The top headline from The Drudge Report
'Wouldn't You Like To Know?'
Courtesy of www.drudgereport.com
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Your Government the Way You Want It
The left and the right are divided into the way they see the world and how they choose to respond to the problems presented to them. They follow their beliefs in how things should be constructed and how lives should be led. The philosophy of government is one of many examples of where liberal and conservative ideology call for the government to perform different tasks and operate differently.
Left-The major difference between liberals and conservatives is the size of government. The left is quite happy with an ever increasing government. The size of government corresponds to the many things in which liberals ask the government to provide for its citizens. The result is a government rich with entitlements. These entitlements usually are called for as a proper right of the citizen and a guaranteed part of life. Whereas a conservative might see the private sector as a better distributor of services, liberals tend to rely on the government. For liberals the social problems of the society are to be corrected by the government. This may lead to programs being instituted to seek to eliminate those problems, welfare, racial inequity, etc. The result is that many problems are not solved or regulation is implemented to such a degree that it has a discouraging effect.
Right-Whereas liberals have no problem with an ever-inflating government, conservatives tend to want government as small as possible. This stems from the realization that government cannot solve every problem and should not attempt to do so in many cases. For conservatives would be happier with less control from Washington D.C. and more control being given to the states. Liberty is a main issue with conservatives, the idea of freedom and being left alone. The problem with the government growing they begin to have a bigger say over how you live your life. The right is happier letting markets solve the problem instead of the government in control. The private sector can work more efficiently then the bogged-down bureaucracies of the federal government. The right also believes that taxes can be lowered along with reduced spending instead of a large government that seek to punishes successful individuals with high taxes.
How do you want you government? You will have a clear choice this election.
Left-The major difference between liberals and conservatives is the size of government. The left is quite happy with an ever increasing government. The size of government corresponds to the many things in which liberals ask the government to provide for its citizens. The result is a government rich with entitlements. These entitlements usually are called for as a proper right of the citizen and a guaranteed part of life. Whereas a conservative might see the private sector as a better distributor of services, liberals tend to rely on the government. For liberals the social problems of the society are to be corrected by the government. This may lead to programs being instituted to seek to eliminate those problems, welfare, racial inequity, etc. The result is that many problems are not solved or regulation is implemented to such a degree that it has a discouraging effect.
Right-Whereas liberals have no problem with an ever-inflating government, conservatives tend to want government as small as possible. This stems from the realization that government cannot solve every problem and should not attempt to do so in many cases. For conservatives would be happier with less control from Washington D.C. and more control being given to the states. Liberty is a main issue with conservatives, the idea of freedom and being left alone. The problem with the government growing they begin to have a bigger say over how you live your life. The right is happier letting markets solve the problem instead of the government in control. The private sector can work more efficiently then the bogged-down bureaucracies of the federal government. The right also believes that taxes can be lowered along with reduced spending instead of a large government that seek to punishes successful individuals with high taxes.
How do you want you government? You will have a clear choice this election.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The Daily Drudge
The top headline of The Drudge Report
Showdown: Russia Vows Shield Response Beyond Diplomacy
Courtesy of www.drudgereport.com
Showdown: Russia Vows Shield Response Beyond Diplomacy
Courtesy of www.drudgereport.com
Ex Iowa Congressman Endorses Obama
In a bit of local news, Barack Obama picked up the endorsement of Jim Leach last week. Leach, a former congressman from Iowa and Republican announced his support of Obama. Leach is one of a group of Republicans supporting Obama with their Republicans for Obama group. The move for those like Leach and former Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island mark an interesting phenomenon this election. It must be said that the two men were moderate to liberal Republicans when they served, but what has driven some to switch to Obama? His ideas and policies seem to run antithetical to what Republicans stand for. Leach apparently appreciates Obama's non-ideological approach and his sense of bi-partisanship. The reality seems to counter the fantasy world that these people inhabit. Obama is a typical liberal and his future policies depict this reality. People may want change but becoming mesmerized by messianic figures is not the answer.
