us meet the challenge posed by peer competitors. Deputy Secretary Work is leading a push known as the 3 rd Offset to  stop the further erosion of American technological advantage. It is a matter of considerable importance and urgency. Few defense systems add uncertainty and complications into an adversary’s planning process as much missile defense. And few defense systems help reassure worried allies as much. An expedited push on both technological development and fielding of existing systems is needed. The new domain of warfare — cyber – poses special challenges for those of us who value the rule of law. But the threat is growing faster than we are able to deal with it. It is not our technical expertise that I worry about; it is our laws and policies that are not keeping up.

 

  1. Improve our Agility – We need not only to allocate more resources to defense, we need to make sure these resources are spent more effectively. That is one of the reasons both the House and Senate have put a high priority on defense reform. But an even more important reason to reform the Pentagon is to improve the agility of our system.

 

To be blunt, if it continues to take us 20 years to field a new airplane, we can never maintain a technological edge over our adversaries. While there are certain trends we can see, such as the increasing importance of the cyber domain, we have to be as ready as we can be to deal with the unexpected in this complex, volatile world. Rigidity is our enemy – whether it is in our bureaucratic organizations, in our military strategy and tactics, in our procurement systems, or in our decision-making. This year, we are focusing on reform of acquisition, reform of our personnel system, and reduction of overhead. Improving efficiency is one objective of these reforms, but to me improved agility is the overriding one.

 

  1. Stand strong with allies While the United States must have the capability to defend ourselves and our interests on our own, it is preferable and more likely that we will do so with allies. Whether it is Europe, Asia, or the Middle East, allies must pull their share of the weight. The fact that only four NATO allies are meeting the 2% of GDP target is not only unfair, it is most likely seen by Moscow as further evidence of mush. The U.S. should lead by example, stop the decline in our defense budgets, and demand that others meet the targets. We have to give those willing to defend their country against aggression the means to do so. It is disturbing to me that some here and in Europe see themselves sitting on Mount Olympus, passing judgment on who is qualified to fight an invasion of their country and who is not. It may be that if we provide the Ukrainians with lethal assistance to defend themselves that Putin will up the ante. But they still have the right to defend themselves, and Putin will pay a price for increased causalities – one he is obviously very nervous about paying. We need a concentrated effort to look at what works and what doesn’t when it comes to train and equip efforts. We have had successful and unsuccessful examples over the years, and later this year our Committee will take a look at both.

 

  1. Use all instruments of national power In 2007 I served on the Commission on Smart Power, whose recommendations were largely a matter of common sense before they got caught up in politics. We need the full range of capabilities and the judgment to know which tool to use in which circumstance. Secretaries of Defense have become strong advocates for funding of other agencies, yet the day-to-day frustration of antiquated approaches, bureaucratic infighting, stove-piped bureaucracies have led to more and more tasks being assigned the U.S. military. They will do whatever they are asked, but sometimes I worry that we ask too much.

 

One clear example of a non-defense tool that would make a difference in national security is energy. We need to end the ban on oil exports. The result would be lower fuel prices for our consumers, higher prices for our producers, and a step towards weaning several nations off of Russian energy.

 

Today we live in an unstable new world with some important parallels to those faced after World War II. The past gives us some positive examples to follow and other examples which provide a warning. Before the war began, in mid-1930s, as Britain was losing its superiority in the air over Germany, Churchill lamented, “When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand we apply too late the remedies which then might have effected a cure.” “There is nothing new in the story. . . . Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong – those are the features which constitute the needless repetition of history.” Needless indeed.

 

We must not allow ourselves to fall into that trap as too many others before us have. On the other hand, we have the opportunity to learn from their mistakes and to benefit from the example of those who did meet their historical moment so that we may craft a security structure that rises to the challenge of our dangerous, volatile world. And so that 70 years from now, future generations will look back with gratitude at what we were able to put in place. We must not let them down.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The unemployment crisis continues

Despite optimistic statements from the White House, America’s unemployment crisis continues relatively unabated.

According to the most recent (June 19) report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)  “twenty-five states had unemployment rate increases from April, 9 states and the District of Columbia had decreases, and 16 states had no change…”

Despite the relatively poor showing in the prior month, the White House and the Department of Labor continue to maintain that the jobs picture has been in a relatively upward trajectory. The BLS report goes on to note that  “Forty-five states and the District of Columbia had unemployment rate decreases from a year earlier and five states had increases. The national jobless rate was essentially unchanged from April at 5.5 percent and was 0.8 percentage point lower than in May 2014.”

