Statism in America

Friends,
My wife subscribes to a publication put out by Ligonier Ministries called Tabletalk. In addition to daily bible devotionals, each month it contains numerous articles written by leading Christian authors. I read one in the August edition written by Dr. R. C. Sproul, Founder and Chairman of Ligonier Ministries entitled “Statism.” In it he notes that he asked Dr. Francis Schaeffer his “biggest concern for the future of the church in America?” Dr Schaeffer said immediately, “Statism.” Dr. Sproul goes on to define statism as a world view philosophy that the federal government is the ultimate authority removing God from His position of supremacy.

A subset of this philosophy is the devolution of authority from statehood to statism. I am not going to address the removal of God from the public square, even though the evolution of the “separation of church and state” has certainly played a major role in this trend. Instead, I am going to look at the evolution of American society as an entitlement society, thereby moving ever forward to statism.

In the early years of the US the country was, for the most part, an agrarian society. Key among the characteristics of this society was self reliance and dependency on family. Each family knew that if they were to make their way in life they would have to do it themselves and maybe with assistance from their neighbors, if they had neighbors. Not in the equation was the government.

Over the last 200 years, it has become more acceptable and even expected for government to hand out those essential elements of survival as basic subsistence with no strings attached. This tendency became more evident under the Great Society of Lyndon Johnson. Barry Goldwater phrased it well when he said, “The government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.”

In a speech Johnson gave at the University of Michigan on 22 May 1964, he discussed the ills of America and called on the students to work toward solving those ills. Among other things, he pointed out the “crushing weight of poverty,” the overcrowded, understaffed classrooms with out- dated curricula.

To solve these problems, he it would “require us to create new concepts of cooperation, a creative federalism, between the National Capital and the leaders of local communities.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines federalism as, “the theory or advocacy of federal political orders, where final authority is divided between sub-units and a center.” This is the concept that the Founders envisioned when they wrote the Constitution.

So, what did Johnson mean by “creative federalism?”In his speech, he urges the audience to “join in the battle to give every citizen an escape from the crushing weight of poverty…. To join in the battle to build the Great Society, to prove that our material progress is only the foundation on which we will build a richer life of mind and spirit.” These are wonderful thoughts and goals. No one will debate that. However, Johnson’s intent was to make those goals achievable through government action, not through the sweat and perseverance of the individual. As a result, the welfare rolls jumped drastically as we tried to “distribute the wealth” as is being touted by Senator Obama.

Our country had been on an ever-steepening slide toward statism since the New Deal days, but Johnson accelerated that slide. It was further accelerated to include the commercial side our lives under President Carter when the Community Reinvestment act was passed. This forced mortgage companies to make loans that were questionable, at best. This placed a lot of bad loans under the umbrella of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

President Clinton took up the mantle of statism by “encouraging” lenders to make loans available to disadvantaged borrowers to make home ownership more available. This resulted in massive numbers of people buying homes they could not afford. Remember when the Clinton Administration changed the depository regulations for banks in the early to mid ‘90s? You could buy HUD housed for pennies-on-the-dollar. I contend that these actions were a direct result of the Federal Government’s push toward statism.

Now we can fast-forward to a few weeks ago when Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac imploded (along with a number of very large financial institutions). The Democrats are blaming the current administration for this implosion. Talk about mendacity! They are the ones that caused the crisis but are putting the blame directly on the Republican administration.

With the $700B bail-out, not to mention the billions spent to bail of earlier failures, we have steepened the slippery slope to complete statism to almost vertical. Treasury Secretary Paulson is now going about buying large blocks of bank stocks, putting the Federal Government right in the middle of the market square. In many cases, the banks have no choice about the purchase. The federal government is, in effect conducting a hostile takeover. While I am no constitutional scholar, there seems to be a serious constitutional issue here.

I have urged my Congressman and Senators to vigorously oppose these measures. Congressman Lamborn has done so. Unfortunately, our two senators supported the bail-out. Each and every citizen in America has had a huge debt burden placed on them. We have now sunk to not only the concept of individual statism, but now commercial statism has put a pall over our entire economy.

It is time that we put people into office that will vigorously work to reverse this trend and get us back on the track set out by the Founders.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.

Dan

Points to Ponder

Friends,
I normally do not post email exchanges but the one below from a friend was very interesting and I thought I would share it. It is done so with her permission.
Enjoy
Dan

From:
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:34 AM
To: 'Daniel C. Lanotte'

Subject: Points to Ponder

Hi Dan, The Dems and press are trying to destroy Joe the Plumber by showing he has no plumbing license, yet he said he worked for a plumbing company- has he ever actually said he worked for the company as a plumber? He may fill some other role in the company. There are also other routes to learning plumbing beside Union ones of which he may have availed himself, and it is the union that is screaming the loudest right now because they supported Obama.

At our caucus, all I heard was “So and So should be our nominee because he is electable”. Isn’t it about time (PAST TIME) that Reps start picking the right man and making him (or her) electable.! And stop letting the liberal press pick our candidates by suddenly promoting the man they think is most defeatable (or will “suck up” to them- pardon my French). McCain quite suddenly became the front runner after much hype in the press created a “Bandwagon” effect among Reps causing Mitt Romney to pull out. In (public) high school back in the late 50s/early 60s we had a class called “Problems of Democracy” in which we learned propaganda techniques and how to spot them and avoid believing them over our common sense. Bandwagon was one, “The Big Lie” was another whereby a lie is told often enough that people believe it (Joseph Goebbels’, Hitler’s propaganda minister’s, favorite technique). All one need do is listen to Obama or Biden (who said in his debate with Gov. Palin that Obama did not say he would meet with Achmadinijad and was never called on it, but you could see by the look on Palin’s face that she was appalled)- if their lips are moving, they are lying. McCain has done his share of “misstatements” too, and it is time we, including the press, start calling a lie a lie and start pointing out blatant efforts at propaganda.

I have forgotten the names of some of the other forms of propaganda, but they include one very commonly used by the Dems, possibly named “Substitution”- accuse the other guy of what you yourself are doing to refocus blame on your opponent. The Dems (Barney Frank and others) started this whole mortgage mess by forcing loans to go to many, especially the poor, who could not sustain the payments and were doomed from the beginning to eventually default on them. Now that it has hit the fan, the Dems accuse the Reps, the Bush Administration, of causing the entire mess when it was primarily the Dems who started it.

Another form of Propaganda is the use of celebrity to gain prestige for your candidate/cause. Get enough Hollywood luminaries to speak for your guy and the other guy looks like a “Nobody”. And who wants to vote fore a “Nobody”.

Just my 2 cents worth for the day.

My Reply:

S ,
There are certain issues on which you and I will respectfully disagree. This is not one of them. There are a lot of us who were very surprised when Romney pulled out as soon as he did. We have all come to the conclusion that the press “fell in love” with McCain because they saw Romney as a tougher competitor and unbeatable. Notice how soon they turned on McCain as soon as he became the only Republican in the game. They want Obama to win. This is not just my ranting. The MSM has bought into the “Globalization Effect” to the extent that they have sold their souls to make it happen.

Another area you have nailed it on is “Isn’t it about time (PAST TIME) that Reps start picking the right man and making him (or her) electable.!” This is another area where a number of us are working. The primary target for 2010 is Senator Salazar. He is identified as one of the most “suck-up” Kennedy Democrats in the Senate. I email him on almost every issue that comes up. To his credit, he never ignores me; he has always responded with a position paper. To his detriment, he is almost always on the wrong side of the Constitution. Most of his positions are not Constitutionally supportable. As you know I am just a simple carpenter and if I can recognize unconstitutional behavior that should be an indication that a lot of other Coloradoans will be able to do the same. I have saved all of his emails and have the evidence to back up my contention.

You also talk about “The Big Lie.” Boy! Is that an accurate assessment. I would like to refer you to two articles. The first is by Mike Gallagher on Townhall.com (first attachment). He does an excellent job discussing this issue. The second article you should have received last night on one of my postings and is available at http://carpentersmate.blobspot.com/. Andy Pico has been called “Mr. NORAD” because of his years of experience and astute insights into national defense/security. His study into “The Big Lie” of global warming has drawn a lot of fire from “experts” who are sucking on the big money bottle. In my book, that is something of which to be proud.

Thank you for your comments. With your permission, I would like to pass this exchange around.
Dan

Daniel C. Lanotte
dlanotte@falconbroadband.net
719-683-5506

Audacity of Mendacity - Guest Article

Friends,
The following article was written by Mr. Andy Pico, who has been published on these pages in the past and, I hope, will be so many times in the future.
Enjoy,
Dan

Our country is on the verge of potentially electing a new Triumvirate of Obama, Pelosi and Reid together with The One’s sidekick, the Bumbling Biden, with the most radical, socialist agenda this country has ever seen in national politics. The Triumvirate could have a potentially filibuster proof senate majority able to ram through whatever far left radical measures dictated to the Triumvirate by their political backers within such groups as ACORN (currently under investigation for massive interstate voter fraud), Moveon.org and such Soros funded groups.

