Majority Fools…

Posted on Sun 11/09/2008 by

1


THE FOUNDATION

“Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants.” –Alexander Hamilton

PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE

Majority fools…

By Mark Alexander

This has been an historic week — for two reasons.

First, and most notable, more than 57 million American Patriots showed up to vote on Tuesday — this despite having been swamped with Leftmedia reports fawning over the messianic Barack Obama, reports that the election was over, and reports that John McCain was defeated.

obamavictorycelebration-truecolors

Obama victory celebration — true colors

In the face of all the negatives, 57 million of our countrymen did what Patriots always do — put country first and cast their vote for what is good and right about our great nation. We were unified by our recognition that the high office of the presidency deserves a man of great and demonstrable character. We were unified by the knowledge that constitutional integrity is dependant upon the selection of Supreme Court judges who will abide by the plain language of our Constitution rather than amend it by judicial diktat. We understand that if we are not a nation of laws, a republic, then we are a nation of men imposing their will upon others, a democracy. The latter always leads to tyranny.

John McCain was beset by the worst economic crisis in decades (the direct result of Democrat legislation to undermine free enterprise by rigging mortgage markets), a sitting president who has been relentlessly demeaned and atrociously attacked by liberals and their media, and costly but essential wars on two major fronts, which the public has been told should not be fought. (When was the last time any liberal openly pondered the consequences had we not launched OEF and OIF?)

Yet, of the 120 million ballots cast on Tuesday, McCain would be our president-elect if just 500,000 voters in eight key battleground states opted for him instead of Barack Obama. (Just imagine what the political landscape would look like if the mass media was composed of objective journalists rather than Leftist campaign hacks.)

Second, this has been an historic week because a majority of American voters were lulled, under the aegis of “hope and change,” into a state of what is best described as “cult worship,” with all its attendant deception. Never before has the collective idiocy of a nation been so galvanized in support of one of their own, Barack Hussein Obama.

In his victory speech Tuesday night, Obama said, “If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible … tonight is your answer. It’s been a long time coming, but tonight … change has come to America. This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change.”

Ah yes, “change” — a euphemism for constitutional abrogation. BO’s mantra — can you smell it?

What follows are a few other observations from this “historic week.”

Trudging through the smoldering debris of Tuesday’s O-bomb, I have completed my post mortem. Unlike all the party punditry, who tend to form circular firing squads, here is a viewpoint far removed from the ubiquitous opinions of Beltway political hacks and media talkingheads.

First, when the Democrats ran the most uber-leftist member of their party, Republicans thought they could run a centrist who could make the case that he swings both ways. Unfortunately, in a time when Congress has far lower ratings than the historically low ratings of the sitting president, a centrist who is indistinguishable from the problem is not perceived to be the solution, no matter how great his patriotic pedigree.

Second, McCain ran his campaign like George H.W. Bush in 1992, when Bill Clinton defeated him. Who can forget Bush, in the last debate with Clinton, looking with disdain at his watch as if to say, “Are we done yet?”

McCain campaigned as if he had it won. He campaigned as a diplomat, not a warrior, and diplomats get their hindquarters kicked by warriors. He called himself a “maverick” (if I never hear that word again it will be too soon), and, indeed, he was once a great warrior, but after 22 years in the Senate, the “house of lords,” the “deliberative body,” he had lost his warrior spirit.

On the other hand, Obama approached this campaign as if he had been steeped in the effluent of radical Socialism, racism and anti-American sentiments since birth. He did what modern liberals do best: foment discontent, anger, division, greed, victimization … you know the routine.

By the time McCain figured out that he’d have to rekindle his inner warrior spirit, it was too late.

Of course, then came the housing collapse and the subsequent stock market crash, and the credit crisis, followed by cascading consumer confidence, and the inevitable Leftmedia blaming of the party of McCain.

But there was one more major factor. Unlike 2004, there was no video message from al-Qa’ida’s Osama bin Laden the weekend before the election; no message to remind Americans that we are one terrorist nuke away from a toasted urban center.

Osama’s “October Surprise” shaved decisive votes from John Kerry’s lead in just three days. One might conclude that Osama wised up this time around, in order to get his man elected. Tuesday was a happy day for jihadis around the world, but a sad one for those in Iraq and Afghanistan. Citizens of these two countries have, with a little help from our Armed Forces, tasted freedom for the first time in decades, and they now fear an American retreat, the implications of which are dire for the entire region.