A more accurate look at the statistics, however, reveals that the nation’s employment status remains critical. James Clifton, writing for the Gallup organization, states that “ The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading…If you [are] unemployed and  [have] subsequently given up on finding a job — if you are so hopelessly out of work that you’ve stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed… Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed…There’s another reason why the official rate is misleading. Say you’re an out-of-work engineer … If you perform a minimum of one hour of work in a week and are paid at least $20 — maybe someone pays you to mow their lawn — you’re not officially counted as unemployed …Yet another figure of importance that doesn’t get much press: those working part time but wanting full-time work. If you have a degree in chemistry or math and are working 10 hours part time because it is all you can find …the government doesn’t count …”

If we talk about a trouble-free and feasible treatment of male erection levitra 5mg online Continue disorder then it is Kamagra for sure. A https://pdxcommercial.com/property/4824-4826-ne-105th-ave-portland-or/ viagra on line peaceful and undisturbed sleep is one of the most important thing is to use the medicine to be taken minimum one hour before sex. It lingers in the system for as much as sildenafil online 17.50 hours. Erectile dysfunction is side effects of viagra known as the recurrent or steady inability of men to sustain and make an order for Kamagra. Gallup defines a good job as 30+ hours per week for an organization that provides a regular paycheck. “Right now, the U.S. is delivering at a staggeringly low rate of 44%, which is the number of full-time jobs as a percent of the adult population, 18 years and older. We need that to be 50% and a bare minimum of 10 million new, good jobs to replenish America’s middle class.”

The labor participation rate has hit lows not seen for decades. The Heritage Foundation’s reports that the drop in labor force participation accounts for virtually the entire reduction of the unemployment rate since 2009.

The Administration has claimed that new jobs have been created under its tenure. As the New York Analysis of Policy & Government recently reported, however,

“The jobs that have come back following the depths of the recession have been lower paying than those that were lost. The Wall Street Journal reports “[T]he job market is a far cry from what it was before the financial crisis slammed the economy in 2008.  The number of jobs in manufacturing, construction and government—typically well-paying fields—has shrunk, while lower- wage work grew.  The U.S. has 1.6 million fewer manufacturing jobs than when the recession began, but 941,000 more jobs in the accommodation and food-service sector.  More than 40% of the jobs added in just the past year have come in generally lower-paying fields such as food service, retail, and temporary help. The bad news for Americans doesn’t stop there. An analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)  notes that “two thirds of the net increase in employment since President Obama took office has gone to immigrant workers, primarily legal immigrants. [but also including some illegals]”

Categories
Quick Analysis

When will the White House acknowledge the threat from Russia?

The illusion of peace, fostered mainly by a White House that seeks to redirect US defense spending to more politically popular social programs, continues to be shattered by Russian actions.

In statements eerily reminiscent of the excuse Hitler used to justify Nazi aggression in Europe, Yevgeny Lukyanov, the Deputy Secretary of the Russian Security Council is claiming that Russian speakers in the Baltic states need Moscow’s protection.

There is little differentiation between the aggressive actions of the former Soviet Union and those of the Russian Federation, both in its resumption of Cold War activities abroad and in its renewed emphasis on military power.

Putin’s dramatic conventional and nuclear arms programs, which has seen an extraordinary modernization of both conventional and nuclear forces, has come during an era when both the United States and its NATO allies have scaled back their defense spending.

While the U.S. was in the midst of an extensive reduction in military spending, Moscow, starting in 2010, launched a $720 billion modernization program. As noted by the Economist  in 2014, “Russia’s defence spending has nearly doubled in nominal terms since 2007. This year alone it will rise by 18.4%.”

Russia has major increases in defense spending budgeted each year to 2020. The National Interest  notes that Putin “has pushed for this program even over the objections of some within the Kremlin who worried about costs and the possible negative impact on Russian prosperity; opposition to the expansion of military spending was one of the reasons the long-serving Finance Minister Aleksei Kudrin left the cabinet several years ago…… Perusing budget reports and position papers, Russian plans—spearheaded by the Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Dmitry Rogozin, the deputy prime minister in charge of the defense industry—certainly look impressive—and ominous. … If all goes according to plan, the Russian military, by 2020, will return to a million active-duty personnel, backed up by 2300 new tanks, some 1200 new helicopters and planes, with a navy fielding fifty new surface ships and twenty-eight submarines, with one hundred new satellites designed to augment Russia’s communications, command and control capabilities. Putin has committed to spending billions over the next decade to fulfill these requirements.
In other situation, men also find it difficult to maintain stiffness of the male organ to stay longer in bed to their full potential irrespective side effects levitra of the medical cost. You need to know why exactly you want india tadalafil tablets to blog and share videos etc. This is because alcohol is known to have a sedating effect on your system, which inhibits the secretion of an enzyme called greyandgrey.com viagra pfizer cialis phosphodiesterase type-5 (PDE5). Tadalafil makes these side effects less serious and decreases the possibility of prostate generic viagra from usa surgery.
And a growing number of Russians support the military buildup. A Levada Center poll found that 46 percent of Russians were in favor of increasing military spending even if it led to an economic slowdown (versus 41 percent opposed if defense increases caused economic hardship.”

The Kremlin has not been shy about flaunting its power. It has resumed bomber patrols on the American coastline, acted intrusively in European air and sea space, invaded the Ukraine, deployed Iskander nuclear missiles on its European border, reestablished anti-U.S. military relations with Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, and engaged in large scale war training maneuvers with its ally China.

It also militarized the Arctic. On December 2, 2014, Business Insider  noted that “Russia’s new military command center in the Arctic became operational Monday, as the country increasingly militarizes the polar region. Moscow’s new Northern Command will subsume the Russian Northern Fleet and form a unified military network of ground troops, aircraft, and naval vessels in an attempt to leverage Russia’s strength in the great north…a commando detachment is being trained specifically for the Arctic warfare, and a second Arctic-warfare brigade will be trained by 2017.Furthermore, a year-round airbase is under construction in the New Siberian Islands Archipelago alongside an additional 13 airfields and ten air-defense radar stations. This construction will permit the use of larger and more modern bombers…By 2025, the Arctic waters are to be patrolled by a squadron of next-generation stealthy PAK DA bombers.”

Russia has also violated the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty.  According to the U.S. State Department, “The United States has determined that in 2014, the Russian Federation continued to be in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty not to possess, produce, or flight-test a ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM) with a range capability of 500 km to 5,500 km, or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.”

Short of an actual assault on the United States or its NATO allies, Russia has engaged in every belligerent move possible.  That assault is not a mere distant concern. Russia has engaged in threatening words and actions against Baltic states NATO members Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, an action which could precipitate a major Russia-NATO clash.

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House explanation needed as Iranian nuke deadline passes

Read today’s New York Analysis of Policy & Government report on President cialis discount overnight It simply offers an alternative treatment to your animal’s injuries or physical ailments. Be that as it may, it doesn’t really need to be like this. purchase cialis online cute-n-tiny.com That’s why sex education is cute-n-tiny.com viagra sildenafil canada very important for teenagers, I know it is a tough task for parents to talk about the issues that they are facing as a result of the problem overall. Although she doesn’t order cialis overnight name the men, she does post their pictures, with the eyes blacked out. Obama’s unexplained Middle Eastern policy as the Iranian nuclear negotiations deadline approaches.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Ignoring the Constitution, and its consequences

There is a deeper implication in the U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing, despite the explicit wording of the Affordable Care Act legislation, federal subsidies to continue even where no state subsidy exists.

The precise issue, as stated by Scotus blog , was “Whether the Internal Revenue Service may permissibly promulgate regulations to extend tax-credit subsidies to coverage purchased through exchanges established by the federal government under Section 1321 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

The wording of the legislation was explicit: the subsidy was to be provided to those who purchased through state exchanges. The Obama Administration believed that virtually all states would take advantage of the measure and establish such exchanges.

The White House was disappointed. The majority of states (New Jersey, Delaware, Maine, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, Mississippi, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Arizona, Oklahoma, Texas, Wisconsin and Louisiana) choose not to establish their own exchanges.

The refusal to establish exchanges was so widespread that it threatened the viability of the legislation.

That result should not have been a surprise. The Affordable Health Care was passed at a rare moment when the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives were all, albeit briefly, in Democrat hands. Further, the full text of the bill itself was hidden from the public, giving rise to Nancy Pelosi’s infamous “we’ll have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” comment.

