About Me

Name: Noam D. Gear
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

Socialist Dicatators Grow On Trees

Posted by Noam D. Gear on Monday, July 13, 2009 11:02:05 PM
It is hard work to spend every day picking fruit from trees that produce it, and scotch-taping that fruit to the trees that would have none otherwise-- so that the orchard will appear to be a more “fair” place. But Mr. Obama took a break from his self-important toil just long enough to show us his true sympathies in world affairs.

In Iran, Obama stayed mum while a brutal dictator slaughtered his own people in the streets.  Obama explained the dullness, dimness, and lateness of his criticism by pointing out a need to “see how the situation would unfold”.

A week later, with Honduras, when former President Zelaya made an anti-constitutional move to extend his term beyond the legal limit; and when the Legislative, Judiciary, and Military branches of government moved together to prevent him from becoming a Socialist Dictator, then Obama waited for nothing to “unfold” before emptying his whole sack of negative rhetoric upon the law-abiding branches of the Honduran government.  In this, Obama essentially demanded that President Zelaya be allowed to resume his illegal efforts to become a dictator.

Take note people. 

Money grows on certain trees, but Socialist Dictators grow on all the rest.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Words Not Worth The Air They Are Printed Upon

Posted by Noam D. Gear on Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:06:52 PM
 
Like millions of Americans this week, I watched the video clip of the killing of Neda Soltani by Iranian thugs who were trying to stop citizens from protesting the sham election of Ahmadinijad.  The sight of her young face becoming flooded with her own blood has indelibly stained my mind in a way that shall not soon fade.
 
This may be horribly un-politically-correct.  However, I must confess that upon seeing the video, I wished that I had been there to stop, deter, harm, or even kill the shooter before he shot Neda Soltani.
 
“Violence is not the answer!” is the banal slogan often chanted by people who stand by while brutal regimes slaughter innocent people. In this slogan, cowardice is perfumed with pacifism so that it smells just like moral virtue.  If you add in the busy shuffling of important documents between your left and right hands…while sniffing your own perfume…while the brutal murders continue all around you… then you have a picture of the United Nations, or its army of tender-minded liberals from the “International Community”. They now call themselves “Foreign Policy Realists”.  It sounds loftier than “Betitled Spectators of Carnage”.
 
The video of Neda moved me to search and find that only one in twenty Iranians own a gun that could have been used to shoot the sniper. If I “Bing” the Internet correctly, it appears that Iran has very restrictive gun laws.  No surprise there. Most oppressive regimes quickly enact laws to take guns from citizens.  Guns are horribly unsafe, you know--just ask Mahmoud Ahmadinijad, Daniel Ortega, Robert Mugabe, Than Shwe ….  They all agree.
 
I wish that President Obama had denounced the Ahmadinijad regime long before the opinion surveys dragged him into it. How could a man who works himself into moral slather over three terrorists being water-boarded seven years ago, now be so blasé about the open-air slaughter of dozens of non-terrorists this very week?  Where else in history has Obama ever closed his mouth and avoided cameras as a tactic of persuasion?
 
Neda Soltani, God blessed us with you.  You have done more to liberate Iran than ten trucks full of United Nations Documents; more than a lake full of pacifist perfume; and more than the sterile, halting, and belated pronouncements of our pitiful “Rock Star” President. His utterances are not worth the air that they are printed upon.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (10) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Second Coming of Robert Mugabe

Posted by Noam D. Gear on Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:03:00 PM
See Mark Sanford’s comments today

I am surprised and delighted to see that other people are beginning to see the similarity between President Mugabe in Zimbabwe and President Obama in America.

