Say Goodbye to 2010

"Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can only gain at the expense of another." — Milton Friedman

It’s that time of year when we look back on the passing year and ahead to the New Year. It’s a time for reflection on what has been and of course prognostications and resolutions for the coming year. With this in mind I will offer my candidates for some the worst and the best of 2010.

The year began with the passing of the health care bill, the mandate or tax or benefit or entitlement or whatever it claims to be. It was not developed by anyone or any group we could identify. It did not have extensive research or studies in support. It made no tests, conducted no experiments, and took no measured steps in development. It appeared fully born like Adam and was left on our stoop like an unwanted changeling. As Nancy Pelosi said, “you have to pass the bill to know what’s in it.” Well its 12 months latter and we still do not know what this massive bill will mean to our economy or our health.

The feel-good story of the year featured a group of over thirty miners in Chile trapped underground for weeks. Through a miracle of international cooperation, the right people and the right machines were brought to bear on the problem, with happy result. This was what a world of individual initiative looks like.

Harry Reid won an election in the state of Nevada despite presiding over the squandering of trillions of dollars, thousands of thousands of millions, on his personal hunches without solid evidence. With the massive backing of the SEIU he beat a flawed opponent who could not effectively get her Tea Party message out to the voters.

The Wikis leaked all over us but President Obama told us it was rain falling on our heads. Barry says we're on the right track in Afghanistan but, as Jimmy McMillen told us, “the rent is too damned high.” Hamid Karzai just wants us to pay it in perpetuity. Joe Biden had bad news for Karzai, though, saying we'll be out of there in 2014 come hell or high water, which must be Joe's long-range forecast for the 2012 election.

The Rump Congress finally went home after slinging its last insults at our economy and our culture. And according to Gallup, 13 percent of Americans still think Congress is doing a very good job. Who are these people? They must be the ones the UN thought of when it proposed to appoint its first official ambassador to extraterrestrial beings. If the House Republicans want to cut something out of the budget next year, how about starting with the $6 billion or so we pay the East 44th Street crime family every year?

It's not just that Barry, Nancy and Harry managed to stampede more nation-mangling legislation into law. It's not just that our national debt is such a large number — $13,868,461,000,000 — that it defies imagination and repayment.

Barry got shellacked in November, but before the varnish could dry the Senate RINOs handed Obama almost everything he wanted, including a tax deal that had so many liberal toys attached, you'd need a new car to pull it. One more powerful than the Chevy Volt, which gets at least 40 miles per billion dollars of taxpayer-funded subsidies.

The passage, by Congress, of the Safe Food Act that will add 10,000 government employees and raise the cost of the food by 10-15%. It will also put the small food suppliers, the farmer’s markets and makers of local jams and jellies out of business.

The Chinese, helping us draw the economic noose ever more tightly around our necks, are also trying to stir-fry some of their neighbors into satellite states. China's military buildup now includes plans for an aircraft carrier or two. In that regard they match the Brits whose long-deck carriers may someday set sail. But the penurious Brits (rendered so by years of liberal government) can't afford to build planes to operate from their carriers. So they're thinking about a partnership with the French to take turns sailing and paying for carrier ops.

The ship will have to be christened HMS Fromage, and the alternating crews will choose between stilton and camembert. The Fromage had better have a reinforced bow because mother earth is cooling so quickly, we appear to be entering a new Ice Age.

2011 will not only be colder, but darker: the last U.S. factory making incandescent light bulbs, in Springfield VA, closed in 2010. From now on, in between the moment you throw the switch and when the stupid spiral actually emits its dull light take time to thank a liberal. When a bulb breaks, call the hazmat squad: the spirals contain mercury, which is nearly as hazardous to your health as Obamacare.

Frozen Britain reported that the first week in December 2010 wasn't the coldest ever opening week of that month. That occurred in 1639 when the British East India Company was founding the city of Madras (thereby establishing a reliable supply of tasteful plaid shirts) and the birth of Sir Isaac Newton was three years off. It's a pity that Sir Isaac isn't around to dissect mathematically California's latest act of economic suicide.

The Great Snowmageddon Snit Fit of 2010 when New York City’s union sanitation workers took a “go slow” posture in the removal of snow resulting in the deaths of several people.

Bernie Madoff went to jail for taking a few billion dollars from people for safekeeping in his Ponzi scheme and squandering it on lavish life style.

Economic terminator Schwarzenegger hailed the enactment of California's version of the failed European cap-and-trade scam just in time for Governor Moonbeam’s re-inauguration next month. Jerry Brown's new turn in Sacramento will be historic: he will be the first governor to oversee the outright bankruptcy of a U.S. state. A more fitting idea would be for California to join the economic leper colony called the "Euro Zone."

Sarah Palin has a hit show about Alaska on the Learning Network (TLC), but is still despised by the left.

Marines don't need to be told to man up, because they perfected the concept in 1775. Two Marine Commandants —  Gen. Jim Conway and his successor Gen. James Amos -- both stood fast against the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law prohibiting homosexuals from serving openly in the military. But the uber-liberals and RINOs of Congress believed themselves better judges of the effect of DADT repeal.

The repeal may be a super-secret strategery to help win the Afghanistan war. Thanks to WikiLeaks, we know the sexual proclivities of many Pashtun men, who apparently embrace a liberal interpretation of Islam as well as each other.

Long will historians ponder why — upon the repeal — the first communication from the Senate Majority Leader was to a creature of unknown biology known as Lady Gaga. The only discernible connection is that Army Pfc. Bradley Manning — accused of passing hundreds of thousands of classified documents to WikiLeaks — reportedly copied them onto rewritable Lady Gaga music disks. Manning is enthusiastically gay, but we will refrain from speculation of any connection between or among him, Senator Reid and Lady Gaga.

The Kabuki troupe performing security-theater at airports have yet to stop a would-be terrorist, but they have determined how Superman's x-ray vision benefits him when he isn't out fighting crime. Some of the TSA goons selected former "Baywatch" babe Donna D'Errico for personal naked x-ray screening and, according to the lady in question, she observed them chuckling furtively at what they saw.

I'm pretty sure that the TSA fondlers will not be able to touch a woman's padded bra and tell if it's padded with cotton or PETN, the explosive du jour among the bad guys. We have enough money to put TV's up in all the Wall Marts to show Big Sis warning us to say something if we see something, but not enough to train screeners to do it as the Israelis do. I'll say something: stop performing security rituals that don't make us safer, fire Janet Incompetano and train profiling screeners to keep the underwear bombers off my next flight.

The Yankees were eliminated in the playoffs and George Steinbrenner went to Heaven avoiding estate taxes. Michael Vick's career, once gone to the dogs, began to soar on the wings of Eagles, but PETA vetoes his getting a dog. LeBron James forsook the city of Cleveland, prompting its citizens to compare him to his late brother Jesse. Brett Farve ends a Hall of Fame career on a sour note by sexting his private parts to a sideline babe.

Sandra Bullock. Defying the Hollywood odds, she won an Oscar for her heartfelt portrayal of Leigh Ann Touhy, whose Memphis family adopted a black teen named Michael Oher and loved him into college and then a starting job with the NFL's Baltimore Ravens. Critics hated the film, but America loved it. One reviewer found it "contrived, storybook-sweet, credulity-straining and — um, true."

Studio heads were shocked again by surprise hits like the remake of "The Karate Kid," which grossed more than $175 million. None of the top 15 movies received an "R" rating. Six of the top 15 movies were animated, and at No. 1 in box-office receipts (with more than $415 million) was G-rated "Toy Story 3." A St. Petersburg Times critic suggested it wasn't just the best film of the summer; it could be Best Picture of 2010. Quality doesn't have to equal perversity. Children are good at nagging and dragging their parents to the Cineplex. Someone in Tinseltown should just wake up and smell the popcorn.

Thanks to the greatness of the American people, voiced through the election by the Tea Party Movement, there is hope. As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell spoke of his Democrat colleagues at the end of the 111th Congress, "If they think it's bad now, wait till next year." — I can hardly wait.

Now that's a promise that must be kept. Happy New Year.

Blame it on the Russians

“It is not religion but atheism that requires a Darwinian explanation. It seems perplexing why nature would breed a group of people who see no purpose to life or the universe, indeed whose only moral drive seems to be sneering at their fellow human beings who do have a sense of purpose.” — Dinesh D’Souza

On December 24, 1979, the Soviet Union invades Afghanistan, under the pretext of upholding the Soviet-Afghan Friendship Treaty of 1978.

As midnight approached, the Soviets organized a massive military airlift into Kabul, involving an estimated 280 transport aircraft and three divisions of almost 8,500 men each. Within a few days, the Soviets had secured Kabul, deploying a special assault unit against Tajberg Palace. Elements of the Afghan army loyal to Hafizullah Amin put up a fierce, but brief resistance.

On December 27, Babrak Karmal, exiled leader of the Parcham faction of the Marxist People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), was installed as Afghanistan's new head of government. And Soviet ground forces entered Afghanistan from the north.

The Soviets, however, were met with fierce resistance when they ventured out of their strongholds into the countryside. Resistance fighters, called mujahidin, saw the Christian or atheist Soviets controlling Afghanistan as a defilement of Islam as well as of their traditional culture. Proclaiming a "jihad"(holy war), they gained the support of the Islamic world.

The mujahidin employed guerrilla tactics against the Soviets. They would attack or raid quickly, then disappear into the mountains, causing great destruction without pitched battles. The fighters used whatever weapons they could grab from the Soviets or were given by the United States.

The tide of the war turned with the 1987 introduction of U.S. shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles. The Stingers allowed the mujahidin to shoot down Soviet planes and helicopters on a regular basis.

New Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev decided it was time to get out. Demoralized and with no victory in sight, Soviet forces started withdrawing in 1988. The last Soviet soldier crossed back across the border on February 15, 1989.

It was the first Soviet military expedition beyond the Eastern bloc since World War II and marked the end of a period of improving relations (known as détente) in the Cold War. Subsequently, the SALT II arms treaty was shelved and the U.S. began to re-arm. Fifteen thousand Soviet soldiers were killed.

The long-term impact of the invasion and subsequent war was profound. First, the Soviets never recovered from the public relations and financial losses, which significantly contributed to the fall of the Soviet empire in 1991. Secondly, the war created a breeding ground for terrorism and the rise of Osama bin Laden.

Let us take a look at 31 years of problems that were cast upon us when the Soviet Union decided to invade this mountainous nation nestled in between Iran and Pakistan.

Jimmy Carter was so upset at the Soviet invasion he called for a boycott of the 1980 summer Olympics that was being held in Moscow. In a fit of pique Carter felt betrayed by the Soviets, a country he was attempting to make peace with.

The United States began to dabble in the fight against the Soviets by delivering arms and technical advisers to the Afghan fighters — mujahidin and we learned the meaning of a new word — Jihad.

The Soviet Union boycotted the 1984 summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles.

We increased our aid to the mujahidin by supplying them with Stinger missiles. We thought we were making friends with the Islamic world.

Osama bin Laden, the son of a billionaire Saudi contractor set up shop in Afghanistan and began pouring money and arms into the fight.

When the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1988 we thought we had beaten the Soviets in a major Cold War battle. Our myopic press shouted with glee how he Soviets had met their Vietnam and lost. The American people did not have the slightest idea who Osama bin Laden was.

The Taliban, who had been forming in Pakistan, took control of the central government in Kabul and began to institute strict Sharia law throughout Afghanistan.

The west begins to notice the brutality and intolerance of the Taliban when destroyed ancient Buddhists statues and instituted strict religious rule for women. They were not allowed an education and were prohibited from working outside of the home. We still heard nothing of Osama bin Laden.

Bin Laden supports the Somalian warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid in his attack on the U.S. forces sent to Mogadishu to secure the delivery of food to the famine sweeping the country. The Americans see U.S. soldiers dragged the streets of Mogadishu (Black Hawk down) and are abhorred. We still don’t know who bin Laden is.

Our embassies are bombed in Kenya and Tanzania. The CIA knows about bin Laden, but there is little mention of the mastermind behind the bombings — Osama bin Laden.

The Taliban begins to execute women in the Kabul soccer stadium for crimes against religious mores. Brandeis University mounts a public relations campaign to bring world attention to this brutality, but can do nothing about it.  They urge peaceful protest against the Taliban and the Taliban tells the world to go fly a kite. Still not too much about bin Laden

On September 11, 2001 nineteen radical Islamists fly planes into the World Trade Center, Pentagon and fail in attempt to hit the Capital when passengers take control of United Flight 93 and crash it into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania — 3,000 American die. Now we know who bin Laden is.

The United States sends troops to Afghanistan to rout the Taliban and kill bin Laden.

Battlefield irregulars are taken to Guantanamo Bay for detention causing vociferous debate and condemnation by the world press and left-wing in the United States.

The United States, along with a coalition of NATO countries invade Iraq on the premise Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction.

George W. Bush’s presidency is plagued by failed policies and strategies fighting he wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Saddam Hussein is removed from power and eventually executed for crimes against the Iraqi people, but the war takes the lives of over 4,000 American soldiers and maims thousands of others.

Hundreds of people are killed in London and Madrid from bombings of the transportation systems. Bin Laden and al Qaida claim responsibility in retaliation for our ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Radical Islam and the War on Terror become major topics in the media causing divisiveness throughout the country.

The United States backed government in Afghanistan is found to be corrupt and the Taliban regains strength.

The war in Iraq draws to a close after a surge of American troops take control of the county.

Christmas day 2009 a radical Islamists attempts to blow up an airliner as it make its approach into the Detroit Airport. This causes new and more stringent airport security measures including body scanners and intrusive body “pat downs”

1,442 U.S. soldiers and Marines die in Afghanistan with no apparent end in sight.

All of the above mentioned happenings can be traced back to the Soviet’s invasion of Afghanistan 31 years ago today.

Cholera in Haiti

“Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance.” — Francis of Assisi

Tonight while my wife and daughter were out finishing some last minute Christmas shopping I happened to catch the Greta Van Susteren show on Fox News. Her entire show was about Haiti and the aftermath of the earthquake and the cholera epidemic that is sweeping the county. Greta was accompanied by Sarah Palin and Franklin Graham, the founder of the Samaritans Purse charity.

At first I did not pay too much attention, but as the show progressed I became more and more drawn into what they were showing and talking about. I was particularly interested in what Sarah Palin had to say about the aid going to Haiti, the poorest country in the western hemisphere.

Palin was erudite and well informed and demonstrated a great deal of honest passion and caring for the children suffering from the effects of cholera. In case you don’t know cholera is an infection of the small intestine caused by the bacterium. The main symptoms are profuse watery diarrhea and vomiting. Transmission is primarily through consuming contaminated drinking water or food. The severity of the diarrhea and vomiting can lead to rapid dehydration and electrolyte imbalance. Primary treatment is with oral rehydration solution and if these are not tolerated intravenous fluids. Antibiotics are beneficial in those with severe disease. Worldwide it affects 3-5 million people and causes 100,000-130,000 deaths a year as of 2010. Cholera was one of the earliest infections to be studied by epidemiological methods.

Haiti has not had an outbreak of cholera for over 100 years. After the 2010 earthquake it is believed that the disease was brought in by United Nations Nepalese Peacekeepers. The Nepalese army has reacted angrily and said there is no evidence to support allegations the cholera emanated from septic tanks at their base in the Artibonite river valley, where the majority of cases and deaths have been. The United Nations has said it will name an international panel to investigate the origin of the epidemic. A team of US and Haitian researchers confirmed last week that the outbreak was likely sparked by a human source from outside the region.

So far there have been over 57,000 cases resulting in 3,000 deaths. The people doing the most to combat the epidemic are the faith based organizations with Franklin Graham’s Samaritans Purse leading the effort. They have set up secure hospitals staffed with volunteer medical staff that is doing a great job at saving lives. They are supplying tents for temporary shelter, sanitation facilities and building materials. Samaritans Purse is also providing over 1 million Christmas packages to the children of Haiti.

Haiti is a political nightmare. The recent elections proved nothing but allegations of fraud and rioting the streets. Right now there is talk of overturning the results of the elections and waiting until the country is more stabilized before calling for another election. In effect there is no central government and the gangs rule the streets of the cities, with Port-au-Prince being the worse. There are nightly murders and lynchings, mainly voodoo priests, and no one’s shelter or belongings are safe. Graham stated that to get his charitable goods through customs his organization had to pay thousands of dollars in bribes.

Most of the international aid has not reached the people and without the efforts of the faith based organizations things would be much worse. Where are Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, George Clooney and the rest of his Hollywood cohorts now? The stage lights have dimmed and the dirty work of providing sanitation, medical facilities and shelter is being done by Christian volunteers, not government workers.

The Fox special showed us the wonderful work the Christian organizations are doing at great risk to themselves. They are the ones on the front lines, not the celebrities and politicians. You may say, well, what about Palin, isn’t she a politician? Perhaps she is and this was an opportunity for her to draw attention to herself. Or it was Van Susteren and Fox News that was using Palin to boost ratings? This would be the view of the cynic, wouldn’t it? A wise man told me years ago that a cynic is a person who knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing. I believe this.

I prefer to not be a cynic. I saw real concern on the face of Palin and good reporting by Van Susteren. I do not have to defend Franklin Graham; his deeds speak loudly for him and his organization.

Palin stated that Haiti needed a great deal of help, but was leery of government to government aid, as it never seems to work its way down the people who need it. She believes, with a great deal of justification, that the faith based organizations will be the ones to best serve the Haitian people. This I wholly support.

Haiti has great potential as an island resort in the Caribbean, but only if it can be governed by a stable, democratic government that can induce business investment. Right now I do not have much hope for the Haitian people.

It’s a Wonderful Life

He appeared in a body, Was vindicated by the Spirit, Was seen by angels, Was preached among the nations, Was believed on in the world, Was taken up in glory.” — I Timothy 3:16 (New International Version) Merry Christmas!

To many of us, the season wouldn't be complete without at least a few scenes from "It's a Wonderful Life." The movie wasn't much of a hit when it was first released just after the Second World War, but it's acquired quite a following since — and even a certain critical acclaim.

But there are those who still give it a thumb's down. Years ago I read a (too) critical analysis of "It's a Wonderful Life" by a professor of American Studies at Boston University. His conclusion: “While the movie shows that life can be an enriching Norman Rockwell experience, it also can be smothering, where you end up marrying the girl you went to high school with, and you never get to go to Europe. It tells us George is one of the most sad and lonely and tragic characters ever imagined. I cry when I see it."

That's about the only similarity between the professor's take on the movie and mine — because I've shed a few tears myself over "It's a Wonderful Life." But not for the professor's reasons. Nothing in the movie seems as sad to me as the professor's analysis of it. Take it from somebody who ended up marrying his high-school sweetheart: A tragedy it isn't. It can be a comedy, an education, a dance to the music of time, that and a lot more. But a tragedy? Please.

Not all the characters in the movie are heroes. And not every banker is a George Bailey. With his camera eye, Frank Capra saw the sordid Potterville inside every wholesome Bedford Falls. He saw the jealousy, envy, greed and misplaced values. There's that devastating moment when George sees his friend driving off to Florida, complete with homburg, plaid suit, limo and a wife out of the 1940s' Good Life catalog, fur piece and all.

At that moment, like the professor in Boston, George sees his life as tragic. All he can think to do is gaze at his own old jalopy and kick the door. He's convinced he's missed The “Chance of a Lifetime”. And here he is stuck in a miserable little town that's never going to be anything but a miserable little town. He doesn't see how important, how central, how essential he's been — until Clarence, his bumbling guardian angel, opens his eyes.

The movie is a celebration of the ordinary middle-class virtues -- like fidelity and family, not to mention hope, faith and charity. Virtues that aren't nearly ordinary enough in these times, or in any other.

While doing research for his book Dupes Paul Kengor discovered a document buried away in the archives of the old Soviet Union that urged the ACLU to pursue lawsuits against schools for the singing Christmas carols. In the 1930s the ACLU began with a suit against a California school to ban the singing of Christmas carols. Fortunately the suit was thrown out of Federal Court, but the ACLU was just getting started.

The document went on to state that one of the ways to bring Communism to the United States was to break down the influence of churches by using the courts, with selected progressive judges, to rule against any displays of religious symbols or traditions.

Roger Baldwin, the first director of the ACLU, was a communist. He explains in his book, Liberty Under the Soviets, “I joined. I don’t regret being a part of the Communist tactic, which increased the effectiveness of a good cause. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the Communists wanted.”

William Z. Foster, then National Chairman of the Communist Party USA and an ACLU co-founder, is famous for this 1932 quote: “The establishment of an American Soviet government will involve the confiscation of large landed estates in town and country, and also, the whole body to forests, mineral deposits, lakes, rivers and so on.” He was the author of "Toward Soviet America".

