1. ...the Nanny State? So what is wrong with sending your pre-schooler off to school with a lunch box filled with a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, apple juice and potato chips? Lots apparently. At the West Hoke Elementary School (in North Carolina), a state agent determined that the lunch did not meet the Department of Health and Human Services/USDA guidelines. Therefore, the offending lunch was apparently confiscated and the child was given a chicken nuggets lunch. And the mom was billed $1.25 for the substitute lunch. (Story from Foxnews.com, 2/15/12.) Is this child now on a "watch" list that results in getting her lunch box checked regularly? And if the lunch "fails" another two or three times, then what? Is the Department of Child Services called? Do they try to have the child taken out of the home for bad parenting (abuse by turkey and cheese sandwich with banana, chips and apple juice)? And what is so healthy about chicken nuggets? Are they fried? Fatty? How have we allowed the Federal Government to be involved in actually inspecting our children's lunch boxes? Where in the Constitution is this nonsense allowed - other than Congress again abusing its power under the Commerce Clause; with a Supreme Court that consistently upholds almost every expansion of Congress' power.
2. ...the Courts? And speaking of the Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg recently spoke on Egyptian television. As Egypt's new government may be pursuing their own constitution, what does this Supreme Court Justice recommend as a model? You might think the U.S. Constitution would come to mind. You know, the oldest existing constitution still in use; one that arguably has guaranteed more freedom and liberty for the people governed by it than any other constitution on the planet. Not a chance. Instead, our Supreme Court Justice had this to say: "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa..." Also,: "Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms." Canada's Charter actually tracks much of what is in our own Bill of Rights. It is always a good idea to periodically read the Bill of Rights. Our founders were concerned about putting limits on the power of government. What a liberal Justice like Ginsberg undoubtedly finds lacking is a distinct absence of "entitlements" anywhere in our Constitution.
3. ...Islamic Propaganda? Apparently, CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) is developing a practice of sending their representatives to speak to high school students across the country. One school district (Tampa) objected, noting that CAIR had been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case brought by the Federal Government. CAIR representative Lovey Saylor called it "fear-mongering" by the school district. Hassan Shibly of CAIR had this to say: "This hatred and animosity only shows the importance of reaching out to the community...It's insulting to the school and the students to think that one person can influence their beliefs. It's misleading." (Story from Foxnews.com, 2/15/12.) Well Mr. Shibly, if the students cannot be influenced by your group, why do you want to bother speaking to them? And notice how every time anyone raises a legitimate objection to anything islamic, it is called "fear-mongering" or "hatred." Our children's textbooks are already influenced by Saudi Arabian rewriting of history through the Saudi's pouring millions of dollars into textbook publishers.
In Mesa County, Colorado, a high school student quit the choir because of his objection to a song put into their repertoire, which he did not want to sing. But School District officials supported the choir director, who chose an Islamic song that said: "There is no other truth except Allah." (I wish I was making this up, but it was on Foxnews.com, 2/18/12.) Said the District spokesperson: "This is about bringing diversity to the students and showing them other things that are out there." Really? Did this district let them know that one Islamic country, Iran, has sentenced to death a young father of two for the "crime" of converting from Islam to Christianity? How's that diversity thing working out in the Muslim world? And what if the song had this line: "There is no other truth except Jesus (or Moses)?" Oh no! Then we need separation of Church and State.
4. ...Our Commander-in-Chief? Recently, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified before Congress. When asked about the huge cut in defense spending under the Obama Administration (which this Congress foolishly went along with), Panetta had this to say: "You can't take 1/2 trillion dollars out of the defense budget and not incur additional risks." That was probably a "no - duh" moment. But, as Panetta works for Obama, he hastened to add: "...but we believe they are acceptable risks." (Quotes from Hannity on Fox, 2/15/12.) And that was a "who are you kidding" moment. Having just celebrated the 50th anniversary of John Glenn's 3 orbits around the earth, I find it very interesting that, for what may be the first time since Glenn's journey, the United States of America is unable to launch an astronaut into space. We have to rely on the Russians. My guess is, that is exactly where Obama wants the U.S. to be; no longer the world leader in space, nor militarily, nor economically nor diplomatically. As I have said before, there will be no vacuum in leadership in the world; it will either be Russia or China or Brazil or Iran and North Korea.
Meanwhile, the IBD (2/21/12) reports that the U.S. Navy is down to 278 active ships. To be fair, the downward trend post-Reagan accelerated under Clinton and Bush as well. But is this really the time to have a weakened Navy? It is through our Navy that the U.S. is able to make its presence known around the world, and prevent Iran from following through on its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz. Our Naval presence lets allies know we are there for them, and lets our enemies know the same. The IBD notes that 10 new ships are projected to be built in 2013; but that is down from the originally proposed 13. Reagan reversed a downward slide that began under Carter; and it appears our next president will have to reverse the cutbacks under Obama. As Reagan said: "Peace through strength."
5. ...an Iranian Nuke in the Hands of the Ayatollahs? What a surprise! The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) just reported that Iran is accelerating its uranium enrichment. IAEA inspectors were denied complete access to all sites by the Iranians. Yet, they were able to report that Iran is enriching uranium beyond levels needed for civilian use. And really, if the purpose is civilian use only, why are so many of their facilities buried deep underground? Does anybody still believe the Iranian's lies? Well, apparently Obama does. He and his administration continue to tell the Israelis not to attack Iran. Obama believes sanctions are working. And I believe the moon is made out of green cheese. Meanwhile, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Dempsey, was on CNN explaining why it would not be prudent for the Israelis to attack - maybe Iran really is not trying to build a nuke, it would only set them back a few years, it would be destabilizing, and there would be retaliation. Well, except for Iran maybe not building a nuke, the rest may very well be true. But if the goal is to deter Iran from going ahead and getting a nuke, then the weakness displayed by our top military commander will have the exact opposite effect. He has basically signaled the Iranians that there will be no military action so they are free to develop their nuke.
Obama has made this same type of error time and again. He thought he would be the President to bring peace to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict by telling the Israelis they needed to stop building "settlements." The result, of course, was a signal to the Palestinians that they could stay away from the peace talks until Israel stopped building. He sent exactly the wrong message. He either does this intentionally, or has absolutely no idea how the real world operates. You tell the Iranians there will be no military consequences to their getting a nuke, and guess what - they will build a nuke. You tell the Palestinians that Israel has to stop building, and guess what - the Palestinians say Israel has to stop building or they won't engage in talks. Netanyahu will be meeting in D.C. next week with Obama. As Israel has always done, I suspect they will do what is necessary for their survival, regardless of the pressure put on Netanyahu by Obama. While the world publicly criticized them for their attacks on Iraq's and Syria's nuclear facilities, the reality is that much of the world privately thanked Israel. This time it will be far more difficult - given the flying distance, the number of Iranian facilities, and the greater strength of the Iranian military. A shame that the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France and Germany will stand idly by while Israel protects the entire world from the Ayatollahs.