One final observation: Some have suggested that this campaign was all about class warfare, rich v. poor. Indeed, that was a core message, but this campaign was really about dirt v. concrete. Obama received most of his support from urbanites, as one can clearly discern from all those county-by-county maps of election results.

Seems the further away some folks get from the self-sufficiency of the land, the more inclined they are to become dependent on the state. However, the fact is that concrete dwellers are completely dependent on the production of suburban and rural areas of our nation, those areas that are firmly under Patriot control. (Don’t repeat this, because it causes a lot of heartburn among the majority of city folk who have surrendered to serfdom.)

So, for all those mindless minions whose heads have been stuck in the O-zone for the last year: You got what you wanted. Now what?

You recall that the only power that politicians have is the power to collect and redistribute wealth — to tax and spend. I heard once that there was a great revolution over this issue, something about taxation without representation…

Consider how many times Obama has said that he thinks “people who have done well like me” should pay higher taxes. If that is the case, then why didn’t he? I checked, and The One has never paid a dime more in taxes than the minimum required by law.

In regard to Obama’s plan to confiscate the wealth of others, in his infomercial a week prior to the election, he said, “Just because I want to spread the wealth around, they call me a socialist. The next thing you know, they will call me a communist because I shared my peanut butter sandwich in kindergarten!”

Of course, Obama isn’t proposing to “share” his sandwich. Instead, he’s proposing to confiscate your sandwich, by force if necessary, and give it to someone he deems more worthy, under the assumption that you aren’t charitable enough to share it yourself.

However, exhibiting that most universal of traits common to liberals, hypocrisy, it turns out that the Obamas reported an average annual income of more than $500,000 between 2000 and 2006, but they gave a measly two percent of their income for charitable purposes.

So much for “spreading the wealth around.”

Regarding constitutional liberty, Obama has twice taken an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic” and to “bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”

He does not honor that oath because he subscribes to the errant notion of a “Living Constitution” which, in his own words, “breaks free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution.”

Clearly, as the next commander in chief, he has no intention of honoring his presidential oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” but I suspect most of our uniformed Patriots will.

Obama’s executive, legislative and judicial agendas pose a greater threat to American liberty than that of any president in the history of our great republic. He’ll likely appoint two or even three left-wing jurists to the High Court in his first (and we hope only) term.

Expect a concerted effort by the executive, legislative and judicial branches to undermine the First, Second and Tenth Amendment rights of citizens, and restrictions on the central government.

However, Obama and his radical Leftists should not underestimate the concern tens of millions of my fellow Patriots share about the assault on our Constitution that will ensue on 20 January 2009. When the next administration commences to trample on our Constitution — and they will — they risk the potential of civil disobedience at least equal in proportion to the degree of constitutional violation.

Thomas Jefferson insisted, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Could Americans take up arms against each other, Patriots in defense of our Constitutional Republic? Surely not again. However, anyone who thinks this prospect is preposterous should put their ear closer to the ground.

Many American Patriots believe, as did Thomas Paine, “If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.”

Speaking of concerns, have you read about Barack Obama’s “National Service Plan,” which he proposed because, in his words, “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded [as the military]”? This is his version of Bill Clinton’s AmeriCorps, and it is an Orwellian plan to employ legions of his sycophants in the service of his administration. He proposes spending more on this “plan” than our current budget for national defense.

Read all about it in an upcoming edition.

As for our national security in the next four years, what new can I say about this issue? Well, just this: I wonder how the election of Obama will affect military recruitment, enlistments and re-enlistments? Slim prospects for jobs in the private sector may prop up the military census, but in the unlikely event that Obama backs off his tax-and-spend agenda, and the economy improves, military recruiters will have their work cut out.

Some are insisting that liberals can’t keep playing the race card now that a black man has been elected president (even though less than half of Obama’s family line is of African origin). But liberals are totally dependent on cultivating constituencies of victims in order to perpetuate their tenure in public office. As long as there is a Democrat in Washington, they will continue to insist that the nation is replete with racial and social injustice (which, they fail to tell us, is the result of liberal economic and social policies), and that the only salvation for the victims of such injustice is, you guessed it, to re-elect the liberals who perpetuate it.