Allow me to expand it for you:
  • Both Obama and Mugabe went to elite Universities (Princeton; Oxford) 
  • Both got degrees from elite Law Schools.  (one from Harvard; two from University of London).
  • Both spent a while teaching and lecturing at a Law School. (Chicago; Zambia)
  • Both are intellectuals of reputation.
  • Both were “community organizers” (Chicago; Rhodesia)
  • Both of them are fantastic orators.  (Do you need proof?)
  • Both of them have countries with abundant and fertile agricultural lands.
  • Both of them rose to power from a new political base of young people who were persuaded that they had “no hope” without their leader.  (Pol Pot too, by the way)
  • Mugabe created a security force by hiring up many people from among his young political base of previously-hopeless people.  His security force was used to extract money and belongings from the rich and give them to the poor.  The part about giving to the poor was completely forgotten at the half-way point.  Obama has proposed the “Civilian National Security Force” that would be “as large and well funded as the US Army”.  No telling what he will use them to accomplish.
  • Both of them use Marx’s “Social Justice” rhetoric liberally when stoking their political base.
  • Both stress “Economic Justice”, and redistribution of as central to their mission.
  • Neither of them had any prior experience in managing an organization, much less a government.
  • Both fight/fought  Catholic Hospitals that served the poor.  Mugabe wanted to impose high tax on the imported medicines that were being distributed (free) to the poor.  Obama will sign FOCA and force Catholics to perform abortions—or quit medicine.
  • Both of them took immediate action to quash critics when their ideas began to fail severely.
  • Both rely on printing money to devalue currency to cope with their own budgetary incontinence—which is astronomical.  More about that later.
The similarities become smaller and less distinguishing after this.  Plus, we are only 50 days in.

Mugabe went on to use his “Security Force” to seize farms from farmers so that he could give the land to the “the poor”.  In this case, “the poor” were Mugabe’s political contributors and high-ranking  officials in his Security Force.  These people knew nothing about farming and they created a durable famine that is slowly killing 40% of the population in a region that had been known as “The Bread Basket of Africa”.  The famine is now being helped along by an outbreak of cholera, which could have been treated with medicine at Catholic Hospitals, but…oops.  Another million or more fled to Zambia and other countries. 

When inflation in the US reaches 22,000,000% per year like Zimbabwe, and when the super-intellectual Obama orders the treasury to print new $100,000,000,000-dollar notes (with his own image) so that people can use one of these notes to pay for groceries… then we will know for sure that we actually elected the second-coming of Mugabe as our president.  Of course, half of us will be dead by then.  And speaking of death…

If simple scale is applied, and if Obama manages to involve the agricultural base of the USA into one of his “Fairness” programs, then Obama’s famine will starve about 150 million Americans to death.  For comparison, that would be approximately: 70 Million more death than Mao; 120 Million more than Stalin; 60 fold more than Pol Pot; and 30-fold more than Robert Mugabe. 

I just wonder whether Obama will be the clear winner of the competition with other legendary leaders of “Social Justice”, or will he just take a spot in the middle of the pack somewhere.  Time will tell.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Office of the President's Defects

Posted by Noam D. Gear on Sunday, March 08, 2009 6:22:17 PM
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Cruelty We Can Believe In

Posted by Noam D. Gear on Sunday, March 01, 2009 3:20:01 PM
As we see people evicted from their homes, I ask readers not to get caught up in the false debate as to whether we should blame banks, bankers, home-buyers… for the banking crisis now at hand

None of those is to blame.

A far more deserving target of blame is Barney Frank, the insane US congressman from Massachusetts.  He bears great responsibility for advancing the legislation in 1995 that required banks to make loans to people who could not afford to repay them.  In the same stroke, he wiped out the regulations that would have stopped the lending when critical thresholds of insolvency were reached. Mr. Frank did this knowing that it could destabilize the banking system of the country, and yet he did it anyway.

This is like cutting the break cables on the car and then removing the guardrails from the road.  All of the burning wreckage we have now is a direct consequence of his actions. Amazingly, even after seeing six months of burning wreckage all over the economy, Mr. Frank is proud of his “accomplishment”.

