Greetings my friends, hey, how's it going as this first day of the week unfolds, or, shouldn't I ask???? That bad, huh? Oh well, cheer up, it will get better as the week plays out.
Now, I am not sure where I am going with this blog, or if I am going at all. I thought there would be more interest to guys and gals, in these fields of politics and religion, if only to justify their differences of opinions as opposed to mine. Or to defend why they are one religion or another, OR, why they are a republican, democrat, or independent. So far I've had no one respond. Does that mean no one watches? I don't know. But if not, I've got a decision to make, keep going and hoping pround Americans will be interested in what I write about. Or, spiritually minded folks who are interested in differences of opinion on why a person is of a certain religion or another. As anyone visiting here in time knows I am a Nichiren Buddhist. Proudly and happily so, and I can tell you why at the drop of a hat. And why I think that religions are "our weakest link", since I think they are divisive. Disagree?, tell me about it. Liberal, Conservative, far-lefter --far-righter?
After this week I will decide. Meantime check out these tid-bits.
*******
There are a terrible lot of lies going around the world, and the worst of it is half of them are true.
~Sir Winston Churchill
*******
Cynical Meanings ...............
Cigarette: A pinch of tobacco rolled in paper with fire at one end and a fool on the other.
Divorce: Future tense of marriage.
Lecture: An art of transferring information from the notes of the Lecturer to the notes of the students without passing through "the minds of either."
Conference: The confusion of one man multiplied by the number present.
Compromise: The art of dividing a cake in such a way that everybody believes he got the biggest piece.
Tears: The hydraulic force by which masculine will-power is defeated by feminine water power...
Dictionary: A place where success comes before work.
Conference Room: A place where everybody talks, nobody listens and everybody disagrees later on.
Classic: A book which people praise, but do not read.
Smile: A curve that can set a lot of things straight.
Office: A place where you can relax after your strenuous home life.
Yawn: The only time some married men ever get to open their mouth.
Cheers. CJ
Monday, March 21, 2011
Friday, March 18, 2011
Well friends, here it is again, and despite all of our differences and problems the world keeps turning and
friday is here, and I suppose you are ready for what goodies the weekend might provide. I have no topic to present to you today and so am going to fill in with some wisdom both Eastern and Western so relax and give yourself a little more "down in the street wisdom & Live smart stuff".
The government that can protect you from your enemies can be used as easily by your enemies to harm you.
~Harry Browne
A happy person is not a person in a certain set of circumstances, but rather a person with a certain set of attitudes.
~Hugh Downs
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
~Thomas Edison
1. There are 3 kinds of Law: Social and Moral; culturally and acceptable behavior; civil and criminal law, or legally acceptable behavior; and Universal Law or Cause and Effect. We may avoid the consequences of the first two, but NEVER the third.
2. It is much easier to 'say' what is just and right, than it is to do what is just and right.
3. There is always a piece of fortune in Misfortune.
4. In all the affairs of life, at every moment, we have a choice.
5. From the previous day, upon awakening, so to are we born with our karma from previous existences. In this way, just as we sleep and wake, we are born and die, maintaining an eternal cycle of life.
FINALLY, NICHIREN BUDDHISM, THE BUDDHISM OF THE 'SUN', IS SHEDDING ITS LIGHT ALL AROUND TEH WORLD. WE HAVE ARRIVED AT A TIME IN WHICH OUR MOVEMENT FOR PEACE, CULTURE AND EDUCATION, GROUNDED INT BUDDHIST PRINCIPLES, MUST SEND ITS LIGHT OF HOPE THROUGHOUT SOCIETY.
Here is to Hope, Health, and Happiness to each of you. Cheers CJ
friday is here, and I suppose you are ready for what goodies the weekend might provide. I have no topic to present to you today and so am going to fill in with some wisdom both Eastern and Western so relax and give yourself a little more "down in the street wisdom & Live smart stuff".
The government that can protect you from your enemies can be used as easily by your enemies to harm you.
~Harry Browne
A happy person is not a person in a certain set of circumstances, but rather a person with a certain set of attitudes.
~Hugh Downs
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
~Thomas Edison
1. There are 3 kinds of Law: Social and Moral; culturally and acceptable behavior; civil and criminal law, or legally acceptable behavior; and Universal Law or Cause and Effect. We may avoid the consequences of the first two, but NEVER the third.
2. It is much easier to 'say' what is just and right, than it is to do what is just and right.
3. There is always a piece of fortune in Misfortune.
4. In all the affairs of life, at every moment, we have a choice.
5. From the previous day, upon awakening, so to are we born with our karma from previous existences. In this way, just as we sleep and wake, we are born and die, maintaining an eternal cycle of life.
FINALLY, NICHIREN BUDDHISM, THE BUDDHISM OF THE 'SUN', IS SHEDDING ITS LIGHT ALL AROUND TEH WORLD. WE HAVE ARRIVED AT A TIME IN WHICH OUR MOVEMENT FOR PEACE, CULTURE AND EDUCATION, GROUNDED INT BUDDHIST PRINCIPLES, MUST SEND ITS LIGHT OF HOPE THROUGHOUT SOCIETY.
Here is to Hope, Health, and Happiness to each of you. Cheers CJ
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, and who has also written for such as the National Review, Wall Street Journal, and Investor's Business Daily. This article was published in the Newsletter, IMPRIMIS. by Hillsdale College. Let's get to it. You've read the Koran Suras to set up your base for understanding one of America's BIGGEST PROBLEM ahead.)
Ah Yes, and here it is mid-week again, and the clouds keep getting darker, but so help me, despite what still seems like public apathy, I think underneath it all, there is a growing antipathy toward this administration, and somewhere along the months ahead, this will turn into full blown action to correct this current trend towards economic disaster. Say, along about Nov. 4, 2012.... Now let's complete my blog on "Not just the economy, stupid".
My last blog finished making reference to our winning the Cold War, and of Russian (at that time) government's brutally repressive domestic policies and their strengthened alliances with America's enemies. Then suggesting that our Conservatives had overdone the winning..... We go on.....
Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that our policy toward Russia has been exceedingly foolish. For the past two decades we have paid the Russians to dismantle nuclear warheads they would have dismantled anyway, while they have used those resources to modernize their ballistic missiles. On our part, we have not even tested a nuclear warhead since 1992 -- which is to say that we aren't certain they work anymore. Nor have we maintained any tactical nuclear weapons.. Nor, to repeat, have we built the missile defense system first proposed by President Reagan.
Just last month, with bipartisan backing from members of the foreign policy establishment, the Senate ratified the New Start Treaty, which will further reduce our nuclear arsenal and will almost certainly cause further delays in building missile defenses -- and this with a nation that engages in massive deception against us, supports our enemies, and builds ever more advanced nuclear weapons.
At the heart of America's strategic defense policy today is the idea of launching a retaliatory nuclear against whatever nuclear power attacks us. But absent reliable confidence in the lethality of forces, such a deterrent is meaningless. In this light, deliberatin about the need for a robust modernization program, rather than arms reductions through New Start, would have been a better way for Congress to spend the days leading up to Christmas -- which is to say, it would have been supportive of our strategic defense policy, rather than undercutting it.
But what about that stretegic policy? Some of New Start's supporters argued that reducing rather than modernizing our nuclear arsenal places us on the moral high ground in our dealings with other nations. But can any government claim to occupy the moral high ground when it willingly, knowingly, and purposely keeps its people nakedly vulnerable to nuclear missiles??
The Russians understand well the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the American defense establishment, and have carefully orchestrated things for two decades so that we remain preoccupied with threats of Nort Korean and now Iranian ballistic missiles. We spend our resources developing modest defense systems to deal, albeit inadequately, with these so-called rogue states, and meanwhile forego addressing the more serious threat from Russia and China, both of which are modernizing their forces.
Who is to say that there will never come a time when the destruction or nuclear blackmail of the U.S. will be in the interest of the Russians or the Chinese?? Do we imagine that respect for human life or human rights will stop these brutal tyrannies from acting on such a determination.?
If I (author) sound pessimistic, I don't mean to. Whatever kind of self-deception gripped the architects of our current defense policies, the American people have proved capable of forcing a change in direction when they learn the facts. Americans do not wish to be subjected to Sharia law, owe large sums of money to the Chinese, or be kept vulnerable to nuclear missiles. Having responded resoundingly to the economic and constitutional crisis represented by Obamacare, it is now time for us to remind our representatives of the constitutional requirement to provide for a common defense -- in the TRUE sense of the word. Finis
Thanks all for stopping by and getting enlightened on a serious subject, if you didn't already realize it. You no doubt are aware of rising prices in every direction that affects the pocketbook or purse, so, are you prepared for it to get worse?Or as has so often been said, "Can't hurt". Cheers CJ
Ah Yes, and here it is mid-week again, and the clouds keep getting darker, but so help me, despite what still seems like public apathy, I think underneath it all, there is a growing antipathy toward this administration, and somewhere along the months ahead, this will turn into full blown action to correct this current trend towards economic disaster. Say, along about Nov. 4, 2012.... Now let's complete my blog on "Not just the economy, stupid".
My last blog finished making reference to our winning the Cold War, and of Russian (at that time) government's brutally repressive domestic policies and their strengthened alliances with America's enemies. Then suggesting that our Conservatives had overdone the winning..... We go on.....
Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that our policy toward Russia has been exceedingly foolish. For the past two decades we have paid the Russians to dismantle nuclear warheads they would have dismantled anyway, while they have used those resources to modernize their ballistic missiles. On our part, we have not even tested a nuclear warhead since 1992 -- which is to say that we aren't certain they work anymore. Nor have we maintained any tactical nuclear weapons.. Nor, to repeat, have we built the missile defense system first proposed by President Reagan.
Just last month, with bipartisan backing from members of the foreign policy establishment, the Senate ratified the New Start Treaty, which will further reduce our nuclear arsenal and will almost certainly cause further delays in building missile defenses -- and this with a nation that engages in massive deception against us, supports our enemies, and builds ever more advanced nuclear weapons.
At the heart of America's strategic defense policy today is the idea of launching a retaliatory nuclear against whatever nuclear power attacks us. But absent reliable confidence in the lethality of forces, such a deterrent is meaningless. In this light, deliberatin about the need for a robust modernization program, rather than arms reductions through New Start, would have been a better way for Congress to spend the days leading up to Christmas -- which is to say, it would have been supportive of our strategic defense policy, rather than undercutting it.
But what about that stretegic policy? Some of New Start's supporters argued that reducing rather than modernizing our nuclear arsenal places us on the moral high ground in our dealings with other nations. But can any government claim to occupy the moral high ground when it willingly, knowingly, and purposely keeps its people nakedly vulnerable to nuclear missiles??
The Russians understand well the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the American defense establishment, and have carefully orchestrated things for two decades so that we remain preoccupied with threats of Nort Korean and now Iranian ballistic missiles. We spend our resources developing modest defense systems to deal, albeit inadequately, with these so-called rogue states, and meanwhile forego addressing the more serious threat from Russia and China, both of which are modernizing their forces.
Who is to say that there will never come a time when the destruction or nuclear blackmail of the U.S. will be in the interest of the Russians or the Chinese?? Do we imagine that respect for human life or human rights will stop these brutal tyrannies from acting on such a determination.?
If I (author) sound pessimistic, I don't mean to. Whatever kind of self-deception gripped the architects of our current defense policies, the American people have proved capable of forcing a change in direction when they learn the facts. Americans do not wish to be subjected to Sharia law, owe large sums of money to the Chinese, or be kept vulnerable to nuclear missiles. Having responded resoundingly to the economic and constitutional crisis represented by Obamacare, it is now time for us to remind our representatives of the constitutional requirement to provide for a common defense -- in the TRUE sense of the word. Finis
Thanks all for stopping by and getting enlightened on a serious subject, if you didn't already realize it. You no doubt are aware of rising prices in every direction that affects the pocketbook or purse, so, are you prepared for it to get worse?Or as has so often been said, "Can't hurt". Cheers CJ
Monday, March 14, 2011
(Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, and who has also written for such as the National Review, Wall Street Journal, and Investor's Business Daily. This article was published in the Newsletter, IMPRIMIS. by Hillsdale College. Let's get to it. You've read the Koran Suras to set up your base for understanding one of America's BIGGEST PROBLEM ahead.)
Hi people, hope all your weekends were Heaven compared to what happened in Japan. Personally I cannot even begin to imagine what it must be like to live through such a horrot. Of course it does no good to dwell on that aspect, but it does give us all an opportunity to be supportive there wherever we might be badly needed. WE who are proudly of the GREAT HEARTS!!!!
Anyway, to continue with the last episode to those of us who are anything but Stupid, right? To Go On......
China has for some time carried out a policy that has been termed "peaceful rise". But in recent years we have seen the coming to power of what scholars like Tang Ben called the "Red Guard generation" -- generals who grew up during the Cultural Revolution, who are no longer interested in China remaining a secondary power, and who appear eager to take back Taiwan, avenge past wrongs by Japan and replace the U.S. as the preeminent military power in the region and ultimately the world.
