Wednesday, December 5, 2012

'The truth has got to come out as to why we let these people die'

 

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/special-ops-vets-demand-benghazi-answers/print/


Listen to the video here and realize we need to know why they let these people die.

Special-ops vets demand Benghazi answers

'The truth has got to come out as to why we let these people die'

Published: 17 hours ago

.With almost three months elapsed since the September terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, a group of special operations veterans is tired of the delay in answers from the Obama administration and is demanding action.

“We view the events in Libya as sort of a jigsaw puzzle that’s been dumped out of the box on to the table, and there’s a heck of a lot of pieces that need to be put together to reveal the big picture,” said retired U.S. Air Force Col. Dick Brauer, co-founder of Special Operations Speaks.  “Unfortunately, this puzzle box had no picture on it so we’re trying to actually figure out what is the truth behind what really happened.”

Special Operations Speaks is insisting that Attorney General Eric Holder choose a special prosecutor to get to the heart of the story in Benghazi – and not just any special prosecutor.  The veterans want a Republican, whom they argue would provide the best chance for a full and honest investigation.

“The only way we can do this is to put pressure on Congress, we feel, to get Eric Holder and the Justice Department to appoint an independent counsel – a Republican independent counsel – because I’m afraid Eric Holder might put the fox in the hen house so to speak, and we would never get the truth,” Col. Brauer told WND’s Greg Corombos. “But the truth has got to come out as to why we let these people die.”

So what are some of the “puzzle pieces” for which Brauer demands answers? Brauer said there’s still no explanation for why the repeated requests for more security in the weeks before the attack were denied.  He wants to know why no air support came while the attacks in Benghazi were unfolding.  Most of all, he wants to know who gave the order to “stand down” to U.S. forces and even two of the men who lost their lives.

“All forces were readily available to go to the aid of the ambassador and his staff – Special Forces strike teams, battalion of the 173rd Airborne Brigade, Special Forces teams in Africa, even the Navy and the Air Force fighters and AC-130 gunships,” Brauer said. ”The questions arise as to why those forces weren’t launched.”

Brauer is especially incensed at the lack of support for Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

“Specifically, the wild cards in all this were the two Navy SEALs, Woods and Doherty, who came to rescue, who did what SEALs do and what warriors are trained to do and that’s run to the sound of the guns.  They were told specifically to stand down,” Brauer said.  “That term was used several times, ‘Stand down.  Don’t do anything.’ Why? Why were they told that? One of the SEALs was designating with a laser designator, painting a target and calling for a gunship. I expect the gunship was nearby if not overhead and they were probably told not to fire. That’s my opinion, but somebody was close by. Otherwise that SEAL would have never lasered the target and spotted on a mortar. That was the mortar that killed him as soon as he did that, so he was expecting support that he never got.”

__._,_.___

AMERICAN REDS STILL BACKING OBAMA

AMERICAN REDS STILL BACKING OBAMA

By Cliff Kincaid

December 4, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Erwin Marquit, a member of the International Department of the Communist
Image002
Party USA (CPUSA), recently told a conference of communist political parties from around the world that communists in the U.S did not run their own candidate for president on November 6 because they worked within the Democratic Party for the reelection of Barack Obama and the victories of “progressive” Democrats to Congress.

“The Communist Party USA not only welcomes the reelection of President Barack Obama, but actively engaged in the electoral campaign for his reelection and for the election of many Democratic Party congressional candidates,” Marquit declared at the conference, hosted by the Lebanese Communist Party.

Under Obama, he said, “…we have been forming Party clubs in states in which we previously had very few or even no members. This influx of new members led us to have a national Party school earlier this year to acquaint new members with the Marxist-Leninist orientation of the Party.”

The communist resurgence under Obama is not surprising, since he has consistently waged a Marxist class warfare campaign as President and was influenced as a young man by Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis.


to the Communist Party USA National Committee on November 17, 2012, national CPUSA chairman Sam Webb declared, “We meet on the heels of an enormous people’s victory.” He explained, “An African American president was reelected to the Presidency, the Democrats unexpectedly strengthened their hand in the Senate and House, new progressive voices, like Elizabeth Warren, are coming to Washington, and victories, including for marriage equality, occurred at the state level.”

