By Thomas Sowell

One of the problems in trying to select a leader for any large organization or institution is the tendency to start out looking for Superman, passing up many good people who fail to meet that standard, and eventually ending up settling for a warm body.

Some Republicans seem to be longing for another Ronald Reagan. Good luck on that one, unless you are prepared to wait for several generations. Moreover, even Ronald Reagan himself did not always act like Ronald Reagan.

The current outbreak of "gotcha" attacks on Texas Governor Rick Perry show one of the other pitfalls for those who are trying to pick a national leader. The three big sound-bite issues used against him during the TV "debates" have involved Social Security, immigration and a vaccine against cervical cancer.

Where these three issues have been discussed at length, whether in a few media accounts or in Governor Perry's own more extended discussions in an interview on Sean Hannity's program, his position was far more reasonable than it appeared to be in either his opponents' sound bites or even in his own abbreviated accounts during the limited time available in the TV "debate" format.

On Social Security, Governor Perry was not only right to call it a "Ponzi scheme," but was also right to point out that this did not mean welshing on the government's obligation to continue paying retirees what they had been promised.

Even those of us who still disagree with particular decisions made by Governor Perry can see some of those decisions as simply the errors of a decent man who realized that he was faced not with a theory but with a situation.

For example, the ability to save young people from cervical cancer with a stroke of a pen was a temptation that any decent and humane individual would find hard to resist, even if Governor Perry himself now admits to second thoughts about how it was done.

Many of us can agree with Congresswoman Michele Bachmann's contention that it should have been done differently. But it reflects no credit on her to have tried to scare people with claims about the dangers of vaccination. Such scares have already cost the lives of children who have died on both sides of the Atlantic from diseases that vaccination would have prevented.

The biggest mischaracterization of Governor Perry's position has been on immigration. The fact that he has more confidence in putting "boots on the ground" along the border, instead of relying on a fence that can be climbed over or tunneled under where there is no one around, is a logistical judgment, not a question of being against border control.

Texas Rangers have already been put along the border to guard the border where the federal government has failed to guard it. Former Senator Rick Santorum's sound-bite attempts to paint Governor Perry as soft on border control have apparently been politically successful, judging by polls. But his repeated interrupting of Perry's presentation of his case during the recent debate is the kind of cheap political trick that contributes nothing to public understanding and much to public misunderstanding.

Those of us who disagree with Governor Perry's decision to allow the children of illegal immigrants to attend the state colleges and universities, under the same terms as Texas citizens, need at least to understand what his options were. These were children who were here only because of their parents' decisions and who had graduated from a Texas high school.

Governor Perry saw the issue as whether these children should now be allowed to continue their education, and become self-supporting taxpayers, or whether Texas would be better off with a higher risk of those young people becoming dependents or worse. I still see Governor Perry's decision as an error, but the kind of error that a decent and humane individual would be tempted to make.

I have far more questions about those who would blow this error up into something that it is not. Error-free leaders don't exist -- and we don't want to end up settling for a warm body.

Ultimately, this is not about Governor Perry. It is about a process that can destroy any potential leader, even when the country needs a new leader with a character that the "gotcha" attackers demonstrate they do not have.

By Eileen McGann & Dick Morris

After his bludgeoning in the Monday, September 12 GOP Debate, Texas Governor Rick Perry has lost more than half of his lead over former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

In the CNN/Opinion Research and PPP surveys taken right before the debate, Perry boasted an average lead of 12.5 points (CNN had it 30-18 while PPP reported 31-18). But in the three surveys whose field dates included interviews that post dated the debate, Perry’s average margin closed to only 5.3 points (USA/Gallup 31-24, CBS/NYT 23-16, and Bloomberg 26-22).

Surprisingly, no other candidates moved much. Despite strong performances, neither Bachmann, Gingrich, Cain, nor Santorum moved up in the polls nor did Ron Paul drop after his hammering over his claim that the US brought 9-11 on ourselves.

Perry’s position as front runner makes him vulnerable to ganging up by the other contenders and his missteps on Social Security, immigration, and the Papalloma vaccine have made him even more so. After Thursday’s FOX News presidential debate, he and Romney should be about even – with Romney on the way up and Perry on the way down

By Eileen McGann & Dick Morris

Rick Perry was cruising in the Wednesday GOP presidential debate. He had weathered a sharp exchange with Mitt Romney over job creation and made the point well that his record as governor was better than Mitt’s. Romney’s counter – that his experience as a businessman makes him better able to create jobs than Perry’s life in politics – may eventually nullify Perry’s edge, but its got a way to go.