However far-fetched this idea may seem to American policymakers, it is widely held in China that America is on the decline, with economic problems that will limit its ability to modernize its military and maintain its alliances. And indeed, as things stand, the U.S. would have to resort to full-scale nuclear war to defenc its Asian allies from an attack by China.
This is the prospect that caused Mao Tse Tsung to call the U.S. a "Paper Tiger". Retired Chinese General Xiong Guong Kai expressed much the same idea in 1995, when he said that the U.S. would not trade Los Angeles for Taipei -- that is, that we would have to stand by if China attacks Taiwan, since China has the ability to annihilate Los Angeles with a nuclear missile. In any case, current Chinese aggression against Japan in the Senkaku Islands and their open assistance of the Iranian nuclear program, not to mention their sale of arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan, would suggest that China is openly playing the role that the Soviet Union once played as chief sponsor of global conflict with the West.
Which brings us to Russia and to the degradation of American strategic thinking during and after the Cold War. This thinking used to be guided bg the idea that we must above all prevent a direct attack upon the U.S. homeland. But over the past 50 years we have been taught something different: that we must accept a balance of power between nations, especially those possessing nuclear ballistic missiles; and that we cannot seek military superiority -- including defensive superiority, as with missile defense -- lest we create strategic instability.
This is now the common liberal view taught at universities, think tanks and schools of foreigh service. Meanwhile, for their part, conservatives have been basking in the glow of "winning the Cold War". But in what sense was it won, it might be asked, given that we neither disarmed Russia of its nuclear arsenal nor put a stop to its active measures to undermine us. The transformation of some of the former captive ntions into liberal democracies is certainly worth celebrating, but given Russion government's brutally repressive domestic policies and strengthened alliances with America's enemies abroad over the past 20 years, conservatives have overdone it.
Closing now for this monday and of course a new week to work on more history. Oh did you notice that with all the turmoil in the middles east and Japan, Obama wa faulted for not answering questions on four big topics, yet he is playing golf today, and planning a trip to South America shortly. Isn't it good to feel that we have a President who is concerned and interested in Ameria's place in this world as a TRUE LEADERs and on top of everything that is happening? Hmmmmmmm????? Cheers CJ
Hi people, hope all your weekends were Heaven compared to what happened in Japan. Personally I cannot even begin to imagine what it must be like to live through such a horrot. Of course it does no good to dwell on that aspect, but it does give us all an opportunity to be supportive there wherever we might be badly needed. WE who are proudly of the GREAT HEARTS!!!!
Anyway, to continue with the last episode to those of us who are anything but Stupid, right? To Go On......
China has for some time carried out a policy that has been termed "peaceful rise". But in recent years we have seen the coming to power of what scholars like Tang Ben called the "Red Guard generation" -- generals who grew up during the Cultural Revolution, who are no longer interested in China remaining a secondary power, and who appear eager to take back Taiwan, avenge past wrongs by Japan and replace the U.S. as the preeminent military power in the region and ultimately the world.
However far-fetched this idea may seem to American policymakers, it is widely held in China that America is on the decline, with economic problems that will limit its ability to modernize its military and maintain its alliances. And indeed, as things stand, the U.S. would have to resort to full-scale nuclear war to defenc its Asian allies from an attack by China.
This is the prospect that caused Mao Tse Tsung to call the U.S. a "Paper Tiger". Retired Chinese General Xiong Guong Kai expressed much the same idea in 1995, when he said that the U.S. would not trade Los Angeles for Taipei -- that is, that we would have to stand by if China attacks Taiwan, since China has the ability to annihilate Los Angeles with a nuclear missile. In any case, current Chinese aggression against Japan in the Senkaku Islands and their open assistance of the Iranian nuclear program, not to mention their sale of arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan, would suggest that China is openly playing the role that the Soviet Union once played as chief sponsor of global conflict with the West.
Which brings us to Russia and to the degradation of American strategic thinking during and after the Cold War. This thinking used to be guided bg the idea that we must above all prevent a direct attack upon the U.S. homeland. But over the past 50 years we have been taught something different: that we must accept a balance of power between nations, especially those possessing nuclear ballistic missiles; and that we cannot seek military superiority -- including defensive superiority, as with missile defense -- lest we create strategic instability.
This is now the common liberal view taught at universities, think tanks and schools of foreigh service. Meanwhile, for their part, conservatives have been basking in the glow of "winning the Cold War". But in what sense was it won, it might be asked, given that we neither disarmed Russia of its nuclear arsenal nor put a stop to its active measures to undermine us. The transformation of some of the former captive ntions into liberal democracies is certainly worth celebrating, but given Russion government's brutally repressive domestic policies and strengthened alliances with America's enemies abroad over the past 20 years, conservatives have overdone it.
Closing now for this monday and of course a new week to work on more history. Oh did you notice that with all the turmoil in the middles east and Japan, Obama wa faulted for not answering questions on four big topics, yet he is playing golf today, and planning a trip to South America shortly. Isn't it good to feel that we have a President who is concerned and interested in Ameria's place in this world as a TRUE LEADERs and on top of everything that is happening? Hmmmmmmm????? Cheers CJ
Friday, March 11, 2011
RELIGION or POLITICS ??? Rules for Economic Recovery ......cont'd.
(It is written by Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, and who has also written for such as the National Review, Wall Street Journal, and Investor's Business Daily. This article was published in the Newsletter, IMPRIMIS. by Hillsdale College. Let's get to it. You've read the Koran Suras to set up your base for understanding one of America's BIGGEST PROBLEM ahead.)
And happy TGIF to you too. My last line from Wednesday read "Yet even to raise a question of whether Islam presents a domestic threat today is to invite charges of bigotry or worse". So we pick it up from there.
NOT JUST THE ECONOMY, STUPID........
And as dangerous as it potentially is, this domestic threat pales in comparison to the foreign threat from the Islamic Republic of IRAN and its allies -- a threat that is existential in nature. The government in Tehran, of course, is enriching uranium to convert to plutonium and place in a nuclear warhead. Iran has advanced ballesitic missiles such as the Shahab-3, which can be launched from land or sea and is capable of destroying an American city. Even worse, if the Iranians were able to deliver the warhead as an electomagnetic pulse weapon from a ship off shore -- a method they have been practicing, by the way -- they could destroy the electronic infrastructure of the U.S. and cause the deaths of millions or more. And let me be perfectly clear: We do not today have a missile defense system in place that is capable of defending against either a ship-launched missile attack by Iran or a ballistic missile attack from China or Russia. We do not yet today have such a system in place, even though we are capable of building one.