The 14th International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties

(IMCWP) was staged under the lengthy slogan, “Strengthen the struggles against escalating imperialist aggressiveness, for satisfying peoples’ socio-economic-democratic rights and aspirations, for socialism.” It was held in Beirut, Lebanon, November 22-25.

Marquit went on in his conference presentation: “In our electoral policy, we seek to cooperate and strengthen our relationship with the more progressive elements in [the] Democratic Party, such as the Progressive Caucus in the U.S. Congress, a group of seventy-six members of the Congress co-chaired by Raúl Grijalva, a Latino from Arizona, and Keith Ellison, an African American Muslim from Minnesota. We also will strengthen our relationship to the Congressional Black Caucus (formed by African Americans in the Congress), which has been the point of origin of innovative policies including an end to the U.S. economic blockade of Cuba, and with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.”

Marquit’s Facebook page includes Reps. Maxine Waters and Keith Ellison among his “likes.”

But when Republican Rep. Allen West in April made sensational charges of communist influence in Congress, through members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, the major media accused West of McCarthyism and making false accusations. The Congressional Progressive Caucus said that West had engaged “in base and childish conversations that lower the high level of discourse Americans rightly expect from their representatives.”

Marquit said the CPUSA is concerned that the Republican Party “still controls the lower house of the Congress and has enough votes in the upper house [the Senate] to block legislative changes of a highly progressive nature…” This “obstacle,” he said, will be addressed and “changed” in the 2014 elections. “We still have the task of strengthening the center-left alliance and enriching its anti-imperialist character,” he said.

The recommendations from the conference included “Promoting the

international front against imperialism and the support for the international anti-imperialist mass organizations, the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), the World Peace Council (WPC), the World Federation of Democratic Youth (WFDY), and the Women’s International Democratic Federation (WIDF), in the specific framework of every country.”

These so-called “international anti-imperialist mass organizations” are old Soviet front groups. Like the CPUSA, they were funded by Moscow during the Cold War and before the “collapse” of international communism.

The activities of the International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Partiesdemonstrate that international communism is very much alive and well.

Marquit praised Obama for “a major expansion of the people’s access to financing of their health care” and “taking some modest but real steps” on the issue of “justice for immigrant workers and their families.”

Referring to the Obama coalition that worked for his re-election, the CPUSA statement said, “…we saw the necessity of a policy of center-left alliances in order not to separate ourselves from the people’s struggles for dealing with the far right onslaught. The basis of such an alliance now includes the labor movement, organizations of African Americans and Latinos, the women’s movement, gay and lesbian civil rights groups, and organizations of the elderly and retirees.”

Turning to foreign policy and referring to Marxist regimes in such countries as Venezuela, Marquit said, “We welcome the election of several progressive, anti-imperialist governments in Latin America and oppose U.S. attempts to undermine them. This leftward shift in Latin America, opening a path to possible socialist development, is of tremendous importance in the worldwide anti-imperialist struggle.”

In regard to the Middle East, Marquit said, “With the elections now over, there is a prospect that growing support in the United States for a just Middle East solution can induce President Obama once again to put pressure on the Israeli government to end the settlement expansion and resume negotiations leading to such a [two-state] solution.”

His statement concluded, “While the victory of Obama is a welcome aid for us in our domestic struggles, we still face the challenge of mobilizing mass pressure on his administration to reverse the imperialist character of U.S. foreign policy. The CPUSA will pursue this formidable task vigorously in alliance with domestic progressive forces and with our comrades in the Communist and Workers’ Parties and their allies throughout the world.”

As a footnote, Marquit is a Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Minnesota, where he had received mixed reviews. On the “Rate My Professors” website, one student said, “Worst class in my college career. Erwin spent the 2.5 hours rambling on about being a diehard Stalinist. This man put everyone to sleep! However, you can still score a good grade (A-B) without actually reading the (mountain of) text books or attending the lectures. But why waste time and money?”


Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues. One of Cliff's books, "Global Bondage: The UN Plan to Rule the World" is still awailable.

Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.

Web Site: www.AIM.org

E-Mail: cliff.kincaid@aim

__._,_.___

Military emails show that NO U.S. sailors witnessed Osama bin Laden's secret burial at sea

Revealed: Military emails show that NO U.S. sailors witnessed Osama bin Laden's secret burial at sea

  • Emails describe how Osama bin Laden's body was washed, wrapped in a white sheet and slid into the sea after religious remarks in Arabic
  • Defense Department says it cannot find any images or videos of bin Laden's aboard USS Carl Vinson
  • Pentagon failed to produce autopsy report, death certificate or results of DNA tests
  • Military officials referred to bin Laden's body as 'package' in coded missives
  • Release of emails mark first public disclosure of information about bin Laden's May 1, 2011 death

By Daily Mail Reporter
PUBLISHED: 19:17 EST, 21 November 2012 | UPDATED: 19:17 EST, 21 November 2012

Internal emails among U.S. military officers indicate that no American sailors watched Osama bin Laden's burial at sea from the USS Carl Vinson, and traditional Islamic procedures were followed during the secret ceremony.

The emails, obtained by The Associated Press through the Freedom of Information Act, are heavily blacked out, but are the first public disclosure of government information about the al-Qaida leader's death. The emails were released Wednesday by the Defense Department.

Bin Laden was killed on May 1, 2011, by a Navy SEAL team that assaulted his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

One email stamped secret and sent on May 2 by a senior Navy officer briefly describes how bin Laden's body was washed, wrapped in a white sheet, and then placed in a weighted bag.

According to another message from the Vinson's public affairs officer, only a small group of the ship's leadership was informed of the burial.

‘Traditional procedures for Islamic burial was followed,’ the May 2 email from Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette reads. ‘The deceased's body was washed (ablution) then placed in a white sheet. The body was placed in a weighted bag.

‘A military officer read prepared religious remarks, which were translated into Arabic by a native speaker. After the words were complete, the body was placed on a prepared flat board, tipped up, whereupon the deceased's body slid into the sea.’

Image001
 
Final destination: Bin Laden's body was taken to an unknown location aboard USS Carl Vinson and dropped into the sea, but the Defense Department says that it cannot find any images showing the terrorist mastermind's remains on the ship

Image002
 
Fallen mastermind: In this undated file image from video seized from bin Laden's walled compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, the al Qaeda leader watches TV

Image003
 
Stronghold: Members of the anti-terrorism squad are seen surrounding the compound where bin Laden was killed by Navy SEAL Team 6 in Abbottabad May 4, 2011

The email also included a cryptic reference to the intense secrecy surrounding the mission.

‘The paucity of documentary evidence in our possession is a reflection of the emphasis placed on operational security during the execution of this phase of the operation,’ Gaouette's message reads.

Image004
 
Long-awaited news: U.S. President Barack Obama is pictured after announcing live on television the death of Osama bin Laden from the East Room of the White House in Washington May 1, 2011

Recipients of the email included Adm. Mike Mullen, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. James Mattis, the top officer at U.S. Central Command. Mullen retired from the military in September 2011.

Earlier, Gaouette, then the deputy commander of the Navy's Fifth Fleet, and another officer used code words to discuss whether the helicopters carrying the SEALs and bin Laden's body had arrived on the Vinson.

‘Any news on the package for us?’ he asked Rear Adm. Samuel Perez, commander of the carrier strike group that included the Vinson.

‘FEDEX delivered the package,’ Perez responded. ‘Both trucks are safely enroute home base.’

Although the Obama administration has pledged to be the most transparent in American history, it is keeping a tight hold on materials related to the bin Laden raid.

In a response to separate requests from the AP for information about the mission, the Defense Department said in March that it could not locate any photographs or video taken during the raid or showing bin Laden's body. It also said it could not find any images of bin Laden's body on the Vinson.

The Pentagon also said it could not find any death certificate, autopsy report or results of DNA identification tests for bin Laden, or any pre-raid materials discussing how the government planned to dispose of bin Laden's body if he were killed.

