Conservative Donnybrook

Our secretary of state apparently doesn’t find her job challenging enough, because she’s gone and decided to create a big new diplomatic headache for the United States by dishing out some combative rhetoric (and much sanctimonious lecturing) on China’s Internet policy.

Now, it’s perfectly reasonable for Clinton to protest China’s hacking of American companies’ networks, using them to spy on Chinese users’ communications, and the theft of their intellectual property. But it’s another thing altogether to invoke cold-war rhetoric in an explicit call to undermine foreign governments:

Some countries have erected electronic barriers that prevent their people from accessing portions of the world’s networks. They’ve expunged words, names, and phrases from search engine results. They have violated the privacy of citizens who engage in non-violent political speech. These actions contravene the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, which tells us that all people have the right “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” With the spread of these restrictive practices, a new information curtain is descending across much of the world. And beyond this partition, viral videos and blog posts are becoming the samizdat of our day.

While it’s unclear what this speech signifies beyond escalating rhetoric, it seems that Hillary is trying to enlist American companies to protest or undermine foreign governments’ Internet policies, á la Google’s stand in China. Continue Reading »

Having completed the race and finding that Achilles could indeed beat him to the finish line, the Tortoise handed over a check to cover his wager.

Tortoise: I trust you will take a check from me, my friend?

Achilles: Of course, Tortoise. You and I go way back. Into antiquity you might even say. In any case, I could really use the money.

Tortoise: Are you still looking for work?

Achilles: Yes. It seems there is very little call for heroic Greek warriors in today’s economy. If only we would declare war on Turkey. I could probably round up any number of Greek warrior heroes for that war.

Tortoise: Maybe you could get Norman Podhoretz to put a bug in Obama’s ear. Just remind him the Turks are Muslim. That should be reason enough for him to advocate for a war. And, at the same time, think of all the jobs that would be created for idled Hellenistic soldiers.

Achilles: I wish I knew what went wrong. I thought for sure the government stimulus would lead to prosperity. I kept hearing that every dollar of deficit spending would create $1.50 of expansion in the economy. Maybe we should have spent more.

Tortoise: That is one way. Or, we could learn from our failure and try something different. Can I ask you a question, Achilles?

Achilles: Of course.

Tortoise: Where does all of the money that the government spends come from?

Achilles: Why, it comes from taxpayers. You should know that.

Tortoise: And who does the government give the money to?

Achilles: Other taxpayers who will spend the money. That’s how jobs are created.

Tortoise: What you are saying then is that the government takes the money from one taxpayer and gives it to another to spend. This seems to be a recipe in spinning one’s wheels. Why would we do that?

Achilles: Well, Tortoise, the people from whom the government takes the money are those who are savers and the people who they give to are spenders. The government just wants to make sure that the money is being used. That way, new money is injected into the economy. It is really quite elementary, Tortoise. Continue Reading »

Remember when the United States used to stand for democracy and the rule of law?  Those were the days!  The United States used to support smaller democratic states going as far as to help craft constitutions, federal laws, judicial systems and legislatures.  Not any more.  Now the U.S. has signaled that we stand for left-wing tyrannts, socialist dictators and the rise to power through illegal means.  Constitutions, courts and legislatures be damned.  Now we stand with Fidel, Hugo, Evo and Rafael in supporting those that would disregard a democratic constitution, government and the rule of law.  Now Obama will have the United States return to supporting dictators in Latin America.  Now we support Zelaya and his clearly illegal and undemocratic methods.

The United States must end the cycle of supporting tyrants in Latin America.  Zelaya is/was a socialist and a dictator in the making.  This was no coup, the military in Honduras arrested the president after he illegally solicited assistance from the dictator Chavez to illegally hold a referendum which would have allowed him to run for election indefinitely.  Furthermore, the military arrested Zelaya upon request from the Honduran Supreme Court after its judgement was dismissed by the would-be dictator Zelaya.  Zelaya actively attacked a military installation with leftist supporters.  His goal was to distribute illegal ballots in an attempt to forever control the nation.  Only the legislature can call for a constitutional referendum. 

