Excellent Essay by John Griffing

Posted on The American Thinker (http://www.americanthinker.com/), John Griffing puts forth a very thoughtful essay titled "The Prince of Lies" on the culture of deceit that seems to have engulfed our country.

WHO SET UP GOVERNMENT ‘PROPAGANDA’ CONFERENCE CALL? Newly Revealed White House, NEA Audio Contradict

I found this on the Drudge Report - another sickenly interesting and informative article about the propaganda efforts of the Obama administration.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/09/08/update-the-nea-and-mainstream-media-remain-silent/

Tuesday Morning Links

As I am preparing for a long trip today computer time will be slight, I am posting many links in one post. Follow the links to read the stories.

When Bush spoke to students, Democrats investigated, held hearings
by Byron York in Washington Examiner

Traveling Tea Party draws thousands
by Casey Cora in Southtown Star

A round up of links via Memeorandum. a good compendeum of news

Timing crucial for Hutchison on quitting Senate to run for Texas governor
by Todd J. Gillman in The Dallas Morning News

Eight Years Later and Still No Revenge
by Richard Cohen in the Washington Post

Once Upon a Time . . .Whatever happened to the old Barack Obama?
by Victor Davis Hanson in National Review

Media Blog
at National Review Online

The Anchoress on Labor Day

Happy Labor Day!
Monday, September 7, 2009, 10:39 AM
The Anchoress

As you gather with your families today, for one last cookout, enjoying your easily-purchased beer, cold-transported from the brewer, your propane grill -probably invented by someone who’d forgotten to buy the charcoal lighter fluid, some time in the past- texting on your phones and so forth, remember to be thankful; say a prayer for those who have less, particularly those people who dream of living the life you have while facing oppression in third-world countries, where their “president” is shutting down radio stations and romancing the despots and the despot-lovers.

Say a prayer for America, whose own president -eager to “remake” America- seems disinclined to lead, and appears to love the despots while supporting those who try to usurp their own constitutions.

I can't add to this, go read it.

Who are the Czars?

Politico has a complete list. Just their names and titles, no background information. the list:

Afghanistan Czar: Richard Holbrooke
AIDS Czar: Jeffrey Crowley
Auto recovery Czar: Ed Montgomery
Border Czar: Alan Bersin
California Water Czar: David J. Hayes
Car Czar: Ron Bloom
Central Region Czar: Dennis Ross
Domestic Violence Czar: Lynn Rosenthal
Drug Czar: Gil Kerlikowske
Economic Czar: Paul Volcker
Energy and Environment Czar: Carol Brower
Faith-Based Czar: Joshua DuBois
Great Lakes Czar: Cameron Davis
Green Jobs Czar: Van Jones (resigned)
Guantanamo Closure Czar: Daniel Fried
Health Czar: Nancy-Ann DeParle
Information Czar: Vivek Kundra
International Climate Czar: Todd Stern
Intelligence Czar: Dennis Blair
Mideast Peace Czar: George Mitchell
Pay Czar: Kenneth Feinberg
Regulatory Czar: Cass Sunstein
Science Czar: John Holdren
Stimulus Accountability Czar: Earl Devaney
Sudan Czar: J. Scott Gration
TARP Czar: Herb Allison
Terrorism Czar: John Brennan
Technology Czar: Aneesh Chopra
Urban Affairs Czar: Adolfo Carrion Jr.
Weapons Czar: Ashton Carter
WMD Policy Czar: Gary Samore
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26779.html#ixzz0QMjEMjGS

Read this Michael Yon Article

If you don't know who Michael Yon is, this is a good introduction. He is an independent reporter embedded with our troops now in Afghanistan. He was previously embedded with the British there and before that was in Iraq. I have been reading him for a long time. It's time for me to share this jewel. He knows what he is talking about whether we like his assessments or not.
His latest:
New Afghan war: Frontline correspondent says fight has morphed – but we still can't afford to lose
by Michael Yon

Helmand, Afghanistan - The West is losing this war. This has been obvious for more than three years. Less obvious is that in 2009, we are down to the wire. Gen. Stanley McChrystal and others will soon recommend to President Obama the latest treatment for a dying patient.

Meanwhile, allies and Americans are asking themselves why we are here. Some are saying that Al Qaeda is still here or is waiting in the wings to return to its home. Yet Afghanistan was never Al Qaeda's permanent home to begin with. Al Qaeda was just renting a little space here, just as it was renting space in places like Germany and Florida.

We must face reality: Our reasons for continuing are not the reasons we came for. We are fighting a different war now than the one that began in 2001. Today's war is about social re-engineering. Given the horrible history of Afghanistan, and the fact that we already are here, the cause is worthy and worthwhile.

The decisions facing us are perilous and immense. On the one hand, we desperately need more troops, while on the other increasing troop levels introduces a host of costs and potential traps.

Yet it seems certain the war will be lost if we do not significantly increase troops. While our enemies grow stronger, years will pass before Afghan forces can replace us. Enemies are gaining ground while we lose the goodwill of the people through disillusionment. In the mostly peaceful Ghor Province, for instance, development is scant and there are no Afghan soldiers.

I just spent more than a month with British combat forces in Helmand. Instead of concentrating on training and operating with Afghan forces, the British are involved in a daily struggle for tiny pieces of real estate.

Last December, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told me in a private discussion while flying back to the U.S. from Afghanistan, Bahrain and Iraq, that his greatest concern is that we will lose the goodwill of the Afghan people. Gates is correct and my confidence in his judgment is high. Gates knows that our stock is still okay here, but clearly it is losing value.

The strongest indicator of progress will come in the form of cooperation from the people. In Iraq, especially in about mid-2007, I witnessed a tidal shift in cooperation from the civilians and largely from that was able to report that the surge was working, long before the statistics would support what might have appeared to be a wild claim.

During 2006 in Afghanistan, I witnessed areas where the population was alienated from Kabul and Western forces. Again, long before the statistics would support what appeared to be wild claims, I published 12 reports saying we were losing here. Analysts cannot feel the pulse through statistics; in this sort of war, statistics lag behind the realities. An observer must be on the ground to sense the pulse.

Pundits who are saying we should pull out of Afghanistan today, to my knowledge, are not here.

Having just spent another month with British forces in Helmand, today I am on my own in the same province. During the last month, our great allies the British lost dozens of soldiers who were killed or wounded. Cooperation from locals is almost nonexistent in many places. Interaction between civilians and British soldiers was nearly zero. The British treat the civilians very well, but being polite and respectful is not enough. Without significant reinforcements, the British likely will be defeated in Helmand within a couple of years. My respect for British soldiers is immense. I have been in combat with them many times in Iraq and Afghanistan, including during the last couple of weeks and would go into battle with them today. Yet it must be said that the average British soldier has practically no understanding of counterinsurgency.

The enemies here cannot defeat the United States, but they can dissolve the coalition. Some allies are ready to tap out, while others are learning that counterinsurgency is difficult. The Germans, for instance, are losing in their battle space. To avoid watching
the coalition melt away, we must show progress before the end of 2010.

Today, the war is still worth fighting, yet the goal to reengineer one of the most backward, violent places on Earth, will require a century before a reasonable person can call Afghanistan "a developing nation." The war will not take that long - but the effort will. There are no short-term solutions to fix this place.

We are planting acorns. Oak trees grow slowly. emphasis added

He is self supported by donations from us in the States, out of the war zone,
this is his ending line:
Reader support is greatly valued and crucial to the continuation of this mission. Today I am unembedded in Helmand Province. Please cover my back while I cover the war.

American Capitalism Gone with a Whimper

This is from Pravda, the Russian newspaper that spread propaganda during the Communist regime, screaming a powerful, scathingly sarcastic warning to Americans to wake up and not allow the Obama revolution to continue. The author rightly fears that wonderful, free America will be forever lost, and that we are going with only a whimper.

To get to the article, click on the title, or here:
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles-2009/Mishin-American-Capitalism-Gone-With-A-Whimper.php

Are We Welcome at the White House? Updated

Would we be banned by the Secret Service? Read this story at Patterico Pontifications and watch the video. UPDATED
Rick Santelli Not Welcome at the White House
by DRJ

In February 2009, CNBC business reporter Rick Santelli vigorously objected to Obama’s “spread the wealth” policies in a rant that many believe inspired the Tea Partiers:

“On CNBC’s “Squawk Box” Feb. 19, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange floor reporter, along with several traders, expressed his outrage about President Barack Obama’s plan to “spread the wealth” for people that didn’t deserve
it. He said a stimulus should go to people who live responsibly rather than some sort of housing bailout to people that lived irresponsibly...."

In an interview today, CNBC reporter John Harwood asked White House Press Secretary about Santelli. Remarkably, Gibbs responded that while he had previously invited Santelli to the White House for coffee to discuss the subject, the Secret Service probably wouldn’t allow Santelli to come now: watch video here

READ MORE HERE FOR UPDATE.

Good News From South America

via Drudge Report and AP article on Yahoo News
Critics march against Chavez across Latin America
by Susana Londono

BOGOTA – Thousands of opponents of Hugo Chavez marched against the Venezuelan president across Latin America on Friday, accusing him of everything from authoritarianism to international meddling.
The protests, coordinated through Twitter and Facebook, drew more than 5,000 people in Bogota, and thousands more in the capitals of Venezuela and Honduras. Smaller demonstrations were held in other Latin American capitals, as well as New York and Madrid.

I wonder if a New York Paper will report this. You can read more about it here.

the General Electric Political Action Committee

From the Washington Examiner:
Leaked e-mail shows how GE puts the government to work for GE
by Timothy P. Carney

The intersection between GE's interests and government action is clearer than ever," General Electric Vice Chairman John G. Rice wrote in an Aug. 19 e-mail to colleagues.

Rice was calling on his co-workers to join the General Electric Political Action Committee. "GEPAC is an important tool that enables GE employees to collectively help support candidates who share the values and goals of GE."

The full letter suggests that "share the values and goals of GE" really means "support policies that profit the company."

Read it all here.

A Doctor Offers to Help Regulate Lawyers

I got a real laugh out of this. It is an opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal online. It is ironic but oh so true....

A Doctor's Plan for Legal Industry Reform
My modest proposal to rearrange how lawyers do business.

By RICHARD B. RAFAL a radiologist in New York City

Since we are moving toward socialism with ObamaCare, the time has come to do the same with other professions—especially lawyers. Physician committees can decide whether lawyers are necessary in any given situation.

At a town-hall meeting in Portsmouth, N.H., last month, our uninformed lawyer in chief suggested that we physicians would rather chop off a foot than manage diabetes since we would make more money doing surgery. Then President Obama compounded his attack by claiming a doctor's reimbursement is between "$30,000" and "$50,000" for such amputations! (Actually, such surgery costs only about $1,500.) ....

Following are highlights of a proposed bill authorizing the dismantling of the current framework of law practice and instituting socialized legal care:
• Contingency fees will be discouraged, and eventually outlawed,
over a five-year period.
• Legal "DRGs."
• Legal "death panels."
• Ration legal care.
• Physician controlled legal review.
• Discourage/eliminate specialization.
• Electronic legal records.
• Ban legal advertisements.
• New government oversight.
• Collect data about the supply of and demand for attorneys.
• Lawyer Reduction Act (H.R. -3200).

Each of these points is elaborated in the actual article.
Go read it all.

Responses to Glenn Beck

There are a lot of stories in the news and on the networks about the Van Jones statement. This is all in response to the Glenn Beck show. Many bloggers worked on getting this information out but the Glenn Beck show reaches people who do not read blogs. The Gateway Pundit covers it pretty well this morning.
Here are some links to the stories, the statement and responses to that:
Gateway Pundit
The American Spectator
Jake Tapper - ABC news
The Politico

If you read all these you will pretty well have it covered.