Image005
 
Historic moment: In this May 1, 2011, image, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden receive an update on the bin Laden mission in the Situation Room

The Defense Department also refused to confirm or deny the existence of helicopter maintenance logs and reports about the performance of military gear used in the raid.

One of the stealth helicopters that carried the SEALs to Abbottabad crashed during the mission and its wreckage was left behind. People who lived near bin Laden's compound took photos of the disabled chopper.

The CIA, which ran the bin Laden raid and has special legal authority to keep information from ever being made public, has not responded to AP's request for records about the mission.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236617/Revealed-Military-emails-NO-U-S-sailors-witnessed-Osama-bin-Ladens-secret-burial-sea.html

__._,_.___

There was this gun - Then the aircraft for it

First, there was this gun...

Untitled_attachment_02031

It was developed by General Electric, the "We bring good things to life" people.

It's one of the modern-day Gatling guns.

It shoots very big bullets...

It shoots them very quickly...

Someone said, "Let's put it in an airplane."

Someone else said, "Better still, let's build an airplane around it."

Untitled_attachment_02034

So they did. And "they" were the Fairchild Republic airplane people.

And they had done such a good job with an airplane they developed back in WWII .....called the P-47 Thunderbolt!

They decided to call it the A10 Thunderbolt’s..AKA the Warthog

They made it so it was very good at flying low and slow and shooting things with that fabulous gun.

But since it did fly low and slow, they made it bulletproof, or almost so.

A lot of bad guys have found you can shoot an A10 with anything from a pistol to a 23mm Soviet cannon and it just keeps on flying and shooting.

When they got through, it looked like this.

Untitled_attachment_02037

It's not sleek and sexy like an F18 or the stealthy Raptors and such, but I think it's such a great airplane because it does what it does better than any other plane in the world.

It kills tanks.

Not only tanks, as Sadam Hussein's boys found out to their horror, but armored personnel carriers, radar stations, locomotives, bunkers, fuel depots... just about anything the bad guys thought was bulletproof turned out to be easy pickings for this beast.

 

Untitled_attachment_02040


See those engines. One of them alone will fly this plane.

The pilot sits in a very thick titanium alloy "bathtub."

That's typical of the design.

They were smart enough to make every part the same whether mounted on the left side or right side of the plane, like landing gear, for instance.

Because the engines are mounted so high (away from ground debris) and the landing gear uses such low pressure tires, it can operate from a damaged airport, interstate highway, plowed field, or dirt road.

Everything is redundant.

They have two of almost everything.

Sometimes they have three of something.

Like flight controls, there's triple redundancy of those,
and even if there is a total failure of the double hydraulic system, there is a set of manual flying controls.

Untitled_attachment_02043

 

Capt. Kim Campbell sustained this damage over Bagdad and flew for another hour before returning to base.

But, back to that gun.

It's so hard to grasp just how powerful it is.

 

Untitled_attachment_02046


This is the closest I could find to showing you just what this cartridge is all about.

What the guy is holding is NOT the 30mm round, but a "little" 50 Browning machine gun round and the 20mm cannon round which has been around for a long time.

The 30mm is MUCH bigger.

Untitled_attachment_02049

Down at the bottom are the .50 BMG and 20x102 Vulcan the fellow was holding.

At the bottom right is the bad boy we're discussing.

Let's get some perspective here: The .223 Rem (M16 rifle round) is fast.

It shoots a 55 or so grain bullet at about 3300 feet/sec, give or take.

It's the fastest of all those rounds shown (except one).

When you move up to the ..30 caliber rounds, the bullets jump up in weight to 160-200 grains. Speeds run from about 2600 to 3000 fps or so.

The .338 Lapua is the king of the sniper rifles these days and shoots a 350 grain bullet at 2800 fps or so.

They kill bad guys at over a mile with that one.

The 50 BMG is really big.

Everyone who picks it up thinks it's some sort of fake, unless they know big ammo.

It's really huge with a bullet that weighs 750 grains and goes as fast the Lapua.