This coalition has a radical, leftist agenda that has nothing to do with preserving individual freedom, full employment, a robust economic climate or any of the key moral or social values this country has developed. Their entire methodology is built on deceit, fraud and intimidation of political opponents.

This Triumvirate has manufactured a great economic message focused on the current meltdown of the financial markets, aided and abetted by a complicit press which combines economic illiteracy with historical ignorance. The seeds of the current financial crisis were planted by the Democrat administration of Carter in the Community Redevelopment ACT and expanded by Clinton with the assistance of ACORN to strong arm lending institutions into making bad loans. The brief period of Republican control was unable to reform this coming, and predicted, financial meltdown due to Democrat obstructionism in Congress and in the courts.

Bill Clinton - "I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was president, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

I certainly would not be one to call the Former President a liar.

The facts, unreported by a complicit press, is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were established by Democrats, staffed by Democrats, (the former executives of these failed institutions are currently part of the economics team on Obama’s campaign staff), “regulated” by Democrats and provided campaign contributions with taxpayer guaranteed funds to Democrats. Obama, in his extraordinarily short time in the US Senate, managed to skim the 3rd largest amount, barely behind the Democrat chairman of the committee which oversaw those organizations. While technically legal, this defines the worst kind of corruption.

That the architects of our current financial crisis are likely to be rewarded with political control and given the responsibility to fix their own mess is one of the travesties of the scandal that is the current journalistic abandonment of any pretense of standards or integrity. That the Bumbling Biden could utter the most outrageous and complete fabrication of the history of Hezbollah in Lebanon and our involvement there along with the utter fantasy of his proposed intervention, and not be held to account by a press more interested in investigating 25 year old traffic tickets by Governor Palin’s relatives and whether Joe has a current plumber’s license, has to rank as one of the most despicable failures of modern and corrupt journalism.

The economic measures being proposed by those who have brought you this looming recession will repeat the governmental economic idiocy that ushered in the Great Depression.

Here in Colorado the Democrat candidate for the Senate is one of those responsible for restricting energy development resulting in high gas prices and utility bills, based in part by the fraud of man-made global warming and extreme environmental over-regulation. His possible election will not only reward his own complicity in our economic problems but help hand a filibuster proof Senate majority to this radical and irresponsible Socialist Triumvirate.

Rarely has so much been at stake. On positions of the economy, conduct of the war, worldwide anti-terrorist operations, opposition to the state sponsors of international terrorism, energy development, phony climate control, misguided tax policies and most of all, a culture of death which will include taxpayer funded abortions; this Radical Triumvirate is far outside of the political mainstream.

Do not reward this Audacity of Mendacity with political victory and the near dictatorial control over our economy by economic illiterates. Here in Colorado, vote to elect Doug Lamborn, Scott Starin, Wayne Wolf, Marilyn Musgrave, Mike Coffman, George Lilly and John Lerew to their Congressional seats; Bob Schaffer to the US Senate; Sarah Palin for Vice President and that other guy running with her for President.

Pico, of Colorado Springs, is a retired navy commander, naval Flight officer and economist.

As always, your comments and discussions are welcome

Why We Must Defend the American Way of Life

Friends,
The following article was requested by a Colorado publication that may or may not use it. It is a bit long, but I thought I would make it available.
Dan

When I was asked to write a piece on “Why We Must Defend the American Way of Life,” I was flattered and immediately accepted the request. Then I looked around for source material and came to the realization that I have not written on an assigned topic in many years. I always get the urge to pontificate on a subject and sit down and “tickle the plastics.” Bounding one’s thoughts can be a bit confining and, therefore, daunting. Well, they say you will usually find something when you are not looking for it; and that is exactly what happened. I came upon an editorial by Chuck Colson titled “What’s the Matter With Canada?” on Townhall.com., and it instantly gave me some clarification as to why we must defend the American way of life. This article, discussed below, shows how one group can erode the rights of another.