Read More
Read More
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Fineman Fingers Biden for Obama's Number Two
The long wait to find out who Barack Obama will have as his running mate this fall may be over. Howard Fineman wrote today that the likely pick will be Senator Joe Biden. This after Fineman had discussed the issue with two individuals of Obama's list of potential VP's. Biden, a Senator from Delaware, is a longtime beltway insider who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee. That experience, lacking from Obama's resume, may be the reason for such a choice.
Read More
Read More
Russia-Georgia War Highlights Need For Directed-Energy Defences
By James Jay Carafano Ph.D
Heritage Foundation
For the second time in recent years, the United States has witnessed another wake-up call for the importance of fielding directed-energy weapons capable of shooting-down mortar and artillery fire, as well as intercepting short-range rockets and missiles.The Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Congress need to place more emphasis on fielding working prototypes of these systems as quickly as possible.
People as Targets
Terrorism continues to be the scourge of the 21st century, but the age of conventional wars is far from over. In recent years we have had plenty examples where both means of warfare have employed conventional weapons to target civilians. Specifically, indirect fire weapons from mortars to short-range missiles have been directly targeted against innocents or employed against military targets in urban areas, putting civilian populations at risk. Terrorists in North Africa attempted to shoot down a commercial airliner with a short-range surface-to-air missile. In Iraq, insurgent groups used mortars to fire on administrative buildings, as well as military facilities in Baghdad and other urban areas.
Even more troubling, however, is the use of these conventional weapons in combat zones aimed at the heart of civilian populations. In the 2006 battles between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hezbollah's Katyusha rocket attacks killed and wounded dozens of Israelis, destroyed property, and sent thousands to bomb shelters. The rain of rockets threatened to spark a larger regional conflict.
Another Rage of Rockets
The Russian incursion into Georgia last week saw the use of rockets in urban areas by both sides. According to reports in The New York Times, Georgia fired BM-21 rockets, a system similar to the Katyusha, at separatist military headquarters. Although the rockets appear to have been aimed at legitimate targets, the risk of damage to the surrounding civilian community from these inaccurate weapons may have been high. According to other press and eyewitness reports, during the massive Russian military offensive, ground troops fired dozens of SS-21s, a short-range ballistic missile that can carry a high-explosive warhead. It is not clear whether these weapons were fired at legitimate military targets. In addition, the large SS 21 high-explosive warhead can carry either fragmentation bombs or mines making the risk of civilian causalities in urban areas very high.
The Promise of Directed Energy
Despite repeated warning signs that both unconventional and conventional combatants have no problem using the weapons of war to target both military and civilian populations, the United States has shown little sense of urgency in developing effective countermeasures for either equipping military forces or safeguarding civilian populations.
Directed energy weapons, such as the Tactical High-Energy Laser (THEL), demonstrate tremendous potential against all kinds of mortar, artillery, rocket, aircraft, and missile threats. Directed energy can be used against short-range threats like the Katyusha rockets being fired at Israel and against ballistic missiles like the SS-21s fired at Georgia. Such systems could also be used for homeland security, such as protecting critical infrastructure, national security events (such as the presidential nominating conventions) and commercial air traffic from terrorist attack.
Concluding that the THEL was not sufficiently mobile and robust for battlefield use, the U.S. Army decided to forgo its full development. Meanwhile, though the Department of Homeland Security has experimented with some systems to defend commercial flights against surface-to-air missiles, it too has not deployed any operational systems.
The Clock Is Ticking
Rather than deploy the THEL, the national security community has turned to a new generation of lasers for developing suitable directed-energy protective systems. These lasers employ a solid-state technology, incorporating multiple industrial thin disk lasers into a single high-powered energy devise. The military is currently developing prototypes for a mobile version of this system.
Congress should insist and the administration should press to field operational prototypes of these systems as quickly as possible for both defense and homeland security applications. Both land-based and air-based platforms (mounted on manned and unmanned aircraft) should be fielded as soon as possible. Putting a system in the field now would provide some limited operational capability and invaluable operational experience on how to use these systems.
Courtesy of Heritage Foundation, read more at www.heritage.org
Heritage Foundation
For the second time in recent years, the United States has witnessed another wake-up call for the importance of fielding directed-energy weapons capable of shooting-down mortar and artillery fire, as well as intercepting short-range rockets and missiles.The Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Congress need to place more emphasis on fielding working prototypes of these systems as quickly as possible.