Since then, the Left has redoubled its efforts to reinforce the mythical "wall of separation between church and state," assuming, as is now common, that those words originally penned by Thomas Jefferson to some of his constituents in Connecticut, supersede the only language in our Constitution concerning such a constraint.

Across the United States, celebrations for what many Americans now refer to as the "C word" have been all but restricted to churches and private homes.

In Wichita, Kansas, a local newspaper ran an apology after referring to a "Christmas tree", rather than a "community tree" at the city's Winterfest celebration. In Denver, a Christian church float was barred from the city's parade while Chinese lion dancers and German folk dancers were welcomed. In parts of Florida, fir trees have been banned this year from government-owned property.

A mayor in Massachusetts issued a formal apology to anyone offended by a press release that mistakenly described the town of Somerville's holiday party as a "Christmas party". Schools in Florida and New Jersey have banned all carols and elsewhere in Washington state a school principal banned a production of A Christmas Carol mainly because Tiny Tim prays: "God bless us, every one."

In one New Jersey school district, where the singing of Christmas carols has long been abandoned, officials have this year forbidden children's orchestras to play songs such as Silent Night because that might remind people of their Christian content.

Frosty the Snowman and Winter Wonderland have, however, been deemed acceptable as they are devoid of any religious references.

That errant assumption, however, lacks even a shred of validity, and it was certainly not Jefferson's intent.

Our Founders were rightly suspect of any encroachment by government upon religious freedom, and they codified a proscription against such in the First Amendment of our Bill of Rights. It reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

And yet, through decades of liberal interpretation of the so-called "living constitution," the Left has adulterated the authentic document via judicial diktat to comport with whatever agenda it desires.

How is it that we've come to this place in our nation's history? How is it that the God who endowed us with "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" has been expelled from the public square under the supposition that religion and politics are antithetical?

Even Barack Hussein Obama, while cynically citing our Declaration of Independence in five public speeches recently, omitted the words "endowed by our Creator" from its context. Indeed, our president even proclaimed during an international forum that our national motto is "E pluribus unum," when it is, of course, "In God We Trust."

The unavoidable Truth is that our nation is founded on the principle that rights of man are endowed by God and not subordinate to the will of other men. The exclusion of God from the public discourse, then, is the objective of those who believe they are the arbiters of the rights of others, and who thus use "separation of church and state" as a means to that end.

This battle — between those who seek to conserve our endowment by God, so that God can rule through the hearts of men, and those who seek to separate us from God so that their chosen men can rule over all others -- reflects the fundamental spiritual battle between God's purpose for us and our desire to be our own God.

Thus, the battle between Liberty and tyranny is really the battle between Light and Dark, which brings me to this perspective about the origins of the celebration of the birth of Christ in December.

The early church did not observe the celebration of Christ's birth. Annual year-end celebrations in the first centuries AD were predominantly pagan festivals associated with the winter solstice on the ancient Roman calendar.

The Puritans did not recognize Christmas as a day of celebration, in fact they did not celebrate much of anything except that we are all sinners in the eyes of God. Jehovah Witnesses do not celebrate Christmas, but they deny no one the opportunity to do so. I know that as I have a close friend of is a Jehovah Witness

History does not confirm for us who instituted the tradition to also celebrate Christ's birth at that time of year, but they were a brilliant lot. Pagans celebrated the solstice because it was the longest day of winter darkness, and because it thus heralded the season's change and the promise of more light and longer days, the growing seasons upon which they depended for life. Isn't that precisely what Christmas represents, the dawn of a new season of Light through the birth of Jesus?

For most of us, Christmas is a collage of our childhood memories and family traditions. As I child growing up during the days of World War II I did not have much in the way of toys. There were no X-Boxes or Wiis, no electronic games to play. Toys were made of compressed sawdust or cardboard. Games like Chinese checkers and Monopoly were in vogue. I can remember with clarity my father and I walking, in the snow, to the store to get my present, a Gilbert Erector Set with an electric motor. It was shortly after the war had ended and such toys were now available, but he demand was high so my erector set had to be backordered.

We always managed to have a Christmas tree, albeit scrawny and small that would shed its needles two after it was put up. Our ornaments were family heirlooms and the lights were the kind that when one bulb went out the entire string went dark. Hours would be spent searching for the dead bulb hoping the replacement you had was not defective. I think one of the best developments for Christmas was the parallel lighting strings where only one bulb went dark when it burned out, not the entire string.

While toys were scarce family was not. We always had family gatherings for Christmas. There were aunts, uncles and cousins at our house for Christmas dinner. And of course there was midnight Mass where as a member of the boys choir I would sing.

Stores were decorated with an abundance of Merry Christmas signs and when the signs began to proclaim Xmas there was a campaign to put “Christ” back into Christmas.

Today we live in a society where to proclaim “Merry Christmas” in public is considered bad taste or in some cases an offense against the community. Even the Dickens’ story, “A Christmas Carol” is being banned in public schools because Tiny Tim proclaims “God Bless us, every one.” Somehow this is thought to be offensive to some people.

The secular left wants to replace Bedford Falls with Pottersville. It’s their way of creating a socialist state where we all live in misery.

I sometimes think of that professor/film critic at this time of the year. I hope he's had many a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year since he wrote that silly review — and, yes, a wonderful life.

As Calvin Coolidge stated; "To the American People: Christmas is not a time or a season but a state of mind. To cherish peace and good will, to be plenteous in mercy, is to have the real spirit of Christmas. If we think on these things, there will be born in us a Savior and over us will shine a star sending its gleam of hope to the world."

At the risk of offending some, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

Who Will Oppose Obama in 2012?

“A return to first principles in a republic is sometimes caused by the simple virtues of one man. His good example has such an influence that the good men strive to imitate him, and the wicked are ashamed to lead a life so contrary to his example.” — Niccolo Machiavelli

The silly season is fast approaching. As we cross into 2011 the pundits and “experts” will begin handicapping the Republicans who will make a run at dethroning Obama in 2012. So at the risk of being wrong I will attempt to evaluate the field of Republican’s who might take on the anointed one and hopefully bring the country back to fiscal sanity and restore our national pride.

Whoever the candidate is they will have to garner the full and passionate support of Republicans and independents, especially the Tea Party. Without this support they will fail as did John McCain in 2008. The candidate must have a resume of fiscal responsibility and constitutional conservatism. The candidate will have to process charisma and a stage presence that will capture the heart of the American people — no dull intellectuals. He or she will need the skills and experience to take control of the dialogue and beat Obama in debates without appearing mean and confrontational — in other words another Ronald Reagan.

I know we will not get another Reagan, but the Republicans need a candidate who can talk the talk and walk the walk of Reagan. Republicans will need someone who has a proven record of cutting taxes, adhering to the principles of the Constitution and is unabashedly proud of America and can effectively communicate these values to the 65% of American who are not professed kool aid drinking liberals and will vote for Obama no matter who opposes him. They will also have to run a smart and disciplined campaign to capture the electoral votes of the swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Florida and Virginia. So with this in mind here is my take on the existing pool of Republican hopefuls with my comments as to why or why not they can make the grade. Some of these candidates are professed possibilities while others are mere candidates of the media.

