SERIOUSLY, THAT IS TRUE: WHAT GOES AROUND, COMES AROUND; THE PROBLEM IS THE TIME IT TAKES TO HAPPEN
Your future depends on the 2014 elections
July 24, 2014 By John Mariotti
The gridlock in Congress that is crippling the American government comes from three sources, but if you believe the mainstream media’s take on whose fault it is, the order of the problem-causers is backwards.
Here are the causes of the gridlock that has rendered the US government dysfunctional, and following that are the reasons that your future truly depends on the outcome of the 2014 elections.
1. Barack Obama, the imperial president is the biggest problem. He respects no one in Congress and they know it. He acts dismissive, condescending and is even disliked by many members of his own party in Congress. They are, however, afraid to cross him because of the power he holds over their future.(translation: Democratic campaign support–money and media. )
Obama has broken so many laws and run roughshod over the Constitution so many times that the court cases can barely keep up with the need to reverse his illegal and unConstitutional actions. Most people know about the recess appointments (NLRB mostly) and the Hobby Lobby case (just decided on Obamacare and certain kinds of contraception). Few people know that there are many, many other cases decided in lower courts and/or still making their way to the Supreme Court, and others actions are being filed now.
The 2014 elections cannot remove Barack Obama, but they can determine who controls Congress, and with the proper oversight of the Supreme Court, slow or stop his runaway “dictatorship” — using executive orders instead of the Constitutional legislative process.
2.Harry Reid and the Democratic controlled Senate are the true obstacles, not the GOP House. While Barack Obama stumps about, calling the GOP obstructionists, his “obstructionist in chief” is Senate leader Reid, who has blocked so many bills that it’s almost impossible to count them. Whether it is a particular piece of legislation, or Reid’s blockage of an age-old ability for the minority party in the Senate to offer amendments—or even debate bills—virtually all legislation is DOA (dead on arrival) at Reid’s Senate desk. If Reid blocks everything from coming to votes in the Senate, then the Obama-led Democrats who are running for reelection in 2014 can avoid being faced with difficult and potentially unpopular votes. That’s the plan.
3. The divided nature of the GOP, and the extreme positions of some factions in the party. As long as members of the Republican Party engage in an ideological tug of war about whose nuanced positions are more correct, the party can only continue to lose–especially in national elections–to the more unified, liberal Democratic opponents. The Tea Party had enough success in 2010 to fuel its zealotry a bit too far in 2012, effectively costing the GOP its first chance to reclaim control of the Senate. The second chance comes in 2014, but remains at risk by the theatrics of prominent Tea Partiers like Texas Senator Ted Cruz. It seems that he puts self-aggrandizement ahead of what’s best for his party–and ultimately for his country.
Until the GOP brings together its factions, it cannot win the Senate control back, and remove Reid’s obstructionist rule. Holding onto the House is imperative, but winning control of the Senate is crucial. Senate control helps block Obama’s judicial appointments, and forces key legislation to his desk, where he must sign it or veto it–and bear the popular dissatisfaction with his actions. This can hugely impact the 2016 presidential election as well.
There you have it, in three simple parts. The course that Barack Obama is steering the US on is one of global weakness both economically and militarily. His term in office and the actions he has directed has the US economy mired in a low growth non-recovery that employs more and more Americans for less and less pay. Meanwhile the Obama welfare state grows and grows, bribing ever more Americans into economic dependency or poverty. Finally, the freedom that has made America great is being siphoned away, leaving a nation permanently in frustration, crisis or despair.
Thats why your future depends on the 2014 elections–your vote will count more than ever!
Will Chinese copying backfire?
July 14, 2014 By John Mariotti
China has been notorious for either ignoring–or stealing–intellectual property rights: patents, trademarks, and copyrights. This kind of theft helps China accelerate its growth by building on the work of others, especially of the United States. The big question is: “will Chinese copying backfire” and reproduce flaws and failures that they don’t understand and have trouble fixing?
The phrase “Chinese copy” has been around since 1920. It’s used to describe an outright copy of an originator’s design or technology. Chinese culprits have been widely accused of cyber-invasions, in which all sorts of information has been stolen. Over a decade ago, a Chinese employee at theDept. of Energy’s Los Alamos (NM) Laboratory allegedly made off with an entire computer hard drive full of classified information, including nuclear device secrets.
There have been instances where the copy even includes a rather obvious mistake, since the copier wasn’t knowledgeable enough to realize the error. But “that was then and this is now.”
