Cooperation between the Obama Administration and the OIC poses a threat to free speech in the U.S.

The… threat we face is the specter of cooperation between our government and the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) to shape speech about Islam. A first indication of this came in President Obama’s Cairo speech in 2009, when he declared that he has a responsibility to “fight against negative stereotypes of Islam whenever they appear.” Then in July of last year in Istanbul, Secretary of State Clinton co-chaired—with the OIC—a “High-Level Meeting on Combating Religious Intolerance.” There, Mrs. Clinton announced another conference with the OIC, this one in Washington, to “exchange ideas” and discuss “implementation” measures our government might take to combat negative stereotyping of Islam. This would not restrict free speech, she said. But the mere fact of U.S. government partnership with the OIC is troublesome. Certainly it sends a dangerous signal, as suggested by the OIC’s Secretary-General, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, when he commented in Istanbul that the Obama administration stands “united” with the OIC on speech issues.

The OIC’s charter commits it “to combat defamation of Islam.” Its current action plan calls for “deterrent punishments” to counter “Islamophobia.” In 2009, an official OIC organ, the “International Islamic Fiqh [Jurisprudence] Academy,” issued fatwas calling for speech bans, including “international legislation,” to protect “the interests and values of [Islamic] society.” The OIC does not define what speech should be outlawed, but the repressive practices of its leading member states speak for themselves.

The conference Secretary Clinton announced in Istanbul was held in Washington on December 12-14, 2011, and was closed to the public, with the “Chatham House Rule” restricting the participants (this rule prohibits the identification of who says what, although general content is not confidential). Presentations reportedly focused on America’s deficiencies in its treatment of Muslims and stressed that the U.S. has something to learn in this regard from the other delegations—including Saudi Arabia, despite its ban on Christian churches, its repression of its Shiite population, its textbooks teaching that Jews should be killed, and the fact that it beheaded a woman for sorcery on the opening day of the conference.

* * *

The encroachment of de facto blasphemy restrictions in the West threatens free speech and the free exchange of ideas. Nor will it bring social peace and harmony. As comedian Rowan Atkinson warns, such laws produce “a veneer of tolerance concealing a snake pit of unaired and unchallenged views.” Norway’s far-reaching restrictions on “hate speech” did not prevent Anders Behring Breivik from slaughtering over 70 people because of his antipathy to Islam: indeed, his writings suggest that he engaged in violence because he believed that he could not otherwise be heard.

In the Muslim world, such restrictions enable Islamists to crush debate. After Salman Taseer, the governor of Punjab, was murdered early last year by his bodyguards for opposing blasphemy laws, his daughter Sara observed: “This is a message to every liberal to shut up or be shot.” Or in the words of Nasr Abu-Zayd, a Muslim scholar driven out of Egypt: “Charges of apostasy and blasphemy are key weapons in the fundamentalists’ arsenal, strategically employed to prevent reform of Muslim societies, and instead confine the world’s Muslim population to a bleak, colourless prison of socio-cultural and political conformity.”

President Obama should put an end to discussion of speech with the OIC. He should declare clearly that in free societies, all views and all religions are subject to criticism and contradiction. As the late Abdurrahman Wahid, former president of Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim country, and head of Nahdlatul Ulama, the world’s largest Muslim organization, wrote in his foreword to Silenced, blasphemy laws

“. . . narrow the bounds of acceptable discourse. . . not only about religion, but also about vast spheres of life, literature, science, and culture in general. . . . Rather than legally stifle criticism and debate—which will only encourage Muslim fundamentalists in their efforts to impose a spiritually void, harsh, and monolithic understanding of Islam upon all the world—Western authorities should instead firmly defend freedom of expression. . . .”

America’s Founders, who had broken with an old order that was rife with religious persecution and warfare, forbade laws impeding free exercise of religion, abridging freedom of speech, or infringing freedom of the press. We today must do likewise.

---

From “Blasphemy and Free Speech” by Paul Marshall as published in “Imprimis” (Feb 2012, Vol. 41, No. 2), a publication of Hillsdale College

“I Want Your Money”

Funny! Thought-provoking!

I liked it so much, I bought my own copy!

Groundhog Day 2012 and other events

Groundhog Day and the State of the Union address have certain similarities this year. One involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to an insignificant creature of little intelligence for prognostication. The other has to do with a groundhog.

