Is the President Waiting Too Long to Flex His Muscles?

Memorial Day is past and the tributes are over. We are now back to business as usual in Washington. Over the weekend and the past few days, I have been trying to decide what to write about. It seems that the Pelosi controversy regarding the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques seems to have gone away for the moment. All I can think about in that regard is that maybe the left wing of the Democratic Party was told to lay off when it began to look like some of their key members might be going down for the count on the issue. We will probably know more about how that is going to play out in the next few weeks.

A quick glance at the news over the past few days gave me some potential firecracker issues. The first is regarding the pending bankruptcy of GM and the second is about our current standing in foreign affairs. Specifically, what is going to be done about North Korea and Iran?

As far back as November 19, 2009, I have been stating in this column that the auto industry bailout was a waste of taxpayer money. The inevitable was that both Chrysler and General Motors would be forced into Chapter 11 protection under the United States Bankruptcy Code. Well, I was right. Chrysler filed for bankruptcy on April 30, 2009. And, it appears that General Motors will be filing for bankruptcy in the next few days. Why?

It is very simple. Neither one of these entities could come up with a plan to satisfy the creditors. The UAW gave major concessions in both cases. Or, did it? I don’t think so. In both cases, the union would stand to gain a large amount of the ownership of the company after the concessions. In the case of General Motors, the union agreed to take a 20% stake in the company. After the Federal Government’s pre-agreed stake of 50%, that’s right 50%, the bondholders and the current common shareholders would have had 30% to split between them. No wonder the whole thing fell apart. By the way, for those of you that do not think this is all leading to socialism, I suggest you take a good look at the 50% number. If that is not central planning, I do not know what is.

The taxpayers are now faced with owning 50% of a bankrupt company or putting more money into it, to keep it afloat. I guess 19.5 billion dollars just wasn’t enough? And, what about the bondholders? All I can say is thank God I do not have any General Motors bonds.

So, six months after my initial article, the inevitable is coming to pass. General Motors will join Chrysler in bankruptcy court. And, the taxpayers and the common shareholders in both companies will be left footing the bill. In my opinion, this should have happened in November, when the only people that would have lost money in bankruptcy court would have been the common shareholders, which is capitalism. At least, you and I wouldn’t have paid approximately 25 billion dollars out of our own pocket.

In bankruptcy court the bondholders will get a little bit more than what they were promised by GM and the federal government. At the end of the day, they may get as much as 40 cents on a dollar. And, if GM is liquidated, they may get even a little more. Would that be so bad? After all, they did loan GM money?

As for foreign affairs, the situation is getting much worse by the minute. As Joe Biden said during the campaign, something is going to happen in the first few months of our presidency.” Well, that something is happening already. People outside of the United States might love Obama and may have been taken in by his celebrity standing, but foreign leaders that have it in for the United States are beginning to flex their muscle.

Both Iran and North Korea are snubbing their noses at President Obama right now and he is doing nothing about it. Meanwhile, the Taliban continues its march towards Islamabad and its nuclear weapons with nothing from the Obama Administration other than threats to Pakistan that if they don’t do something quick, we will. As each day passes, I’m just wondering how far this is going to go before the President does something? In my opinion, it had better be soon.

In just the last two days, North Korea has tested a nuclear weapon, tested another missile (this one powerful enough to reach US territory in Guam) and threatened military action to any country that tries to stop it. In fact, South Korea could be attacked based upon these threats any day now. How long will South Korea and for that matter Japan allow this to continue before they do something about it? I know that if I was the leader of Japan, I would be doing everything I could to develop a nuclear weapon as quickly as possible. For the past 60 years, Japan has relied upon the United States for defense. Well, now the time has come to put up or shut up. North Korea must be stopped one way or the other.

In the Middle East, Iran continues to develop its nuclear weapons program. Unless they are stopped, they will also have a nuclear weapon and I am sure it will be aimed at Israel. Last week, when the Prime Minister of Israel met with President Obama, this matter must have been discussed. However, Obama has not done anything. Israel’s patience should be wearing thin.

The Taliban continues to gain territory in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The current administration better react soon. At some point, no matter how much is done; it will be too little, too late. The Pakistani government will fall and there will not only be a power base for the Taliban and Al Qaeda, there will be nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists. In that instance, it will not be long before Afghanistan falls as well.

The only country we haven’t really heard from in the past few weeks is Venezuela. I wonder when Mr. Chavez will start flexing his muscle. Based upon the events of the past few weeks, it won’t be too far into the future.

One of my readers, who would like to be called Allen Smithee, sent me the following: “When society weakens its resolve and finds appeasement, relativism, and statism (sic) more desirable than the price of individual freedom, we are diminished. When we retreat from the transparent analysis of the Pelosi lie about the CIA, we are diminished. When we misrepresent Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (Holder now holds that the definition of water-boarding as torture depends on intent), we are diminished. When we ever decline to put America first, we are diminished. The thinking person did not need Cheney’s articulate expose in late May 2009 to tell us so. This is the clear, concise and definitional difference between 9/10 and 9/12 and yet so many need another 9/11 to experience this epiphany. How sad. So it is with opinionated cowardice, selfish pursuit of political power, hatred and ignorance. This is cowardice, far more insidious than a demagogue’s claim of America’s cowardice concerning reluctant dialogue about racism. This is a cancer on patriotism.”

To me, this says it all. As Dick Cheney stated last week, we are a different people after 9/11 and we must react accordingly. I remember watching the two towers come down. Do Mr. Obama and the remainder of his party remember the same? Is President Obama ready to flex his muscles?

As for Memorial Day, a few readers informed me that there is an HBO movie out this month based upon the death of a US Marine in Iraq. It is called “Taking Chance” and stars Kevin Bacon. Everyone should see it. There is an article at the following web site: www.blackfive.net/main/2004/04/taking_chance.html that tells the story by the man who accompanied the fallen Marine home on his last journey. Reading this article brought tears to my eyes. I think you should all take the time to read it I would like to thank Richard Stoll from Orange County, California for bringing it to my attention. This is patriotism.

In closing I would like to state that military intervention is not always the answer, but unless the opposing party believes you will use it, you have no power whatsoever. This, unfortunately, is what all of the celebrity of our current President has done. He has convinced the world that America wants to be friends with everybody. And, we do. But, we must remember the words of Teddy Roosevelt, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.” And, I would like to add to that, “Be Ready to Use It.”

©2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. All rights reserved. Permission to copy will be freely granted upon request.

Current Affairs and Remembering Memorial Day

My original plan was to make this a non-political column and to address what Memorial Day should mean to this country in the current worldwide political climate. However, there have been so many developments politically in the past week that politics must have its fair say and Memorial Day will be addressed later.

Nancy Pelosi’s political standing has taken a turn for the worse in the past few days. The press conference she gave last week was one of the most awkward things I have witnessed by a politician. She seemed flustered and completely out of her element. And during it, she attacked the CIA, which is run by a confirmed Democrat, Leon Panetta. Why she would be attacking the CIA makes absolutely no sense? The only thing she accomplished by this ridiculous behavior is to go to war with the CIA and Mr. Panetta.

Members of both parties are now openly declaring she has been politically damaged by the whole situation. It is quite clear she is lying about something. She was so flustered she couldn’t even remember what she said a few minutes earlier during the press conference. My personal feeling is that she is now attempting to cover up what she new about the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques as early as 2002, but no later than 2003. It’s like 1973 all over again. She does not want anyone to know what she knew because she and her party want Republican blood on this issue.

It is pretty clear that a high ranking member of a House Intelligence committee would know everything that was going on and receive regular briefings from the intelligence community. For her to claim that she did not know about the water boarding is beyond belief. She obviously knew what was going on and did not object back in 2002-2003 because they majority of the country was in fear as a result of 9/11. Now, the times have changed, public opinion has changed and she can do whatever she wants to further the goals of her party.