The Shoe is on the Other Foot

Fouad Ajami has a piece in the WSJ about how forward and righteous it was to have protestors during the Bush Administration but now.....
Obama's Summer of Discontent
The politics of charisma is so Third World. Americans were never going to buy into it for long.

So we are to have a French health-care system without a French tradition of political protest. It is odd that American liberalism, in a veritable state of insurrection during the Bush presidency, now seeks political quiescence. These "townhallers" who have come forth to challenge ObamaCare have been labeled "evil-mongers" (Harry Reid), "un-American" (Nancy Pelosi), agitators and rowdies and worse.

A political class, and a media elite, that glamorized the protest against the Iraq war, that branded the Bush presidency as a reign of usurpation, now wishes to be done with the tumult of political debate. President Barack Obama himself, the community organizer par
excellence, is full of lament that the "loudest voices" are running away with the national debate. Liberalism in righteous opposition, liberalism in power: The rules have changed...

Go read it all.

Oh! Those Right Wing Terrorist- NOT

MoveOn: California fracas, finger-biting ‘regrettable’

— A spokeswoman for MoveOn responded to an incident this morning in which a supporter allegedly bit the finger off a conservative demonstrator amid a health care-related fracas in Ventura County, calling the violence “regrettable.” via memeorandum.com/

It was first reported this was a "Right Wing Protestor." Not true, it was a MoveOn astroturfer.

Back tracking on the Speech

WH withdraws call for students to 'help' Obama - a Washington Times article by By Matthew Mosk

UPDATE: President Obama's plan to inspire the nation's schoolchildren with a video address next week erupted into controversy Wednesday, forcing the White House to pull out its eraser and rewrite a government recommendation that teachers nationwide assign students a paper on how to "help the president."

Presidential aides acknowledged the White House helped the U.S. Education Department craft the proposal, which immediately was met by fierce criticism from Republicans and conservative organizations who accused Mr. Obama of trying to politicize the education system...

The article has more about all the different excuses and explanations by the presidential aides. Read if you want, but the idea they didn't have a clue we didn't all see the President as a "glorius leader" is evident in the whole idea
At least they have had the sense to back off, even if just a little.

Bi-Lingual Education

The Media Blog at National Review has an article on Texas Bi-Lingual Education
Bilingual Education Still Doesn't Work
by Kevin D. Williamson

I've spent a lot of time writing and yakking about what Texas does right in terms of public policy. But you know what doesn't work in Texas? Bilingual education. The Texas Public Policy Foundation released an interesting report today. Bottom line:

“Bilingual education has a negative effect on reading, math, writing, and science achievement in English,” Dr. Rossell said. “Furthermore, lower testing rates for ELL students artificially raise ELL achievement because the lowest scoring students are not tested.”

Read all the links.

Another Outrage Discovered

Where Did the American Flag Go?
by Kathryn Jean Lopez

The United States Mission to the United Nations has a new look online. If you check out the redesigned site, you see it’s decked out in United Nations blue, with the U.N. logo prominently displayed.

Fine, the U.N. logo is there. But where is the United States flag? And where did the red, white, and blue that used to introduce the site go?If you compare the new U.S. Mission site to the Mission sites of other permanent member nations, you’ll see that America takes a backseat to not just the United Nations, but nationalism...You also won’t find archived statements from past U.S. ambassadors to the United Nations. It’s all Susan Rice, all the time. That means the U.S. Mission site is currently no longer hosting historic documents concerning our ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In Barack Obama’s America, we don’t just apologize for the past, we erase it?

I assume with a little uproar, the U.S. flag will, at least, make a return. If nothing else, members of the European Union, who have already made strides in surrendering their sovereignty, should do the job.
Currently, their Mission websites put ours to shame.

Go to the corner of National Review to see it all! Let Susan Rice know how you feel about this.