On Pres’ent Obama’s unseemly conduct

No one can say this too strongly, and no one can say it enough until it is remedied in the office of the POTUS:

We are not subjects; we are citizens! We fought a war so that we do not have to treat even kings like kings, and—if I may remind you—we won that war. Since then, the principle of royalty has, in this country, been inoperative. Who is better suited or more required to exemplify this conviction, in word and deed, that the President of the United States?

Big Government spending and the Economic “Wreckovery”

Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and editor of DownsizingGovernment.com, points out that “[d]ata from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)  show that total federal, state, and local government spending in the United States this year (2011) is a huge 41 percent of GDP [Gross Domestic Product]. That compares to the average of the 32 advanced economies in the OECD of 45 percent. Until the big-spending Bush and Obama years, we enjoyed a government size advantage compared to the OECD average of about 10 percentage  points of GDP. But that advantage has now shrunk to just 4 points, and we are fast becoming just another bloated welfare state.” (Cato Policy Report, Nov/Dec 2011)

What this means is that more and more of our economic resources are being shifted from producers (those who produce goods and services for consumption) to non-producers (those who produce no goods or services for consumption).

“What difference does this make?” I hear you ask? “Doesn’t government spending ‘stimulate’ the economy?”

The answer is a resounding, “No!”

If the economy is stimulated by government spending, then we should not restrict ourselves to building four-lane highways. We should build eight- and 16-lane highways everywhere. In fact, we really should invest in “bridges to nowhere” and even in “highways to nowhere.” Maybe would should even start a program where four lanes are being jackhammered away while the citizens use the other four lanes. Then, when the jackhammered lanes have been rebuilt, shift the traffic onto those lanes and jackhammer the first four lanes and rebuild them. Then just keep repeating that cycle.

If a little bit of spending by the government is good for the economy, then all that spending should have the economy skyrocketing.

However, with all that money is being taken out the private sector economy and more and more workers and money being used to build roads and bridges and whatever government decides to undertake, that leave less money in the economy and fewer workers to produce what consumers (read: citizens and taxpayers) need day-to-day. There would be less food produced, less gasoline being refined and delivered, fewer automobiles being produced, fewer coffee shops to go to, fewer movies being made and fewer theaters in which to watch them—in short, less of everything.

And, since supply influences prices, that also means that the prices of all those goods and services would be going up. There might be more money circulating due to the wages being paid for all the public works projects, but all that money would be chasing fewer and fewer goods until no one could afford to buy anything.

Edwards tells us: “Stanford University’s Michael Boskin calls government spending a ‘leaky bucket’ because the benefits are a fraction of the cost. For every $1 spent on a government program, the required taxes cause about $1.50 of damage to the private economy. And because programs are so inefficient, every $1 of spending may only produce a return of perhaps 50 cents. Thus, ‘it costs taxpayers $3 to provide a benefit worth $1 to recipients,’ notes Texas A&M University’s Edgar Browning.”

Let’s get real! Tell your Congressman and Senators that you’re onto the scheme and know that all that “stimulus” just leads to “wreckovery,” not recovery.

Obama–The Post-Turtle President

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that Pres’ent Obama (I call him that in honor of the number of times he has chosen to vote “present” in his political career, and because he does not seem to know what to do when he is put into the situation where he cannot simply vote “present.”) is the “tool” of some large effort to damage America, the American economy and what we have known as the American way of life. Perhaps this effort is led by the likes of George Soros or other international money-brokers. Who knows?

I don’t like this “Change”!

Let’s change it back!

Remember to vote November 6, 2012, and get your friends and family to do the same.

Thanks.

Had enough…?

 

Remember to vote on November 6, 2012!

Our TOTUS

Obama voted “present” so frequently while in the U.S. Senate that I refer to him as “Pres’ent of the United States.”

What Obama said when he was a senator…

Remember this quote from Senator Barack Obama?

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.” ~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

If he was insincere then, what do you think he is now?!? Remember that quote in the coming election.

Still fighting the Obama machine on health care

Here's a letter I just sent to multiple newspapers by employing Pres'ent Obama's technology machine AGAINST his agenda.

You can do the same by CLICKING HERE.

To: Minneapolis Star Tribune, St. Paul Pioneer Press, Rochester (MN) Post-Bulletin, Finance and Commerce, Minnesota Daily, and the Wall Street Journal

Subject: Americans are waking up

Americans are waking up to the fact that the so-called health care "reforms" current before Congress are not reforms at all. The legislation is nothing more than a federal takeover of a huge economic sector and another step toward socialism.