China’s technological prowess has improved dramatically over the past few decades. Part of this was simply China’s investment in people and technology. Part of it was the infusion of knowhow from American companies developing Chinese sources as suppliers. The Wall Street Journal recently investigated China’s many spying activities:
“As Beijing modernizes its high-tech defensive arsenal, the Journal backed up on-the-ground views of 3PLA facilities with an examination of the organizational structure of the NSA-like military department, which increasingly rattles governments and corporations around the world while remaining obscure outside security circles.”“Its operational units are spread out widely throughout China. Recruited from elite specialist universities, 3PLA’s estimated 100,000-plus hackers, linguists, analysts and officers populate a dozen military intelligence bureaus, according to the foreign experts. Its multiple sub-operations divvy up responsibility according to geography and task, they say.”
The WSJ’s investigation also exposed massive Chinese efforts to study, learn and use advance spying techniques.
“The Journal located more than 100 technical papers—including one on predictive models for the evolution of computer viruses—written by officers who often identify themselves with addresses of 3PLA units. Other articles detail techniques for encrypting networks, defending and attacking computer systems, automated foreign language data translation, and calculating satellite orbits.”…“The U.S. indictments in May gave one part of 3PLA an especially high profile: Unit 61398, also known as the Second Bureau. Its operations were analyzed in a report early last year by U.S. cyber-security firm Mandiant, now a unit of FireEye Co.”
Another part of China’s spying leads to the theft of information and intellectual property. One of the most widely publicized cyber-thefts in recent years was the reports that hackers (again, allegedly Chinese) stole the plans for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter from Lockheed Martin before it ever made its first flight. Not only is this report believable, but probably true.
Here is where the ironic twist of fate comes into play. The F-35 is so complex, and uses so much new or advanced technology that it has beenplagued by problems. Among the problems were oil leaks, tire problems, issues with pilot helmets, and most recently an engine fire. This was serious enough to ground the F-35s built thus far. Prior problems delayed plans to use the planes from the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons program ($400 billion!!). It is still not cleared for use, much to the chagrin of the first user–the U. S. Marine Corps.
Wouldn’t it be the ultimate irony of a Chinese copy, if the Chinese planes built based on stolen U.S. technology also contained the same troublesome flaws?
In related situations, this kind of problem could easily exist if China copied/used GM’s problematic ignition switch design for its cars. After all, GM has pointed its finger at a Chinese vendor as being part of the problem. Boeing has struggled with problems on its Dreamliner airplane, notably battery fires. Might China have also copied those designs from Japan?
The old saying, “what goes around, comes around” might be more true than ever. Copying a technology or design is not the same as understanding how and why the design is configured the way it is. Nor does the copier have the depth of understanding to anticipate and fix nagging problems or design flaws—especially if they are buried several layers back in development and in different countries.
It would be incredibly ironic if the answer to the question “will Chinese copying backfire?” is a resounding “Yes!” The world’s leader in spying and thefts might be destined to incur its own payback–failure and humiliation.
FROM A CORRESPONDENT:
What does this President know about America?
You may recall that a few weeks ago, President Obama spoke of three former Presidents making prisoner swaps at the end of wars that took place on their watch, "much like his swap" he said convincingly.
CNSNews.com carried this quote, "This is what happens at the end of wars," President Barack Obama boasted Tuesday when he was asked about swapping American Army Sgt. Deserter for five vicious Taliban terrorists. "That was true for George Washington... That was true for Abraham Lincoln and that was true for FDR. That's been true of every combat situation, that at some point, you make sure that you try to get your folks back... And that's the right thing to do."
Really? That statement blatantly demonstrates that the most powerful man in the World and two-term President of the United States lacks even a grade school level of knowledge of American History; specifically, history as it relates to three of his rather critical predecessors. (It shows me that we have essentially elected a foreigner who has no understanding of the very country that he reigns supreme over.)
Allow me to expound:
1. The Revolutionary War ended in 1783… George Washington did not become president until six years later in 1789.
2. Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in mid April of 1865. The Civil War ended the following month. He was still dead at that time. No deals were made to exchange prisoners after the war. All prisoners were simply freed.
3. FDR died of a stroke before the end of WWII. You'll recall that Harry S. Truman made the decision to drop two nuclear bombs on Japan, ending World War II. We made no deals for prisoners. We went in and released them when necessary...