Since I (author) have mentioned China and Russia, let me turn to them briefly in that order. The U.S. trades with China and the Chinese buy our debt. Currently they have $2 trillion in U.S. reserves, about half of which is in U.S. treasuries. Their economy and ours are intimately intertwined. For this reason it is thought that the Chinese will not go to war with us. Why, after all, would they want to destroy their main export market.???
On the other hand, China is building an advanced army, navy, airforce, and space-based capability that is clearly designed to limit the U.S. and its ability to project power in Asia. It has over two million men under arms adn possesses an untold number of ICBMs -- most of them aimed a the U.S. -- and hundreds of short and medium-range nuclear missiles. China's military thinking is openly centered on opposing American supremacy, and its military journals openly discuss unrestricted warfare, atomic warfare, and terrorism. China is also working to develop a space-based military capability and investing in various launch vehicles, including manned spaceflight, a space station, and extensive anti-satellite weaponry aimed at negating U.S. global satellite coverage.
Absent a missile defense capable of intercepting China's ballistic missiles, the U.S. would be hard pressed to maintain even its current security commitments in Asia. The U.S. Seventh Fleet, however capable, cannot withstand the kinds of nuclear missiles and nuclear-tipped cruise missiles that China could employ against it. The Chinese have studied American capabilities, and have built weapons meant to negate our advantages. The destructive capability of the recently unveiled Chinese DF-21D missile against our aircraft carriers significantly raises the stakes of a conflict in the South China Sea. and the SS-N-22 cruise missile -- designed by the Russians and deployed by the Chinese and Iranians -- present a daunting challenge to its enormous size and Mach 3 speed. (To be continued on Monday). Hey. are you getting the picture????
OK, so much for this wonderful week. Unfortunately, the dire things in the futur, near or otherwise, are not tomorrow or next week or month, it is just an insidious movement that causes many people to shrug and say "oh well, maybe it isn'' going to happen and I'll wait and fact up to it, IF it happens"" Kaboom, and that attitude is WHY it happens. All I can say, hey, be alert, awake and vigilant. Prepare for what might and could happen, and if it doesn't, breath a sigh of relief and be damned grateful. Cheers CJ
And happy TGIF to you too. My last line from Wednesday read "Yet even to raise a question of whether Islam presents a domestic threat today is to invite charges of bigotry or worse". So we pick it up from there.
NOT JUST THE ECONOMY, STUPID........
And as dangerous as it potentially is, this domestic threat pales in comparison to the foreign threat from the Islamic Republic of IRAN and its allies -- a threat that is existential in nature. The government in Tehran, of course, is enriching uranium to convert to plutonium and place in a nuclear warhead. Iran has advanced ballesitic missiles such as the Shahab-3, which can be launched from land or sea and is capable of destroying an American city. Even worse, if the Iranians were able to deliver the warhead as an electomagnetic pulse weapon from a ship off shore -- a method they have been practicing, by the way -- they could destroy the electronic infrastructure of the U.S. and cause the deaths of millions or more. And let me be perfectly clear: We do not today have a missile defense system in place that is capable of defending against either a ship-launched missile attack by Iran or a ballistic missile attack from China or Russia. We do not yet today have such a system in place, even though we are capable of building one.
Since I (author) have mentioned China and Russia, let me turn to them briefly in that order. The U.S. trades with China and the Chinese buy our debt. Currently they have $2 trillion in U.S. reserves, about half of which is in U.S. treasuries. Their economy and ours are intimately intertwined. For this reason it is thought that the Chinese will not go to war with us. Why, after all, would they want to destroy their main export market.???
On the other hand, China is building an advanced army, navy, airforce, and space-based capability that is clearly designed to limit the U.S. and its ability to project power in Asia. It has over two million men under arms adn possesses an untold number of ICBMs -- most of them aimed a the U.S. -- and hundreds of short and medium-range nuclear missiles. China's military thinking is openly centered on opposing American supremacy, and its military journals openly discuss unrestricted warfare, atomic warfare, and terrorism. China is also working to develop a space-based military capability and investing in various launch vehicles, including manned spaceflight, a space station, and extensive anti-satellite weaponry aimed at negating U.S. global satellite coverage.
Absent a missile defense capable of intercepting China's ballistic missiles, the U.S. would be hard pressed to maintain even its current security commitments in Asia. The U.S. Seventh Fleet, however capable, cannot withstand the kinds of nuclear missiles and nuclear-tipped cruise missiles that China could employ against it. The Chinese have studied American capabilities, and have built weapons meant to negate our advantages. The destructive capability of the recently unveiled Chinese DF-21D missile against our aircraft carriers significantly raises the stakes of a conflict in the South China Sea. and the SS-N-22 cruise missile -- designed by the Russians and deployed by the Chinese and Iranians -- present a daunting challenge to its enormous size and Mach 3 speed. (To be continued on Monday). Hey. are you getting the picture????
OK, so much for this wonderful week. Unfortunately, the dire things in the futur, near or otherwise, are not tomorrow or next week or month, it is just an insidious movement that causes many people to shrug and say "oh well, maybe it isn'' going to happen and I'll wait and fact up to it, IF it happens"" Kaboom, and that attitude is WHY it happens. All I can say, hey, be alert, awake and vigilant. Prepare for what might and could happen, and if it doesn't, breath a sigh of relief and be damned grateful. Cheers CJ
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
RELIGION or POLITICS ??? Never Just The Economy, Stupid - Cont'd.
Happy Wednesday to you, friends. I am convinced this to be a very important article for everyone to read, bar none. It is written by Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, and who has also written for such as the National Review, Wall Street Journal, and Investor's Business Daily. This article was published in the Newsletter, IMPRIMIS. by Hillsdale College. Let's get to it. You've read the Koran Suras to set up your base for understanding one of America's BIGGEST PROBLEM ahead.
NOT JUST THE ECONOMY, STUPID.....
It is often said that to point out these verses is to cherry pick unfairly the most violent parts of the Koran. In response, I(author) assert that we must try to understand Muslims as they understand themselves. And I hasten to add that the average American Muslim does not understand the Koran with any level of detail. So I am not painting a picture here of the average Muslim. I am trying to understand those Muslims, both here in the U.S. and abroad, who actively seek the destruction of America.
Here at home, the threat is posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and its organizational arms, such as the Council on American on Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, and the various Muslim student associations. These groups seek to persuade Americans that Islam is a religion of peace. But let me quote to you from a document obtained during the 2007 Holy Land Trial investigating terrorist funding. It is a Muslim Brotherhood Strategic Memorandum on North American Affairs that was approved by the Shura Council and the Organizational Conference in l987. It speaks of "Enablement of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims' efforts, present Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is".
Elsewhere this document says:
The process of settlement is a "Civilization-JIHADIST Process" with all the means. The IKHWAN {the Muslim Brotherhood} must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand JIHAD in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for JIHAD yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform JIHAD and work wherever he is and wherever lands until the final hour comes......
Now during the Bush administration the number of Muslims in the U.S. was typically estimated to be around three million. The Pew Research Center in 2007 estimated it to be 2.35 million. In 2000, the Council on American Islamic Relation put the number at five million. And President Obama in his Cairo speech two years ago put it at seven million.
In that light, consider a 2007 survey of American Muslim opinion conducted by the Pew Research Center. Eight percent of American Muslims who took part in this survey said they believed that suicide bombing can sometimes be justified in the defense of Islam. Even accepting a low estimate of three million Muslims in the U.S., this would mean that 240,000 among us held that suicide bombing in the name of Islam can be justified.
Among American Muslims 18-29 years old, 15 percent agreed with that and 60 percent said they thought of themselves as Muslim first and American second. Among all particpants in the survey, five percent -- and five percent of the low estimate of three million Muslims in America is 150,000 -- said they had a favorable view of al Qaeda.
Given these numbers, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the political aims and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood represent a domestic threat to national security. It is one thing to have hundreds of terrorist sympathizers within our borders, but quite another if that number is in the hundreds of thousands. Consider the massacre at Fort Hood: Major Nidal Malik Hasan believed that he was acting as a devout Muslim -- indeed, he believed he was obeying a religious mandate to wage war against his fellow soldiers. Yet even to raise the question of whether Islam presents a domestic threat today is to invite charges of bigotry or worse.
OK, I am cutting here and will continue on Friday. My blog friday starts out thusly -- AND AS DANGEROUS AS IT POTENTIALLY IS, THIS DOMESTIC THREAT PALES IN COMPARISON TO THE FOREIGN THREAT FROM THE ILSAMIC THREAT FROM THE iSLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND ITS ALLIES --- Are you all getting the picture??
If not come visit again then, and you will be convinced. Cheers CJ
NOT JUST THE ECONOMY, STUPID.....
It is often said that to point out these verses is to cherry pick unfairly the most violent parts of the Koran. In response, I(author) assert that we must try to understand Muslims as they understand themselves. And I hasten to add that the average American Muslim does not understand the Koran with any level of detail. So I am not painting a picture here of the average Muslim. I am trying to understand those Muslims, both here in the U.S. and abroad, who actively seek the destruction of America.
Here at home, the threat is posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and its organizational arms, such as the Council on American on Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, and the various Muslim student associations. These groups seek to persuade Americans that Islam is a religion of peace. But let me quote to you from a document obtained during the 2007 Holy Land Trial investigating terrorist funding. It is a Muslim Brotherhood Strategic Memorandum on North American Affairs that was approved by the Shura Council and the Organizational Conference in l987. It speaks of "Enablement of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims' efforts, present Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is".
Elsewhere this document says:
The process of settlement is a "Civilization-JIHADIST Process" with all the means. The IKHWAN {the Muslim Brotherhood} must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand JIHAD in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for JIHAD yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform JIHAD and work wherever he is and wherever lands until the final hour comes......
Now during the Bush administration the number of Muslims in the U.S. was typically estimated to be around three million. The Pew Research Center in 2007 estimated it to be 2.35 million. In 2000, the Council on American Islamic Relation put the number at five million. And President Obama in his Cairo speech two years ago put it at seven million.
In that light, consider a 2007 survey of American Muslim opinion conducted by the Pew Research Center. Eight percent of American Muslims who took part in this survey said they believed that suicide bombing can sometimes be justified in the defense of Islam. Even accepting a low estimate of three million Muslims in the U.S., this would mean that 240,000 among us held that suicide bombing in the name of Islam can be justified.
Among American Muslims 18-29 years old, 15 percent agreed with that and 60 percent said they thought of themselves as Muslim first and American second. Among all particpants in the survey, five percent -- and five percent of the low estimate of three million Muslims in America is 150,000 -- said they had a favorable view of al Qaeda.
Given these numbers, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the political aims and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood represent a domestic threat to national security. It is one thing to have hundreds of terrorist sympathizers within our borders, but quite another if that number is in the hundreds of thousands. Consider the massacre at Fort Hood: Major Nidal Malik Hasan believed that he was acting as a devout Muslim -- indeed, he believed he was obeying a religious mandate to wage war against his fellow soldiers. Yet even to raise the question of whether Islam presents a domestic threat today is to invite charges of bigotry or worse.
OK, I am cutting here and will continue on Friday. My blog friday starts out thusly -- AND AS DANGEROUS AS IT POTENTIALLY IS, THIS DOMESTIC THREAT PALES IN COMPARISON TO THE FOREIGN THREAT FROM THE ILSAMIC THREAT FROM THE iSLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND ITS ALLIES --- Are you all getting the picture??
If not come visit again then, and you will be convinced. Cheers CJ
Monday, March 7, 2011
RELIGION or POLITICS ??? Never Just The Economy, Stupid
Happy Monday to you friends. I believe this to be a very important article for everyone to read, bar none. It is written by Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, and who has also written for such as the National Review, Wall Street Journal, and Investor's Business Daily. This article was published in the Newsletter, IMPRIMIS. by Hillsdale College. Let's get to it.
IT'S NEVER JUST THE ECONOMY, STUPID------
We are often told that we possess the most powerful military in the world and that we face no serious threat for some time to come. We are conforted with three reassurances aimed at deflecting any serious discussion of national security: (1) that Islam is a religion of peace; (2) that we will never go to war with China because our economic interests are intertwined; and (3) that America won the Cold War and Russia is no longer our enemy. But these reassurances are MYTHS, propagated on the right and left alike. We believe them at our peril, because serious threats are already upon us.
Let me begin with Islam. We were assured that it was a religion of peace immediately following September 11. President Bush, a good man, believed or was persuaded that true Islam was not that different from Judaism or Christianity. He said in a speech in October 2001, just a month after the attacks on the Twin Towers and The Pentagon; "Islam is a vibrant faith... We honor its traditions. Our enemy does not. Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion." But unfortunately, Mr. Bush was trying to understand Islam as we would like it to be rather than how countless devout Muslims understand it.
Organizationally, Islam is built around a belief in God or Allah, but it is equally a political ideology organized around the Koran and the teachings of its founder Muhammad. Whereas Christianity teaches that we should render unto Caesar's and unto God what is God's -- allowing for a non-theocratic political tradition to develop in the West, culminating in the principles of civil and religious liberty in the Ameerican founding -- Islam teaches tha to disagree with or even reinterpret the Koran's 6000 odd verses, organized into 114 chapters or Suras and dealing as fully with law and politics as with matters of faith, is punishable by DEATH.
Islamic authorities of all the major branches of Islam hold that the Koran must be read so that the parts written last override the others. This so-called theory of abrogation means that the ruling parts of the Koran are those written after Muhammad went to Medina in 622 A.D. Specifically, they are Suras 9 and 5, which are not the Suras containing the verses often cited as proof of Islam's peacefulness.
Sura 9, verse 5, reads: "Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them in every stratagem of war. But if they repent, and establish egular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them...."
Sura9, verse 29, reads: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, even if they are of the 40 people of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
Sura 5, verse 51, reads: "Oh ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protctors to each other. And he amongst you that turn to them for friendship is of them. Verily Allah guideth not the unjust."
And Sura 3, verse 28, introduces the doctring of TAQIYYA, which holds that Muslims should not be friends with the infidel EXCEPT AS DECEPTION, always with the end goal of converting. subduing, or destroying him.
That is it for today, friend, and please be clear on just esactly what this says, and so why would you need any further proog of where we in America stand with the Muslim and Islamic faiths. For your life, if not already, wake up to the facts and do not be deterred in your mission to wake up and stand up for the America of our Constitution. I shall continue this and it gets even better, so be sure to come back as I bring you more on this subject. Cheers CJ
IT'S NEVER JUST THE ECONOMY, STUPID------
We are often told that we possess the most powerful military in the world and that we face no serious threat for some time to come. We are conforted with three reassurances aimed at deflecting any serious discussion of national security: (1) that Islam is a religion of peace; (2) that we will never go to war with China because our economic interests are intertwined; and (3) that America won the Cold War and Russia is no longer our enemy. But these reassurances are MYTHS, propagated on the right and left alike. We believe them at our peril, because serious threats are already upon us.
Let me begin with Islam. We were assured that it was a religion of peace immediately following September 11. President Bush, a good man, believed or was persuaded that true Islam was not that different from Judaism or Christianity. He said in a speech in October 2001, just a month after the attacks on the Twin Towers and The Pentagon; "Islam is a vibrant faith... We honor its traditions. Our enemy does not. Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion." But unfortunately, Mr. Bush was trying to understand Islam as we would like it to be rather than how countless devout Muslims understand it.
Organizationally, Islam is built around a belief in God or Allah, but it is equally a political ideology organized around the Koran and the teachings of its founder Muhammad. Whereas Christianity teaches that we should render unto Caesar's and unto God what is God's -- allowing for a non-theocratic political tradition to develop in the West, culminating in the principles of civil and religious liberty in the Ameerican founding -- Islam teaches tha to disagree with or even reinterpret the Koran's 6000 odd verses, organized into 114 chapters or Suras and dealing as fully with law and politics as with matters of faith, is punishable by DEATH.
Islamic authorities of all the major branches of Islam hold that the Koran must be read so that the parts written last override the others. This so-called theory of abrogation means that the ruling parts of the Koran are those written after Muhammad went to Medina in 622 A.D. Specifically, they are Suras 9 and 5, which are not the Suras containing the verses often cited as proof of Islam's peacefulness.
Sura 9, verse 5, reads: "Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them in every stratagem of war. But if they repent, and establish egular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them...."
Sura9, verse 29, reads: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, even if they are of the 40 people of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
Sura 5, verse 51, reads: "Oh ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protctors to each other. And he amongst you that turn to them for friendship is of them. Verily Allah guideth not the unjust."
And Sura 3, verse 28, introduces the doctring of TAQIYYA, which holds that Muslims should not be friends with the infidel EXCEPT AS DECEPTION, always with the end goal of converting. subduing, or destroying him.
That is it for today, friend, and please be clear on just esactly what this says, and so why would you need any further proog of where we in America stand with the Muslim and Islamic faiths. For your life, if not already, wake up to the facts and do not be deterred in your mission to wake up and stand up for the America of our Constitution. I shall continue this and it gets even better, so be sure to come back as I bring you more on this subject. Cheers CJ
Friday, March 4, 2011
RELIGION or POLITICS ??? Rules for Economic Recovery ......cont'd.
Hi Ho, and away we go, and since it is friday, like in TGIF, I must complete this weeks topic on Rules of Recovery. What has been presented here during this week, you all should know the source, and what it has to do with the economy as in past history. Today I will show the Relevance. As you all know the contents of all blogs this week come from the newsletter IMPRIMIS published by Hillsdale College. All of it was written by Amity Shlaes, senior fellow in economic history at the Council on Foreign Relations.
RELEVANCE FOR TODAY ---------
It is not hard to see some of today's troubles as a repeat of the errors of the 1930s. There is arrogance up top. The fereal government is dilettantish with money and exhibits disregard and even hostility to all other players. It is only as a result of this that economic recovery seems out of reach.
The key to recovery, now, as in the 1930s, is to found in property rights. These rights suffer under our current politics in several ways. The mortgage crisis, for example, arose out of a long-standing erosion of the property rights concept - first on the part of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but also on that of the Federal Reserve. Broadening FDR's entitlement theories, Congress taught the country that home ownership was a "right." This fostered a misunderstanding of what property is. The owners didn't realize what ownership entailed - that is, they didn't grasp that they were obligated to deliver on the terms of the contract of their mortgage. In the bipartisan enthusiasm for making everyone on owner, our government debased the concept of home ownership.
Property rights are endangered as well by the ongoing assault on contracts generally. A perfect example of this was the treatment of Chrysler bonds during the company's bankruptcy, where senior secured creditors were ignored, notwithstanding the status of their bonds under bankruptcy law. The current administration made a political decision to subordinate those contracts to union demands. That sent a dangerous signal for the future that U.S. bonds are not trustworthy.
Three other threats to property loom. One is tax increases, such as the coming expiration of the Bush tax cuts. More taxes mean less private private property. A second threat is in the area of infrastructure. Stimulus plans tend to empasize infrastructure - especially roads and railroads. And after the Supreme Court's KELO decision of 2005, the federal government will have enormous license to use eminent domain to claim private property for their purposes. Third and finally, there is the worst kind of confiscation of private property, which excessive government spending necesssarily encourages. Many of us sense that inflation is closer than the country thinks.
If the experience of the Great Depression taches anythin, it is that property rights must be firmly established or else we will not have thekind of economic that leads to strong recovery. The Monopoly board game reminds us that economic growth isn't mysterious and inscrutable. Economic growth depends on the impulse of the small businessman and entrepreneur to get back in the game. In order for this to happen, we don't need a perfect government. All we need is one that is "not too bad," whose rules are not constantly changing and snuffing out the willingness of these players to take risks. We need a government under which the money supply doesn't change unpredictabley, there are not too many "Go to jail" cards, and the top hats are confident to the possibility of seeing significant returns on investment.
Recovery won't happen from the top. But when those at the top step back and create the proper conditions, it will happen down there on the board - one house at a time.
I wish all a happy weekend, and that you wise ones will take this presentation to your good senses, because the things that are going to happen in this country will defy your imagination, because most of you will shrug your shoulders and say whatever happens I'll take care of it then. Well, friend, that will be too late, there are too many factions in this country and around the world who are diligently working to sink America to levels you couldn't believe, UNLESS you listen to people whom you might say, Oh they're crazy. They are not, but many will learn the hard way and it won't be at all pretty. Be warned, if only by me, who believes the danger signs rampant all over the place. So Pleasant dreams, and will be back monday with a whole new-old topic which will further make the case. Cheers. CJ
RELEVANCE FOR TODAY ---------
It is not hard to see some of today's troubles as a repeat of the errors of the 1930s. There is arrogance up top. The fereal government is dilettantish with money and exhibits disregard and even hostility to all other players. It is only as a result of this that economic recovery seems out of reach.
The key to recovery, now, as in the 1930s, is to found in property rights. These rights suffer under our current politics in several ways. The mortgage crisis, for example, arose out of a long-standing erosion of the property rights concept - first on the part of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but also on that of the Federal Reserve. Broadening FDR's entitlement theories, Congress taught the country that home ownership was a "right." This fostered a misunderstanding of what property is. The owners didn't realize what ownership entailed - that is, they didn't grasp that they were obligated to deliver on the terms of the contract of their mortgage. In the bipartisan enthusiasm for making everyone on owner, our government debased the concept of home ownership.
Property rights are endangered as well by the ongoing assault on contracts generally. A perfect example of this was the treatment of Chrysler bonds during the company's bankruptcy, where senior secured creditors were ignored, notwithstanding the status of their bonds under bankruptcy law. The current administration made a political decision to subordinate those contracts to union demands. That sent a dangerous signal for the future that U.S. bonds are not trustworthy.
Three other threats to property loom. One is tax increases, such as the coming expiration of the Bush tax cuts. More taxes mean less private private property. A second threat is in the area of infrastructure. Stimulus plans tend to empasize infrastructure - especially roads and railroads. And after the Supreme Court's KELO decision of 2005, the federal government will have enormous license to use eminent domain to claim private property for their purposes. Third and finally, there is the worst kind of confiscation of private property, which excessive government spending necesssarily encourages. Many of us sense that inflation is closer than the country thinks.
If the experience of the Great Depression taches anythin, it is that property rights must be firmly established or else we will not have thekind of economic that leads to strong recovery. The Monopoly board game reminds us that economic growth isn't mysterious and inscrutable. Economic growth depends on the impulse of the small businessman and entrepreneur to get back in the game. In order for this to happen, we don't need a perfect government. All we need is one that is "not too bad," whose rules are not constantly changing and snuffing out the willingness of these players to take risks. We need a government under which the money supply doesn't change unpredictabley, there are not too many "Go to jail" cards, and the top hats are confident to the possibility of seeing significant returns on investment.
Recovery won't happen from the top. But when those at the top step back and create the proper conditions, it will happen down there on the board - one house at a time.
I wish all a happy weekend, and that you wise ones will take this presentation to your good senses, because the things that are going to happen in this country will defy your imagination, because most of you will shrug your shoulders and say whatever happens I'll take care of it then. Well, friend, that will be too late, there are too many factions in this country and around the world who are diligently working to sink America to levels you couldn't believe, UNLESS you listen to people whom you might say, Oh they're crazy. They are not, but many will learn the hard way and it won't be at all pretty. Be warned, if only by me, who believes the danger signs rampant all over the place. So Pleasant dreams, and will be back monday with a whole new-old topic which will further make the case. Cheers. CJ
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
RELIGION or POLITICS ??? Rules for Economic Recovery ......cont'd.
Hi midweekers, How's it going with y'all for this week, some good, some not so good??? Yeah, well that's life, eh? I am going to continue with the present topic, which is after the scene in the court case of the Schecters, butchers in the chicken market from Brooklyn, N.Y., in 1935, represented by Louis Spatz. (This article was written by Amity Shlaes, senior fellow in economic history at the Council on Foreigh Relations. As published by Hillsdale College in their montly newsletter, IMPRIMIS.
More on the ARROGANCE AND DISCRETION section.
Regarding monetary policy, it is clear that there wasn't enough money in the early 1930s. So Roosevelt was not wrong in trying to reflate. But though his general idea was right, the discretionary aspect of his policy was terrifying. As Henry Morgenthau reports in his diaries, prices ser set by the president personally. FDR took the U.S. off the gold standard in April 1933, and by summer he was setting the gold price every morning from his bed. Morgenthau reports that at one point the president ordered the gold price up 21 cents. Why 21, Morgenthau asked. Roosevelt replied, because it's 3 x 7, and three is a lucky number. "Of anyone knew how we set the gold price," wrote Morgenthau in his diary," they would be frightened."
Discretionary policies aimed at cleaning up Wall Street were destructive as well. The New Dealers attacked the wealthy as "money changers" and "Princes of Property." In l937, after his re-election, Roosevelt delivered an inaugural address in which he described government as an instrument of "unimagined power" which should be used to "fashion a higher order of things". This caused business to freeze in its tracks. Companies went on what Roosevelt himself resentfully termed a "capital strike".