By my count, there are 24 people who are beneficiaries of nontrivial presidential buzz: Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, John Thune, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Mike Pence, Rick Santorum, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, David Petraeus, Ron Paul, Jeb Bush, John Bolton, Bob McDonnell, Jim DeMint, Chris Christie, Herman Cain, Gary Johnson, Judd Gregg, Marco Rubio and Rick Perry. Half of these people are almost surely not running.

Earlier this year, there was a lot of talk about General Petraeus running. But then the Army general gave a lot of dull, substantive speeches in which he didn't say anything about ethanol or the Hawkeye State's divine right to hold the first-in-the-nation contest. It seems like he prefers Kandahar to Ames.

Rubio, Ryan and Jindal, respectively the incoming junior senator from Florida, the incoming chairman of the House Budget Committee and the governor of Louisiana, are all wisely sitting out the presidential contest to concentrate on their to-do lists, though the three golden boys of the GOP are ripe vice presidential picks. Rubio, while a good looking and possibly charismatic candidate, who could capture Hispanic voters, has not served one day in Congress as of this witting. By Election Day he would have the same weak national resume as Obama had and I think the public would be wary of being taken again. He would make an attractive VP candidate.

Ryan, while a fiscal and constitution conservative and would be an attractive candidate to Tea Party members, is still a Congressman with no real executive experience. He might be able to turn the blue state of Wisconsin with its 10 electoral votes into a red one.

Jindal, the governor of Louisiana is from a red state with 9 electoral votes. Jindal, a constitutional conservative of Indian heritage, has proven himself a more than competent chief executive, especially during the BP oil spill. He has also reduced the size of the Louisiana state government, balanced the budget and is bringing business back to his state by allowing tax breaks and reducing regulations. He would have problems due to his Indian heritage. A good VP choice.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and the current governors of New Jersey, Virginia and Texas — Christie, McDonnell and Perry — probably aren't running, though they all enjoy deep reservoirs of admiration on the right, particularly Christie, whose YouTube videos are passed around like hotcakes. Also, there's growing buzz that Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and a fierce defender of his top-tier contender status, may not run because he's got a big new contract with Fox News in the works.

Jeb Bush, while a competent governor of Florida, is a Bush. There is nothing more to be said. Florida went blue in 2008, but in the last elections it sent Rubio, a conservative Republican to the U.S. Senate. A good conservative could regain Florida’s 27 (or 29 after the census) electoral votes.

McDonnell is not well known outside of Virginia and has indicated little or no interest in either the presidential or vice presidential positions. He beat a liberal Democrat in 2009 for the governorship and should be able to return Virginia’s 13 electoral votes to the Republican column.

Christie, the Governor of New Jersey, is a maverick and a new kid on the block. He has been making a lot of noise by taking on the teachers and public service unions to reduce the pension liabilities. He has a confrontational style and is weak on foreign policy issues. New Jersey’s 15 electoral votes will probably go the Democrat, so his value as a VP candidate is minimal.

Rick Perry, the Governor of Texas, is very popular at home. He is gaining visibility on the national scene with his sound fiscal policies for Texas and his fight against illegal immigration. Texas’ 34 electoral votes will remain with the Republicans, but he could be a good VP choice. However, I doubt if he is interested.

Huckabee is a big national name due to his run in 2008 and his constant appearance on Fox News. He has a strong following among the Christian right and has demon stated a comfortable folksy style. Through his Fox show he has demonstrated a sound knowledge of domestic and foreign issues. Whether he runs or not will depend on is he wants the money or the power. Arkansas is a red state and will stay red.

DeMint, the South Carolina senator and the Tea Party's man on the inside, has said he's not running but acts like he might be. Meanwhile, Gregg, New Hampshire's retiring senator, acts likes he's not running but hasn't ruled it out. (If he did run as a New Hampshire favorite son, it would complicate things for Romney.) Pence, the Indiana representative, definitely wants to run but now may switch to the Indiana governorship instead.

Of this group DeMint is has the highest visibility. He is the darling of the Tea Party and a strong fiscal conservative with a broad knowledge of domestic and foreign issues. He would be good in debates against Obama, but he is really hated by the left. They will try to thorough everything, including the kitchen sink, at him. South Carolina’s 8 electoral votes went to Obama in 2008, but I think they will go back to the Republicans in 2012. The Tea party is strong there.

Mike Pence has two years to prove himself as a leader in the House, but presidents don’t come from the House of Representatives. If Mitch Daniels, the current governor of Indiana makes a run at the presidency Pence would probably go for Daniels seat. Pence is a strong fiscal conservative, but his image on international affairs is weak. Mike Pence needs chief executive experience.

Barbour, perhaps the sharpest political operator with a natural Southern constituency in a Southern-dominated party, could be a front-runner (and a hilarious adept debate opponent for Obama), but his plans remain murky. Also, I don’t think a president can come from Mississippi. As a VP candidate he can contribute very little, the state’s 6 electoral votes will remain red.

That leaves 11 who are probably, but not definitely, running: Romney, Gingrich, Palin, Pawlenty, Santorum, Bolton, Daniels, Cain, Johnson, Paul and Thune. Five of these are unlikely to last long as serious contenders, not least because talk-show and grass-roots popularity doesn't necessarily win in the "money primary."

Paul's issues — gutting the Federal Reserve, shrinking government, foreign policy noninterventionism, drug legalization — are the ripest they've ever been in the GOP. But, at 75, that's just about the only way "ripe" and "Ron Paul" can be used together in a sentence. He has an incredible cadre of passionate supporters, mainly Libertarian, but this is not enough to gain him much.

Thune will probably discover early that his Senate colleagues telling him to run isn't necessarily a compliment. In many respects, Thune is the GOP version of John Kerry: a candidate with very presidential hair who seems "electable" despite not having done much of anything. South Dakota’s 3 electoral votes will remain red. Also, due to some of his recent votes he has lost Tea Party support.

Bolton, the famously mustachioed and gruff former U.N. ambassador, is a tireless and brilliant guy, but he's never run for federal office. Presumably he wants to highlight national security issues and, I hope, duke it out with Ron Paul. Bolton brings nothing to the political table and will be someone’s adviser on international affairs.

Cain, the former chief executive of Godfather's Pizza, is a charismatic superstar on the Tea Party circuit and in many rank-and-file conservative circles. An African-American who likes to joke about his "dark-horse candidacy," he's a lot more than merely a sane Alan Keyes. But it's hard to imagine him amounting to more than an exciting also-ran. Any Republican who gets the nomination would be wise to include Cain on their team of economic advisers for his small business acumen.

Johnson, the former New Mexico governor, Libertarian and a keynoter at last weekend's KushCon II, will focus attention on pot legalization. Meanwhile, Santorum, a former senator, will focus attention on Rick Santorum while he makes his appearances on Fox. Neither of these guys are serious contenders.