I don't have data on the Vulcan, but hang on to your hat.

The bullet for the 30x173 Avenger has an aluminum jacket around a spent uranium core and weighs 6560 grains (yes, over 100 times as heavy as the M16 bullet, and flies through the air at 3500 fps (which is faster than the M16 as well).

The gun shots at a rate of 4200 rounds per minute, Yes, four thousand.

Pilots typically shoot either one- or two-second burst which set loose 70 to 150 rounds.


The system is optimized for shooting at 4,000 feet

OK, the best for last.

You've got a pretty good idea of how big that cartridge is, but I'll bet you're like me and you don't fully appreciate how big the GA GAU-8 Avenger really is.

Take a look.

Untitled_attachment_02052


Each of those seven barrels is 112" long.

That's almost ten feet.
The entire gun is 19-1/2 feet long.

Think how impressive it would look set up in your living room.

Oh, by the way, it doesn't eject the empty shells but runs them back into the storage drum. There's just so dang many flying out, they felt it might damage the aircraft.

Oh yeah, I forgot, they can hang those bomb and rocket things on 'em too, just in case.

After all, it is an "airplane"!

Like I said, this is a beautiful design.

Untitled_attachment_02055

I'm glad it's ours.


DEFINITION OF A VETERAN

A veteran - whether active duty, retired, National Guard or Reserve - is someone who, at one point in his or her life, wrote a blank check made payable to "The United States of America" for an amount of "up to and including my life."

That is Honor, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it. 

Krauthammer: Why was there war in Gaza?

Why was there war in Gaza?

By Charles Krauthammer

Image002
Why was there an Israel-Gaza war in the first place? Resistance to the occupation, say Hamas and many in the international media.

 

What occupation? Seven years ago, in front of the world, Israel pulled out of Gaza. It dismantled every settlement, withdrew every soldier, evacuated every Jew, leaving nothing and no one behind. Except for the greenhouses in which the settlers had grown fruit and flowers for export. These were left intact to help Gaza's economy — only to be trashed when the Palestinians took over.

 

Israel then declared its border with Gaza to be an international frontier, meaning that it renounced any claim to the territory and considered it an independent entity. In effect, Israel had created the first Palestinian state ever, something never granted by fellow Muslims — neither the Ottoman Turks nor the Egyptians who brutally occupied Gaza for two decades before being driven out by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War.

 

Israel wanted nothing more than to live in peace with this independent Palestinian entity. After all, the world had incessantly demanded that Israel give up land for peace.

 

It gave the land. It got no peace.

 

Image004

The Gaza Palestinians did not reciprocate. They voted in Hamas, who then took over in a military putsch and turned their newly freed Palestine into an armed camp from which to war against Israel. It has been war ever since.

 

Interrupted by the occasional truce, to be sure. But for Hamas a truce — hudna — is simply a tactic for building strength for the next round. It is never meant to be enduring, never meant to offer peace.

But why, given that there is no occupation of Gaza anymore? Because Hamas considers all of Israel occupied, illegitimate, a cancer, a crime against humanity, to quote the leaders of Iran, Hamas' chief patron and arms supplier. Hamas' objective, openly declared, is to "liberate" — i.e. destroy — Tel Aviv and the rest of pre-1967 Israel. Indeed, it is Hamas' raison d'etre.

 

Hamas first killed Jews with campaigns of suicide bombings. After Israel built a nearly impenetrable fence, it went to rockets fired indiscriminately at civilians in populated areas.

 

What did Hamas hope to gain from this latest round of fighting, which it started with a barrage of about 150 rockets into Israel? To formally translate Hamas' recent strategic gains into a new, more favorable status quo with Israel. It works like this:

 

Hamas' new strength comes from two sources. First, its new rocketry, especially the Fajr-5, smuggled in from Iran, that can now reach Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, putting 50 percent of Israel's population under its guns.

 

Image006
Second, Hamas has gained strategic strength from changes in the regional environment. It has acquired the patronage and protection of important Middle Eastern states as a result of the Arab Spring and the Islamist reversal in Turkey.