Then Rick stepped on the third rail – he called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme”, a “failed program”, and said it was a “monstrous lie” that young people would collect retirement benefits from the system. He might as well have come out against motherhood and apple pie. Whether you agree with Perry or not, who wants to spend the entire fall season of 2012 defending his Social Security comments. Obama and the Democrats are famous for creating issues that don’t exist. Look at how all Democratic candidates in 2010 campaigned against Congressman Paul Ryan’s roadmap proposals to cut Medicare when they were not yet in play in Congress.

Polling shows that Republican primary voters this year are very sophisticated and are much more interested in finding a candidate who can beat Obama than in finding one that suits every bit of their ideological convictions. Hence, Romney’s dalliance with an individual mandate for buying health insurance in Massachusetts does not make him radioactive in the GOP primary. As long as he can win.

Perry could have easily sidestepped the question and distanced himself from his remarks in his book on the subject. He could have said that perhaps he was overly heated in his rhetoric in using the terms “Ponzi scheme” and underscored his support for George W. Bush-style reforms in the system. But, no way. He surged right ahead and embraced his former words. Now he owns them for all time.

Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme? It was sold politically as a form of social insurance where the “premiums” paid each year of a working person’s life were saved up and entitled him to retirement benefits. To underscore this point, FDR started collecting Social Security taxes in 1937 but did not distribute benefits until 1941.

But, under the weight of the automatic cost of living adjustments started under Nixon, the benefits have long outstripped the amounts that have been paid in by each retiree. Social Security functions like any other cash transfer program, taking from younger generations and paying the money to the older ones. The collected payroll tax deductions of the average retiree account for only a small part of his total pension. In that sense it is a Ponzi scheme – it sells itself as a savings and investment plan but it uses each new generations’ revenues to fund the older one’s benefits.

But it’s a Ponzi scheme with the power to tax. If Bernie Madoff had that capability, he wouldn’t be in jail today. A Ponzi scheme is only bad when the new money dries up. With the power to tax, it need never do so.

Is Social Security a failure? Hell no! It is the most successful anti-poverty program of all time. From FDR’s second inaugural where he said that one-third of the nation was “ill clothed, ill housed, and ill fed” until the early 60s when Michael Harrington alerted the nation to its high poverty level, the elderly constituted about half of America’s poor. Now there is no such thing as an impoverished senior citizen and our poverty rate has dropped from one-third to one-eighth, largely due to Social Security (and partly due to welfare reform).

Now Perry is flying in the face of the deeply held opinions of the entire American electorate. Rasmussen Reports shows that only 17% of Americans agree that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Rick Perry would do well to side with the 83%, not the 17% if he wants to get elected.

Romney’s Jobs Plan Cuts Taxes, Rules While Confronting China

September 07, 2011, 12:22 AM EDT

Sept. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney laid out a 59-point economic-recovery proposal that sets up a clear contrast to the plan President Barack Obama is likely to present tomorrow in a speech to Congress.

Romney proposed a reduction in U.S. corporate taxes, fewer federal regulations, new trade agreements, and sanctions against China for currency manipulation as he highlighted business experience that he said sets him apart both from Obama and other Republican 2012 presidential contenders.

The former Massachusetts governor, speaking at a trucking company in North Las Vegas, Nevada, also called for the elimination of taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains for individuals making $200,000 or less per year.

Romney’s speech came before today’s Republican debate in California, where he will share the stage for the first time with Texas Governor Rick Perry, who has surged in national polls since joining the race Aug. 13 to become the front-runner.

“The right course for America is to believe in growth,” said Romney, whose plan drew criticism from both the Obama and Perry campaigns. “The right answer for America is not to grow government.”

Obama is wedded to economic policies of the past, deploying a “pay-phone strategy” in a “smart-phone world,” he said.

Underscoring Differences

Phillip Swagel, an economics professor at the University of Maryland and a former Treasury official, said the proposal underscored a fundamental divide between Romney and Obama.

“The big difference with Obama is on the size and role of government in the economy,” said Swagel, who worked in President George W. Bush’s administration. “Romney is not trying to be a reflexive ‘government is everywhere and always bad.’ He is saying that too big government holds down growth and job creation.”

Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for Obama’s re-election bid, said in a statement that Romney’s proposals would “tip the scales against hard-working Americans” by repackaging the “same old policies that helped create the economic crisis.”