Socialist/collectivist action has never built a great nation. The only evidence of history is that such action is only capable of consuming the wealth of nations -- national wealth and welfare that has been built through individual effort and initiative in the context of personal liberty and economic freedom.

Take another look at the fraud and waste in the current Medicare program and ask if we really want to enlarge that kind of "government efficiency" (falsely so-called) for more Americans.

Stop and think! We need to stop this hugely expensive boondoggle that will do nothing but aid in the destruction of the U.S. economy as we have known it.

Those who have become a part of the problem...

"I don't believe that those who have become part of the problem are necessarily the best qualified to solve the problems." -- Ronald Reagan (1976)

In the final analysis...

"If an act of government... violates the liberty of the people, it is of little importance who did it or how he came to have power to do it; it is of little importance whether a dictator gained his power by accident of birth, by force, or by the vote of the people." -- F.A. Harper Liberty: A Path to Its Recovery

In fact, it is of little importance if it is done by the legislature through the foolish or dastardly acts of the elected representatives of the people and merely signed into law by an equally foolish or dastardly president. The liberty of the people is still diminished.

Obama's Top Secret Motivation for a Federal Take-over of Health Care

Why is Obama so intent on getting universal health coverage in place as soon as possible? Is it just his socialist heart driving him to do what he thinks is the right thing to do for people?

Not on your life!

There is a hidden motive that has NOT been revealed in anything I’ve seen written about this administration’s hard-driving campaign for so-called “health care reform.”

What is that hidden motive?

The labor unions! In particular, there are the UAW (United Auto Workers) and USW (United Steel Workers) unions that have been clamoring for government-funded universal health coverage for nearly three decades. Then, do not forget how the federal government’s shared ownership of the GM and Chrysler with the unions’ trust funds plays into all of this.

Back in 1981, health insurance for union employees and retirees was costing U.S. automakers more than $400 per automobile. A few short years ago, that number had skyrocketed to nearly $3,000 per vehicle. Is it any wonder that Representative John Dingell (D-MI), Michigan's (and Congress's) longest-serving Member of Congress has been a champion of universal health care for more than 50 years -- that' right, since 1957. And, yes, it's the same Michigan that is home to Ford, Chrysler and General Motors. Is there a connection? Of course there is a connection!

Just imagine what happens if government-sponsored universal health insurance is made available. Suddenly the manufacture of automobiles at GM and Chrysler becomes about $3,000 per vehicle more profitable. Suddenly the unions have another $3,000 per vehicle to bargain for — again!

Make no mistake about it: Just like the “Card Check” legislation, universal government-funded health coverage is JUST ONE MORE PAY-BACK to BIG LABOR for the part the unions played in getting Mr. Obama into office in the first place.

STOP THE PAY-BACK! Contact your Congressmen and Senators and tell them that we cannot afford another multi-trillion-dollar political payback laid on the backs of the American taxpayer (the roughly 40% of us who actually pay taxes).

Concerning a Second American Revolution

May God forbid either another American Revolution or another American Civil War. The Civil War was fought over secession, and I have already expressed my views (at LinkedIn.com) on that, so I will not opine further here on that matter.

As to a second American Revolution, Thomas Jefferson warned us that it may be necessary to have a revolution every 200 years or so, just to set government again on a sound footing. Here, however, is the danger: This is NOT 1776 and we will never again, in this nation, have group of people like the colonists (many of whom had experience tyranny and oppression first-hand) nor such staid leadership as was present in our Founding Fathers. I cannot imagine what an ill wind might arise were we to take men of power and influence today and ask them to construct for us an entirely new Constitution.

You must remember, if one were to start an armed rebellion, we would not be supporting our nation and our Constitution, for even though many in the battle might hold to the ideals expressed in our present Constitution, it would be necessary to violently overthrow the existing government and establish an new one. That is the nature of violent revolution.

We have a method for changing our government in a non-violent way. You and I have forsaken that way through our own idleness and indolence, through self-serving and an unwillingness to fight the fight for liberty EVERY DAY instead of just when things "get too bad."

Plato warned us millennia ago that for preservation of a republic there are ONLY TWO IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:

1. WHO gets to teach the children, and

2. WHAT do they teach them.

More than an hundred years ago, the American citizenry decided that state-run schools were an acceptable solution for the education of our children. Despite warnings to the contrary, the vast majority of citizens took the path of least resistance and surrendered their children to COMPULSORY MIS-EDUCATION promulgated first by the states, and then, ultimately (under Jimmy Carter), by the federal Department of Education.