Did she expect everyone to let her slide on this? I think not. If she did, she is even dumber than I initially thought. Bottom line is she has got to come clean and admit she knew what was going on and that she either expressly or impliedly acquiesced to it. If that brings her down, so be it. It could not happen to a nicer person.

This brings me to another issue that is directly related. Apparently, Senate Democrats, keeling over to public pressure, are beginning to change their mind on Gitmo. Just today, they denied 80 million dollars in funding needed to close the facility. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Democrats not only oppose the release of detainees into the United States but also oppose the transfer of detainees to U.S. prisons. Maybe, Mr. Bush and the Republicans had it right all along? Wouldn’t it be wild to have the Democrats finally admit that President Bush was acting correctly on certain controversial national security issues?

Of course, this would make President Obama look really bad to the majority of his supporters. How does he explain the necessity of leaving Gitmo open when closing it was, not only one of his main campaign promises, but also one of his first executive orders when taking office? Either way, the Democrats are going to end up with egg on their faces on this issue and the Republicans will have been proven correct.

Another interesting development in the last few days is US/Israeli relations. Does President Obama really support Israel? In the past few months it is beginning to seem less clear. Obama wants a two state solution. Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel made it clear to President Obama at the White House on Monday that Israel wanted peace. However, he did not acquiesce to a two state solution and he did not agree to stop the settlements in the disputed areas.

Instead Netanyahu stated that the peace process must be a two way street. He further stated that Iran was the biggest danger to the entire peace process. The other Middle Eastern countries, including, but not limited to Iran and the Palestinians, must recognize Israel’s right to exist. Until that happens, no peace is possible.

President Obama must side with Netanyahu on these issues. Israel must remain America’s strongest ally in the Middle East. Every President in the past thirty years has realized this. I think President Obama should stop applying pressure on Israel and instead apply it to Iran. Until Iran’s nuclear threat is neutralized, there will be no peace in the Middle East.

I wonder where Rahm Emmanuel is right now?

My position on the Middle Eastern situation is not because of my standing in the entertainment community as some of my critics have suggested. It is simple and basic foreign relations. Israel is the only true democracy in the region. It is one of our most important trading partners in the region. We cannot turn our backs on them and we must support them. After all, we are war with radical Islam no matter what President Obama chooses to call it.

Finally, I would like to speak about Memorial Day which was my original intent in this column. It was originally called Decoration Day and began after the Civil Way in 1868 as a way to pay tribute to those who had died defending the country. The original tradition, begun in Waterloo, NY, was to decorate the graves of the fallen military. Hence, the name Decoration Day.

It has evolved beyond that into much more. It is on this day we remember everything the military has done for us. We remember those that died storming the beaches in Normandy. We remember those that lost their lives in the Tet Offensive. We remember our fallen brethren in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, we should remember those that have long been forgotten with time.

These are our sons and daughters and ancestors that have given all so that our way of life could survive. We should not protest against them. We should honor them. So, on Monday, when you are attending a Memorial Day BBQ or parade, try to remember why you are there. Remember, all of the good we have in this country and those that gave all for that good. And, remember those who died keeping this country together approximately 150 years ago during the Civil War. There would be no “United” States without them.

We are one proud nation. The whole world looks up to us and wants to emulate us. This is still the country where most of the world wants to live. Regardless of which party is in power, no one leaves here for greener pastures. These are the greener pastures and on Memorial Day, we must remember those who have given their lives to keep them that way.

©2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. Permission to use excerpts will be freely given upon request.

Has Being PC Taken Away Free Speech?

The week has been a little slow politically. The unemployment numbers for April came out and depending on your frame of reference were either great or not that bad. In my opinion, five hundred thousand jobs lost in one month is not good. But, I am in the minority on this according to polling in the last few days.

On other fronts, Pakistan has started a major offensive against the Taliban. There is still no real word on whether it has been successful. But, it appears that the Taliban has not made any progress towards Islamabad. This gives President Obama a little breathing room before he will have to make a decision on what course of action to take there.