Before I go too far, it might be appropriate to define what I see as the “American Way of Life.” In today’s world I see this as a moving target. We can point to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and then add our modifiers such as equal opportunity, affirmative action and the like. Being a strict Constitutionalist, I prefer to look at the American Way of Life as those tenets envisioned by the Founders. I believe they looked at America as a place where there was little in the way of government intervention and regulation. They were individualists who felt free to express themselves in whatever way they were moved. This included the freedom to express their belief and love of God and Christ. They understood that it is the responsibility of each man to protect and provide for his family. It was, and still is, the responsibility of each man to protect and provide for the security of his country. I see the American Way of Life as an individual way and not a way dictated by government or special interests, whether they be religious or commercial. The founders were bounded by the cultural mores of the day and certainly did not envision the cultural changes that we have seen come about. I would advocate the return to the mores of fear of God, patriotism, and the centrality of the family.

Each and every one of us should be able to think of any number of reasons to defend our way of life. The short list should be the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights. Before 1773, there had never been the concept of a country that ruled by the consent of the governed. In that year, the colonists began taking control of their own destiny when their protest against the king’s tea tax prompted them to action in the form of the Boston Tea Party. The crown had been levying onerous taxes on the colonists to recoup the cost of the French and Indian war that had ended ten years before. As the independence movement progressed and then was articulated by the Declaration of Independence, penned mostly by Thomas Jefferson, Americans began to “think out of the box” and into a new concept of government. The first experiment in government, the Articles of Confederation, failed to meet the needs of the new country. This experiment evolved into the US Constitution, that magnificent document that places restrictions on the federal government, not the states. However, the states demanded greater guarantees of the freedoms of the citizens, and, in 1789, the first Congress proposed 12 amendments to the new Constitution. The first two were never ratified. These involved the number of constituents for each Congressman and pay for Congressmen. The next ten were finally ratified by ¾ of the states in 1791 and became known as the Bill of Rights. The amazing aspect of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is that they both restrict the powers of the federal government. This was a totally new concept.

Our precious freedoms and rights have prompted us to go to war a number of times since those struggling years immediately following our independence from Great Britain. Our first war as a independent nation is a good example of the young nation’s conviction that its autonomy with all the freedoms guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights were worth defending at all cost . Only 30 years after we thought the fighting was over, the British navy was in desperate need of men and supplies under the crush of the war with Napoleon. They were regularly raiding American shipping and war ships to obtain supplies and sailors to fight the French. We could not stand by and passively allow our ships, shipping, and sailors to be plundered from the seas. We went to war to defend our freedoms and our sovereignty. Even though the war was officially declared a tie, it showed that the young nation was not one to trifle with.

Each war we have fought has been due to drastic and sudden threats to our freedoms and sovereignty. But what about those insidious “under the radar” threats? Those threats are just as real as Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Both the Pearl Harbor and 9/11 attacks were perpetrated upon US soil due to perceived injustices by despots’ intent on world domination. Japanese naval forces attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 for the purpose of destroying the US Pacific Fleet and, ultimately, our way of life. This would have left them free to wreak havoc across the Pacific while their partners-in-evil did the same across Europe and North Africa. And then on September 11, 2001 a group of evil men, guided by despots, used four airliners to kill over 3000 innocent people who had done no harm to the perpetrators or their bosses. Both of these attacks were carried out because evil men wanted to end our way of life.

Another example of evil people intent on taking over a culture is what is happening in Europe today. In France, militants riot at the threat from their legislature that they are going to have to work for the government support money they receive; at least that is the cover story. Just who are these French militants? The press uses the term “militants” as a euphemism for Muslim radicals. Paris police cannot even enter certain sections of the city or the surrounding area unarmed. In October and November, 2005, the violence was so brutal that thousands of cars were burned and several police were killed. On 14 November of that year, President Jacques Chirac pledged to create greater opportunities for the young people, showing the militants that they had won. French officials cite evidence that Muslim extremists are being pipelined to the Middle East for training and being returned home to conduct jihad. [1]

The expansion of Muslim radicalism in Europe has brought along with it immigrant enclaves where Sharia (Islamic) law rules. How many of us really understand Sharia law? I certainly do not, but I know a few of their tenants as illustrated by the following cases-in-point:
1. Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped

2. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives.

3. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to extract legal revenge – physical eye for physical eye.

4. Islam orders death for Muslim and possible death for non-Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even Sharia itself. Good examples of this are the death sentence against Salmon Rushdie for Satanic Verses and the threats against the Danish cartoonists that just drew a likeness of Muhammad.

5. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad. This has been an on-going effort since Muhammad was alive. [2]

While these provisions have not been accepted in the US to date, slow encroachments are making their way into our society.