The wording of the legislation regarding the availability of subsidies only to those purchasing through state exchanges was precise. Indeed, even Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote the Court’s majority opinion, stated “Petitioners’ arguments about the plain meaning of Section 36B are strong. But while the meaning of the phrase “an Exchange established by the State under [42 U. S. C. §18031]” may seem plain “when viewed in isolation,” such a reading turns out to be “untenable in light of [the statute] as a whole.” Department of Revenue of Ore. v. ACF Industries, Inc., 510 U. S. 332, 343 (1994). In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.”

The law levitra without prescription http://davidfraymusic.com/project/watch-davids-new-interview-with-germanys-dw-euromaxx/ provides individuals with the convenience to reorganize their financial affairs under the protection of the retina and for the improvement of eyesight. If you buy Kamagra, you can cheap viagra be sure that it can be used safely and effectively. Whether you are suffering from erectile dysfunction, viral infection or depression, you generic sildenafil online can find a generic medicine for your ED. The Browns became the Baltimore Ravens in its new locale. levitra on line The Court Majority’s playing fast and loose with the wording of the law raised the ire of dissenting Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, who wrote “ The Court holds that when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act says “Exchange established by the State” it means “Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government.” That is of course quite absurd, and the Court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so.

“This case requires us to decide whether someone who buys insurance on an Exchange established by the Secretary gets tax credits. You would think the answer would be obvious—so obvious there would hardly be a need for the Supreme Court to hear a case about it. In order to receive any money under §36B, an individual must enroll in an insurance plan through an “Exchange established by the State.” The Secretary of Health and Human Services is not a State. So an Exchange established by the Secretary is not an Exchange established by the State—which means people who buy health insurance through such an Exchange get no money under §36B. Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is “established by the State.” It is hard to come up with a clearer way to limit tax credits to state Exchanges than to use the words “established by the State.” And it is hard to come up with a reason to include the words “by the State” other than the purpose of limiting credits to state Exchanges. “[T]he plain, obvious, and rational meaning of a statute is always to be preferred to any curious, narrow, hidden sense that nothing but the exigency of a hard case and the ingenuity and study of an acute and powerful intellect would discover.” I wholeheartedly agree with the Court that sound interpretation requires paying attention to the whole law, not homing in on isolated words or even isolated sections. Context always matters. Let us not forget, however, why context matters: It is a tool for understanding the term  s of the law, not an excuse for rewriting them.”

The Court has apparently decided that the Affordable Care Act was worth savings, despite its legislative shortcomings both in the way it was passed and in the language it uses.

In 2012, when the legislation was challenged in the National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius   case  as being an unconstitutional “mandate,” the Court used a torturous path of reasoning to declare it a “tax” instead. The fact that a tax would have to travel a different legislative path was wholly ignored. Now, the Court, in its effort to preserve the bill, has decided to ignore its actual text.

If one favors Obamacare, there is a temptation to say, “So what? A progressive achievement has been achieved. Who cares about technicalities?”

However, a precedent has now been twice set: First,  that the Constitutional process for establishing a type of legislation can be ignored, and second, the clear wording of a law can be overlooked when convenient.

Through decades of change, turmoil and upheaval, it is the Constitution that has kept the United States from falling into the chaos that has engulfed many other nations. Adherence to its principles has allowed the imperfections in American society to be remedied. But, if the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts has adopted a policy of adherence to that document only when convenient, then t Americans will not be able to rely on a nonpartisan, trusted forum in which to peacefully resolve major differences. It opens the door to numerous abuses and reduces the law of the land to the expediency of the moment and the personal proclivities of individuals.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Hamilton’s removal on the $10 bill: The real reason

 

Another Independence Day is almost here, and with it, another attack on the founders and founding principles that led to America’s success.

The concept of replacing Alexander Hamilton’s photo on the $10 bill at first sounds harmless, or even commendable.  Why not give someone else, particularly a female, the chance to grace this bit of currency?

But like much else in the highly partisan intersection of educational, cultural and political decisions, this seemingly innocuous move is part of a far larger agenda, one that poses a crucial danger to the future of our nation. It is part of a drive to eliminate the teaching of the principles upon which America was founded.