These capital strikers mattered because they were even more important to recovery than the Schecters. Consider the case of Alfred Lee Loomis, who had the kind of mind that could contribute significantly to Gross Domestic Product and job creation. During the First World War, he had improved the design of firearms for the U.S. Army. In the 1920s, he became wealthy through his work in investment banking. He moved in a crowd that was developing a new form of utility company that might finally be able to marshal the capital to bring electricity to the American South. But when Loomis saw that the Roosevelt administration washauling utilities executives down to Washington for hearings, he shut down his business, retreated to his Tudor house, and ran a kind of private think tank for his own benefit. We have heard a lot about a labor surfeit in the 1930s. Here is a heresy: What if there was a shortage of TALENT brought on by declaration of class warfare?
Another challenge to the Depression economy was tax increases. While these increases didn't achieve the social equality at which they were aimed, they did significant damage by confiscating too much individual and corporate property. As a result, many individuals and businesses simply reduced or halted production -- especially as teh New Deal wore on. In the late 1930s, banker Leonard Ayres of the Cleveland Trust Company said in teh New Times: "For nearly a decade now the great majority of corporations have been losing money instead of making it."
As for big labor, the Wagner Act of 1935 proved to be quite destructive. It brought on drastic changes at factories including the closed shop -- the exclusion of non-union members. Another innovation it helped bring about was the sit-down strike, which threatened the basic property right of factory owners to close their doors. Most importantly, it gave unions the power to demand higher wages -- and they did. A wage chart for the 20th century shows that real wages in the 1930s were higher than the trend for the rest of the century. This seems perverse, considering the economic conditions at the time. The result was high paying jobs for a few and high unemployment for everyone else. The reality of overpriced labor can be seen in several stock phrases coming out of the Great Depression-- "Nice work if you can get it," for example, was the refrain of a Gershwin song performed by Fred Astaire in THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS, a film released in 1937 at the zenith of union power.
To return to the Monopoly board metaphor, the problem in the 1930s was not that there was no bank. It was that there was too much bank -- in the form of the federal government. The government took an argitraty approach to the money supply and made itself the most powerful player. It shoved everyone else aside so that it could monopolize the board. Benjamin Anderson, a Chase economist at the tiem, summed it up in a book about the period: "Preceding chapters have explained the Great Depression of 1930 to 1939 as due to the efforts of the governments and very especially the government of the United States to play God.
OK, this will close for hump day and will finish this topic on friday by explaining the RELEVANCE FOR TODAY in its regard. This should give some of the younger ones an idea of this 1930s age and what set the stage for the Progressive movement to take off and get this country setup for socialism, which you Must agree is fast approaching reality unless Americans wake up. I heard a statement today that sort of fits, that Americans have become a bunch of cowards. And I guess you could make a case for it, but I will hold on to the thought, that when it boils down to push and shove, Americans will rise up to the occasion and show the world the real "who we really are... "Tough and proud." Cheers CJ
More on the ARROGANCE AND DISCRETION section.
Regarding monetary policy, it is clear that there wasn't enough money in the early 1930s. So Roosevelt was not wrong in trying to reflate. But though his general idea was right, the discretionary aspect of his policy was terrifying. As Henry Morgenthau reports in his diaries, prices ser set by the president personally. FDR took the U.S. off the gold standard in April 1933, and by summer he was setting the gold price every morning from his bed. Morgenthau reports that at one point the president ordered the gold price up 21 cents. Why 21, Morgenthau asked. Roosevelt replied, because it's 3 x 7, and three is a lucky number. "Of anyone knew how we set the gold price," wrote Morgenthau in his diary," they would be frightened."
Discretionary policies aimed at cleaning up Wall Street were destructive as well. The New Dealers attacked the wealthy as "money changers" and "Princes of Property." In l937, after his re-election, Roosevelt delivered an inaugural address in which he described government as an instrument of "unimagined power" which should be used to "fashion a higher order of things". This caused business to freeze in its tracks. Companies went on what Roosevelt himself resentfully termed a "capital strike".
These capital strikers mattered because they were even more important to recovery than the Schecters. Consider the case of Alfred Lee Loomis, who had the kind of mind that could contribute significantly to Gross Domestic Product and job creation. During the First World War, he had improved the design of firearms for the U.S. Army. In the 1920s, he became wealthy through his work in investment banking. He moved in a crowd that was developing a new form of utility company that might finally be able to marshal the capital to bring electricity to the American South. But when Loomis saw that the Roosevelt administration washauling utilities executives down to Washington for hearings, he shut down his business, retreated to his Tudor house, and ran a kind of private think tank for his own benefit. We have heard a lot about a labor surfeit in the 1930s. Here is a heresy: What if there was a shortage of TALENT brought on by declaration of class warfare?
Another challenge to the Depression economy was tax increases. While these increases didn't achieve the social equality at which they were aimed, they did significant damage by confiscating too much individual and corporate property. As a result, many individuals and businesses simply reduced or halted production -- especially as teh New Deal wore on. In the late 1930s, banker Leonard Ayres of the Cleveland Trust Company said in teh New Times: "For nearly a decade now the great majority of corporations have been losing money instead of making it."
As for big labor, the Wagner Act of 1935 proved to be quite destructive. It brought on drastic changes at factories including the closed shop -- the exclusion of non-union members. Another innovation it helped bring about was the sit-down strike, which threatened the basic property right of factory owners to close their doors. Most importantly, it gave unions the power to demand higher wages -- and they did. A wage chart for the 20th century shows that real wages in the 1930s were higher than the trend for the rest of the century. This seems perverse, considering the economic conditions at the time. The result was high paying jobs for a few and high unemployment for everyone else. The reality of overpriced labor can be seen in several stock phrases coming out of the Great Depression-- "Nice work if you can get it," for example, was the refrain of a Gershwin song performed by Fred Astaire in THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS, a film released in 1937 at the zenith of union power.
To return to the Monopoly board metaphor, the problem in the 1930s was not that there was no bank. It was that there was too much bank -- in the form of the federal government. The government took an argitraty approach to the money supply and made itself the most powerful player. It shoved everyone else aside so that it could monopolize the board. Benjamin Anderson, a Chase economist at the tiem, summed it up in a book about the period: "Preceding chapters have explained the Great Depression of 1930 to 1939 as due to the efforts of the governments and very especially the government of the United States to play God.
OK, this will close for hump day and will finish this topic on friday by explaining the RELEVANCE FOR TODAY in its regard. This should give some of the younger ones an idea of this 1930s age and what set the stage for the Progressive movement to take off and get this country setup for socialism, which you Must agree is fast approaching reality unless Americans wake up. I heard a statement today that sort of fits, that Americans have become a bunch of cowards. And I guess you could make a case for it, but I will hold on to the thought, that when it boils down to push and shove, Americans will rise up to the occasion and show the world the real "who we really are... "Tough and proud." Cheers CJ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)