So, the legislature condemned Zelaya, the Supreme Court condemned him and the military defended democracy and the rule of law by abiding by the constitution and the wishes of the other two branches of government by arresting the hack. 

And Obama calls for a return of the socialist would-be dictator in defiance of democracy and the rule of law.  Mr. Obama, one’s character can be determined by the company he keeps.  Fidel and the mini-communists in this hemisphere are not good company.

President Obama has threatened to respond to nuclear proliferationwith a stern finger wagging.  That’s right, on Friday the Obama administration said it is prepared to confront ships near North Korea which it believes to be carrying contraband.  However, in no event will the United States Navy attempt to forcibly board the suspected contraband ships nor will it blockade or force a diversion of the ship’s course.  Instead, Obama will wag his finger and point: a time tested nuclear deterrent.

Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (ugh), said “There’s reason to believe they (North Korea) may respond in an irresponsible fashion to this.”  Hmm, more irresponsibily that the Obama administration?  Rice said the administration was “very pleased” with the sanctions. She called the new resolution, which was supported by China and Russia, an “unprecedented” position by the Security Council.  Right, unprecedented because Russia and China did not veto new sanctions.

Rice also said Obama’s wagging finger should scare the Hell out of Iran.  “I imagine that they have been following this closely.”  She said Iran will observe that “the response from the international community has been very clear, very firm and very meaningful.”  Oh, indeed.

UPDATE:

It appears the United States Navy has encountered its first suspect ship!  Start wagging, Mr. Obama.  I am sure the NoKos wont threaten Hawaii…AGAIN.  Looks like we might have to santion North Korea.  God, I am sure they aren’t ready for that!

North Korea is set to launch what appears to be a ballistic missile.  The launch could happen as early as Saturday.  What is really shocking is not that the DPRK is saber rattling, but that the U.S. is acting like such a weenie on the world stage.

Initially, Admiral Anthony Keating suggested that the U.S. Navy was in a position to shoot down the rogue state’s threat.  “We’ll be prepared to respond,” he said, adding that “the United States has the capability” to destroy any missile.  Then the Obama administration, Via Secretary Gates, said “...we’re not prepared to do anything about it. If we had an aberrant missile, one that looked like it was headed for Hawaii, we might consider it, but I don’t think we have any plans to do anything like that at this point.”

Let me get this straight, if the missile looks like it will hit Hawaii we may do something about it?  This is ludicrous and dangerous.  The DPRK is calling this a communications satellite launch and if it is, we should not shoot it down.  But the very second it looks as if it will land on Earth, we ought to shoot it out of the heavens.  We have pandered to this totalitarian menace for too long.  Its time we used our defenses to demonstrate to Kim Jong-Il that his missile program and his nuclear development are useless.

Instead of ending the threat, Obama will allow the DPRK to advance their technological know-how.  Hell, maybe we should just send them a series of Titans.  Show some backbone Mr. President.

Well, well, well. The Russian Menace has now come out in favor of a world gold standard in order to “uphold discipline in the world financial system.” Sound like any elderly third-party presidential candidates from Texas you know of?

What’s more, the Great Enemy of the East, China, seems open to the idea as well. Need I say more?

Two conclusions necessarily follow from these disturbing developments.

1. Ron Paul and his followers are fascist sympathizers and possibly traitors. They should be watched closely at the very least.
2. We need to invade Russia as soon as possible.

The North American International Auto Show got off to a subdued beginning this weekend. GM unveiled a new Cadillac that will utilize the power train for the Chevy Volt.

But Bob Lutz, GM’s Vice Chairman of Global Product Development, said that changing the buying habits of the American public is going to be difficult in the face of low gas prices, and it’s going to be up to the Obama administration to create an energy policy that gets people interested in buying fuel efficient vehicles.

Did he really just say that he thinks Obama should raise taxes on every American to force them to purchase electric vehicles? What makes him think the Japanese won’t kick the Big Three’s asses in that segment too? It never ceases to amaze me that so many people think the way out economic malaise is through taxation. With idiots like Mr. Lutz in the management of General Motors, it is my fervent hope that Congress rethinks its foolish desire to bail these people out.

Last night the representatives the states rejected the House’s plan to bail out the Big Three automakers. The disagreement lay in the House’s refusal to force the unions to accept pay concessions. Last night Nancy Pelosi called upon the White House to circumvent the will of the States and impose a bailout by shunting monies already allocated for the financial crisis to the car companies and their unions.

Not surprisingly, President Bush is considering Pelosi’s demands. However, before acceding to the demands of Pelosi, Levin, and Gettelfinger, Bush should consider the long-term costs to the economy of allowing the carmakers to escape their poor management and the union’s rapaciousness. It is acknowledged that this is to be only a bridge “loan” meaning that everyone fully expects to be back in this same position at a later date when the carmakers blow through the money. Bush should also consider whether caving in to the Democrats will make Michigan any redder, whether the Unions will switch allegiances or if, politically, it will only serve to save the bacon of a number of Democrat representatives.

I’m no constitutional scholar, but it seems that diverting funds that Congress approved for the finincial markets and repurposing them to bail out the automakers may be impermissible under the Constitution’s clear rule that only Congress has the authority to spend. Congress last night rejected further spending for the purpose of bailing out Detroit. It would be violation of the separation of powers for the executive branch to conduct an end run around that inconvenient fact. Another breach of contract seems to be in the offing.

Apparently it’s en vogue to hang pictures of genocidal maniacs on your wall in London. I’ve written about this sick admiration that many have for communism and its vile leaders before. The BBC article does a good job of shining a light on the stupidity one must have when they choose to hang a poster of Joseph Stalin on their wall. As the article eludes to, it seems that the core problem here is the seemingly free pass that the “Progessive” Western world is willing to give communism. The horrors imposed on the world in the name of communism cannot be forgotten, just ask any survivor of the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe or a Soviet citizen who survived Uncle Joe’s purges.

Victory!  Albeit temporary victory.  The “buy up” bill was killed in the House today.  We can thank the likes of Rep. Michele Bachmann , (R- Minn) for the death of this socialist and unnecessary bill.  “Every American who has played it safe and smart to avoid debt is being asked to spend the rest of his or her life paying off the debts of Washington and Wall Street,” Ms. Bachmann said.  And she is right. I wish you were in CA, Congresswoman, I would vote for you. 

Danger!  Russian saber-rattlers have announced tentative plans to provide Comrade Chavez and his crazy commie buddies with nuclear technology.  This follows the deployment of Russian naval vessels to the Caribbean.  While Ol’ George has apparently listen to my advice is starting to pay attention to the Western Hemisphere, the simple re-activation of the 4th Fleet will not do.  Increased trade preferences, military funding, humanitarian missions and an end to the “war” on drugs would be a nice start.

Tally-Ho!  General Petraeus has announced that NATO troops will continue to fight Taliban and Al-Qaeda forces in Afghanistan throughout the winter.  Coalition forces have lost some ground in recent months.  It is past time for our service members to show ‘em what they are made of and expand the zone of freedom in Afghanistan. 

Yikes!  The flow of tainted products continues to flow out of China.  In addition to oodles of bad baby formula, chocolate in the Red Empire may also be poisoned.  Cadbury has announced a recall of at least 11 different types of candies made in China.  First toys, now candy.  What’s next? 

Disgusting!  Obama and McCain had very few differences of opinion during their debate.  They surely did insult each other, which is always entertaining, but their policies differed by minuscule amounts if at all.  So a vote for one of them is, essentially, a vote for either of them. 

Outstanding!  The Dodgers, having won only 84 games, will return to the post season for the first time in four years.  They play the little bears starting on Wednesday in the NLDS.  While definitely the underdogs, I predict another disappointing year for the North Side suckers.

The AP is reporting this morning that North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong Il may have suffered a stroke. He has not been seen in public since mid-August. Speculation about the Stalinist dictator’s health has been swirling for months and when he failed to appear for the country’s 60th anniversary military parade, officials concluded that reports they had been hearing are correct. It appears that the people of North Korea may be one step closer to freedom.

As Bill has pointed out, I have been reticent to take a position on the recent hostilities in South Ossetia. The reason for this is quite simple: I don’t really know much about that region and its history. However, in the past week or so, I have been reading about it and, the more I read, the less I am convinced that the Russians are in the wrong. (They are most certainly in the wrong in Poland, but that is another matter…maybe).

Often, when I think about other regions of the world, I will attempt to analogize to an event or situation in American history (with which I am more familiar) which might provide parallels. In this case, although imperfect as all analogies are, there is a fair similarity between the situation as it exists in South Ossetia and that of Texas around 1845.

South Ossetia

As I understand the timeline, South Ossetia declared its independence from the Republic of Georgia in the early 1990s after the breakup of the Soviet Union. After its announced independence the Western nations refused to recognize the new government and regarded South Ossetia as part of Georgia. South Ossetia again declared independence in 2006. Again, the rest of the world failed to recognize the declaration. From about 1992 onward, Russian peacekeepers were located within South Ossetia to prevent large-scale conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia. However, a couple weeks ago, Georgia invaded South Ossetia in an attempt to “reunify” Georgia.

The people of South Ossetia appear to be largely Ossetian with Russian citizenship and are ethnically distinct from the people of Georgia.

Texas

Texas was originally the Northernmost border of Mexico, and after Mexico declared its independence from Spain, it suffered near financial collapse as a result of the war that accompanied that declaration. In the wake of their war for independence, the government opened the northern border to Americans willing to establish order in the Texas region. Unfortunately for Mexico, they were unable to control their borders (that sounds familiar) and Americans flooded into Mexico in unanticipated numbers. Fairly quickly, Americans became the most populous citizens of the Texas region, comprising a sizable majority of Texans. Like the South Ossetians, the Texans were of a different ethnicity from their government and identified more closely with the United States than with Mexico.

In 1835, Texas declared its independence from Mexico and Santa Anna invaded. After a disastrous clash at the Alamo, the Texan forces rallied and decimated Santa Anna’s forces at the Battle of San Jacinto effectively establishing Texas as an independent sovereign nation. In 1845, Texas petitioned for Statehood and joined the United States. However, Mexico never accepted Texas’ secession and accession into the United States and many Mexican politicians advocated an invasion of Texas. President Polk sent a expedition under General Zachary Taylor to secure the Texas border at the Rio Grande River. In April 1846, Mexico attacked a U.S. patrol and the war was begun.

Applying the Analog

In many ways, the conflict in South Ossetia is similar to the situation in Texas. An ethnic group, distinct from its putative government, declared its independence. Of course, in both cases, the government refused to recognize the independence of the breakaway territory, but the government with which the citizens of the breakaway region most closely identified sent troops to keep the peace. The big difference is the presence of the United States in the middle of the current conflict. There is no analog to that in the Mexican-American War. The equivalent would have been if Spain were to take sides with Santa Anna and Mexico against the United States. I daresay we would not have looked kindly on that sort of intervention on Spain’s part. In fact, it might have led to war against Spain as well – accelerating our eventual conflict with that country by about 50 years.

Some may argue that our annexation of Texas was unjust. And, Ulysses S. Grant said precisely that:

Generally, the officers of the army were indifferent whether the annexation was consummated or not; but not so all of them. For myself, I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory.

In that sense, it would seem that Grant might side with the Georgians, finding the intervention of the Russians to be nothing more than an unjust land-grab by a strong nation at the expense of a weak one. Nonetheless, the question one needs to confront is, even granting Russia’s questionable moral position, if a third party had interfered in our annexation of Texas, how would we have reacted to them? Does it matter?