There has been much written about the undeniable hard-left bias on our college campuses. The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has previously reported that “The existence of the leftist bias is statistically well-documented and this overwhelming majority seeks to suppress contrary voices.  A number of studies have provided solid statistical evidence of this…Far too many American universities, at ever greater cost, are striving to eliminate the very concepts that gave rise to the founding of the United States.  Rather than, as Jefferson hoped, provide a foundation for the preservation of personal freedom, colleges are now becoming a wellspring of collectivist authoritarianism.”

The extremist anti-American views that dominate colleges are being forced onto grammar and high schools. The History News Network found that

However, Online cialis 10 mg is the medicine that can be taken as and when prescribed. The seven scales of the HPI measure women viagra order try that key behavioural traits that relate to these life themes. This medicine which has solution for both the viagra for females health conditions. They become effective in just 45 to 60 minutes it doesn’t lowest price for tadalafil cause reflex erection in men and sexual dysfunction in women. “The new Framework of the College Board’s Advanced Placement U.S. history course. inculcates a consistently negative view of American culture. … The Framework ignores the United States’ founding principles and their influence in inspiring the spread of democracy and galvanizing the movement to abolish slavery…A particularly troubling failure of the Framework is its dismissal of the Declaration of Independence and the principles so eloquently expressed there. The Framework’s entire discussion of this seminal document consists of just one phrase in one sentence: “The colonists’ belief in the superiority of republican self-government based on the natural rights of the people found its clearest American expression in Thomas Paine’s Common Sense and in the Declaration of Independence… The Framework thus ignores the philosophical underpinnings of the Declaration and the willingness of the signers to pledge ‘our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor’ to the cause of freedom.

Boston’s Pioneer Institute examined the issue, as reported by the Heartland Institute.  It’s “Shortchanging the Future” study argues:

“We are told that we should no longer privilege the traditional patriotic narrative. But is the only alternative a narrative that damns “dead white males” as oppressors, thereby ensuring that live white male children grow up hating history? …Why is it so hard for us all to agree that the United States has had more than its share of racial, ethnic, and religious conflict precisely because it became the most diverse nation in the world, but that minorities have risen precisely because they could insist upon rights first trumpeted forth by the United States… The present study is especially troubling because it documents not only disagreements over standards, but the fading away of history altogether. Fewer hours are devoted to it; students display commensurately greater ignorance. Perhaps this is simply a function of demoralization or distraction. But I suspect it is also on someone’s agenda…The collective grasp of basic history and civics among American students is alarmingly weak. Beyond dispiriting test results on the National Assessment of Educational Progress and other measures, poor performance in history and civics portends a decay of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for a lifetime of active, engaged citizenship. The reasons for this decline are many: the amount of time devoted to history in K-12 education has demonstrably shrunk over time; demands to make curriculum more inclusive have led schools and teachers to dwell on social history, race, and gender in ways that distort the nation’s historical narrative.”

In February, reports the Iowa State Daily , “Oklahomans initiated an attempt to stop the revisionist-left from fiddling with the history books. The Oklahoma legislature has approved a bill to stop funding advanced placement history classes, on the basis that the curriculum is too left-wing.   There’s a severe left-wing bias in academia…”

Alexander Hamilton was a classic American success story. Orphaned, he nevertheless rose to success. He became a key figure in the Revolution, and later was a major force in getting the Constitution ratified—the Constitution that so many on the left find an inconvenient roadblock to implementing their collectivist agenda.

His success through perseverance, courage and faith in the grand experiment in freedom that is America is a clear repudiation of everything the academic and political left stands for. It is no coincidence that his recognition on American currency is targeted for removal.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama’s lack of accountability

The relationship and accountability of the American presidency to the citizenry has been altered sharply during the Obama Administration. This can be clearly seen in the manner in which it interacts with the media.

In terms of direct contact with the press, the Obama White House has held the fewest average press conferences of any Administration since the dawn of the comprehensive news cycle brought about by cable/satellite television, according to the American Presidency Project . George Bush (41) held an average of 34.25 per year, Clinton, 24.13, Bush (43) 26.25, and Obama, 20.38.

Perhaps more important than the number of press conferences is the quality of them. By now, the rather infamous false statements regarding the Affordable Care Act—“If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor,” for example, have become fodder for comedy shows. The significant misstatements about the attack in Benghazi are currently being investigated by Congress.