That leaves us with a top tier of five front-runners: Romney, Palin, Gingrich, Pawlenty and Daniels. Romney is the organizational front-runner; Daniels is the first pick of wonks and D.C. eggheads; Palin probably has the most devoted following among actual voters; Gingrich will dominate the debates; and Pawlenty (vying with Daniels) is the least disliked.

Romney ran in 2008 and did not get the nomination. He is erudite and polished, but never seems to show passion for any issues. As the founder of Staples, Manager of the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics (which made a profit) and Governor of Massachusetts he has a great deal of executive experience, more than any other potential contender. His Achilles heel is the failing Massachusetts Health Care Program that was instituted under his term as governor. He would be good in debates with Obama, especially on the economy and jobs. His other problem is that he is a Mormon and that will be used against him by the secular left and the media.

Pawlenty, the outgoing Governor of Minnesota, is a nice fellow and seems to be a fiscal and constitutional conservative. He was able to get elected in a really deep blue state. He is not too well known outside of Minnesota and could be another Harold Stassen. I don’t see him as a major player in 2012.

Daniels, the current governor of Indiana is a strong fiscal and constitutional conservative. He was elected to his second term by an 18-point margin on November 4, 2008. Previously, he was the Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget under George W. Bush and worked for Eli Lilly and Company. He is cited as a rising star in the Republican Party and has approval ratings hovering near 70%. As a two term Governor Daniels is a serious contender for the nomination. Daniels is someone to keep an eye on 2011 to see if he can generate the passion of the Tea Party.

Gingrich is no doubt the sharpest knife in the drawer of contenders. As a historian, teacher, author, lecturer and former Speaker of the House of Representatives Gingrich has the experience and knowledge to carry out the duties of Commander-in-Chief. He is well versed in domestic policy, government, economics, international affairs, the Constitution and world and United States history. He would absolutely destroy Obama in a debate. He is well known, perhaps too well, for his constant appearances on Fox News. Gingrich, the author of the Contract with America, rose to Speaker of the House after the Republicans took control of the House in 1994 and drove President Clinton to the center. His major problem is the baggage he has  due to a divorce and a reputation for being mean spirited. He no doubt could get the full support of the Tea Party, but he will be viciously attacked by the left.

This leaves us with Sarah Palin, the former Governor of Alaska and 2008 running mate with John McCain. Palin is no doubt the best known of all the Republican contenders, probably because she is the most hated by the left. She is a super star of the Tea Party and has the ability to raise millions of dollars for the party’s coffers. She did well with her endorsements in the 2010 elections. She is the author of two books, a Fox News contributor and a has a top rated show on the Learning Channel (TLC), which will no doubt be picked up for a second season. Palin shows passion for America, has a son serving in Afghanistan, and is good looking. Her major hurdle is the failed run by John McCain and the way his handlers managed Palin and some of the gaffs she made during interviews in 2008.

She is absolutely despised by the left-wing media. Even the establishment Republicans have disdain for her. She has been increasing her image in international affairs and is currently touring earthquake ravaged Haiti. It is also doubtful a woman could be elected president in 2012. 

This is my end of 2010 take on the candidates for the Republican nomination in 2012. I am sure things will change over the next 12 months as the 112th Republican controlled Congress begins to prove itself. If the Congress does well and the economy improves it will help the Republican cause, if not they will have problems. They cannot discount Obama, he is a fierce campaigner, and it’s what he does best.

Let’s see who starts making trips to Iowa in 2011 laying the groundwork for 2012 and who can raise the money.

If the Republicans can recapture Colorado, New Mexico, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and Iowa all once traditional red states and with the traditional blue states losing as many a 5 congressional seats they will win the 2012 election by 5-7 electoral votes. Click here for the 2008 electoral map.

Marines against repeal of DADT

“Make no mistake: the anti-war voices long for us to lose any war they cannot prevent.” — Colonel Ralph Peters

CNS.Com reported on December 20, 2010 that 66.5 percent of U.S. Marine combat forces surveyed by a special Defense Department working group said that putting homosexuals in their units would hurt their effectiveness in the field, and 47.8 percent of Marines in combat units specifically said putting homosexuals in their units would hurt their effectiveness “in an intense combat situation.”

The U.S. Congress voted last week to repeal the law — commonly known as Don’t Ask, Don’ Tell — that barred homosexuals from serving in the military.

Earlier this year, after President Barack Obama said in his 2010 State of the Union Address that he wanted to end the ban on homosexuals in the military, Defense Secretary Robert Gates put together a special working group to begin making plans for integrating homosexuals into the Armed Forces if Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell were in fact repealed.

The working group secured the services of Westat Corporation, a polling company, to survey more than 115,000 active duty service members on their attitudes and views about integrating homosexuals into the military. Among those surveyed by Westat were 989 men serving in Marine combat units.

Question 71a in Westat’s survey of these Marine combat forces read as follows: “If Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed and you are working with a Service member in your immediate unit who has said he or she is gay or lesbian, how, if at all, would it affect your immediate unit's effectiveness at completing its mission ... In a field environment or out to sea?” The Marines were given 6 options for answering: Very positively, Positively, Equally as positively as negatively, Negatively, Very negatively, No effect.

The Marines in combat units answered as follows:

• Very positively: 2.9 percent
• Positively: 3.0 percent
• Equally as positively as negatively: 18.8 percent
• Negatively: 23.9 percent
• Very negatively: 42.6 percent
• No effect: 8.7 percent

Only a combined 5.9 percent said putting a homosexual in their combat unit would have a positive or very positive effect on their ability to complete their mission in the field, while 66.5 percent said it would have either a negative or very negative effect.

Almost half of the Marine combat forces surveyed specifically said placing a homosexual in their unit would have a negative or very negative effect on the unit’s effectiveness even in “an intense combat situation.”

Question 71c in Westat’s survey of Marine combat forces read as follows: “If Don’t Ask, Don't Tell is repealed and you are working with a Service member in your immediate unit who has said he or she is gay or lesbian, how, if at all, would it affect your immediate unit's effectiveness at completing its mission... In an intense combat situation”

The Marines in combat units answered as follows:

• Very positively: 3.2 percent
• Positively: 6.0 percent
• Equally as positively as negatively: 28.4 percent
• Negatively: 17.8 percent
• Very negatively: 30.0 percent
• No effect: 16.7 percent

Last week, before Congress voted to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military, Gen. James Amos, the commandant of the Marines, told reporters that he opposed lifting the ban because of what he had heard from Marines about it.

On December 21 CNS reported that Rep. Barney Frank (D.-Mass. And a homosexual male) says he agrees with the recommendation of a Department of Defense (DOD) working group that straight and gay military personnel of the same gender should be required to shower together when the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law goes into effect. Click here for the video

“What do you think happens in gyms all over America?" Frank said when asked by CNSNews.com about the working group's recommendation that straights be required to shower with gays. "What do you think happens in the House of Representatives? Of course people shower with homosexuals. What a silly issue. What do you think goes wrong with showering with homosexuals? Do you think the spray makes it catching? I mean people shower with homosexuals in college dormitories, in gyms where people play sports; in gyms elsewhere. It is a complete non-issue. ”

CNSNews.com then asked Frank why he thinks it is a non-issue.