In a purely pragmatic sense, America needs to ask the question of where our interest lies. By backing Georgia, we are expending political capital in international affairs. In the long run, we have to believe that we will benefit from that expenditure. Might we not be better off attempting to improve our relationship with Russia? Dare we trust that any overture to Russia will result in a relationship in which we can repose our trust? It seems that our interest would be stronger in establishing a closer relationship with Russia, but the prospect of that happening due to the high level of mistrust between the nations makes that more aspirational than achievable. Nonetheless, do we gain anything by antagonizing Russia and what do we gain by developing the friendship of Georgia – a nation that, after pledging not to employ military force against Russia, nonetheless invaded South Ossetia and fired upon Russian peacekeepers? Can we trust Georgia?

I am reminded of the classic film, WarGames. This is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play. Perhaps we should consider a nice game of chess, preferably in our own hemisphere. The Russians are awfully good at chess.

The Russkies have reportedly been in contact with the communists is Cuba concerning nuclear bombers.  Sources inside fascist Russia have indicated that the two long time allies may agree to place strategic nuclear bombers on the Caribbean island as a way to “counter” the proposed missile shield Washington plans for eastern Europe.  

Power-hungry and wanting to appear dangerous, the Russian government sees the threat of nuclear war as a reasonable response to defensive installations in Europe.  Even isolationist paleo-conservatives will have to agree that a nuclear Cuba is unacceptable.  But how to prevent it?  A naval blockade will not work this time.  An air blockade would work only if the U.S. is prepared to destroy Russian aircraft, a clear act of war.  The hope is that the Russians, once again, are bluffing. 

However, an effective way to counter act this threat would be to blockade Cuba itself.  This means no foreigin tourism, no foreign investments and no trade would be allowed with Cuba.  This, of course would be a declaration which would have to be enforced by the United States.  A longer-range, more productive plan would be the creation of an economic Monroe doctrine I have advocated for in the past, though this would not fix the immediate problem, it would help to turn away most of central and south America’s, as well as the Caribbean’s, pink tide (an old article).

When I was a kid, I noticed that a lot of people were flying POW/MIA flags. I found this odd because I had been told that all of the POW’s and MIA’s to date had been (or were on their way to being) classified as KIA by the government. I thought that the sign of solidarity for those whose status was unclear (but who were most likely dead) was misplaced and Pollyanna-ish, the stuff of Rambo fantasies and conspiracy garbage. It wasn’t until I was older that I understood that the motivation shown by folks flying the now-ubiquitous black flag was not a display of their own hope, but rather for the sake of the memories of missing themselves; that the awful thing that happened to them in pursuit of freedom would not be left in doubt forever, and that there were still people at home who would not rest until every single man was definitively accounted for. In this way, the forces of evil would not have victory over their memories.  In the end, the brave will find their true home, and the valiant will, at last, have their rest.

Which brings me to the point of this post. There are thousands of unaccounted-for clergy behind the Bamboo Curtain, and one remarkable case of a Catholic “MIA”  bears retelling, if for no other reason than that Holy Mother Church has been keeping solidarity with the memory of Francis Hong-yong Ho for decades. In October, he will celebrate his 102nd birthday, and he is currently be the oldest reigning bishop in the world, if not the entire history of the Church.

The Most Rev. Francis Hong Yong-Ho (born 12 October 1906) was made Vicar Apostolic of P’yong-yang, Korea, by Pius XII in 1944, and ordained Bishop the same year. When the Chi-Coms invaded and installed their puppet, Kim Il-sung (the father of the present butcher in charge of North Korea), Bishop Hong was, first, imprisoned in 1949, and then later disappeared. In solidarity with Korean Catholics suffering under the Red Yoke, Pope Bl. John XXIII errected P’yong-yang as a diocese and named Bishop Hong as its first (and, to date, only) ordinary on 10 March 1962.

The sign of solidarity against the Communist outrage is ongoing. The Pontifical Yearbook continues to list Bishop Hong as Ordinary of P’yong-yang, with a footnote: “(missing)” Bishop Hong has been the bishop of record in P’yong-yang for 46 years and counting.

See also: Wikipedia.

Today, Iran tested nine missiles, one of which reportedly has sufficient range to reach Israel. The United States of course, has rightly condemned the saber rattling of the Iranians. Meanwhile, the Iranians stoutest ally, Russia, has expressed some concerns over the prospect of an Iranian regime possessed of ballistic missiles.