Romney argued that his plan would promote economic growth, saying it would achieve an average 4 percent annual expansion in gross domestic product during the first four years after its enactment, add 11.5 million new private-industry jobs during that period and lower the unemployment rate to 5.9 percent.

Corporate Tax Cut

A central point of the program is the reduction of the top corporate tax rate to 25 percent, from 35 percent now.

Although the U.S. rate is among the highest in the world, the effective levy that companies pay after taking advantage of tax benefits is often lower. In 2008, it averaged 27.1 percent, according to the Congressional Research Service.

As president, Romney said he’d also seek an immediate 5 percent cut in non-security federal discretionary spending.

He reaffirmed his pledge to repeal the health-care overhaul promoted by Obama that Congress enacted in 2010, as well as the Dodd-Frank measure that toughened financial industry regulations, saying both have injected too much unpredictability for businesses.

Romney said he would initiate an immediate review of all Obama-era regulations, with the goal of eliminating any that unduly burden the economy and job creation. He also pledged to require federal agencies to offset any new rules by eliminating existing ones of equivalent cost.

“It’s still important to have regulations to get rid of the bad actors,” he said, while adding that many of the rules have become a “burden” on small businesses.

Confronting China

Romney said he would direct the Treasury to list China as a currency manipulator and order the Department of Commerce to assess duties on Chinese imports, if the Asian nation didn’t quickly move to float its currency.

“I’ll clamp down on the cheaters, and China’s the worst example,” he said. “I will go after them for stealing our intellectual property and they will recognize that if they cheat, there is a price to pay.”

Romney said he had no plans to start a trade war. “But we can’t have a trade-surrender either,” he said.

Daniel Griswold, who studies trade policy at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, said China can only be pushed so far.

“If we go down the road to trade confrontation with China, it could cost Americans jobs in terms of our exports and investments,” he said. “There’s definitely a wing of the Republican Party which is really itching to pitch a trade fight with China.”

‘Applause Lines’

Griswold added: “These are good applause lines. They won’t do a thing to put 14 million unemployed Americans back to work.”

Romney also pushed for passage of trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.

Without specifying how much he wants to lower tax rates, he said he would also like to overhaul the individual tax code. Cutting corporate tax rates by 10 percentage points would result in about $1 trillion in forgone revenue over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office; Romney says the economic growth it would generate would provide new revenue.

His plan would also permanently extend the Bush-era tax cuts -- set to expire at the end of 2012 -- and eliminate the estate tax.

Now here comes Rick Perry challenging Mitt Romney’s record on job creation. The stats are definitely in his favor. Between June of ’09 and June of ’11, 50% of the net new jobs created in the United States were in Texas, making Texas number one in job growth by a loooooooooong shot.

Under Romney, Massachusetts’ record was terrible by comparison. The Bay State ranked 47th in job growth with employment rising less than one percent from ’03 to ’07 – his years in office (during which US job growth was 5 percent).

Governor Perry clearly did better than Governor Romney at creating jobs. But it is not two governors who will square off over the issue, it is two men with two lifetimes of experience to look at.

Ever since President Clinton drummed the concept of net job creation into our heads with his mounting claims of the millions of jobs “I created,” we have become accustomed to monitoring this figure as evidence of executive economic skill. But, in this case, Romney can point to a lifetime of actually creating jobs while Governor Perry can only cite his role in presiding over their creation as head of state.

It’s quite a difference. Perry’s Texas has had historically low taxes for decades and is one of only a handful of states without an income tax. In 1970, for example, Texas had 11 million people and Michigan had 10 million. Now Texas has 25 million while Michigan cannot find jobs for its current population of 11 million. The credit for Texas’ low taxes belongs not just to Perry, but to Governors George W. Bush and Bill Clements before him. (And even a nod is due Governor Ann Richards in between).

The job creation record is partially due to a surge in oil demand (one quarter of the new Texas jobs are in the energy sector) and some of the new jobs are due to the efforts of former Governor (and client) Mark White in getting the chip research industry to locate in Austin in the 80s.

Romney has actually, personally, financially created tens of thousands of jobs. His record of buying companies, fixing them up, selling off the unprofitable parts, obtaining financing to grow the money-making parts is invaluable in helping us to get out of the current job creation funk.