“To accept the principle that homosexuals can’t shower with other people is a degree of discrimination that goes far beyond this. We don’t get ourselves dry cleaned. We tend to take showers when we go to the gym; when we play sports,” he responded.

Rep. Frank continued, “The notion that knowing that someone is gay or lesbian as opposed to knowing that they are gay or lesbian people that have to pretend who they are; that that somehow makes a difference is pretty silly,”

As I stated in a previous blog post the repeal of DADT is not so much about gay and lesbians serving in the military (they already do) as it is about destroying our military’s effectiveness to protect our nation. This is being done by forces, representing less than 7% of our population, who are anti military and want to bring it down.

Top military leaders must find or certify that changes to the current policy “must not affect troop readiness, cohesion or military recruitment and retention.” How is this possible when Marine Commandant General Jim Amos has already said that the changes would cost lives? Calling repeal a major distraction, Amos said, “I don’t want to lose any Marines to the distraction. I don’t want to have any Marines that I’m visiting at Bethesda [National Naval Medical Center, in Maryland] with no legs be the result of any type of distraction.”

A New York Times story on the “repeal” simply noted, “The repeal will not take effect for at least 60 days while some other procedural steps are taken. In addition, the bill requires the defense secretary to determine that policies are in place to carry out the repeal ‘consistent with military standards for readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention.’”

The “procedural steps” that are part of the bill give the new conservative-controlled House an opportunity to derail the repeal policy.

The Center for Military Readiness, a group that specializes in social issues in the military and has opposed repeal, said the new legislation “will impose heavy, unnecessary burdens on the backs of military men and women.” It said the Senate majority voted with “needless haste” by not waiting for hearings into a recent Department of Defense study of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Elaine Donnelly, president of the group, said that the Pentagon’s survey indicated that 32 percent of Marines and 21.4 percent of Army combat troops would leave the military sooner than planned if “don’t ask, don’t tell” were repealed.

Only two days after it proclaimed the end of the Pentagon’s homosexual exclusion policy, The Washington Post is now admitting that open homosexuals can NOT join the military services. “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ ban on gays won’t change immediately,” was the headline over the article in the print edition of the paper.

Even after Obama scrawls his signature, the law won't actually change until the Pentagon certifies to Congress that the military has met several preconditions, including education and training programs for troops. On Monday, Pentagon officials repeatedly declined to predict how long they would need, saying only that they would proceed at a "methodical" and "deliberate" pace.

"I don't think anybody has any idea yet how long this will take," Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said.

As senior military leaders prepare to integrate openly gay men and lesbians, they are drawing on conclusions of a Pentagon study outlining tricky scenarios that might arise. Among the hypothetical situations in the report: A chaplain's sermon includes several direct statements calling homosexuality a sin. An applicant informs recruiters that he is gay. Troops are heard making jokes about using the same showers as gay colleagues.

Some commanders who oppose the repeal warned in the days before Saturday's historic vote to end the ban that such incidents could compromise the military's ability to fight two wars. But the 300-plus-page report provides potential solutions for each, and reminds commanders that such issues should be treated the same as incidents of harassment, racism or sexism.

The sermons and teachings of the chaplain could not be restricted, unless he publicly maligned military leaders, the report said. The applicant who shares his sexual orientation should be handled like any other recruit. Commanders should remind the joking troops that discrimination or harassment against gay colleagues is inappropriate, but could grant a service member's request not to shower among them

Frank Barrett, a professor of management and organizational behavior at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., predicted that the military will move quickly to implement the new law, but that the ease of doing so will vary widely among the different branches.

"The real challenge of repealing 'don't ask, don't tell' is that it challenges the warrior ethos, what it means to be a warrior," Barrett said. Warriors, he said, forge a "bonding love" during combat and preparation for war. The question that arises, he said, is: Can people who are uncomfortable with gays continue to form those close warrior bonds with openly gay troops?

"The Marines are going to have the hardest time, and the Air Force is going to have the easiest time," he said. "The Air Force doesn't do eye-to-eye combat. But Marines, they are close-knit in close quarters, and the identity of hyper-masculinity is so core to their mission."

In order to secure the vote of Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that “neither he [Admiral Mullen] nor I would sign a certification until we were satisfied, after having consulted with each of the Service Chiefs and Combatant Commanders, that risks to combat readiness, unit cohesion, and effectiveness had, in fact, been mitigated, if not eliminated, to the extent possible for all Services, commands, and units.”

The law, however, specifically states that the changes must be “consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.” The option of changing the policy as long as the negative impact is just “mitigated” is not there.

Senator Webb, a highly-decorated combat Marine in Vietnam and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee, voted for the “repeal” anyway.

In a statement opposing the overturning of the homosexual exclusion policy, Jimmie L. Foster, national commander of The American Legion, said that “The American Legion remains convinced a repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ cannot be easily implemented and could compromise the effectiveness of crucially needed fighting forces.”

Mike Gravel, a failed presidential candidate, former Democrat U.S. Senator from Alaska, and all around nut case, claimed repeal of DADT was in the best interest of the military. Gravel, a former lieutenant in the U.S. Army, claimed that the most fearsome fighters in history were the Spartans, and most of them were homosexual. He said that the Spartans encouraged their soldiers to enter into homosexual relationships because they would fight to the death save their lovers. This is partially true in a historic sense, but Sparta is not the U.S. Military. Sparta did not have sensitivity and diversity sessions for its soldiers, nor did they have a Uniform Code of Military Justice. They took young boys as sex toys, but they also entered into heterosexual marriages.

The burden is now on the gay rights lobby to prove that the changes will have no negative effect on any of the above. How can they prove such a thing when the Pentagon has already concluded that the change is risky and faces opposition from as many as 60 percent of our combat troops?

What is going to happen when a straight soldier is sexually harassed or assaulted by a gay soldier? How will that play out?

The next time you hear about Gays, diversity and sensitivity please consider the story of  Leon A. "Jed" Jedziniak of the 101st Airborne during the Battle of the Bulge.  These were soldiers, not rear echelon weenies whining about diversity and equal rights. The only equal rights they had was the right to die for freedom.

 

Forget the Terrorists; the Real Threat is Climate Change

"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?" — Frédéric Bastiat (The Law)

The Wall Street Journal reported on December 21 “U.K. police arrested 12 men in a large-scale counterterrorism operation described as "absolutely necessary" for public safety, underscoring concerns that the threat of terrorist attacks across Europe is escalating.”

The suspects, who ranged in age from 17 to 28, had been under surveillance for weeks and were believed to have links to Pakistan and Bangladesh, security officials said.

The arrests come amid growing concerns in Europe over terrorism following a suicide bombing in Sweden and reported threats of a terror attack on a European city modeled on the deadly shooting spree in Mumbai, India.”

Police swooped in before dawn Monday in coordinated raids on houses in four cities _ London, the Welsh city of Cardiff and the English cities of Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent. The officers were unarmed, suggesting any planned attack was not imminent.”