For 60 years, non-Arab Turkey had been a reliable ally of Israel. The vicious turnaround instituted by its Islamist prime minister, Recep Erdogan, reached its apogee last week when he called Israel a terrorist state.

 

Egypt is now run by Hamas' own mother organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is simply the Palestinian wing. And the emir of Qatar recently visited Gaza, leaving behind a promise of a cool $400 million.

 

Hamas' objective was to guarantee no further attacks on its leaders or on its weaponry, launch sites and other terror and rocket infrastructure. And the lifting of Israel's military blockade,

Image008
which would allow a flood of new and even more deadly weapons. In other words, immunity and inviolability during which time Hamas could build unmolested its arsenal of missiles — until it is ready to restart the war on more favorable terms.

 

Yet another hudna, this one brokered and guaranteed by Egypt and Turkey, regional powers Israel has to be careful not to offend. A respite for rebuilding, until Hamas' Gaza becomes Hezbollah South, counterpart to the terror group to Israel's north, with 50,000 Iranian- and Syrian-supplied rockets that effectively deter any Israeli pre-emptive attack.

 

With the declaration of a cease-fire Wednesday, Israel seems to have successfully resisted these demands, although there may be some cosmetic changes to the embargo. Which means that in any future fighting, Israel will retain the upper hand.

 

Israel has once again succeeded in defending itself. But, yet again, only until the next round, which, as the night follows the day, will come. Hamas will see to that.

 

Charles Krauthammer is a Washington Post columnist.

The above column was published in the Chicago Tribune on November 26, 2012

                     

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Bush Tax Cuts Narrowed Budget Gap

 View Enlarged Image

While President Obama insists the Bush tax cuts caused the recession and record deficits, his own economists say otherwise.

He might want to consult their data for the truth.

Kicking off fiscal cliff negotiations last month, Obama said: "What I'm not going to do is extend Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% that we can't afford and, according to economists, will have the least positive impact on our economy."

During the White House press conference, he added, "If we're going to be serious about deficit reduction, we've got to do it in a balanced way."

Obama argued voters made it clear in the election that they don't want to go back to Republican policies that "cost" the Treasury revenues and "blew up the deficit," as he told them repeatedly during the campaign.

The Washington media by and large share these assumptions. And they're driving the debate over what to do about the federal budget crisis before Jan. 1, when the tax cuts and spending programs are set to expire.

But the assumptions are faulty, based largely on political demagoguery rather than hard numbers — including ones certified by Obama's own fiscal policy advisers and bean counters in the White House.

Turn to Pages 411-413 of his 2012 Economic Report of the President, published by the Council of Economic Advisers. They show that "the math," as Obama is wont to say, in fact does add up for tax cuts.

After President Bush in late May 2003 signed the largest tax cut since President Reagan — including dropping the top marginal rate to 35% from 39.6% — government receipts from individual income taxes rose from $793.7 billion to a peak of $1.16 trillion in 2007, when the mortgage crisis began, a 47% jump.

Stronger economic growth expanded the tax base and brought in so much revenue that Bush more than halved the deficit over that period. The budget gap plunged to $160.7 billion from $377.6 billion, according to the president's report.

Perhaps the most impressive statistic appears on Page 412, one that undercuts Obama's core argument against continuing the Bush tax cuts.

The post-tax-cut surge in economic growth and tax revenues helped drive down the deficit from 3.5% of gross domestic product in 2004 to 2.6% in 2005, to 1.9% in 2006 and to a manageable 1.2% in 2007.

Based on Bush fiscal policies, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected budget deficits of 0.7% to 1.5% of GDP for the years 2008 through 2011. The CBO even predicted surpluses for the subsequent years through 2018.

What derailed the forecast was the subprime mortgage crisis of 2008.

This financial anomaly threw the economy into a deep recession, beginning in December 2007, and forced a collapse in federal tax revenues.

As a result, the deficit-to-GDP ratio shot up to 10% in 2009 and has remained around that level, thanks to record Obama spending.

(The recession technically ended in June 2009.)