When our children are educated by the state, what in your wildest imagination makes you believe that these children will not ultimately be conformed to believe that the government is the solution to EVERY PROBLEM?

This has gone on for so long now that even our colleges of education are wholly contaminated by this philosophy. Almost every new teacher and administrator comes into the state-run school system fully saturated with nothing but foolishness about government, economics, politics, the environment and more.

This present generation in the U.S. has never KNOWN tyranny, never FOUGHT AGAINST tyranny, never really STOOD UP for anything much more than their own SELF-SATISFACTION. (Sometimes that self-satisfaction involves making themselves feel better by "standing up for the poor" or "hugging a tree," but, in the end, it is self-satisfaction.) That's why it is much simpler to establish a solid constitution, a new government, free markets and a sound monetary policy in places like the Czech Republic today than it is to do the same thing here in the U.S. The people in the Czech Republic -- most of them -- experienced 40 years of oppression and tyranny and they know what they DON'T WANT again! Many in the U.S. electorate that voted for Obama, on the other hand, considered their vote of no more significance than casting a vote for their favorite on "American Idol."

I believe there is a way back. I have written an article that describes that way. It is available here.

Thanks.

In Opposition to the DHS Report Against 'Rightwing Extremists'

Here's a message I just sent to many in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate in reaction against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report regarding "rightwing extremists."

OPPOSE the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report that labels citizens opposed to new firearms and ammunition restrictions, returning veterans and other conservatives as "rightwing extremists" and associates them with white supremacists and violent anti-government groups. This is none other than a blatant attempt by DHS director Napolitano and the Obama administration to silence political dissent and other liberties granted under the U.S. Constitution.

AS A SWORN SUPPORTER AND DEFENDER OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, YOU SHOULD CONDEMN THIS KIND OF RHETORIC BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WITH A LOUD VOICE.

Obama's recent trip to Mexico City and recent Congressional debates make it appear that Congress and the Obama administration are MORE CONCERNED about Mexico and the SOUTHERN border of Mexico than they are about SECURING OUR OWN U.S. BORDERS, PROTECTING THE SANCTITY OF THE U.S. CITIZENS' (NOT illegal aliens') RIGHT TO FAIR AND HONEST ELECTIONS (NOT elections intentionally diluted by massive abuse and fraud), and OUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

It also appears that the Obama administration is far more prepared to LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF U.S. CITIZENS in the name of "homeland security" than they are prepared to stand against ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS or the foolishness of ENVIRONMENTAL EXTREMISTS. In fact, the Obama administration and FAR TOO MUCH OF CONGRESS appears to be populated with those who have SOLD THEMSELVES OUT to ENVIRONMENTAL PSEUDO-SCIENCE as an excuse of all manner of violations of STATES' RIGHTS, FREE MARKETS, LIMITED GOVERNMENT or even SOUND MONETARY POLICY.

GIRD YOURSELVES UP AND TAKE A STAND FOR THE U.S. CONSTITUTION by CONDEMNING SUCH ACTIONS BY FELLOW MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, THE FEDERAL COURTS or THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.

What are YOU going to tell them? Something, I hope!

Please listen to the WARNINGS!

Here's a message I just sent to many members of Congress:

Recently, an essay published by the governor of the People's Bank of China appeared to favor the creation of an IMF currency to replace the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency. This, of course, is a tragic sign as the U.S. has been the safe haven for investors from around the world for the greater part of the last century.

In Europe, the outgoing president of the European Union, the Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, described America's current plan to fight the widening global recession as the "road to hell." Then British Member of the European Parliament Daniel Hannan made worldwide news headlines by rebuking the UK's own inflationary and debt-focused policies.

Meanwhile, Pres'ent Obama's administration carried on an effective public relations campaign to convince the U.S. citizenry and the rest of the world that if the world just worked together, everything would be "okay" -- even if they worked together mostly doing the WRONG things. That seemed to pretty much put most everyone back to sleep.

The Washington drumbeat is that our economic woes result from a lack of consumer spending. Therefore, Pres'ent Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress seem intent on making up for all the U.S. citizens by spending money the government does not have. It hardly seems reasonable that the cure for the sick man's disease is to drain blood from his leg while trying to inject it back in his arm.

To postpone inevitable (formal) tax increases, it seems the Obama administration is content with a strategy of printing money. Of course, printing money is just another form of taxation. Rather than taking money out of the citizens' pockets, the administration is satisfied with simply robbing the currency itself of its purchasing power.

The things that are lacking in the current worldwide recession are PRODUCTION and CAPITAL (trillions of dollars of capital having been destroyed in the bursting of the "bubble"). It is PRODUCTION, not spending, that will building capital and restore purchasing power -- not the printing of currency that is ever more diluted in value. Besides, if the government simply prints more money, it won't allow Americans to buy more things because the things. They will just be able to buy less stuff at higher prices.

Obama's economic advisers seem to have convinced themselves -- and Congress -- that more debt and government spending will restore growth and ultimately allow the repayment of the huge debt. However, when all of the entitlement obligations come due over the next decade (i.e., Social Security, Medicare and other welfare), these obligations will amount to TENS OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS and the federal government will have NO ALTERNATIVE but to repudiate much of the debt (perhaps through hyper-inflation as other nations have done).

But, even if that were not true, Pres'ent Obama's assumption that additional borrowing and spending will restore growth is wrong on the face of it. IN FACT, MORE CONSUMER DEBT AND GOVERNMENT SPENDING WILL UNDERMINE OUR ECONOMY AND KEEP IT FROM GROWING. We borrowed and spent ourselves INTO this current situation. We must now SAVE AND PRODUCE ourselves OUT of the recession.

However, as long as the Pres'ent Obama administration and Congress are intent on propping up the FALSE ECONOMY, rather than letting it COLLAPSE, their CAN BE NO REBUILDING of a GENUINE ECONOMY.

Calls from other nations that actually see things clearer than do we will simply get LOUDER AND LOUDER until we are willing to FACE THE UGLY TRUTH.

What are YOU going to tell them?

My Opposition to Obama's Proposed $1 Trillion Tax Hike

Here's a message I just sent to Minnesota Senators:

I am strongly opposed to any form of energy tax, like cap-and-trade, that will, in President Obama's own words, cause electricity prices to skyrocket.  During a time of economic distress, hitting families with such a burden of rising prices would be a mistake and can't be justified.

Even if you disagree on the cap-and-trade issue, however, I hope you'll agree that such an enormous substantive policy change has no place in the reconciliation process, which would amount to a procedural trick to enact the plan without proper debate and the usual rules that encourage bipartisan cooperation and consensus-building.

I urge you to join the growing number of senators who have taken a strong stand against including cap-and-trade in reconciliation.  Whenever cap-and-trade does advance as legislation, I urge you to consider the interests of regular American taxpayers and consumers and oppose it.

What are YOU going to tell them?

No Founding Father He

From ThePatriotPost

Obama White House Maneuvers for Permanent Control

The real DANGER is that the machinations of the current Democrat Congress and the Obama administration are NOT just doing damage to the U.S. economy. Many of their moves are designed to secure a political LOCK-IN for years to come.

1. Place control of the upcoming 2010 U.S. census in the hands of the White House to assure the outcome is favorable to Democrats when reapportionment comes about.

2. Save the TRADE UNIONS from their slow demise through deceptive new legislation -- because union members vote Democrat in disproportionate numbers.

3. Vastly increase the number of GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES -- at all levels -- because government employees vote Democrat in disproportionate numbers.

4. Enlarge existing and create entirely NEW ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS because those who receive government hand-outs vote Democrat in large numbers.

5. Assure that no legislation encumbers the U.S. election processes with anything that could be called real INTEGRITY, for the fraud virtually always favors Democrats.

6. Give government handouts to groups like ACORN, because these groups encourage election fraud and abuse, and they stir up class envy and hatred, which tends to work in the favor of Democrats at the polls.

7. Provide GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS to banks and securities trading firms in order to ingratiate them to the Democrats and to assure a continuing stream of political contributions from this sector of the economy.

8. Encumber FREE SPEECH through rules and regulations tended to, more than anything else, quash conservative conversation in the public media.

9. Encourage continuing ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION because illegal immigrants -- who shouldn't be allowed to vote in the U.S. elections AT ALL -- vote disproportionately in support of Democrats.

I'm sure there's more, I just can't think of them at this moment.

Obama Ain't No Abraham Lincoln

From Free Market Politics