And, the general consensus seems to be that Nancy Pelosi is playing fast and loose about what she knew and when she knew it about the enhanced interrogation techniques.

So, nothing much has changed. As a result, I’ve decided to write about something that I have taken a regular stand on and that is “Free Speech.” As those of you that read this regularly know, I believe very strongly on this issue and I take offence at any liberals that try to limit it in order to promote their own personal agenda. To those of you that argue the right has little tolerance of the other side, I disagree.

This Saturday I attended a performance of “The Fantastiks” on the UCLA campus. To me, this is a classic show that should be treated with the same respect and admiration as “South Pacific,” “The Music Man,” and many others.

About halfway through the first act, there is a song in which the leading character describes a plot to bring the two lovers together. He is selling the parents’ of the couple that fact that he and his gang will “rape” the leading lady thereby allow the hero to save her causing them to fall in love. This is not one of the classic songs from the show, but nonetheless it is very important and drives the remainder of the plot.

Imagine my surprise when the singer completely changed the lyrics. The word “rape” was changed to “abduction.” Research done for this column shows that the word “rape”, although used in its literary sense meaning “abduction,” had offended enough people to cause the authors to change the lyrics in recent years. The authors caved to pressure.

Are we heading this way in all forms of art? Has the PC movement changed things so much that we must change the way artists express themselves?

Apparently, this is more often true than not. As I pondered this, I began to think of other ways that the PC movement has taken away an artist’s right of free expression. Let’s talk about some of the classic television shows from the 70’s. Would “All in the Family,” “Sanford and Son,” “Good Times,” or “Maude” get on the air today or would some studio executive be too afraid of upsetting some minority group to risk it.

Just imagine “All in the Family” without Archie’s lovable bigoted comments or “Sanford and Son,” without Fred’s comments about Puerto Ricans or the homosexual community; or, for that matter the use of the “N” word on a few occasions on either show. In fact, TV Land, when broadcasting “Sanford and Son,” has edited out all uses of the “N” words thereby changing the humor and taking away whatever “droit moral” rights the creators had. In fact, in one sequence, TV Land cut the scene four lines short in order to avoid the “N” word. Does it bother anyone that the lines in question had the audience howling in fits of laughter so much that Redd Foxx actually had to wait for the audience to quiet down before delivering the next line?

Could you just imagine trying to do “The Merchant of Venice” these days on a college campus? I’m sure some liberal self righteous organization would be so upset at the clearly prejudicial stance against the Jewish Religion that Shylock’s famous soliloquy would be edited to shreds.

Would some PC group allow this to be said on a college stage or for that matter pretty much any theater:

The cries and claims of anti-Semitism would be shouted from the highest rafters. The protesters would be outside the theater with signs saying that the college was propagating anti-Semitism. Of course, the fact that this is one of the most famous soliloquies of all time would mean nothing to these zealots.

Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the
same weapons, subject to the same diseases, heal'd by the same means, warm'd and
cool'd by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we
not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?
And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we
will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility?
Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian
example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me, I will execute, and it shall
go hard but I will better the instruction.
—Act III, scene
I

The point I am trying to make here is that we have gone so far with trying to be politically correct that we are stifling creative people. “All in the Family” and its ilk from the 70’s were not based upon prejudice or bias per se. They forced us to look at our prejudices and laugh at them. Don Rickles’ routine is exactly the same. He is not making fun of racial or ethnic groups; he is making fun of the stereotypes of racial and ethnic groups. In my opinion, we must be able to look at these and laugh at them before we can become cured of them.

But what has happened now? We have become so afraid to speak in racial, ethnic or sexual overtones that, the prejudices are returning. The country is not a better place because of it. Now, you don’t here these ethnic slurs on TV or in the movies, but believe me, they are still out there. And, I’m sure the people that are saying them; mean them just as much now as they did 40 years ago. We have gone backwards creatively.