Obama's economic report shows that the average deficit-to-GDP ratio during the entire Bush administration — 2001 to 2009 — was 2%, which is well below the 50-year average of 3%.

During the Obama years, in contrast, the same deficit ratio has averaged 9.1%.

The Bush tax cuts did not "cost" the Treasury revenues. Nor did they increase income inequality.

When fully implemented, they increased the portion of the income tax burden that fell on the wealthiest Americans.

The top 1% of taxpayers went from paying 38.4% of overall taxes to 39.1%, while the bottom 50% saw their share drop from 3.4% to 3.1%.

And as a percentage of the economy, deficits shrank to historically low levels.

Record red ink flowed much later as the housing market toppled and government spending shot up.

New spending on welfare programs and Obama's $1.9 trillion national health care entitlement threaten only to compound the budget crisis.

Yet he proposes backloading any promised spending controls while front-loading "revenue increases" from tax hikes.

On Tuesday, December 4, 2012, Automatic Steam wrote:

 

L: Doug, after conversations like the one we had last week, we often get letters from angry readers who accuse you of hating America, disloyalty, and perhaps even treason. These people don’t know or understand what I do about you — that you love the idea that was America. It’s the United State it has become for which you have nothing but contempt. Perhaps we should try to explain this to them?

D: I doubt it would work; it’s a tough row to hoe, trying to explain things to people who are so set in their thinking that they truly and literally don’t want to hear anything that might threaten their notions. A person who feels threatened by ideas and who responds with emotion is acting irrationally. How can we have a discussion with someone whose emotion trumps their reason? How do we even begin to untangle the thinking of people who [gathered two weeks ago] to give thanks for the bounty produced by freedom and hard work — the famous puritan work ethic — by eating a turkey bought with food stamps?

But we can outline the ideas, for the record.

L: I’ll bring a copy if they ever do put you on trial for thoughtcrime — which is frighteningly close to being real these days and called treason to boot.

D: It’s not just close; it’s here. Just try telling an unapproved joke in a security line in an airport these days.

L: True enough. Where to begin?

D: At the beginning. America was founded as a confederation of independent countries — that’s what a state is. Or was, in our language. The original United States of America was a confederation of countries that banded together for protection against larger and more powerful countries they feared might be hostile. This is not a disputed interpretation of history, but as solid a fact as the study of history produces — and yet a largely neglected one.

L: We did cover this ground briefly in our conversations on the Civil War and the Constitution.

D: So we did... the short version being that the US Constitution was essentially a coup; the delegates to what we now call the Constitutional Convention were not empowered to replace the existing government — only to improve upon the Articles of Confederation between the then-independent states. The framers of the Constitution drafted it with the notion of a national government already in place, but calmed fears of loss of state sovereignty by calling the new government the “United States of America” — a verbal sleight of hand that worked for over half a century. Then the southern states decided to exercise what these words imply, their right to leave the union. While slavery was and is a wholesale criminal activity I object to in every way possible, the southern states did have the right to secede, both legally and ethically. But the question was settled by force, not reason, and the wrong side won.

L: Another coup?

D: More like an exposure of the first one for the whole world to see. But by then it was way too late. Despite this, the relative freedom of the US — because it was for many years far freer than other countries — made it possible for artists, engineers, inventors, and businesspeople to flourish and create a society more wealthy and powerful than any the world had ever seen. This is what I call the idea of America — the America That Was.

But the seeds of destruction were already sown at the very beginning — with the Alien and Sedition Acts being perhaps the first highly visible step in the wrong direction. Then came the forceful assertion of one national government, with states reduced to administrative regions via the War of Southern Secession, from 1861- ’65. I’m no fan of state governments, incidentally, but at least they’re smaller and closer to their subjects than the federal government. Another major step in the wrong direction occurred with the Spanish-American War of 1898, where the US acquired an overseas empire by force. The next major step downhill was the creation of the Federal Reserve and the income tax, both in 1913, just in time for World War I. It took time for these things to make the system crash, because it was still a fairly free economy.

L: But crash it did in 1929...