People as Targets
Terrorism continues to be the scourge of the 21st century, but the age of conventional wars is far from over. In recent years we have had plenty examples where both means of warfare have employed conventional weapons to target civilians. Specifically, indirect fire weapons from mortars to short-range missiles have been directly targeted against innocents or employed against military targets in urban areas, putting civilian populations at risk. Terrorists in North Africa attempted to shoot down a commercial airliner with a short-range surface-to-air missile. In Iraq, insurgent groups used mortars to fire on administrative buildings, as well as military facilities in Baghdad and other urban areas.
Even more troubling, however, is the use of these conventional weapons in combat zones aimed at the heart of civilian populations. In the 2006 battles between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hezbollah's Katyusha rocket attacks killed and wounded dozens of Israelis, destroyed property, and sent thousands to bomb shelters. The rain of rockets threatened to spark a larger regional conflict.
Another Rage of Rockets
The Russian incursion into Georgia last week saw the use of rockets in urban areas by both sides. According to reports in The New York Times, Georgia fired BM-21 rockets, a system similar to the Katyusha, at separatist military headquarters. Although the rockets appear to have been aimed at legitimate targets, the risk of damage to the surrounding civilian community from these inaccurate weapons may have been high. According to other press and eyewitness reports, during the massive Russian military offensive, ground troops fired dozens of SS-21s, a short-range ballistic missile that can carry a high-explosive warhead. It is not clear whether these weapons were fired at legitimate military targets. In addition, the large SS 21 high-explosive warhead can carry either fragmentation bombs or mines making the risk of civilian causalities in urban areas very high.
The Promise of Directed Energy
Despite repeated warning signs that both unconventional and conventional combatants have no problem using the weapons of war to target both military and civilian populations, the United States has shown little sense of urgency in developing effective countermeasures for either equipping military forces or safeguarding civilian populations.
Directed energy weapons, such as the Tactical High-Energy Laser (THEL), demonstrate tremendous potential against all kinds of mortar, artillery, rocket, aircraft, and missile threats. Directed energy can be used against short-range threats like the Katyusha rockets being fired at Israel and against ballistic missiles like the SS-21s fired at Georgia. Such systems could also be used for homeland security, such as protecting critical infrastructure, national security events (such as the presidential nominating conventions) and commercial air traffic from terrorist attack.
Concluding that the THEL was not sufficiently mobile and robust for battlefield use, the U.S. Army decided to forgo its full development. Meanwhile, though the Department of Homeland Security has experimented with some systems to defend commercial flights against surface-to-air missiles, it too has not deployed any operational systems.
The Clock Is Ticking
Rather than deploy the THEL, the national security community has turned to a new generation of lasers for developing suitable directed-energy protective systems. These lasers employ a solid-state technology, incorporating multiple industrial thin disk lasers into a single high-powered energy devise. The military is currently developing prototypes for a mobile version of this system.
Congress should insist and the administration should press to field operational prototypes of these systems as quickly as possible for both defense and homeland security applications. Both land-based and air-based platforms (mounted on manned and unmanned aircraft) should be fielded as soon as possible. Putting a system in the field now would provide some limited operational capability and invaluable operational experience on how to use these systems.
Courtesy of Heritage Foundation, read more at www.heritage.org
Monday, August 18, 2008
The Daily Drudge
The top headline of The Drudge Report
Paper: Obama Ready To Announce His VP
Courtesy of http://www.drudgereport.com/
Paper: Obama Ready To Announce His VP
Courtesy of http://www.drudgereport.com/
The Bear's Bullish Behavior
An old aggressor has reverted back to its old ways. Russia, in its entry into Georgia, has not only raised questions about its motives, but its future plans. The cold war may have ended but with each new action taken by Russia it becomes harder to dismiss their actions as anything but an attempt to reassert control. The news cycle has focused on the conflict since it started and many eyes have turned to a relatively unknown territory who plays the role of David to Russia's Goliath. The story has developed to sides as observers note the military aspect of Russia entering its former satellite but also how the world community has responded to such actions.