I sure am beginning to sound like a broken record on this. But, to me “Free Speech” means just that. Everyone should be able to voice their opinions and to say whatever they want without fear of reprisal from anyone else. I still respect Miss California for having the courage to state her opinion on gay marriage. And, I am proud to say that I agree with Donald Trump’s decision today that she should maintain her crown. As for Perez Hilton, you all know how I feel about him from last week’s column.

In closing, I would like to make a few comments about some of the feedback on my last column. Many readers pointed out to me that one of President Obama’s strong points is that he listens to the other side. In fact, it appears that the contrary is true. It seems from the events of the last few weeks, that he is not listening. It appears he is taking the approach that I spoke of; it’s either his way or the high way.

One example is the report that came out last week stating that the Obama Administration gave the Israeli government an ultimatum that either Israel plays ball on the Palestinian issue or the US would leave them hanging on Iran. Of course, the Obama administration denied this report, but when pressed there was no response.

Another example is the reconciliation rule that is going to be invoked on health care at the administration’s request if the Republicans even threaten a filibuster. Again, it does not seem that the great pragmatist is listening to anybody except his obvious caving to the left wing of his party as evidence by his latest stand on the “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

As always, I hope all of you have a fruitful and blessed week. And, God Bless America. Someone try and stop me from saying that!

© 2009 Frank T. DeMartini – All rights reserved. Permission to be copied will be granted freely upon request

Dissolve the Union, Say it Aint So!

Two nights ago, I was lying in bed reading the “New Yorker.” I know it is a very liberal periodical, but usually I like to learn both sides of issues. I, not like many people in the political spectrum, listen to both sides equally and make my opinion based upon a fair sampling of the material. It is one of the reasons I started this column. I want to give both sides a place to voice their opinions.

There is one weekly column in the “New Yorker” called The Talk of the Town. It is a column that expresses the editorial content of the periodical and also various tidbits about New York and what is current in the “Big Apple.” Last week there was a section of the column called “So Long, Pardner” (sic) in which, Hendrik Hertzberg made a case for the dissolution of the United States.

As I was reading this, I got angrier with each passing paragraph. Isn’t this what the Civil War was fought over approximately 150 years ago? Where have we come? Are the “red” and “blue” states so difference and distinct now that a portion of the electorate believes they should be split in two? Abe Lincoln would be turning over in his grave. After all, wasn’t he the man who saved the Union, as well as, the Civil War’s last casualty? I really hope we aren’t heading in the direction that Mr. Hertzberg advocates!

During the “tea parties” on April 15, the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, stated, “My hope is that America, and Washington in particular, pays attention. We’ve got a great Union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, who knows what might come out of that.” Mr. Hertzberg decided that this quote was a good starting point for an article about the dissolution of the United States and a good time to voice his opinion that dissolution of it might be a good thing. How could he take this comment from the Texas governor more than the light hearted comment it was meant to be?

In the article, Hertzberg continues, “But, if the numbers mount, (in favor of secession) might it not be better for all concerned if we just let Texas – and, by extension, any other parts of the old Confederacy that wish to accompany it--- go?” He then goes on to state the benefits of secession stating that “a more intimately sized Congress would briskly enact sensible gun control, universal health insurance, and ample support for the arts, the humanities and the sciences.” “The (Con)Federated States meanwhile, could get on with the business of protecting the sanctity of marriage, mandating organized prayer sessions and the teaching of creationism in schools, and giving the theory that eliminating taxes increases government revenues a fair test” And, also it could make abortion illegal.

Mr. Hertzberg is clearly taking the position that most liberals seem to be taking these days: If you don’t agree with us, leave. We don’t need you anyway. And, for the most part we don’t want to hear your opinions either.

This is also the case with the recent debacle over the comments made by Miss California in the Miss USA pageant. The girl chose to be honest and voice her opinion on gay marriage. She could have taken the easier way out and given the politically correct answer, but she was honest. What happened next was deplorable. The poor woman was raked over the coals by the lunatic that is Perez Hilton. I am truly happy that he has taken the brunt of the criticism, both from the gay and straight lobby, over this situation. The way he treated this girl is a disgrace and should not be tolerated. If she has any legal right of redress, she should take it.

This also addresses the issue of Arlen Spector. He has left the Republican Party and is now a Democrat. Why? In all reality I say good riddance, but giving breath to the other side, his reason for leaving the Republican Party is that he believes his views on a few issues have made his election as a Republican impossible in the next election. He truly believed that he could not get the nomination of his own party because he disagreed with the majority of the party on a few “social” issues. Have we taken away his right to speak or have we voiced our opinion against him by telling him that he is no longer really a Republican?

What has happened to open debate in this country? Is every area of the media now taking sides one way or the other? Do Chris Mathews or Keith Olbermann even try to show non-bias. Is the same true of any of the pundits on the other side? However, to give the conservative commentators a bit of a break, they don’t attempt to be journalists. They are one sided and argue that one side exclusively. They are the conservative equivalent of Michael Moore. They have an opinion and they state it. I have no problem with this. Just don’t try to pass yourself off as a journalist when you are in reality, a pundit.

The problem I have is that the supposed journalists are not even attempting to be journalists. The New York Times is blatantly liberal and doesn’t even try to hide it. Isn’t the Times supposed to be the best newspaper in the world. It was when I was a child. Now, it is the equivalent of the National Enquirer, “all the news that fits its audience and opinions.” The other side is completely ignored and not even given a forum. Sean Hannity has taken to calling it “The New York Obama Times.”

As stated earlier, the left refuses to listen to the other side and simply states we have the power, if you don’t like it leave. America is a great country and always will be a great country. We are the only true superpower left in the world and that is because we all are Americans; we think alike, we behave alike and hopefully, we love our country equally. The Baptists in the south and the Atheists in New York are all Americans. The farmers in the mid-west and the bankers on Wall Street are all Americans. The industrialists in the north and the Hollywood Moguls in California are all Americans. Even though we have our different opinions, religions and way of life, we are always Americans first.

I remember reading an article many years ago about why Federalism works in the United States but doesn’t really work anywhere else except in a handful of countries. The article stated that when somebody asks an American overseas, where they are from, the answer is always “I’m an American.” Citizens of the old Yugoslavia, never said Yugoslavia, they always said Serbian, Croatian or Bosnian. The same is true in many other Federalist governments that fall apart. We are always Americans first and Californians, Texans or New Yorkers second.

The article in the New Yorker about secession should be called for what it really is, the opinion of one angry person who cannot tolerate anyone who disagrees with him. Thank God he is in the minority. Hopefully, he will stay that way.

On another issue completely, I will now take a position on something that I have ignored for a long time: gay marriage. A reader of mine, whom I will not identify for fear or reprisal from his/her friends, came up with a solution that I believe will work and will not anger the majority. Let us take marriage away from the government completely. Marriage in all its sanctity and history shall be a religious union only. If a religious organization wants to marry only men and women, so be it. This fits the liberal position of separation of church and state and should also protect the churches that refuse to perform gay marriages.

If, on the other hand, a gay couple wants to tie the knot, it shall be at the governmental level as a “civil union.” This would also go for heterosexual couples. The state shall preside over all civil unions. The will regulate them, tax them and decide how they should be ended. States, and/or government will no longer have any power over the word marriage and its implications. This solution should satisfy the gay marriage proponents because they will be treated equally with non-gays. Religion is not the states concern and marriage will no longer be the states concern.

In closing, I would like to state that I have a strong love for this country and I hope that many members of the Democratic Party feel the same way. I am sorry that there are people out there that cannot tolerate anyone that disagree with them. America is great because we have always had the ability to have an open debate. Let’s not ever take that away, especially by the Democrats’ demand to bring back the Fairness Doctrine which is anything but…..

©2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. All rights reserved. Permission to copy will be freely granted upon request.