Any good Republican president will hold down taxes and block new regulations. But it may take a businessman with Romney’s skill set to dig down into the bureaucracy and understand precisely how bank regulation or EPA controls stop job creation. Romney needs to make the case that we need more than broad brush policy strokes to get the job machine running again. It is not enough to have been a good driver of the economic engine. You need to be a mechanic who knows how it works!

www.dickmorris.com

A new poll shows Texas Gov. Rick Perry with a double-digit lead nationally over the current 2012 frontrunner, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

The poll, which will be released Wednesday by Public Policy Polling (PPP), is not being detailed in advance, the New York Post reported. But PPP's Director Tom Jensen confirmed Perry's double-digit advantage to the Post.


It will be the second poll of Republican primary voters by the Democratically-aligned polling company to show Perry with a lead nationally since the three-term Texas governor entered the contest.A Rasmussen Reports national poll out Aug. 16 showed Perry leading Romney by 11 points, 29 percent to 18 percent.
Before that, Romney led in national polls pretty consistently going back to early 2010.In Iowa, a separate PPP poll of state Republicans Tuesday found Perry taking the lead from . Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.
 
The poll found Perry favored by 22 percent of Iowa Republicans, ahead of Romney's 19 percent and Bachmann's 18 percent.Still, Romney currently enjoys leads in the early voting states of New Hampshire, Florida and Nevada, while a dearth of recent polling in South Carolina makes it difficult to predict the preferences of Palmetto State voters, commonly assumed to be fertile ground for Perry.

PPP told the Post that Wednesday's release will show that in a head-to-head matchup, Perry trails President Barack Obama 49 percent to 43 percent. Obama benefited from independent voters who favored him by 56 percent to 32 percent.

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Read more on Newsmax.com: PPP Poll: Perry Takes Double-Digit Lead Over Romney Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Have you listened to Senator Jim DeMint's message yet?

My boss, National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix, asked me to follow up with supporters like you to make sure you've received the message from the chief sponsor of the National Right to Work Act in the U.S. Senate.

Congress will come back from this recess soon, and it's vital we be ready to hit them with an enormous pile of petitions.
Please, click here to watch Senator DeMint's message and sign the National Right to Work Act petition.

Sincerely,
Anne Coulter
National Right to Work Committee

Random thoughts on the passing scene:

The next time a member of the British royal family gets married, I hope they elope and spare us all another 24/7 media orgy.

Does the "not guilty" verdict in the Casey Anthony child murder trial mean that the jury succumbed to the confusion between "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "beyond any conceivable doubt"? The word "reasonable" is not put in there just for decoration.

We seem to be living in an age when nobody can be bothered to answer their telephone, but everybody has a recorded message telling us how important our phone call is to them.

President Obama often talks about wanting to raise taxes on "millionaires and billionaires" but -- in his actual tax proposals -- higher taxes usually begin with couples earning $250,000 between them. Apparently that makes you a millionaire or a billionaire.

It doesn't seem very scientific to have a good-looking nurse taking a man's blood pressure.

As the British have lost their empire and, more important, lost their respect for laws and standards, Britannia has gone from ruling the waves to waiving the rules.

The difference between mob rule and democracy was never more sharply demonstrated than by labor unions' attempts to prevent the Wisconsin voters' elected representatives from carrying out their official duties at the state Capitol. What would it matter what the voters want if any mob can stop it from happening?

My favorite birthday card this year said on the outside, "Ageing is Inevitable" -- and, on the inside: "Maturity is optional."

Theodore Roosevelt said that his foreign policy was to speak softly and carry a big stick. Barack Obama's foreign policy in Libya has been to speak loudly and carry a little stick. Too often Obama's foreign policy around the world looks like children happily playing with fire.

Class-warfare politics is bad enough when it is for real. But often it is as phony as a three-dollar bill, when the same politicians pass high tax rates on "the rich" to win votes -- and then get financial support from "the rich" to create loopholes that enable them to avoid paying those high tax rates.

It is amazing how many people seem to think that, if you give them your phone number or e-mail address, this means that they are authorized to pass them on to others.

Three little words -- "We the people," the opening words of the Constitution of the United States -- are the biggest obstacle to achieving the political goals of the left. For that, they must move decisions away from "We the people" -- from individuals to government; from elected officials to unelected judges; and from national institutions to international institutions like the United Nations -- all safely remote and insulated from "We the people."

Some hotels have been called "historic." But to me that just means old. I don't like staying in old-fashioned hotels. There is usually a reason why those fashions went out of fashion.

Learned scholars still debate the reasons for the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. Learned scholars of the future, looking back on our decline and fall, may simply be baffled as to how we could have been so stupid.

Awkward and uncomfortable hospital gowns for patients just add a needless complication to the problems of people who are already sick. Surely someone could design something less bothersome.

I have never believed for a moment that Barack Obama has the best interests of the United States at heart.

Many liberals who consider themselves friends or allies of blacks are usually friends or allies of those particular blacks who are doing wrong things, often at the expense of other blacks.

At one time, it was well understood that adversity taught valuable lessons, which reduce the probability of repeating foolish decisions. But, today, the welfare state shields people from the consequences of their own mistakes, allowing irresponsibility to continue and to flourish among ever wider circles of people.

Amid all the concerns about the skyrocketing government debt, a front-page headline in the Wall Street Journal said: "Families Slice Debt to Lowest In 6 Years." It is remarkable how differently people behave when they are spending their own money compared to the way politicians behave when spending the government's money.

Clayton Liotta at Dickmorris.com

When I saw Chris Evans perform in the film "The Loss of a Teardrop Diamond"  I knew he was destined to be a great actor reminescent of the Golden Age of Hollywood and its finest actors such as Grant, Bogart , Tyrone Power and my favorite Orson Wells.

Captain America is the right movie at the right time. Captain America represents the quentessential virtue of the American Hero's character embodied in the principle of "Strength and Honor"!

Finally a film about American Exceptionalism! America as its heroes from George Washington to our boys in the military today has stood and will stand for freedom and justice. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Source: DickMorris.com Cartoon By Clayton Liotta

Regretfully , Blagojevich is the effect--and  not the only cause of corruption in Illinois. Therefore, this case eradicates an atom of corruption. Really, I find it difficult to believe that this sends a powerful message to other corrupt politicians.

In the light  of July 4Th, which by the way is my favorite holiday for obvious reasons. Our founding fathers risked everything for this country. They pledged their lives, fortunes and most importantly their sacred honor to the cause of freedom.

Today, politicians , especially the Democrats, risk nothing but the taxpayers' money for the purpose of perpetuating their own welfare and not the people's.Blagojevich is just one example of that.

As one of the Gop contenders for the Presidency put it: "Just because we followed Greece into "democracy" , we do not have to follow Greece into "bankruptcy!"

What were your thoughts on the Republican Primary Debate?


 Ron Paul is entertaining and has  interesting perspectives on policy. He is wrong on the permanent role of the President as Commander in Chief. The Constitution confer es this title to the President temporally. Article II Section 2 : " The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, when called into the actual Service of the United States:..."

 The other candidates spoke eloquently and were brilliant on the issue of economy and foreign policy. I particularly like Romney  and Santorum. Pawlenty 's answer on defense was concise and strong. Whereas Bachman's answer on the right to life was inspiring and Cain's fortitude reflects a strong determination .

I am glad the debate was on CNN and our candidates had the opportunity to present their philosophy of government  and defined their position's rather than be defined by the subjectivity of the left wing/main stream media. That is constantly disseminating the wrong infomation that Republicans have no viable candidate.

The last presidential election it was this "Media" that chose the President. We, are living the disastrous economic consequences of that choice. This time it will be the American People that will determine  the outcome  of the election. 

Source: DickMorris.com Copyright 2011, Clayton Liotta, All Rights Reserved

Today marks the 558th anniversary of the fall of Constantinople. The heart of the Byzantine and Christian Empire in Asia Minor. So what does this have to do with current and future policies in the Middle East? Well, everything!

Last year I wrote a column about Benjamin Netanyahu comparing him to the last Byzantine emperor. When he was making his case at the United Nations regarding Israel's indispensability as a unique democratic nation that protects the rights of all religious denominations and ethnic groups. Evidently to no avail! Netanyahu's plea, as did the plea of the penultimate Byzantine Emperor failed to stimulate support for his cause.

Worse off, this year, the President offered a plan for Israel that resembles a "Final Solution"! The question becomes what happens if Obama is reelected?
I hope that in the light of this solution offered by the President, American Jews will reflect upon and re-examine their support of the Democratic Party.
For, unfortunately those who forget history are deemed to repeat it. I think the fall of Constantinople was enough. Please, do not make Netanyahu the last Byzantine Emperor!

Source: DickMorris.com

Excellent analysis although I do not share Dick's point of view on Bachmann and Pawlenty. A Romney- Huckabee ticket would be invincible! Do not count Huckabee totally out-- yet.  

Romney's formidable fund raising abilities are unmatched. And this election like most will be about money! I also like Daniels. 

Newt Gingrich is a scholar and an accomplished politician but the message to him is as one political analyst put it  : "Get Lost! Right Now". Not an elegant exhortation. But this election will be ferocious!

Now that two of the top three candidates for the Republican nomination have pulled out of the race, the big winner is the one candidate left standing: Mitt Romney.

The polling before Huckabee and Trump pulled out was — in my survey — Romney-22, Huckabee-20, Trump-15, Gingrich-11, Palin-9, Bachmann-6, Pawlenty-3, and Daniels-2.

Now, Romney will inherit a large proportion of the votes left on the table by Huckabee’s and Trump’s withdrawal. My polling suggests that, based on the expressed second choices of the Huckabee and Trump voters, Romney will get 30% of Huckabee’s voters and 40% of Trump’s. These additions should lift him over 30% of the vote and give him a 2:1 lead over the nearest contender (Gingrich).

Romney was having a terrible week. His speech on health care was terrible. With Massachusetts up in arms over Romney-care and Republicans dead set against the individual and employer mandate, his failure to repudiate his program would have cost him dearly. But now he is sitting on top of the world.

Republicans are a legitimist group. Having run before and paid his dues since, Romney is broadly attractive. He is seen as most likely to handle the economy successfully and most likely to defeat Obama. He new has the decided edge.

Gingrich, Bachmann, Daniels, and Pawlenty are the obvious other beneficiaries of the shifting cast of characters.

For Newt, the key is the debates that begin on June 7. (Tune into on to dickmorris.com for my play-by-play commentary — in writing — on the debate as it unfolds and for my video commentary on it as soon as it is over). If Newt can establish that his intellectual and rhetorical prowess can overcome his personal negatives, he could be on his way to a strong run at the nomination. But perhaps they won’t be enough. We’ll see.

For Bachmann, the key is to announce right away, first to keep Palin out of the race (Huckabee’s withdrawal will encourage her to run) and to lay claim to the evangelicals and Tea Party folks who would have backed Mike. Recent polling shows that the evangelicals and the Tea Party supporters are substantially the same people. They would be the base of a Bachmann candidacy and Michele needs to go out and claim them.

For Daniels, the withdrawal of Trump opens the way for him to become the main establishment business community rival to Romney. And Huckabee’s withdrawal opens the door for conservatives to support him as well. He needs also to announce soon to get into the fray.

For Pawlenty, the withdrawals may open the way into the race. With candidates as formidable as Trump and Huckabee sitting on their vote shares, there was little the former Minnesota Governor could do to get a word in edgewise. Now the way is open for him to get into the fray.

But the big, big winner is Romney. It is now a rebuttable presumption that Romney will likely be the nominee. And that’s huge.

Dear Loyal Conservative,
In my 50-plus years covering politics, I've lost a lot of sleep worrying about our great nation and its leaders. 

But I've never been as sleepless as I am today. Because today, I'm downright scared.

Right now, conservatives have no way to fight back against Obama's online juggernaut.

I can't stand by while 2008 repeats itself. I fear it will be the final nail in the coffin of freedom. Look at these numbers.

Disastrous defeat in 2008 is why Human Events has launched Click to Victory 2012 — an urgent campaign to fund a powerful new conservative web site aimed at young voters — and to use every digital outreach tool to convince them to vote conservative in 2012.

Frankly, this vital effort is too costly for us at Human Events to undertake on our own.  That is why I reach out to you for help. We must act together. I urge you to learn more by clicking here.

For Freedom,

Tom Winter
Editor in Chief, Human Events

As I was attending the Chicago Tea Party meeting last Monday, one thought persisted through my mind: "THE TEA PARTY SAVED AMERICA!"

 The Tea Party Patriots made the 2010 election a republican victory, and put a restraining order on Obama's agenda. The next step of the Tea Party is to make Obama a one term president.

Moreover, to reverse the negative economic trend that this administration put the country on will take "continuous (kinetic) awareness" on the part of the American people.  Freedom is not a generation away but at times it seems --an election cycle away. Elections have consequences. It is indispensable that every citizen partake in the upcoming presidential election of 2012. It is the most important election of this century. Donald Trump is an interesting individual. His unrestricted ability to say certain things is courageous and admirable. But the Presidency of the United States is no real estate deal or television show. What I am trying to say is that if Trump continues as a Republican contender for the Presidency, Barack Obama will win. It is the sad reality. Game over. 

What can you do to prevent that?

So, who is Donald Trump? Certainly not JOHN GALT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is there anybody who still thinks that the compromise on the budget was in the best interest of the American people?

It seems that some elected officials did not get the crystal clear message of the 2010 election: SPEND LESS!

It is not about cutting significant programs as Medicare or Medicaid. It is about cutting corporate welfare, entitlements and foreign aid to dictators that enrich themselves at the expense of the American taxpayers.

I am tired of bogus politics, politicians and compromises! Can we get some real leadership for a change?

SYMPOSIUM ON

HEALTHCARE REFORM: A GLOBAL IMPERATIVE
Keynote Address by Dr. Tachi Yamada, President, Global Health Program, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Governments are recognizing that healthcare is central to global economic competitiveness and are working to restructure their national systems. The United States, which spends more on healthcare than any other industrialized country, is undertaking legislative and market based reforms to reduce costs and improve access. China has outlined a plan for universal coverage as a way of encouraging domestic consumption, rather than savings, to reduce its dependence on exports. As the demand for healthcare increases worldwide, decision makers need to address a wide range of healthcare delivery and funding challenges. This symposium will explore healthcare reform in an interconnected world. Dr. Tachi Yamada, president of the Global Health Program for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, will deliver the closing keynote address “Innovation in Global Health Products and Delivery.”

Panel discussion topics include:

• China: Providing Healthcare for a Billion People
• U.S. Healthcare Reform: Where Are We?
• The Globalization of Healthcare Delivery

Following the French avant garde military intervention in Libya . Sarkozy’s neo  Napoleonic emergence is impulsive and ill advised. Although , I do not dislike Sarkozy , on the contrary I do admire his ability to think out of the political correctness box.  I remember well when he walked off the set of 60 minutes when he was asked a question about his personal life.

Nowadays it is rare that statesman or more correctly politicians to exhibit this kind of naturalesse. Donald Trump will have the guts to do it but he is not a politician.

So far, Sarkozy's determination to lead the effort in Libya by abetting the rebels is highly questionable. The only resemblances between Sarkozy and Napoleon are impulsiveness and height. While Napoleon crowned himself emperor, Sarkozy is crowning himself as a fool if it turns out that "the rebels" are anti democratic elements that support Islamic fundamentalism. But I am sure that Sarkozy knows something that I don't. That is the only hope!
As far as the coalition that has deemed that military intervention is imperative in Libya invoking humanitarian causes I do understand the need to protect civilians from brutal dictators. What I fail to see and understand so far is why are they abetting a so called rebel force that we have little information about. Who are these rebels and what do they stand for?

I know that Oliver North, Bolton and even the President support the idea that Qaddafi must go. My question becomes if he goes and another version of a Libyan Ayathollah   Khomeini appears, how will this benefit to the Libyan people and freedom itself?
It has been determined that 20% of the insurgents in Iraq are from  Libya. I do not like dictators and by no means do I advocate support for Qaddafi. But if Qaddafy is going to be replaced by a neo Libyan version of Ayatollah Khomeini, NO THANKS.

It sure as hell looks to me that this entire revolutionary movement in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Oman , Bahrain, and Yemen is evolving into an anti secular movement. To support it would be antidemocratic, anti western and contrary to the interest of the inhabitants of the region.

Just because some European political dwarfs decide that intervention is needed, we do not have to follow.  NATO cannot dictate our foreign policy.

George Tenet, the former CIA director has pictured a vivid account about Qaddafi’s transformation and cooperation in his book  At The Center Of The Storm.

While it is the honorable and just to prevent civilians anywhere from being killed. Following Dr. King’s tenet that : “in justice anywhere is a treat to justice everywhere.” My question becomes what is the relationship between power, justice and national security?  How is the Libyan intervention justified in terms of our national security, interest and sacred honor?

Interestingly, this question occurred to me as I was reading The Melian Dialogue (Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, The Melian Dialogue) . The Athenians invading Melos a small island allied with Sparta have justified their invasion in the following terms:  “ the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must…and that expediency goes with security while justice and honor cannot be followed without danger…”

What are that consequences of the intervention, and most importantly who benefits from this ?

By Ion Mihai Pacepa

This administration suffers from an acute syndrome of low blood pressure which deems it impotent on domestic and foreign policy. Although the employment data was optimistic for February, gas prices are skyrocketing and food is becoming extremely expensive. Not, good. While China is prospering at our expense, driving in Chicago is a nightmare. Pot holes and an infrastructure that does not justify the taxes we are paying.