The first part of the story is fairly simple to evaluate. You have a country with leaders that long for a previous time when its borders reached farther latitudes and longitudes and power was not challenged. This pre-fall of the wall mentality is what has become a critical issue in a world besieged by evil and evildoers people. The increased threat comes as dangerous people with competing agendas to the rest of the world link-up and work against the world's interest. The question comes to who controls Russia? President Medvedev is the designated leader but his Prime Minister is Vladimir Putin who recently held the job. Medvedev may seem to control things but one would wonder if he is used to directed as if manipulated by a puppeteer. One can not fully know what lies beneath in regards to Putin, the Communist Party member and KGB agent. Perhaps what is longed for is a renewed action by Russia to assert dominance of the region in a return to the time of the Czar.
Looking at this story there is also the issue of how the world has responded. The United States appears to have taken the lead to come to the defense of Georgia. A condemnation of the act committed by Russia was sadly lacking from much of the world. This movement to be tentative has real consequences. Russia historically has been slow to change its actions apart from a strong rebuff by the rest of the world. The world should know better then to appease for it can lead to a side strengthened with a new resolve to proceed further without fear of punishment. Perhaps an unintended consequence of Russia's invasion was to galvanize many of Georgia's neighbors and former Soviet states in rebuking Russia's actions.
It has not been a long time since that wall came down and with it a renewed warmth. What has taken place since could caution some that foresaw a new day for Russia. But it is the Cold war remnants of leadership with that mindset that appear to wish for old days and times. The result of which could be a potential for such disorder to harken to days of real and present fear for the world. These are the times when the world needs one voice to call out against aggressors and actions that threaten true stability. I fear this may not be possible from world organizations that are routinely found to be idle when their action is needed most. I do not believe we are of imminent threat to be caught in another Cold War but the atmosphere has cooled. Russia's present action in Georgia and its possible future actions should send a chill up all of our spines.
The first part of the story is fairly simple to evaluate. You have a country with leaders that long for a previous time when its borders reached farther latitudes and longitudes and power was not challenged. This pre-fall of the wall mentality is what has become a critical issue in a world besieged by evil and evildoers people. The increased threat comes as dangerous people with competing agendas to the rest of the world link-up and work against the world's interest. The question comes to who controls Russia? President Medvedev is the designated leader but his Prime Minister is Vladimir Putin who recently held the job. Medvedev may seem to control things but one would wonder if he is used to directed as if manipulated by a puppeteer. One can not fully know what lies beneath in regards to Putin, the Communist Party member and KGB agent. Perhaps what is longed for is a renewed action by Russia to assert dominance of the region in a return to the time of the Czar.
Looking at this story there is also the issue of how the world has responded. The United States appears to have taken the lead to come to the defense of Georgia. A condemnation of the act committed by Russia was sadly lacking from much of the world. This movement to be tentative has real consequences. Russia historically has been slow to change its actions apart from a strong rebuff by the rest of the world. The world should know better then to appease for it can lead to a side strengthened with a new resolve to proceed further without fear of punishment. Perhaps an unintended consequence of Russia's invasion was to galvanize many of Georgia's neighbors and former Soviet states in rebuking Russia's actions.
It has not been a long time since that wall came down and with it a renewed warmth. What has taken place since could caution some that foresaw a new day for Russia. But it is the Cold war remnants of leadership with that mindset that appear to wish for old days and times. The result of which could be a potential for such disorder to harken to days of real and present fear for the world. These are the times when the world needs one voice to call out against aggressors and actions that threaten true stability. I fear this may not be possible from world organizations that are routinely found to be idle when their action is needed most. I do not believe we are of imminent threat to be caught in another Cold War but the atmosphere has cooled. Russia's present action in Georgia and its possible future actions should send a chill up all of our spines.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
The Daily Drudge
The top headline of The Drudge Report
Kremlin Anger: Poland Says Yes To U.S. Missles
Courtesy of www.drudgereport.com
Kremlin Anger: Poland Says Yes To U.S. Missles
Courtesy of www.drudgereport.com
Monday, August 04, 2008
Robert Novak to Retire After Diagnosis
Longtime columnist Robert Novak has decided to retire after a long and distinguished career. Novak who was diagnosed with a brain tumor recently stated the diagnosis as "dire". I know I echo the sentiments of many who wish Mr. Novak and his family well during this tremendously difficult time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