If any Conservative President had made such an uninformed statement we'd never hear the end of it. None of the Presidents that Obama noted were in office at the ends of those wars, making it impossible for them to make any sort of prisoner swaps, let alone the 5 for 1; plus unspecified cash; for a deserter and traitor by the President of "57 States". (It should be pointed out that countless deserters and traitors were shot or hung during all three of the aforementioned wars…)
The vacant presidency
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER
WASHINGTON — The president’s demeanor is worrying a lot of people. From the immigration crisis on the Mexican border to the Islamic State rising in Mesopotamia, Barack Obama seems totally detached. When he does interrupt his endless rounds of golf, fundraising and photo ops, it’s for some affectless, mechanical, almost forced public statement.
Regarding Ukraine, his detachment — the rote, impassive voice — borders on dissociation. His U.N. ambassador, Samantha Power, delivers an impassioned denunciation of Russia. Obama cautions that we not “get out ahead of the facts,” as if the facts of this case — Vladimir Putin’s proxies shooting down a civilian airliner — are in doubt.
The preferred explanation for the president’s detachment is psychological. He’s checked out. Given up. Let down and disappointed by the world, he is in withdrawal.
Perhaps. But I’d propose an alternate theory that gives him more credit: Obama’s passivity stems from an idea. When Obama says Putin has placed himself on the wrong side of history in Ukraine, he actually believes it. He disdains realpolitik because he believes that, in the end, such primitive 19th century notions as conquest are self-defeating. History sees to their defeat.
“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice” is one of Obama’s favorite sayings. Ultimately, injustice and aggression don’t pay. The Soviets saw their 20th-century empire dissolve. More proximally, U.S. gains in Iraq and Afghanistan were, in time, liquidated. Ozymandias lies forever buried and forgotten in desert sands.
Remember when, at the beginning of the Ukraine crisis, Obama tried to construct for Putin “an off-ramp” from Crimea? Absurd as this idea was, I think Obama was sincere. He actually imagined that he’d be saving Putin from himself, that Crimea could only rebound against Russia in the long run.
If you really believe this, then there is no need for forceful, potentially risky U.S. counteractions. Which explains everything since: Obama’s pinprick sanctions; his failure to rally a craven Europe; his refusal to supply Ukraine with the weapons it has been begging for.
The shooting down of a civilian airliner seemed to validate Obama’s passivity. “Violence and conflict inevitably lead to unforeseen consequences,” explained Obama. See. You play with fire, it will blow up in your face. Just as I warned. Now world opinion will turn against Putin.
To which I say: So what? World opinion, by itself, is useless: malleable, ephemeral and, unless mobilized by leadership, powerless. History doesn’t act autonomously. It needs agency.
Germany’s Angela Merkel still doesn’t want to jeopardize trade with Russia. France’s Francois Hollande will proceed with delivery of a Mistral class attack-helicopter carrier to Russia. And Obama speaks of future “costs” if Russia persists — a broken record since Crimea, carrying zero credibility.
Or did Obama think Putin would be shamed into regret and restraint by the blood of 298 innocents? On the contrary. Putin’s response has been brazen defiance: denying everything and unleashing a massive campaign of lies, fabrications and conspiracy theories blaming Ukraine and the U.S.
Putin doesn’t give a damn about world opinion. He cares about domestic opinion, which has soared to more than 80 percent approval since Crimea. If anything, he’s been emboldened. On Wednesday, his proxies shot down two more jets — a finger to the world and a declaration that his campaign continues.
A real U.S. president would give Kiev the weapons it needs, impose devastating sectoral sanctions on Moscow, reinstate our Central European missile-defense system and make a Reaganesque speech explaining why.
Obama has done none of these things. Why should he? He’s on the right side of history.
Of course, in the long run nothing lasts. But history is lived in the here and now. The Soviets had only 70 years, Hitler a mere 12. Yet it was enough to murder millions and rain ruin on entire continents. Bashar al-Assad, too, will one day go. But not before having killed at least 100,000 people.
All domination must end. But after how much devastation? And if you leave it to the forces of history to repel aggression and redeem injustice, what’s the point of politics, of leadership, in the first place?
The world is aflame and our leader is on the 14th green. The arc of history may indeed bend toward justice, Mr. President. But, as you say, the arc is long. The job of a leader is to shorten it, to intervene on behalf of “the fierce urgency of now.” Otherwise, why do we need a president? And why did you seek to become ours?
Write to [email protected].
Number 1:
Comments