The bottom line is that we are approaching 2012 and this economic situation is not acceptable for our nation.

Romney has an excellent record of reversing a negative economic situation into a positive one. I definitely support him as I have in the past election.

I have a tremendous veneration for Senator McCain for the sacrifices and services rendered for our country. But his nomination was counterproductive.  
I sincerely hope that Romney will capture the nomination this time around. He will be the right man at the right time, America needs him!

From across the pond, an interesting article about the nature of economic warfare  waged against United States by China, Jihadists and Russia.

It makes sense for we see a concerted effort by the enemy to decapitate the dollar and turn the reserves of world currency to bogus.  

The most important question to ask when trying to identify those responsible for the economic catastrophe of 2008 is to ask: "Who benefited?"  Certainly not the American people! 

In an alarming time where we are attacked on all fronts it is indispensable that the leadership of this country recognizes this imminet ceaseless threat. 

Two mystery investors 'were number one traders in all financial companies that collapsed or are now financially supported by the U.S. government'

Terrorists and other 'financial enemies' were likely responsible for the near collapse of the U.S. financial system in 2008, a new Pentagon report has concluded.

The 2009 report, Economic Warfare: Risks and Responses, said financial terrorism by Jihadists or countries such as China may have cost the global economy $50 trillion in a series of co-ordinated strikes against the U.S. economy.

In an astonishing conclusion, the report claims two unidentified traders deliberately devalued trillions of dollars' worth of stocks at the height of the crisis.

Attack: The report concludes that state or terrorist organisations contributed to the collapse of the U.S. financial system through a series of targeted financial attacks

The report also concludes that untraceable actors undertook a three-tiered attack beginning in 2007, and that 'Phase III [of the attack] may be under way right now.'

'In addition, these same actors have clearly demonstrated the means to carry out such an attack.

'There is sufficient justification to question whether outside forces triggered, capitalised upon or magnified the economic difficulties of 2008.'

The report concluded that: 'Without question, there were actors who had the motive to harm the U.S. economy.

The report was commissioned in early 2009 by the Pentagon's Irregular Warfare Support Program - which prepares U.S. government and military agencies for emerging non-traditional threats.

Its author, economic analyst Kevin Freeman, published it in June 2009 before passing it on to investigators at the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission in November 2010.

Although never classified, sources indicated that the report emerged only after concerned Congressmen and Defence Department officials highlighted its existence to media sources.

Speaking to MailOnline, a source close to the report added: 'It is my understanding that people in the DoD and government officials thought this should be brought to public attention.'

Speaking to the Washington Post, Mr Freeman said that American security forces needed to address vulnerabilities in the U.S. financial system.

He said: 'We spend hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons systems each year.

'But a relatively small amount of money focused against our financial markets through leveraged derivatives or cyber efforts can result in trillions of dollars in losses.

'This is the equivalent of box cutters on an air plane.'

When asked who he thought may be responsible for the attacks, Mr. Freeman added: 'Unfortunately, the two major strategic threats, radical jihadists and the Chinese, are among the best positioned in the economic battle space.'

Collapse: The destruction of Lehman Brothers in 2008 caused panic in the markets, prompting a massive U.S. government bail out

The attacks, according to the report, were part of a three-phase strategy.

The first phase was the deliberate inflation of oil prices in 2007 that generated as much as $2 trillion of excess wealth for oil-producing nations, 'filling the coffers of Sovereign Wealth Funds, especially those that follow Shariah Compliant Finance.'

In the second phase, untraceable investors attacked financial institutions such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers in a 'bear raid'.

The term refers to a strategy where investors try to force the value of companies down through malicious rumours or complex financial trades that impact its stock price.

The report says that as the crisis began,  'virtually overnight'  two relatively small brokers emerged to trade, 'trillions of dollars worth of U.S. blue chip companies.'

Crucially, these as yet unidentified investors are currently the number one traders in, 'all financial companies that collapsed or are now financially supported by the U.S. government,' according to Mr Freeman.

Blame: The report points to China or terrorist organisations as possible candidates for the massive financial attacks on the U.S.

Attacks on banks, especially Lehman Brothers which collapsed in 2008, caused interbank lending to seize up and stock markets around the world to collapse.

The U.S. government then had to step in and bail the system out.

Following this, the 'third phase' has seen the massive U.S. public debt now threatening the primacy of the dollar as a global currency.

'Such an event,' the report says,  'has already been discussed by finance ministers in major emerging market nations such as China and Russia as well as Iran and the Arab states.