In a completely unrelated story (or was it?), Russia has threatened the United States with the use of military force if the United States and the Czech Republic persist in their attempts to install a defensive missile defense system. I don’t know if this reaction strikes everyone as strange, but why, especially in light of the fact that the most radical of nations in the Middle East is developing a nuclear capability and the means to deliver it, would Russia take such a stance and risk war with the United States and its allies when Russia acknowledges the danger which an armed Iran presents.

The bottom line is that if there were any tendency to regard Russia in a hopeful light as a potential ally, that illusion has been shattered. Why does Russia begrudge Europe the means to defend itself from Islamic aggression? Perhaps Europe should reassess its relationship with Russia as well. If there must be a conflict with Russia, let it be over an issue like this where the rest of the world cannot fail to see that Russia is the aggressor, objecting to defensive measures which seek only to keep Europe safe from the likes of Russia’s southern puppet.

With the insane leadship of Iran calling for the destruction of Israel, the hastening of Armageddon and death to the West on a weekly basis, Europe would be derelict in its duty to protect its citizens if it failed to install whatever defensive measures it could lay its hands on. Russia be damned. The United States and Europe should call Russia’s bluff on this.

The most expensive truck-producing plant on earth has been slated for closure by General Motors and the Canadian Auto Workers Union is threatening dire consequences if GM follows through. The move was determined to be in General Motors’ best interest given the sudden collapse of the truck and SUV market due to rising oil prices. After the announcement, the CAW reacted angrily, “This decision is unfair, it’s unjust, it’s unwarranted, it’s illegal, it violates our collective agreement and we’re going to do everything in our power – and we have power,” Canadian Auto Workers president Buzz Hargrove declared at a news conference. “This is not going to happen without a fight.”

Hargrove said the union wasn’t ruling out anything and “will explore all options.” He declined to be specific, but when asked whether the options included a wildcat strike or legal action against the company, the union leader said “everything is on the table.”

GM is not alone in cutting vehicle production in Canada and the United States. All of the major American auto makers have recently announced cuts. Meanwhile, their main rivals, Toyota and Honda, have been expanding their North American production capacity. The main difference: the Japanese plants have managed to avoid unionization.

The CAW’s threat to stage wildcat strikes and take legal action against GM is a direct threat to the viability of the company itself and reveals a short-sightedness that is alarming. In essence, the union is demanding that the company continue to produce vehicles that it cannot sell – in short, they are demanding the company eat the losses which would result from bad business out of “moral obligation to its workers and their families.”

I agree that General Motors has a moral obligation to its workers and their families. It is for this very reason that it must close unprofitable plants so that other plants, which are viable, survive. The issue, to the union, is clearly not the corporation’s workers or the union would understand that sometimes plants have to be closed in order to keep the company viable (and therefore provide income to at least some workers). And if GM Charley Wilson’s old quotable is correct, “What’s good for America is good for General Motors, and vice versa,” then the union’s demand is a direct attack on America itself.

The latest round of contract negotiations reveals how disingenuous the “workers and families” argument is. While the American union agreed to cuts of $25-$30 per hour from their compensation and benefits package, the Canadian union took only $5 per hour in reductions. Plainly, the Canadian union is in it to get theirs and do not have the good of the corporation (and, by extension, their brother workers throughout the organization) at heart. Ironically, the Canadian union’s intransigence at the negotiating table is now costing its members dearly.

I used to work with a guy, Willie, who would always tell me, “It’s better to get a little piece of the pie than to get no pie at all.” The workers at the Oshawa plant can attest to Willie’s wisdom. Of course, I think Willie was actually talking about pie.

Barack Obama has admirers throughout the world. It is instructive to examine from where his support stems.

The latest Obama devotee is none other than Fidel Castro, who finds him to be “the most progressive of all the candidates.”

Prior to Castro’s endorsement, Obama has enjoyed the support of William Ayres, an unrepentant former domestic terrorist who was a member of the Weather Underground Organization, which sought the overthrow of the United States government.