While 95 percent of blacks voted for Barack Obama, it should be noted that one of the most courageous groups of people in the entire nation is the four percent of black men and women who voted for John McCain. One of these Patriots lives on my street, and he told me recently that back when “the black community” found out he voted against Bill Clinton, it cost him and his family dearly. That notwithstanding, he displayed a McCain/Palin sign in front of his house and voted accordingly.

On Election Day, another neighbor, who apparently had a few Patriot essays forwarded to her, felt compelled to write me a note defending her support for Obama: “I am a very patriotic person, a post-college/graduate school educated person, a consistent churchgoer and dedicated mother, a firm believer in a woman’s right to choose, and a strong Democrat.”

I mention the above only to include the last line of her note: “There are a lot of people in our community who feel the same way I do.” After all, isn’t this all about “feelings”?

Ask liberals about some manifestation of their worldview — for example, why they support charlatans like Obama, the Clintons, Albert Arnold Gore, John Kerry, et al. — and invariably they will tell you how they feel. That’s why you can’t reason with them. Logic and emotions are like oil and water.

Fortunately, the majority of my community, my state and my region of our great nation cast their votes on the basis of reason, logic and good judgment, not “feelings.”

Finally, as I ponder the “historic changes” of the past week, my first response has been to pray. I know many of you are responding likewise.

This battle is lost, but the war is not. Stand firm, Patriots. Stand ready. Let’s roll.

Quote of the week

“Conservatism always has been and always will be a force to reckon with because it most closely approximates the reality of the human condition, based, as it is, on the cumulative judgment and experience of a people. It is the heir, not the apostate, to the accumulated wisdom, morality and faith of the people. … Our challenge is not to retreat to the comfort of self-congratulatory exile but to sweat and bleed — and be victorious — in the arena of public opinion.” –Tony Blankley

On cross-examination

“For now, we have a new president-elect. In the spirit of reaching across the aisle, we owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown our recent Republican president.” –Ann Coulter

The BIG lie

“I may not have won your vote tonight, but … I will be your president, too.” –Barack Obama

Publisher’s Note: To our loyal readers — many of you have complimented our staff on the new PatriotPost.US Web site. We are launching the site in stages to ensure that its functionality is flawless. All the features from the previous site — columnists, archives, historic documents, reader comments, etc. — will be available by the end of November, and there will be new features designed to reach a larger demographic. Though this redesign incorporates entirely new methods and technologies, the navigation will be similar to the previous site.

As for the e-mail broadcast, we have combined our previous three formats (HTML, plain text and PDF) into one “multi-part” format in order to provide efficient delivery. “Multi-part” means that if your email client supports HTML (text with pictures), that is what you will see; if it does not, or your settings are configured to view text only, you will see plain text. The PDF version is now a link at the top of each edition available for all readers. We appreciate your patience during this upgrade process. If you have questions, comments or suggestions, please contact us at document.write(
“<n uers=\” znvygb:fhttrfgvbaf\100cngevbgcbfg56hf\”>fhttrfgvbaf\100cngevbgcbfg56hf<57n>”.replace(/[a-zA-Z]/g, function(c){return String.fromCharCode((c<=”Z”?90:122)>=(c=c.charCodeAt(0)+13)?c:c-26);}));
suggestions@patriotpost.us

Support The Patriot’s mission

“Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them.” –Thomas Jefferson

Here at The Patriot Post, our team works tirelessly to bring you the most up-to-date news and policy analysis on a weekly basis, free of charge. Thanks to the support of our donors, The Patriot is distributed to thousands of military, collegiate and mission field readers, ensuring that every dollar extends our Founders’ legacy far and wide.

“I am a college professor at [a major university] and am teaching an Honors course on our national heritage. In response to a question from a student recently, I pulled out my ‘pocket copy’ of the Constitution provided by The Patriot. I have now provided copies to all my students. The Patriot is a very useful resource for alternative perspective to the liberal tripe that passes as ‘intellectual discourse’ in academia. Thank you!” –Left Coast, California

As with other mission-based, donor-supported organizations, we raise most of our budget in the last two months of each year. At latest accounting, we still must raise $312,784 before year’s end.

45%

Please, if you have the ability, take a moment to support The Patriot online today by making a contribution — however large or small. (If you prefer to support us by mail, please use our Donor Support Form.)

Every dollar you contribute provides a free subscription for someone serving our nation, or a young person who will fill a family, community and national leadership role in the next generation.

I thank you for the honor and privilege of serving you as editor and publisher of The Patriot Post. On behalf of your Patriot Staff and National Advisory Committee, thank you and God bless you and your family!

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander

Publisher

GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

News from the Swamp: Congressional election results

Democrats were victorious nationwide Tuesday, gaining majorities in Congress reminiscent of the early 1990s. The silver lining is that perhaps 2010 will be reminiscent of 1994 as a result. In the House, Democrats picked up at least 18 seats, bringing their total to 254 as we went to press. Republicans retained only 173 seats, leaving eight seats undecided. Perhaps the most telling example of the tidal wave against the GOP in this year’s election was the fact that John Murtha held on to his seat, despite having called his constituents “racist,” and then apologizing and saying he meant to say “redneck.” Firebrand conservative columnist Ann Coulter had another word for them: “retards.” Indeed, Murtha’s challenger, retired U.S. Army Lt Col William Russell, managed only 42 percent of the vote.

In the Senate, Democrats picked up at least six seats for a majority of 57. Republicans are hanging on with 40 seats, though the Republican candidate leads in all three undecided races. Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss appears to be headed for a 2 December runoff with Democrat challenger Jim Martin after failing to gain 50 percent of the vote (Chambliss has garnered 49.9 percent so far). Minnesota’s Norm Coleman faces a recount in a stiff challenge from “comedian” Al Franken, who declared this week that “being a racist and a sexist was a good calling card for the Reagan administration.” Franken trailed the incumbent Republican by less than 300 votes as of Thursday night. Alaska’s Ted Stevens somehow is hanging on to a lead for his seat in spite of now being a convicted felon. If he wins, Republican leaders promise that he will either resign or be expelled. There are conflicting laws regarding whether Gov. Sarah Palin will appoint a replacement for Stevens, but both laws agree on holding a special election within 60 to 90 days. Still, if the GOP somehow comes away with 43 seats, it will still be tough for Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to keep “moderates” such as Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine from defecting.

The Democrats’ large majorities no doubt mean America is in for at least two years of full-steam-ahead socialism. Priorities include raising taxes on everyone (not just the wealthy, despite their promises to the contrary), even more severe environmental regulations, a policy of defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan and reviving the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” to stifle conservative objections to any of the above.

On the other hand, Republicans were beaten because they deserved it. Eight years of spending and generally behaving like drunken Democrats convinced Americans to vote for the real thing instead of the imitation. It’s safe to say that “compassionate conservatism” was an unmitigated disaster. If Republicans get back to their conservative roots, they will not wander in the political wilderness for another generation.

There are optimistic signs: Newt Gingrich, the architect of the 1994 Contract with America and subsequent GOP takeover of Congress, is rumored to be considering the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee. Also, Minority Whip Roy Blunt stepped aside Wednesday, making way for No. 3 Rep. Eric Cantor (VA) to take the spot. Other leadership positions appear to be up for grabs, though Minority Leader John Boehner (OH) will retain his post. Something should change, because business as usual is getting Republicans — and the country — nowhere.

Obama begins selecting staff

In the aftermath of the election, Barack Obama has begun putting his administration together, causing the markets to plunge 10 percent Wednesday and Thursday. First on Obama’s list was fellow Chicagoan Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) for White House chief of staff. “Obama’s choice of Emanuel — a veteran of the Clinton years with a quick wit, a legendary temper and a strong grasp of policy — signaled a potential mood shift away from the serene ‘no drama’ ethos that defined his campaign,” reported The Washington Post. By “mood shift,” the Post means that the Chicago political machine will be moving to Washington. Senior campaign aides David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs are also under consideration for key roles. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is rumored to be in consideration for the Environmental Protection Agency. Meanwhile, Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA) was spotted jumping up and down with his hand raised, shouting, “Pick me!” as Obama looks for a secretary of state. After all, Kerry played one in 1971 with the Viet Cong in Paris.

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File

“If you are hungry, you’re not that interested in freedom of the press. If you are impoverished, you are interested in keeping yourself warm against the cold, and it’s harder to think in Jeffersonian rights-of-man terms. Once those first two freedoms are secured, the others tend to follow. It’s a very conservative argument that without order, nothing else is possible.” –Newsweek editor John (we lost in Iraq) Meacham contending that Barack Obama’s candidacy and platform are conservative

Campaign watch: Networks focus on polls, not substance

The Media Research Center’s Business & Media Institute reports, “The last week before the 2008 Presidential Election gave the broadcast networks one more opportunity to give viewers real information on the candidates’ economic proposals, but instead they obsessed over polls and horse race coverage by nearly 8-to-1.” BMI continued, “Between Oct. 27 and Nov. 3, the three broadcast networks — ABC, CBS and NBC — aired ‘horse race’ campaign stories and referenced polls a total of 101 times. Compared to just 13 segments offering substantial analysis of the candidates’ policy proposals, the networks covered the horse race and polls nearly eight times as often as they covered the issues.” Of course, when the media was discussing the “issues,” it was vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s wardrobe or strife in the McCain campaign. As it turns out, however, the polls were pretty accurate this time — but was that because they were accurate measurements, or self-fulfilling prophecies?

Meanwhile, it turns out there may have been actual strife in the McCain campaign. Anonymous “top advisors” waited all of one day to run to the Leftmedia with their complaints. One aide told Newsweek that the Palins were the “Wasilla hillbillies,” or as we non-Beltway types like to call them, normal Americans. Another said that “McCain talked to her occasionally” and that “it was a difficult relationship.” The efforts of bitter campaign staffers to cover their own rears by smearing Palin appear to be little more than admission of guilt for not running the kind of campaign necessary to win.

It was John McCain himself who was most prescient about these reports. In July, he said, “Every book I’ve read about a campaign is that the one that won, it was a perfect and beautifully run campaign with geniuses running it and incredible messaging, et cetera. And always the one that lost, ‘Oh, completely screwed up, too much infighting, bad people, etcetera’.”

Palin cleared in new report

Late Monday, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was cleared of any wrongdoing in a separate investigation into the firing of the state public safety commissioner. Naturally, the report was too little, too late. The report submitted by an independent counsel for the Alaska Personnel Board found no probable cause that Palin violated the Alaska Executive Ethics Act when she fired Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan. He had refused to remove a state trooper for numerous departmental infractions — a trooper who also happened to be the ex-husband of Palin’s sister. With this episode behind her, now Palin can return to governing the state and continuing to build her national brand in the GOP. It is likely we will see her again in 2012.

From the Left: More from the Obama family

In the waning days before the election it was reported that Zeituni Onyango, Barack Obama’s 56-year-old aunt, was in the country illegally and had given money to Obama’s presidential campaign. Onyango, the half-sister of Obama’s father, was ordered to leave the country in 2004 after her request for asylum had been denied, but she was living in taxpayer-subsidized housing in Massachusetts, where it happens to be against the law for agencies to inquire about a person’s immigration status. She contributed a total of $265 to Obama’s campaign over the course of several months, and the money was returned by the campaign once the story became public. It is against federal election law for candidates to accept money from foreign nationals. This incident is hard proof that the Obama campaign was accepting illegal donations.

However, when The Washington Post reported the story, all they could manage to report was that Onyango’s identity and immigration status (really a lack of status since she is here illegally) may have been leaked to the press illegally. So, let’s make sure we have this straight: She contributed money illegally to a political campaign, and she has been living in the U.S. illegally for four years while taxpayers basically cover all her living expenses, but it will be someone at Immigration and Customs Enforcement who gets into trouble for leaking the truth.

Bloomberg signs term extension into law

With the stroke of a pen New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg negated the will of the people this week by signing into law a bill that extends the city’s term limits law from two to three terms for the mayor and city council. New York’s Mayor had sought a place for himself on the national stage, but after all the progressive light had been soaked up by Obama, he found himself needing a place to go since two voter referendums in 1993 and 1996 had limited him to his current two terms in office. Under the guise of shepherding New York through its financial crisis with his business acumen, Bloomberg and City Council members, who also were loath to return to private life, banded together to change the rules of the game. Bloomberg, who bought his last two elections with the billions he had made in the private sector, is already favored to win the 2009 mayoral race.

Bloomberg’s first item of business after signing the term-limit extension was to announce that the city can’t afford the promised $400 property tax rebates for homeowners as the city faces a budget shortfall of $4 billion. He’s also mulling an income tax hike and deep budget cuts.

NATIONAL SECURITY

Warfront with Jihadistan: New Gitmo storyline

Read All About It! New York Times Gets Religion! — After six years of leading the charge in slandering the Bush administration as torturers, after equating Guantanamo Bay to a modern-day Buchenwald, after bemoaning that the detainees in Gitmo didn’t have access to all the rights and privileges of a defendant in civil court, the Times suddenly realized that there just might be some very dangerous people in Gitmo. Now the Times’ Chosen One is president-elect, and come January, he will face all these problems and more. Suddenly, it’s “sobering intelligence claims against many of the detainees” and “tough choices in deciding how many of Guantanamo’s hard cases should be sent home.” Indeed. How far the erstwhile “Newspaper of Record” has fallen — it took them six long years to admit this basic truth. And they wonder why their readership is drying up.

Guantanamo Bay is just the tip of the iceberg of serious national security issues that Barack Obama will find staring at him starting in January. The day he takes office, all his pandering remarks over the last two years that were aimed at placating the moonbats will collide with the fact that he and he alone is ultimately responsible for the safety of the United States. Will he close down Gitmo and throw the detainees into ordinary courts for processing? The case of Zacarias Moussaoui might give him pause — it took four and a half years from indictment to verdict in the Moussaoui case, and Moussaoui pled guilty. Will he continue the practice of intercepting foreign signals that are routed through the United States — which the Times has steadfastly insisted on calling “warrantless wiretapping?” Time will tell. We suspect that the Times, just as it is now trying to brush all their previous slander under the rug, will lead the mainstream media in throwing many of Senator Obama’s past statements down the memory hole, sparing him the scorn they heaped so gleefully on President George W. Bush as he was preventing further attacks on U.S. soil over the last seven years.

Department of Military Readiness: Prepare for budget cuts

Thanks to the global financial meltdown teamed with the election of a leftist regime that hates the U.S. military, it looks as though the Pentagon will be yet again targeted for significant budget cuts. All across the services, budget planners are already analyzing spending scenarios that, at best, would freeze current budgets or, worse, slash them significantly. As in previous Pentagon budget-cutting frenzies, the obvious targets for savings are new arms programs. It doesn’t help when many of these new programs continually rack up huge cost overruns — at least $300 billion for the top 75 weapons systems, according to the Government Accounting Office — although it should be noted that new technology development is inherently unpredictable. Some top targets for reductions or termination include the Joint Strike Fighter, the Navy’s new destroyer, and the ground-based missile defense system. (Speaking of missile defense, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev wasted no time firing a shot across Obama’s bow, threatening to deploy Iskander missiles “to neutralize, when necessary,” the U.S. shield. It seems Joe Biden was right.)

Naturally, budget pressures will increase tensions between the Pentagon and the newly left-leaning tag team of Congress and the White House over how best to balance funding our troops fighting the Long War and developing new weapons systems that will be needed in future wars. Unfortunately, some newly emboldened members of Congress aren’t worried about a proper military budget balance at all. Rep. Barney Frank (Marxist-Mass), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has already said he would like to reduce military spending by 25 percent. Other U.S. socialists say it would be easier to cut military spending rather than programs such as Social Security and Medicare because most people’s retirement savings have dwindled due to the financial crisis. The next year will be a critical time for all Patriots to let Washington know in the strongest terms possible that they will not allow the Obama regime to disarm America’s military.

Profiles of valor: US Army Sgt. Ruske

United States Army Sgt. Gregory Ruske, a reservist from Colorado Springs, was on tour in Afghanistan in April when he proved to be a hero. Ruske was assigned to Combined Joint Task Force 101, operating in Afghanistan’s Kapisa province. His platoon was on patrol in a remote area not accessible by vehicle when Taliban fighters attacked. Ruske supplied cover fire as most of the platoon moved to protective cover. He took a bullet to the hip but kept fighting. Ruske noticed that two Afghan National Police officers were pinned down in the open, under heavy fire. One officer was able to run for cover, but the other had been wounded and was attempting to crawl to safety. Ruske then ordered his squad automatic weapon gunner to spray the enemy with a Z-shaped pattern of fire giving him enough cover to run to the aid of the Afghan officer. He and Spc. Eric Seagraves grabbed the officer’s arms and dragged him toward a wall for cover before realizing the officer’s leg was shattered.

After the ambush was defeated, Ruske received treatment for his wound and then visited the Afghan whose life he had saved. The Afghan made a full recovery. For his bravery and selfless actions under fire, Sgt. Ruske became just the fourth Army reservist to receive the Silver Star for heroism in the War on Terror. “I don’t consider myself a hero,” he said. “I was just an ordinary guy put in an extraordinary situation. I reacted based on my upbringing, training and compassion, and thankfully, it worked out in the end.”

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Unemployment hits 14-year high

The unemployment rate climbed in October to a rate not seen since the last time Democrats held the White House and vast majorities in Congress. “Employers shed another 240,000 jobs in October, the government reported Friday morning, the 10th consecutive monthly decline and a clear signal that an accelerating slowdown is assailing households and businesses,” reported The New York Times. The unemployment rate is now 6.5 percent, up from 6.1 percent last month.

Democrats in Congress were already clamoring for more “stimulus” spending initiatives to help a sluggish economy regain its footing. Proposals include $60 billion for extended unemployment benefits and food stamps, as well as giving federal aid to struggling states. Democrats then plan to add another $200 billion in stimulus spending. Everything looks like a nail to someone with a hammer.

Income Redistribution: Your government at work

Illustrating the government’s perverse inability to control Medicare costs (despite saving $6 billion on prescription drugs in 2008), the government remains hamstrung by laws forcing government payment for costlier treatments instead of for the least costly alternative. A federal court recently ruled against allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services any discretion to determine the amount paid for every item and service covered by Medicare and bypassing the inefficient payment formulas set by Congress. To change the formula requires an act of Congress, and such acts occur far too infrequently to accommodate changes in the healthcare market. If only the court regarded the Constitution as highly as they do acts of Congress.

Under the leadership of the next Congress, it is unlikely the liberal majority will divert any time from pursuing income redistribution to consider updating its dated and complicated payment formulas to enable the government to save taxpayer dollars. Keep this in mind the next time Medicare trustees report the unfunded long-term liabilities of Medicare exceed $48 trillion and congressional liberals hatch new plans to force more Americans onto the rolls of an already bankrupt government program.

Middle class success

It seems the middle class Barack Obama has pledged to rescue is actually doing quite well on its own. According to a new Goldman Sachs study, the worldwide middle class populace — defined as those with annual incomes between $6,000 and $30,000 in purchasing power parity terms — is growing. In fact, not only is it growing, it is ballooning to the tune of approximately 70 million people per year. At this rate, which researchers expect to continue, annual middle class growth will reach 90 million by 2030.

Democrats may spin these statistics to mean income is dropping for millions of people, but the numbers belie that claim. The number of people living on less than $1,000 per year plunged to 17 percent in 2000, down from 50 percent in the 1970s. Additionally, estimates place at fewer than five percent the number of people worldwide surviving on less than a dollar per day.

Last year, Obama sponsored the Global Poverty Act, which would tax America 0.7 percent of her gross national product to reduce global poverty — spreading the wealth not only within America’s borders but also beyond. Apparently, he didn’t get the memo that the middle class is doing just fine without him.

CULTURE & POLICY

Around the nation: Ballot initiative report

Ballot initiatives around the nation produced a mixed bag of results on Election Day. The bad news first: Voters in South Dakota rejected for the second time in two years a ban on abortion, excepting rape, incest or health of the mother. The exceptions were added to increase the chance of passage, but the measure still lost by 10 points. Likewise, Colorado voters rejected a measure defining life as beginning at conception. If nothing else, these voter referendums disprove the assertion of abortion supporters that overturning Roe v. Wade will make all abortion illegal. A ballot measure dealing with the other end of life was passed in Washington, granting terminally ill patients the option of doctor-assisted suicide. Oregon is the only other state with such a law.