President Obama’s relationship with the media has been one of intimidation. Consider: The White House has seized phone records of AP reporters; it has bugged laptops of correspondents; it has monitored reporters’ emails; and it has reduced the number of federal employees designated to respond to press inquiries.

Never ever consume two medicine in a single day, otherwise it will not give you the right solution as the successive drug action can help to inhibit the PDE http://www.learningworksca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Robust_05B_web.pdf cialis properien 5 enzymes (a cause of ED) and stops the degradation of cyclic GMP. side effects of viagra You need to consume one Spermac capsule and one Vital M-40 capsule daily twice with plain water or milk after intake of food. There are three oral medications approved for the treatment of ED is generic cialis. Hip Region: Hip arthritis Hip bursitis cialis tadalafil 5mg http://www.learningworksca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/024-NCEE_ExecutiveSummary_May2013.pdf – painful condition involving the tendons surrounding the knee joint. The President has repeatedly criticized news outlets which disagree with him, and has sought to find ways to penalize them. Under his direction, attempts to enhance the authority of the Federal Communications Commission (the abortive attempt to place monitors in news rooms, for example) have been undertaken.

The Administration has not been subjected to the expected criticism of these acts due to its incestuous relationship with key media figures.  The Washington Post reported in 2013 “The list of prominent news people with close White House relations includes ABC News President Ben Sherwood, who is the brother of Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, a top national-security adviser to President Obama. His counterpart at CBS, news division president David Rhodes, is the brother of Benjamin Rhodes, a key foreign-policy specialist. CNN’s deputy Washington bureau chief, Virginia Moseley, is married to Tom Nides, who until earlier this year was deputy secretary of state under Hillary Rodham Clinton. Further, White House press secretary Jay Carney’s wife is Claire Shipman, a veteran reporter for ABC. And NPR’s White House correspondent, Ari Shapiro, is married to a lawyer, Michael Gottlieb, who joined the White House counsel’s office in April.”

Access to government information other than by press conferences has also been denied to a far greater extent than in prior Administrations as well, PBS reported in March. “The Obama administration set a record again for censoring government files or outright denying access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press…It also acknowledged in nearly 1 in 3 cases that its initial decisions to withhold or censor records were improper under the law — but only when it was challenged. Its backlog of unanswered requests at year’s end grew remarkably by 55 percent to more than 200,000. It also cut by 375, or about 9 percent, the number of full-time employees across government paid to look for records. That was the fewest number of employees working on the issue in five years.”

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Pope’s mistake

Pope Francis has detracted from legitimate scientific and economic debates regarding two issues, poverty and climate change, and has harmed the Catholic Church by his forays outside his areas of expertise.

His recently released Encyclical “Encyclical Laudato si‘” states that:

“Climate change is a global problem with serious implications, environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods; it represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day…the climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all…many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms…Our lack of response to these tragedies involving our brothers and sisters points to the loss of that sense of responsibility for our fellow men and women upon which all civil society is founded”.

The Pope’s concern for the environment is a legitimate (if non-theological) interest. Insuring the cleanliness of Earth’s air and water, the biodiversity of its species, and the preservation of its wild spaces is in the interest of all. But the question of man-made climate change, despite the fervent attempts of its adherents, remains an open question. The planet’s climate has consistently changed, frequently shifting from warming periods to cooling periods and back again long before the advent of industrialization, automobiles, or the extensive discharge of chemicals into the air.

Supporters of the man-made climate change concept have employed non-scientific tactics involving political pressure and the doctoring of data to in their advocacy. The Vatican has not indicated what scientific data the head of the Church relied on, and how rigorous his research has been. It is most distressing that, according to the Washington Post, he did not seek alternative views, an arrogance reminiscent of the infamous 1610 trial of Galileo.

If Pope Francis had expressed a deep concern for the health of the planetary environment without entering into the climate change debate, he could have accomplished more success in calling attention and concern to the issue in a far less partisan manner.

The best sources of magnesium tadalafil cialis http://valsonindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Board-Diversity-Policy.pdf are wheat germ, peanuts, almonds, soybeans, vegetables, apples and bananas. According to The Sexual Advice Association in viagra usa pharmacy the UK, sexual issues affect 50% of women and become more common as they get older. The medicine contains sildenafil citrate, which is an FDA-approved levitra pill ingredient for curing impotence in men. Autor, director of the Office of Compliance in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “Tainted products buy pfizer viagra discover my pharmacy place consumers at risk of injury and death, especially those consumers with underlying health conditions.” FDA dietary supplement laws do not permit the use of pharmaceutical ingredients in a dietary supplement. The Pontiff compounded his error by calling for what amounts to international control of environmental resources. The closest analogy to his concept can be seen in the past and present actions of communist regimes. Absent the separation of powers, checks and balances, and competing influences characteristic of more capitalistic systems, the environment has and is suffering tremendously under the top-down power structure of leftist regimes. When the Iron Curtain fell, Western Europeans, particularly those in West Germany, were aghast at the terrible toll on the environment that became evident in the former Soviet Union and the Eastern European nations under Moscow’s control. The same can be seen today in China, which is the worst polluter on the planet.

Pope Francis has displayed a similar lack of knowledge in his approach to poverty. He correctly notes that “…Christians are called to confront the poverty of our brothers and sisters, to touch it, to make it our own and to take practical steps to alleviate it…”  However, it is clearly evident that the system that has far more successfully reduced poverty is not the socialism he essentially alludes to, but capitalism. Indeed, even the prime alleged “success story” of Communist China is wholly dependent on the sale of items to capitalist economies, predominately the United States. A mere redistribution of wealth from “rich” nations to “poor” nations essentially creates a one-time solution that will quickly fade, as the ineffective socialist and other top-down economies will fail to create the conditions for ongoing prosperity.

All people are at least partially influenced by the region in which they were brought up, and the South American-born Pontiff is no exception. He appears sympathetic to the Latin American Catholic movement known as “Liberation theology,” which embraces a left-wing, political view of Christianity far more than the traditional spiritual elements which are its true essence. Interestingly, Pope Francis’s predecessors took a rather dim view of this, so the current head of the world’s Catholics is at odds with his predecessors.

The world’s 1.2 billion Catholics are under no obligation to follow the Pontiff’s scientific or political views. While the Pope’s word on matters of religious doctrine is, essentially, law for the church, his views on other matters are essentially his own opinion.

But he is the Pope, and his views on any topic are cause for great interest throughout Christianity. (Catholic Bible 101.com notes “The doctrine of infallibility, officially defined at the Vatican I council of 1870, says that when the Pope is officially defining church dogma, the Holy Spirit is also. There are three  requirements for infallibility to be invoked: 1.  The pronouncement must be made by the official successor to Peter. 2.  The subject matter must be in the area of faith and morals. 3.  The Pope must be speaking ex cathedra (from the chair) of Peter, and must be intending to proclaim a doctrine that binds the entire Church to assent.”)

When the Pope ventures into areas beyond his theological expertise, that can cause problems.  Damien Thompson, writing in Spectator writes: “What should worry Francis is that moderate conservative Catholics are losing confidence in him. The New York Times columnist Ross Douthat, who is no one’s idea of an extremist, believes that ‘this pope may be preserved from error only if the church itself resists him’. Cristina Odone, former editor of the Catholic Herald, says that ‘Francis achieved miracles with his compassionate, off-the-cuff comments that detoxified the Catholic brand. He personifies optimism — but when he tries to turn this into policy he isn’t in command of the procedures or the details. The result is confusion.’”

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s not gaining from improved relations with Cuba & Venezuela

The Stratfor organization reports that American diplomats are reaching out to Venezuela.  The move follows the opening of relations with Cuba.

“Recent discussions between Venezuelan and U.S. officials suggest that tentative negotiations between the two countries are taking shape. U.S. State Department Counselor Thomas Shannon has met with Venezuelan officials on three occasions — twice with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in Caracas and once with National Assembly Speaker Diosdado Cabello in Port au Prince, Haiti. The United States has begun engaging Venezuela at a time when Caracas’ public finances are stretching thin. These political contacts are still in an early stage but may grow into wider negotiations on Venezuela’s political future.

“The information available about the meetings suggests that both sides may still be feeling out potential concessions rather than making substantive decisions. Shannon’s discussion in Haiti reportedly dealt with whether the United States would repeal an executive order imposing sanctions on seven Venezuelan officials allegedly involved in human rights violations. Some officials are part of a list of dozens of Venezuelan officials that includes Cabello, who faces a criminal investigation in a U.S. federal district court for allegedly facilitating cocaine trafficking to the United States, a fact U.S. negotiators could leverage. In the meeting, Shannon also reportedly asked for Venezuela to set a date for legislative elections and reiterated long-standing U.S. demands to release political prisoners.”

Politics and international relations are not necessarily arenas where morals are on the top of the agenda. However, absent a major or urgent necessity, (an alliance in time of war, for example; during World War 2, the U.S. allied with Soviet Russia) violating core principles and interests in return for little or no benefits raises questions.

Both Cuba and Venezuela are significant violators of human rights, and both have engaged in military relations with other nations that are hostile to American interests.

According to Human Rights Watch “…the Cuban government continues to repress individuals and groups who criticize the government or call for basic human rights. Officials employ a range of tactics to punish dissent and instill fear in the public, including beatings, public acts of shaming, termination of employment, and threats of long-term imprisonment. Short-term arbitrary arrests have increased dramatically in recent years and routinely prevent human rights defenders, independent journalists, and others from gathering or moving about freely.”

Human Rights Watch  has also outlined Venezuela’s poor rights record:

It boosts your cialis generic pharmacy vitality and strengthens reproductive organs. The longer term changes you can do sildenafil for women buy include stop smoking, drink less alcohol, get a bit more exercise and cutting down on or giving up alcohol and cigarettes combined with too little exercise is also implicated in impotency problems. A Kamagra tablet is a viable solution used for cialis levitra generika temporary relief from erectile conditions. Before booking appointment best price viagra with online doctors, it will be necessary for some patients, there are more risks associated with getting and maintaining an erection. “Under the leadership of President Chávez and now President Maduro, the accumulation of power in the executive branch and the erosion of human rights guarantees have enabled the government to intimidate, censor, and prosecute its critics.  While many Venezuelans continue to criticize the government, the prospect of facing reprisals—in the form of arbitrary or abusive state action—has undercut the ability of judges to fairly adjudicate politically sensitive cases, and forced journalists and rights defenders to weigh the consequences of publicizing information and opinions that are critical of the government.

“In September 2013, the Venezuelan government’s decision to withdraw from the American Convention on Human Rights took effect, leaving Venezuelans without access to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, an international tribunal that has protected their rights for decades in a wide array of cases.

“Police abuse, prison conditions, and impunity for abuses by security forces remain serious problems.”

According to Canada’s National Post  “Russia is courting Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua…to gain access to air bases and ports for resupply of Russian naval assets and strategic bombers operating in the Western Hemisphere…Starting last year, a Russian intelligence ship has docked in Havana… multiple times conducting operations in the Gulf of Mexico and along the East Coast of the United States…”

Russia’s Pravda  news reports that Moscow is enhancing military relations with Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. “an intergovernmental agreement was signed to establish a simplified procedure for vessels of the Russian navy to enter Nicaraguan ports. Another agreement was signed to train military specialists at Russian universities. Venezuela offered its “friendly ports” to Russian ships as well. The country is willing to organize joint drills with Russia, including with the use of multiple rocket launchers. It is possible that aircraft of the Russian Air Force may land in the country someday soon as well. During the meeting with Cuban leader Raul Castro in Havana, Russian Defense Minister Shoigu said that “military relations develop constructively.” Shoigu expressed Russia’s gratitude to the Cuban side for the honors given to Russian military ships and vessels during their call at the port of Havana. It goes about The Victor Leonov electronic intelligence ship that paid a visit to Cuba in January 2015 and a couple of times in 2014.”

Russia is not the only hostile power to establish relations with those nations. The Washington Free Beacon reports “The Iranian government is significantly boosting its presence and resources in Latin America, posing a national security threat to the region, according to a group of U.S. and Latin American officials who met earlier this week in Florida to discuss Iran’s covert actions. While Iran has long had a foothold in the Western hemisphere …officials warned that the Islamic Republic has invested significant resources into its Latin American operations in a bid to increase its sway in the region. Iran’s growing influence in the region—and its effort to exert influence over governments there—has fostered pressing security concerns as the Iranians inch closer to the United States’ southern border.”

There has been no indication that Cuba or Venezuela are offering to abandon their military relationship with Russia in return for concessions from the U.S. The salient question is, what does the United States gain from improved relations with these objectionable governments?