D: Yes. And it led to the Great Depression of 1929-’46, which lasted so long entirely because of the unmitigated disaster of the New Deal . The New Deal injected socialist-fascist ideas into mainstream American thought like a poisonous acid, corrupting the heart of the idea of America that once made the place great. The process was completed with Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, which really established the basis of the welfare-warfare state. It truly set the stage for the total ethical, economic, social, political, and even military disaster now unfolding before our eyes.

Still, the beating heart of the idea of America — which is to say both social and economic freedom — took time to corrupt. Like a strong man who doesn’t know he’s headed for a heart attack, American culture didn’t really peak until the 1950s. The bullet-finned 1959 Cadillac is a symbol of this peak, in my mind.

L: Then we had Johnson and his “guns and butter” policy — War in Vietnam and War on Poverty at the same time — followed by tricky Dick kicking the last leg out of under the stool by taking the dollar off an even theoretical gold standard.

D: Yes. Nixon was arguably even a worse president than Johnson, with the devaluation of the dollar in 1971 and his creation of the War on Drugs. Things have spiraled out of control since then. We’ve written reams about these last decades and how they led to and shaped what’s happening now. But I have to say, the focus has been largely financial.

L: Which is as it should be, in a publication designed to help investors navigate these turbulent times.

D: Yes, but the corruption goes way beyond that, beyond even the senseless wars and idiotic foreign policy we discussed last week. America, once the land of the brave and the home of the free, is well on its way to becoming a police state — worse than any we’ve seen in the past, including the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.

L: How could it get worse than that?

D: Because Big Brother has better technology now, allowing possible manipulation and control of the population that Stalin and Hitler never dreamed of. And because the US used to be such a great place, a lot of people have been tricked into believing it’s the same as it was. But there’s no more resemblance between the America of old and the US of today than there was between the Rome of the Republic and the Rome of the later emperors. Furthermore, most Americans have conflated the government with society. They’re not only different things, but often antithetical.

L: I thought you said you’re an optimist!

D: I am. But that’s for the survivors who make it through the wringer the global economy — and every person on this planet — is about to go through. I keep telling you that the coming Greater Depression is going to be even worse than I think it is. You may think I’m joking, but I’m not. I do think that, primarily for reasons we discussed in our conversation on technology, what comes next will not only be even better than I imagine, it will be better than I can imagine... but first we have to go through the wringer. I see no way around it. I truly don’t.

L: Okay, I know you believe that. Can you substantiate the police-state claim?

D: Well, rather than give you anecdotal evidence — of which there are masses more each day — let me refer to a rather perceptive blog post by a George Washington law professor named Jonathan Turley, titled "10 Reasons Why the US Is No Longer the Land of the Free". I’m sure I don’t see everything the way the professor does, but the list struck me as quite accurate and very important for people to understand.

L: I’m sure I don’t want to hear this, but okay, shoot.

D: [Chuckles] Maybe you don’t, but I know you value the truth. These points underline something I’ve said for years: the Bill of Rights is a completely dead letter. It’s essentially meaningless and rarely even gets the benefit of lip service. Quoting it will result in derision, if not arrest as a dangerous radical.

Frankly, I didn’t think the civil liberties situation could get worse than it was under Cheney-Bush, but it has. Obama has repealed none of what they did — and added more...


Boehner, GOP Leaders Purge Conservatives from Powerful Committees U

 

Boehner, GOP Leaders Purge Conservatives from Powerful Committees UPDATE: Boehner Scoffs

House Speaker John Boehner and GOP leadership have removed several conservative House members from their respective powerful committee positions, Breitbart News has learned. Effective next Congress, leadership pulled Kansas Republican Rep. Tim Huelskamp, Michigan Republican Rep. Justin Amash and Arizona Republican Rep. David Schweikert off committees from which they could exert conservative pressure on fiscal matters. Amash and Huelskamp were pulled from the Budget Committee and Schweikert from the Financial Services Committee. Huelskamp, a freshman elected during the 2010 tea party wave, thinks the leadership move to pull him from the powerful committee is revenge for him standing up for...