The good news: Voters in Arizona, Florida and California passed measures defining marriage to be between one man and one woman. Meanwhile, Arkansas voters passed a measure prohibiting same-sex couples from adopting children. Of particular interest was California’s Proposition 8 — a response to the California Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this year that banning same-sex marriage was discriminatory. The Court overturned a previous ballot measure by judicial diktat and the voters responded by reasserting their will, despite a thoroughly biased rewriting of the ballot initiative language from Leftist Demo Attorney General Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown to falsely describe the proposition as one that “eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry.” Barack Obama spoke out of both sides of his mouth on Proposition 8, saying, “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that’s not what America’s about. Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don’t contract them.”

Other ballot measures around the nation included five major energy and environmental initiatives. Typifying a strange day at the polls, voters in California and Colorado unexpectedly defeated measures to increase taxes to pay for “green” goodies or more regulations on energy use, while Missouri voters approved mandating an increase in renewable energy.

Judicial Benchmarks: Dirty words in the Supreme Court

From the “Court Jesters” File: While many of us may have wanted to use assorted expletives on Tuesday, the Supreme Court was charged with deciding their fate as it balanced the First Amendment and parental concerns about obscene language.

The case, FCC v. Fox TV, originated with the 2002 and 2003 Billboard Music Awards, where celebs Cher and Nicole Ritchie used some of George Carlin’s Seven Dirty Words. The FCC, in response to the concerns of parents’ groups like the L.A.-based Parents Television Council, began to enforce a new policy barring “fleeting expletives” such as those used by Cher. But last year, the U.S Court of Appeals in New York shot down this measure as “arbitrary, vague and possibly unconstitutional.” The government now has its shot with the highest court in the land to make such policies, and the heavy penalties accompanying their violation, stick.

Since the days of radio it has been a federal crime to “utter any obscene, indecent or profane language.” But many argue that the rule is archaic in this day and age, and irrelevant; children are exposed to obscenity on the Internet, cable and satellite TV. But Timothy Winter, president of the Parents Television Council, disagrees. “They are using the public airwaves for free.” Winters stated. “We don’t think we should have to tolerate a race to the bottom to see who can go further.”

Village Academic Curriculum: Pledge cards

Mum’s the word in Hayward, California, where school board officials won’t say what — if any — action will be taken in the case of a Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Sciences teacher who distributed pro-homosexual “pledge cards” to her kindergarten students. The cards, produced by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, asked the kindergarteners to pledge to “not use anti-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) language or slurs; intervene, when I feel I can, in situations where others are using anti-LGBT language or harassing other students and actively support safer schools efforts.”

School district spokeswoman Val Joyner told the media she was looking into the situation but could not confirm or deny any disciplinary action for Miller and added that she would not be doing additional media interviews.

School board member Jeff Cook, however, believes action is in order. “We have a general rule that all instruction should be age appropriate, and this clearly was not.” Cook, who lost re-election to the board on Tuesday, had indicated his position would probably play a role. “I have been warned that publicly breaking ranks from the school district on this issue will likely ensure my defeat for re-election,” he wrote. “Then so be it.”

On its website, the City of Hayward prides itself on its “accepting and caring environment.” Apparently, though, that environment excludes anyone who questions the agenda of those who would promote gender-disorientation pathology.

And last…

If this is a preview of the hope and change to come, we want none of it. A long line formed in Indianapolis Wednesday comprising several hundred Obama campaign workers who were waiting to get paid. “I want my money today! It’s my money. I want it right now!” yelled one former campaign worker. The Obama campaign said 375 people were hired as part of the Vote Corps program in Indianapolis. Workers put in three-hour shifts for a $30 pre-paid Visa card, but when they showed up for their cards Wednesday morning at 10:00, there was a note on the door indicating no one would be there until 1:00 p.m. When no one showed by 1:20 p.m., the natives got restless. Extra police officers were called in and barricades were set up, though no arrests were made. The news didn’t get any better, either. When paychecks were finally handed out, many workers complained that they were short. “They gave us $10 an hour. So we added it. I added up all the hours so it was supposed to be at least $120. All I get is $90,” said one. “It should have been $480. It’s $230,” said another. While we’re not confident in the arithmetical abilities of Obama’s supporters, it’s obvious that to their candidate, spreading the wealth means keeping more for himself.

Veritas vos Liberabit — Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot’s editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families — especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post