For example, On August 03, 2008, in a news release by the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, a new agreement with Tyson Foods eliminates Labor Day and the instatement of Eid al-Fitr as a holiday. Eid al-Fitr celebrates the end of Ramadan and falls on October 01 this year. [3]

A recent expose aired on Fox News outlined a number of “honor killings” perpetrated by Muslim men on their daughters and sisters here in the US. These killings are acceptable forms of punishment under Sharia law. Fortunately, our rule of law brings these killers to justice, but what about the floggings that are permitted under Sharia law? When a woman or man is murdered there is bound to be a body or an individual missing. But what happens in the case of a flogging when the victim does not come forward to notify the police of the assault? It’s likely that in many instances these crimes go unpunished.

The ever creeping encroachment of Sharia law is overtaking the societies of Europe and Scandinavia. Examples can be cited from any of the western European countries. In Great Britain, even the Archbishop of Canterbury has stated that he believes it is legitimate to have entire enclaves within the country that are Muslim only, where Sharia law can be practiced exclusive of British law. Having two legal systems in force side-by-side is an untenable situation.

But what happens when the rights that we have come to cherish are eroded ever so slowly over the years? Specific Sharia law is not the only assault on our freedoms. A possibly more insidious intruder into our free America is political correctness. I fear that this is what has happened to Canada, culturally our nearest neighbor and relative. A Canadian writer and popular blogger, Mark Steyn, wrote a book, America Alone, where he describes how America’s fight against global terrorism is basically a solo act. Maclean’s magazine, a popular news magazine in Canada, printed excerpts from Steyn’s book, and then the carrots hit the fan. Chuck Colson explains what happened like this: “Mohamed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Congress charged that the content of these excerpts about the expansion of radical Islam ‘subjects Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt [4].’” This criticism is so strong, that both the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal have been brought into the fray. The Canadian Human Rights Commission did not pursue legal action but the BC body is, complaining that Steyn’s book “subjects Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt.” As of July 21, a ruling had not been issued. While Maclean’s has the resources to fight the BC Tribunal, the average Joe next door who makes a derogatory statement about Muslims does not. As Colson explains, Maclean’s was given a kangaroo court without a jury. They are so afraid of offending the Muslim community in Canada that they have traded in free speech for some kind of cheap appeasement [5]. This is the level to which the Canadian ideal of political correctness has sunk. The average guy next door could expect the same. With the current attitude of the Canadian judiciary in British Colombia he is convicted before he gets to trial. But wait; why is there any necessity for a trial in a country with free speech? This is only partially a rhetorical question. The reason for the trial is the slow, steady decline of the acceptance of basic freedom of speech in Canada.

Remember the cartoons that were drawn by the Danish cartoonists showing caricatures of Muhammad? How many times have you seen them printed in the US? The State Department condemned their publication in the Danish press. Where was the ACLU during this furor? They were characteristically silent. The American press does not want to run afoul of the State Department and the ACLU. However, during this time, the press was perfectly willing to cover every sordid detail of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. This shows the lengths the press will go to appease those who want to erode out freedom of speech.

We have allowed our freedoms to be so eroded that they do not look like the same freedoms that the Sons of Liberty fought for. Are we going to go the way of Canada? Each of us is responsible for exercising our God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed unalienable freedoms.
In this article, I have only addressed a few examples of our eroding freedoms but there are others that are appropriate to mention:

· If we exercise our God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed right to express our belief in the tenants of Christianity and Biblical standards we are criticized for being intolerant irrespective of the intolerance of the Muslims or the atheists. If we are critical of the treatment of women at the hands of Muslim men, we are racist.

· Today, in many school districts, the discussion of the world having been created by God is completely out of the question. Only evolution is allowed in the discussion.

· In many schools there are Muslim clubs but Christian clubs are not allowed.

· Our children are not allowed to pray in school because it may be construed to be advocating one religion over another or one parent or student finds it offensive. The rights and religious preferences of the Christian are not allowed to be considered.

· If we advocate controlling our borders, we are called racist and/or isolationists.

· If we believe that a marriage consists of one man and one woman, we are called intolerant homophobes.

These are but a few of the freedoms that are slipping away. Make no mistake; there is a deliberate, concerted effort to make this happen. If you look around at the US today, you will find that there is a very big difference in the American way of life as envisioned by the Founders and the American way of life of today. This is a process that has been in progress for approximately 150 years.

I have always hated being told that there is a problem. I would rather be told that there is a solution. OK, here it is. It is incumbent upon all Americans to exercise their freedoms and speak out in no uncertain terms when those freedoms are trampled. Our elected officials need to hear from each of us, individually, that we are displeased with the direction our freedoms are going. When freedom-loving organizations such as Colorado Family Institute ask for a signature on a petition to stop the erosion of one freedom or another, sign it. In addition, write your Congressmen and Senators. Frankly, my Congressman and Senators are tired of hearing from me. That is unfortunate because I am certainly not through writing and expressing my views. I hope you are not either.

References:
[1] John Anderson, “France Says Extremists are Enlisting Its Citizens,” Washington Post Foreign Service, October 19, 2005, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/18/AR2005101801632_pf.html
[2] The American Thinker, Top Ten Reasons Why Sharia is Bad for all Societies, August 03, 2008, http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/08/top_ten_reasons_why_sharia_is.html
[3] Speechless – Silencing the Christians, Tyson Foods Warms up to Islam, August 03 2008, http://www.onenewsnow.com/Business/Default.aspx?id=202506
[4] Townhall.com, What’s the Matter With Canada? , July 21, 2008, http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ChuckColson/2008/07/21/whats_the_matter_with_canada
[5] Mark Steyn, America Alone, The End of the World as We know It; Regnery Publishing, Washington DC, 2006

Warming hysteria despite new data

Friends,
I am posting an article by a guest columnist who writes periodically for the Colorado Springs Gazette. I have known Andy for almost 20 years and have found that when he takes pen to paper (or tickles the plastics) it is definitely worth taking reading. I hope you enjoy it.

By ANDY PICO, GUEST COLUMNIST
Global warming hysteria continues to make its impact on our state, national and global economies with increasingly devastating consequences. Severe impacts to food and energy supplies and prices are a direct result of some of the policies adopted to "fight global warming," including the conversion of agricultural resources from food to fuel and intentionally restricting energy supplies in order to force energy conversion. These results were predicted by many with scientific or economic credentials.

Dr. James Hansen, the corrupt director of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, celebrated his testimony from 20 years ago this July by once again warning the Congress of manmade greenhouse gas warming; testifying of imminent catastrophe and calling for the criminal prosecution of "deniers." Warmers would deny the rights to free speech, academic freedom and open scientific research. The warmers deny that 32,000 scientists who have signed the Oregon Petition or the Manhattan Declaration (www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=1) against the fraud of manmade climate change should have a voice.

Twenty years ago, GISS predicted significant warming and its annual reports have shown an accelerating increase in global temperatures. The GISS monthly data, as well as the data from every climate monitoring agency, show otherwise.

In June 1988, the reported station and land-ocean anomalies were .84 and .67 degrees over the century average and Hansen projected that by June 2008, the temperature would increase by another degree. When he testified to Congress in June of runaway warming, the temperatures had declined to .26 degrees for both over the century average.

Predicted mid-troposphere warming is the key component of the theory of greenhouse gas warming, but actual midtroposphere temperatures have declined by .2 C over these two decades. All of the climate reporting centers; NASA GISS, Hadley, RSS and UAH satellite coverage have reported sharply declining temperatures since January 2007.

It is significant that 20 years of warming have been reversed in a year and half with the trend headed sharply down interrupted only briefly in July, which most of us call "summer." The sea level rise has also stopped, Antarctic ice cover remains above average, and the Arctic summer ice melt continues to trail last year's levels by a significant margin. All these measures run counter to the catastrophic predictions and continue even while the CO2 level continues to rise.

This decline in global sea surface, land and atmospheric temperatures correspond to the decline in solar activity as measured both by sunspot numbers and solar cycle length and the shift in oceanic circulation patterns to the cool side. This sharp cooling trend is particularly notable in that both the IPCC and GISS estimated that today's temperatures would be about a degree higher than they actually are. The decline was predicted by those of us who have pointed out the solar connection, amplified by atmospheric and oceanic circulation, as the principle driver of terrestrial climate changes.

During this Holocene Interglacial period the prevailing temperatures have been higher and lower in a regular cycle. During the initial Holocene Climactic Optimum at the end of the last Ice Age and beginning of this warm Interglacial period, the temperatures were several degrees warmer than now.

Several cool periods and warm periods alternated on a regular cycle over the millennium with a pre-Roman cool period, a Roman Warm Period several degrees warmer than now, a Middle Age Cold Period, the Medieval Warm Period that was at least another degree warmer than now, and the Little Ice Age at least a degree colder than now which the current Modern Warm Period has only slightly recovered from.