I encourage readers to search for “Community Reinvestment Act” (CRA) and watch the old C-SPAN video of Barney Frank and Andrew Cuomo arguing in favor of wiping out these two important banking regulations for Freddie and Fannie.  It is a real eye-opener, and entertaining too.

Thinking back to the happy days of tiny scandals like Enron, I can recall four different Congressional hearings where executives such as Ken Lay (CEO), and Jeff Skilling (CFO) were called upon to explain what they did…and then they were jailed.  The crimes of the Enron executives were 8,000 times smaller than the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae Scandal—in which Frank and his chums discarded the regulation that had required those two institutions (and others) to keep a 4% solvency reserve. Further scandal is that senior executives of Freddie and Fannie and every other financial institution in trouble contributed huge sums of money to the Democrats who ran those committees, and smaller sums to some Republicans who were also on those committees. 

Scaling this crime to Enron, we should expect to have seen 16,000 Congressional Hearings by now…with another 16,000 hearings to come soon.  Have you noticed one single Congressional Hearing yet?  No.  There have been none.  None are planned. 

Like third-world dictators, Democrats never hold themselves to the same rules they create for everyone else.  Henry Waxman will never hold Barney Frank to account.  Nancy Pelosi will never hold Henry Waxman to account. Journalists at MSNBC will demand to know which newspapers Sarah Palin reads—because they judge her to be ignorant and uninformed.

To stuff the economic wound created by Mr. Frank, the Obama administration has now announced a plan to run a deficit of about $1.8 trillion in 2009, which is about four times larger a deficit than George Bush’s most reckless year. The USA will most likely borrow this money from the government of China.  Assuming China takes on the whole deficit for us, that government would need to extract about $720 from every man, woman, and child in China.  For a family of five (including one child and two grandparents), that might be a month’s pay.  They would use that money to buy food, and other essentials, but we will use it for a high-speed train that will to connect Disneyland to Las Vegas; Obama’s new personal fleet of 28 helicopters; New grass sod in Washington DC…

The list of American folly that Chinese people will be forced to pay for goes on at a pace of $70 million per page, for over a thousand pages.

This is the nauseating cruelty of classic liberalism.  They peddle slogans like “investment”, and “caring for poor people”, but they are really just pushing pain and suffering beyond the range of television cameras. As a result, “compassionate” liberals will make life even worse for people who are already even poorer than the poorest people in this country.  Liberals will call their cruelty “change we can believe in”, and they will demand to know how conservatives could dare to hope that the plan fails.

Meanwhile, Mr. Frank still has his job in Washington, where he lectures us about “fairness” every night via the wonder of television.

A while ago, a popular semantic game was to ask, “Why do Islamic terrorists hate the United States?”

Here in Massachusetts, we should be asking, “Why do people in other States hate Massachusetts?”  One answer is that we manufacture and sell politicians like Barney Frank.  It would be okay if Frank inflicted his pain only upon those who voted for him, but that is not the case.  His insane ideas about “fairness” inflict pain upon the entire country, and now China too.

The people of Massachusetts have eaten far too much mindless liberalism—which is very much like eating far too much broccoli. As a result, Congressman Barney Frank is now a foul cloud of flatulence that only Massachusetts cannot smell.  It is time to open the window and let him out, for the sake of the other passengers in the car.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Miss Teen South Carolina Clarifies Obama’s Capital Gains Rate

Posted by Noam D. Gear on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 12:00:00 AM
 “I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some people out there in our nation don't have maps of our, uh, 57 States and I believe that our education like such as our Capital Gains tax rate should serve purposes of fairness by moving the tax rate from 15% to a number no higher than the 28% that was under Bill Clinton. But I personally also believe that raising the tax rate on such as Wall Street Americans would be unable to hurt the economy of U.S. Americans because of good things that might happen in other places, like Wall Street America. And for purposes of fairness to all the U.S. Americans, not just rich U.S. Americans, the lowest increase in tax rates will go to the great majority of U.S. Americans who own small amounts of stock for our children.”
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »