Now is not the time for profits

President Obama yesterday was complaining about the $18 billion in bonuses that were received by Wall St. executives and had this to say:

“There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses. Now is not that time.”

What was not stated is that the $18 billion in 2008 is 44 percent less than in 2007. He claimed that the bonuses were irresponsible, but what is more irresponsible, the $18 billion in bonuses paid out to companies, (some successful, some unsuccessful) or the $800 billion + (more than a trillion with interest) that our children and grandchildren will be paying for and is not going to fix the economy?

The question is this, what did the President mean? Was he letting the truth slip out here or did he simply misspeak? Rush Limbaugh was recently taken out of context and his statements were misrepresented. I don't want to do the same to the President, but I'm thinking that this is another example of how the socialist side of President Obama comes out when he's not in front of a teleprompter.

So far...

I've really tried to be optimistic about President Obama and wait until he does something before I really jump on his case. I've hoped that he would govern as a moderate as the RINO's have said he would. But unfortunately that hasn't been the case so far. He's planning on holding off on the stimulus package, so to speak. As of right now, the plan is to slowly release bits and pieces of the stimulus over the next 3-8 years. The thing about STIMULUS is that it's supposed to STIMULATE. Unemployment continues to rise and the President is not using the money designated to stimulate the economy to stimulate the economy. Over the next few years he plans to slowly release this money into special projects which do not provide long term benefits to the economy. He wants to build infrastructure, which is a one and done type of stimulus. Once the infrastructure projects are completed you will have those people involved in the projects out of a job. If you want LONG-TERM job creation, you need to cut taxes. The problem with cutting taxes is that the liberals will lose power so President Obama is unlikely to do that. But if I were a restaurant owner thinking of expanding my business, (and creating 10-20 new jobs) I wouldn't do it if I knew my taxes were about to go up. The only industry that will not be affected by this increase in taxes and spending will be the government industry which is the only industry that SHOULD be downsizing.

Next, in all of his wisdom, with his military and diplomatic experience the President has decided to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Many of the detainees who have been released from this facility have gone on to return to the front lines against our military forces and have been involved in further terrorist activity. I agree that the detainees should receive a form of due process. They should be given a fair trial by military tribunal as would be given to any enemy combatant or prisoner of war. As terrorists who are not fighting for any nation, these terrorists are not guaranteed protection under the Geneva Convention. With that said, there should still be a trial which would release those held falsely and convict those who are truly terrorists. However, our soldiers and marines should not have to read terrorists Miranda rights, and terrorists do not deserve a trial in US civilian courts at US taxpayer expense. The other question is: What do we do with the guys that we can't convict and can't send back? My proposal is to let them stay at the Obama's home in Chicago. But seriously, the president at the press conference was referring questions regarding this Executive Order to his lawyer. Mr. President, you are the Chief Executive. You shouldn't be asking your lawyer questions about an order you just signed, especially in front of the media. But none of those empty suits called you on the fact that you didn't know what was in your own order did they?

The last thing that burned me up (well there's more, but this is the last one I'll talk about) is that the President signed another order to loosen restrictions on abortion. It allowed US tax dollars to be spent on abortions overseas. I don't really like the idea of my tax dollars going to murder babies. I don't want to say more because blood is about to shoot out of my eyes.

The one bright spot (if you can call it that) is that the President signed an order to freeze high-level executive pay in the government. I like the idea that we are freezing unnecessary spending, but this is a drop in the bucket. So he saves the taxpayers a couple of million (yea) and raises the deficit by about $500 billion and doesn't even get the stimulus where it's supposed to go. So he gets props for the one good measure, albeit a minor one, and a whole lot of thumbs down for just about everything else he did over the past week.

Worst Guest in the World???

I saw a CNN video where one of the CNN gossip shows was discussing how Ann Coulter was the worst guest in the world. (or something like that) The people who make a living talking about what other people do, and the producers and hosts of 'The View' should know what most people know about Ann. She is extremely opinionated and she believes what she believes and doesn't really care who it offends. This is quite the opposite of the bleeding hearts on 'The View'. The only time they get opinionated is if it has to do with attacking George Bush or Sarah Palin. Then they can attack away.

At any rate, as I watched this video, I didn't see anything wrong with Ann Coulter's appearance on this show, except the 5 women who kept interrupting her. Ann makes some statements in her book which are strong statements, and she backs them up with her sources. (I haven't read her book, but she quotes a few sources just during the interview) One of the sources is a progressive 'think tank'. (a bit of an oxymoron if you ask me) So as they are questioning her about her strong statements, they keep interrupting her answers. She makes a statement they don't like. They call her on it. She tries to explain why she said what she said and they cut her off. I thought the premise of 'The View' was to be a discussion program, where topics, light and heavy, are DISCUSSED. Apparently the only discussion allowed is what the liberals on that show want to talk about.

But the bottom line is this question: Was Ann Coulter out of line during her appearance on 'The View'? I don't think so. She was Ann being Ann, with strong opinions and not backing down from anyone, even 'saint' Barbara Walters.

It's My Potty

Ok, I'm sure a hundred other bloggers will use this title for this story, but it jumped in my head, and I had to go with it. Today, on Glenn Beck's radio show they did the numbers of expected Inaugural guests, (4,000,000) and the number of port-a-pottys at the inaugural event. (5,000) That means, if the expected 4,000,000 people show up, there will be 1 port-a-potty for every 800 people. According to the research on the Glenn Beck Radio Show, a private event would require, one P.P. for every 75 guests. A government event requires one for every 300. I don't know why there's such a disparity, but nevertheless there is seemingly a big gap between the estimates, and the number or P.P.'s available for the event. How did they resolve this dilemma? They just gave a low official estimate. Just like they do with their government programs. They say this will cost 1 trillion dollars, and it usually costs about 5 trillion. Very useless information I know, but it at least made me laugh.

Britain's Finest Hour

The conversations with Stanley Rosenthal and ReckNHavic on my Gaza post inspired this video post.

Gaza Conflict

This is what the LORD says: "For three sins of Gaza, even for four, I will not turn back my wrath. Because she took captive whole communities and sold them to Edom, I will send fire upon the walls of Gaza that will consume her fortresses. Amos 1:6-7

I don't believe this scripture really has any relevance as far as God's plan is concerned anymore. Jesus was the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. However, I'm sure there are people in Israel that are reading this. I don't really know what to say when it comes to Israel. I am truly on the fence. They appear to be a free and democratic, tolerant society, and compared to the rest of the middle east, they are. However there isn't true religious freedom there. Not if you are a Christian who is trying to fulfill the Great Commission:

Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." Matthew 28:18-20

If you are trying to fulfill the Great Commission in Israel, you will likely be barred from reentry into the country if you leave. I don't believe that it is God's plan for a physical state of Israel in the Middle East anymore, at least not in the sense of His twelve tribes. God's Kingdom is now a Spiritual Kingdom.

Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place." John 18:36

With that said, I feel that there is a great need for a strong democracy in the middle east. I also think that it is good that in Israel there is a chance to see the great historical sights from the bible. There is a big difference between reading the constitution in a book, and seeing the actual constitution. There is a big difference between seeing the White House on TV, and actually walking through it, or walking through the US Capitol. In the same way, but greater, it is important to have access to the physical historical sights spoken of in the bible. I also believe that as a nation whose borders have international recognition, Israel has a right to defend itself from foreign aggression.

Palestinian terrorists are firing rockets from Gaza into sovereign Israeli land. Israel doesn't have very much land to spare and every time that there is a flare-up between Israel and terrorists, the terrorists, be it Hamas or Hezbollah seem to be able to carry out more destruction than the last time. Their weapons systems become more and more advanced. If Israel does not defend itself, it will very soon cease to exist. Theodore Roosevelt said: "Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft." Israel may be the best in the world at doing this. They negotiate and negotiate, they give land back to their enemies and are thanked with rockets. The Israeli responses to their enemies would probably make TR proud. Israel annihilates the infrastructure of their enemies, and the capability of their enemies to strike Israel (at least for a few years) and they do so with surprisingly few civilian casualties. In any war, civilians will be hurt, but Israel is very good at keeping collateral damage to a minimum, especially considering that the terrorists hide among civilians.

I am torn in this conflict. As you see the devastation in Gaza, it is impossible to not feel sorry for those in harm's way; the innocent people who were unfortunate enough to be born on the wrong side of a border. But if Israel relents, if Israel doesn't defend itself, there will be no Israel left. They will be wiped out forever. I think there needs to be peace, but there needs to be international pressure put on Syria and Iran who are likely supplying Hamas with weapons to stop supporting them or it will be considered an act of war. But the United States seems to be the only nation defending Israel internationally, and I fear that on January 20th they will have no allies left. If Israel loses it's last ally, I suspect they will begin launching pre-emptive nuclear strikes. I hope I'm wrong. I hope this conflict can come to a peaceful resolution, and I pray for peace in the middle east. But somehow, I don't think it will happen.