Obama is endorsed by the leaders of FARC: “In a Feb. 28 letter, FARC chieftain Raul Reyes cheerily reported to his inner circle that he met “two gringos” who assured him “the new president of their country will be Obama and that they are interested in your compatriots. Obama will not support ‘Plan Colombia’ nor will he sign the TLC (Free Trade Agreement).”

Obama is friendly with the terrorist group, HAMAS:

One of Barack Obama’s Middle East policy advisers disclosed today that he had held meetings with the militant Palestinian group Hamas – prompting the likely Democratic nominee to sever all links with him.

Robert Malley told The Times he had regularly been in contact with Hamas, which controls Gaza but is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organisation. Such talks, he stressed, were related to his work for a conflict resolution think tank and had no connection with his position on Mr Obama’s Middle East advisory council.

“I’ve never hidden the fact that in my job with the International Crisis Group I meet all kinds of people,” he added.

But Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for Mr Obama, responded swiftly, saying: “Rob Malley has, like hundreds of other experts, provided informal advice to the campaign in the past. He has no formal role in the campaign and he will not play any role in the future.”

Daniel Ortega likes the cut of Obama’s jib. Hugo Chavez has endorsed anyone but McCain, which is a backdoor endorsement for Obama.

This post details the motley assortment of tyrants, dictators, and terrorists which find an Obama administration in  their best interests.

The friend of my enemy…

The Nepali people have thrown off the chains of monarchical government and declared themselves a republic!  The monarchy ruled for the past 239 years.  Yet there wolves in the shadows, communist wolves. 

Maoist rebels fighting the monarchy for a socialist/communist state agreed to lay down arms and join the provisional government to oust King Gyanendra from his throne.  The former rebels are more transparent than they believe.  Soon after the declaration of the republic, the communists announced that 20,000 youth volunteers were converging on the city to “help control celebrations.”  These youth “volunteers” are essentially ruthless soldiers well known for their brutality.  Further cause for concern follows from successive days of bombings in the Nepali capital of Katmandu in which two civilians were wounded.  The bombings appeared to be aimed at pro-democracy demonstrators and activists.

The scene in this south Asian nation is much like the one that developed in February, 1917 in Czarist Russia.  There a provisional republic was created after deposing Czar Nicholas II.  Soon after seeking power, pro-democracy forces freed imprisoned and exiled Bolsheviks in the hope that they would join their cause.  Instead, the Bolsheviks seized power, imprisioned the pro-democracy officials and embarked on a nearly 75 year reign of terror and murder.  Similarities between the Russian Revolution and the current Nepali situation abound.  And dreadfully, as in Russia, Nepali communists seem poised to grab power.

Making the situation worse, if not possible in the first instance, is Nepal’s location.  Red China sits directly to the north of this small and agrarian nation.  Communist forces have and will continue to receive arms and funding from their ideological neighbor.  It appears the fate of Nepal is sealed, at least for the foreseeable future.  Nepal will be communist soon.

Comrade Chavez thinks the United States is using military aircraft to spy on Venezuela.  The United States refuted his statement saying the aircraft are used to perform anti-narcotic surveillance in Colombia.  The U.S. did acknowledge that militray assets did unintentionally violate Venezuelan airspace and that the Air Force is working to ensure it does not happen again.

If we are spying, and we should be, it had better happen again!  collecting verifiable intelligence on hostile regimes is essential to the national security of the United States and out allies in South America.  Keep up the good work, Air Force.

A few weeks ago, House Resolution 5800 was introduced on the House floor by its sole sponsor Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa). The bill would amend the tax code by inserting a tax on windfall profits on oil and natural gas companies. What constitutes windfall profits? Well, that would be decided by the newly formed Reasonable Profits Board – a board of three persons, appointed by the president, whose job it would be to determine when a company has surpassed a reasonable level of profits and has entered windfall territory.

For the legions of Conservative Donnybrook readers in Pennsylvania, we would simply remind you that Paul Kanjorski is up for reelection this year. Don’t send this guy back to Washington.