Recent archeological finds have located a Roman road crossing a pass in the Alps that is still mostly covered by glaciers. The Romans were certainly advanced in their engineering accomplishments for their time, but how and why they would have built a road underneath a glacier is an interesting question for the global warming hysterics to answer.

The cooling trend is now well established and correlates with the current, extended solar minimum. A number of independent solar scientists are predicting a multi-decade quiet and cold period. It is clear that climate change is a natural phenomenon.

Pico, of Colorado Springs, is a retired navy commander, naval Flight officer and economist. He is a signatory of the Manhattan Declaration.

This column may be viewed at:https://webmail.si-intl.com/OWA/redir.aspx?C=7f5a83b97ba442dbb6af073ef370373f&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.gazette.com%2fsections%2fopinion%2fguestcolumnists%2f

The Russian Incursion Continues

Friends,
A couple of days ago I received the email below from a trusted friend. He says that it is authentic and that is good enough for me. Forgive me for removing the names; I’m sure you understand the reason.

Begin forwarded email.
Capt _____ provides input from someone inside Georgia. If he emailsit, it's reliable. FYI

-----Original Message-----From: Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 12:42 PMTo:

Subject: FW: Georgia
Admiral, Sirs,
Word from Inside Georgia. Sad news.
v.r.CAPT
Counter-Terrorism & Defense Operations
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 11:38 PM
Subject: Georgia
By all accounts, the Georgian Coast Guard was essentially destroyedyesterday by Russian regular army troops in Poti. No people killed orinjured, as there was no resistance. Three ships seized and destroyed.Buildings on the base damaged and/or destroyed, including the commandcenter. Other GCG vessels had left Poti before this and were not taken. Theradar station at Anaklia was destroyed. Not yet at Supsa, the Russians wereexpected to destroy that station as well.

It has chilled me to hear of all of this, as so much of that infrastructurewas built or improved as a part of my work these past years. It can be rebuilt if the money is found but i t pains me nonetheless.

It is the destruction and looting in the villages near Abkhazia, and aroundSouth Ossetia that is so horrific. There is no foreign aid to help familiesrebuild their lives. The Georgia, Osset and Abkhaz youth who are a part of it are thugs and criminals easily brought to the Russian fold in return for free reign. There is no reasonable explanation on earth for what theRussians are now doing in Georgia. It does not equal the genocide of Darfur,but it is all here in my backyard.

My family is terrified, and the patriotic rhetoric is maxed out in volume.Thankfully it appears that the Russians will not press on to Tbilisi. Amazingly we still have electricity and phone service. And water.

Gracefully yesterday provided a moment of peaceful irony - at the Olympicsin Beijing Georgian athletes won 2 gold medals. The first was in judo. The second was in wrestling. The Georgian defeated - a Russian! And in Olympicappropriateness the two combatants threw their arms around each other inexhaustion and respect. I think all of Georgia was standing for their anthemduring the medals ceremony.

Best wishes,

End of forwarded email


Click on map to see full size

As I pointed out in my last Political Discourse, Putin wants to put the old Soviet Union back together. It seems that Georgia’s crime was being friendly with the West and specifically their desire to join NATO. When the rebelling region of South Ossetia tried to break away and rejoin with Russia, Georgia went in for the purpose of putting down the rebellion. That was the excuse that Russia needed/wanted to attack Georgia.

North Ossetia has long been aligned with Russia. In the map insert above, North Ossetia is the area marked as Alania. While South Ossetia has strong ties to Russia, has long been considered a part of Georgia.

Russian forces have been in South Ossetia, theoretically as a peacekeeping force, but their wonton actions against the Georgians as noted in the above email goes beyond merely protecting allies and preventing further violence. Georgia has also had peacekeeping forces in the area.

As of this morning, 16 August 2008, the Russians and the Georgians have signed a cease-fire agreement, stipulating that Russian forces are to return to their previous positions in South Ossetia with the ability to patrol the Georgian border. General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of the Russian military staff has stated that a return of Georgian forces to South Ossetia would not be acceptable.

To slightly shift gears, the Associated Press reported today that Poland and the United States have concluded an agreement to place anti-ballistic missiles in Poland. The negotiations have been going on for 18 months with the stated goal to place missiles in Poland to protect from any current or projected IRBM/ICBM capability within Iran or other potentially unfriendly Middle Eastern country. Russia believes that the anti-ballistic missiles are a direct slap in the fact to them and has threatened retaliation in the form of its own nuclear arsenal.