The raid, a joint operation by Britain's domestic spy agency MI5 and police, was the largest since April 2009, when 12 men were detained over an alleged al-Qaida bomb plot in the northern city of Manchester.

Counterterrorism officials declined to give more details of the latest alleged plot, saying only that the men had been under surveillance for several weeks. No details were given as to whether explosives or arms were found, and searches were under way in the homes where the arrests took place.

CNS.Com reported on December 17 that a new mission for the Department of Homeland Security was to fight the effects of climate change. “At an all-day White House conference on "environmental justice," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that her department is creating a new task force to battle the effects of climate change on domestic security operations.”

Speaking at the first White House Forum on Environmental Justice on Thursday, Napolitano discussed the initial findings of the department’s recently created "Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force."

Napolitano explained that the task force was charged with “identifying and assessing the impact that climate change could have on the missions and operations of the Department of Homeland Security.”

According to the former Arizona governor, the task force would address specific questions, including:  “How will FEMA work with state and local partners to plan for increased flooding or wildfire or hurricane activity that is more serious than we’ve seen before? What assistance can the Coast Guard bring to bear to assist remote villages in, for example, Alaska which already have been negatively affected by changes up in the Arctic?”

The findings from the Homeland Security Department (DHS) also asked: “How can we focus on how climate change is going to affect our rural citizenry including those who live along our boarders both northern and southern?”

The all day White House Forum on Environmental Justice also included talks by White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.

Napolitano was at this conference just two days after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered in the Arizona desert by bandits. Terry was killed on December 14, 2010.

On ABC’s World News (December 20th), Diane Sawyer sat down with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to talk about the possibility of a terror attack over the holidays. Napolitano, doing her best to keep us all feeling cozy and warm, said it’s almost a year-round operation: “What I say to the American people is that… thousands of people are working 24/7, 364 days a year to keep the American people safe.”

Hmm — 364 days, she says. So which day is it when the staff at DHS is at the beach? On that day I will stay at home. No airports, bus stations, subways or salad bars for me. I’ll skip the family reunion and take a pass on a visit to Times Square or Detroit (I’ll skip Detroit the other 364). I’ll become a paranoid mess and dig a hole in my back yard and spend that 24 hour stretch out of sight. Ops! What about leap year, does this mean that the folks at DHS get an extra day off?

Napolitano didn’t specify which day was the Homeland Security “off day,” which of course helps to keep our terrorist enemies off guard. After all, if they don’t know the magic day when all are defenses are down, how can they plan an attack? Is it New Year’s Eve? (Perhaps too obvious) Flag Day? Is it Arbor Day or National Cupcake Day? Can we agree to make it a day when I’m out of town?

To watch Napolitano’s brilliant moment click here.

If someone like Napolitano is dumb enough not to realize there are 365 days in a year, what does this say about how capacity to handle homeland security issues? Don’t worry though. Napolitano is directing the DHS to focus like a laser on a really important security issue. No, not the borders, or Islamic terrorists, but global warming!

Only one day out of the year are Terrorists not going to have to worry about the Department of Homeland Security keeping the American People safe. If someone like Napolitano is dumb enough not to realize there are 365 days in a year, what does this say about her capacity to handle Homeland Security issues? Her comment went unchallenged by the fair and balanced Diane and the only media to pick on it was, yes your guessed it — the conservative blogs and radio talkers. Just think if Sarah Palin had made such a gaff — it would have been a gaff heard round the world.

It's been almost a year since Abdulmutallab attempted to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 with a bomb hidden in his crotch. The administration's initial reaction — as with other major acts of terror such as the Fort Hood massacre — was to minimize the threat. President Obama referred to Abdulmutallab as an "isolated extremist," and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said there was "no indication" the attack was "part of anything larger." When Abdulmutallab was initially arraigned in court last December, he was charged with two criminal counts related to putting a bomb on an aircraft. A grand jury indictment in January added four more counts, including attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction and attempted murder, but there was no charge of terrorism.

On December 26, 2009 the brilliant Janet Napolitano told us not to be concerned about the ability of the underwear bomber to attempt to blow up an airplane over Detroit. She said “all systems were in place and they worked.” Yes they sure were. Abdulmutallab was tagged by his father as a potential terrorist. He informed the US embassy in Nigeria as well as the Nigerian Intelligence Agency of his son's extremist views and associations with al Qaeda. Abdulmutallab was entered into an intelligence database of known and suspected terrorists a month prior to his flight to Detroit, but added Napolitano stated there was not enough data on him at the time to put him on a "no-fly" list.

Abdulmutallab cleared security at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam without so much as a second glance and it took a passenger and crew members to subdue him as he attempted to ignite the explosives concealed in his underwear as the were approaching the Detroit airport. Even after his being detained by airport security he was handed over to the FBI, who questioned him for 90 minutes before he called for an attorney. Oh yea, all systems worked. Thank God for alert passengers and a faulty mix of explosive compounds — all systems worked. Two days later Napolitano revised her statement and said there would be in investigation into the security measures that were in place.

In a statement posted on the Web site dated Saturday December 18th, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has claimed responsibility for the attack. In the statement, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula said Mr. Abdulmutallab coordinated with members of the group, an alliance of militants based in Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

Abdulmutallab's ties to foreign terror groups were known soon after the attack - and in some quarters beforehand - especially his links to al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki. After the original charges were filed against Abdulmutallab, al-Awlaki was deemed threatening enough to be placed on a targeted killing list personally authorized by President Obama. This "contract" is controversial since al-Awlaki is an American citizen, and a lawsuit brought by his father and the American Civil Liberties Union over the order was dismissed by a federal district judge on Dec. 8. Bringing a terrorism charge against Abdulmutallab, whom al-Awlaki described as one of his "students," helps reinforce the case that the al Qaeda leader is too dangerous to be left alive.

One important development is the Transportation Security Administration's new crotch-inspection policy, which was a response to Abdulmutallab's attempted attack. The controversial groping has been justified as a necessary bulwark against future terror attacks. It would be difficult for the government to sustain this line of argument if it didn't brand the pioneer of underwear-bombing as a terrorist himself.

It would have been better if the government had acknowledged from the beginning that Abdulmutallab was a Muslim radical bent on suicide terrorism, and it's likely the administration will still downplay or wholly ignore his jihadist motives, as it has with one of al-Awlaki's other students, Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan. At least the Obama administration finally has decided to admit a person who tried to commit an act of mass murder against innocents to make a political point is a terrorist.

It seems as though this administration, both the Department of Justice and Homeland Security can’t get their act together. Holder’s prosecutors were only able to get a conviction on one of 285 counts related to al Qaeda's 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania This prosecutorial incompetence has called into question the Obama team's centerpiece policy of bringing terrorists to trial in U.S. courts. The Justice Department needs to demonstrate it can decisively win such a trial, and since Abdulmutallab has officially been promoted to the ranks of the terrorists, he may provide the legitimizing victory the administration needs.

Fear not, Holder and Napolitano have, however, decided that the fight against global warming is more important. Brian Terry and the folks in Arizona don’t seem to count for much at DHS.