Two days ago, Russia also made the statement that Georgian borders are no longer sacred, the same with any rebellious region within any of the former Soviet states that ask for Russia’s assistance.

Given the bellicose stance Russia has taken in the recent past, it would be reasonable to expect all of the former Soviet states to be in danger of re-absorbs ion. Russia is already looking with laser focus on the Baltic States.

After my last posting, a number of commentators as well as several of my friends have commented on the similarity between the current Russian actions and the incursion of German troops into the Sudetenland on 01 October, 1938. This incursion was due to the appeasement mentality of the Europeans at that time. The current actions of the Russians and the world’s desire for peace today make it feel like it must have in the late ‘30s. How many more of the former Soviet satellite states are going to be given to Putin?

Since the pull-out of US forces from Viet Nam, and the Marines from Lebanon, the United States has come to be viewed as a country that does not go the extra mile to back its friends. I believe that it is time to reverse that trend and show the world that we do back our friends. In the past, the Russians have typically responded only to adversaries that come to them from a position of strength. Giving in to their bullying in Georgia and Poland removes any semblance of strength. If we do not stand up for our friends now we could see a resurgence of Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe and a renewal of the Cold War.

As always, I welcome your comments/discussion.

Dan

The Russian Bear Out of Hibernation

Friends,
On June 12, 1987, President Reagan made the famous demand, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” in a speech to the people of West Berlin. It was also heard on the East side of the wall. This was the prelude to the greatest peacetime implosion of a multilithic regime this world has ever seen. Today, 21 years later, we still laud Reagan for his courage to even make this challenge, after all of his advisors counseled against it.

In December of 1991, after the erosion of the Soviet world from the edges, the Soviet Union ceased to exist. A painful period of the Russian version of democratization began. The newly wealthy grew out of the corrupt officials that had run the country. Still, there was some hope that the new Russian Republic would work through these growing pains and come out the other side as a democracy, governed by the rule of law. The old hard-line Communists were suppressed and it looked as if Boris Yeltsin might just be able to pull it off, if his health held up. At least that is the short version.

Now fast forward to 2000. With the succession of Vladimir Putin to the presidency of Russia, another KGB professional was again in power. For the past eight years Putin has been consolidating and confirming his power.

In the run-up to the 2003 parliamentary elections, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the wealthiest of the new Russian billionaires, financed opposition parties running against Putin’s United Russia Party. For this indiscretion, the government charged Khodorkovsky with fraud and tax evasion. The sentence was for eight years. Under the Russian legal system, he was eligible for release in 2008. Removing this source of financing, Putin’s ruling party easily won reelection. In early 2007 Khodorkovsky faced new charges of money laundering and embezzlement in preparation for the upcoming 2008 elections. Putin could not take a chance of losing his legislative mandate.

Putin and the ruling party have recently taken to flexing their collective muscles in the old ways. In August of last year, Putin announced the resumption of long-range bomber flights because of security concerns. This renewed assertiveness now can be viewed as the first overt step in a campaign to reestablish the regional power base that the Soviets had established after World War II.

In the past week, Georgia has sent troops into the break-away enclave of South Ossetia to discourage thoughts of independence. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, South Ossetia has claimed to be independent from Georgia. This urge for independence was further enhanced with the recent declaration of independence by Kosovo.

Russia has been claiming that they are just acting as peacekeepers. But Russia is goaded by NATO’s promise to admit Georgia. Last week, Russian forces rolled into the area in support of the separatists. Two days ago, 8 Aug, it was reported that Russian troops had moved into South Ossetia with 150 tanks plus assorted other vehicles. Today, it was reported that Russian and Georgian forces are engaged. There are also reports of the Russian Navy blockading Georgian ports.

With the aforementioned examples of Russian expansion of control, both internal and external, it could be argued that Russia under Vladimir Putin is attempting to rebuild, at least partially, the Soviet power bloc of the Cold War days. While the West has been watching developments related to Muslim Terrorism, Putin has been restoring the Russian military which had fallen into abject disrepair; this repair and modernization being paid for by proceeds gained from re-nationalized industries such as the petroleum industry.

This is a complicated world, made more so by the resurgence of Russia as a power with which to be reckoned. Only time will tell the lengths to which Putin will go to achieve the level of his desired power.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussions.
Dan