The Five Pledges

I received this in an email from a friend. Before I post emails I like to trace their origins, if I can. This is from the Glenn Beck show of August 28th. He has a pretty version of it posted on his site.

To Congress, The 5 Pledges

1. I believe in a balanced budget and therefore will vote for a freeze in government spending until that goal is realized.

2. I believe government should not increase the financial burden on its citizenry during a difficult economic times, therefore I will oppose all tax increases until our economy has
rebounded.

3. I believe more than four decades of US dependence on foreign oil is a travesty, therefore I will support an energy plan that calls for immediately increasing usage of all domestic resources including nuclear energy, natural gas and coal as necessary.

4. I believe in the sovereignty and security of our country and therefore will support measures to close our borders except for designated immigration points so we will know who is entering and why. I will vehemently oppose any measure giving another country, the United Nations, or any other entity power over US citizens.

5. I believe the United States of America is the greatest country on earth and therefore will not apologize for policies or actions which have served to free more and feed more people around the world than any other nation on the planet.

National Keep-Your-Kids-Out-Of-School-Day

So says Shawn Mallow at theWizbang blog. I was out most of the day and the headline on the Drudge Report about the President and his national address to the children was the first thing I noticed. By the time I was up to blogging it was everywhere. We all have the same idea. Don't Let Your Kids be Propagandized! Of course they are every day but look what he's planning now.
It's all at docstoc.com:

President Obama’s Address to Students Across America September 8, 2009

PreK-6 Menu of Classroom Activities: President Obama's Address to Students Across America Produced by Teaching Ambassador Fellows, U.S. Department of
Education September 8, 2009

Before the Speech:
Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama and motivate students by asking the following questions:

Who is the President of the United States?
What do you think it takes to be President?
To whom do you think the President is going to be speaking?
Why do you think he wants to speak to you?
What do you think he will say to you?

Teachers can ask students to imagine being the President delivering a
speech to all of the students in the United States. What would you tell students? What can students do to help in our schools? Teachers can chart ideas about what they would say.

Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?

During the Speech:
As the President speaks, teachers can ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful. Students could use a note-taking graphic organizer such as a Cluster
Web, or students could record their thoughts on sticky notes. Younger children can draw pictures and write as appropriate. As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following:

What is the President trying to tell me?
What is the President asking me to do?
What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?
Students can record important parts of the speech where the President is asking them to do something. Students might think about:

What specific job is he asking me to do? Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?

Students can record any questions they have while he is speaking and
then discuss them after the speech. Younger children may need to dictate their questions.

After the Speech:
Teachers could ask students to share the ideas they
recorded, exchange sticky notes or stick notes on a butcher paper poster in the classroom to discuss main ideas from the speech, i.e. citizenship, personal responsibility, civic duty.

Students could discuss their responses to the following questions:
What do you think the President wants us to do?
Does the speech make you want to do anything?
Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us? What would you like to tell the President?

Teachers could encourage students to participate in the Department of Education's "I Am What I Learn" video contest.On September 8th the Department will invite K-12 students to submit a 2 video no longer than 2 min, explaining why education is important and how their education will help them achieve their dreams. Teachers are welcome to incorporate the same or a similar video project into an assignment. More details will be released via http://www.ed.gov/.

Extension of the Speech:
Teachers can extend learning by having students
Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants or puzzle pieces or trails marked with the labels: personal, academic, community, country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in those areas. It might make sense to focus on personal and academic so community and country goals come more
readily.

Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.

Write goals on colored index cards or precut designs to post around the classroom.

Interview and share about their goals with one another to create a supportive community.

Participate in School wide incentive programs or contests for students who achieve their goals. Write about their goals in a variety of genres, i.e. poems, songs, personal essays.
Create artistic projects based on the themes of their goals.
Graph student progress toward goals.

I have printed the whole document of instructions, excuse me "suggestions." Everyone should be aware of what is going on here. Now, it is possible I could have misconstrued something here, (no, it's not!) possibly it's just going to be a pep talk to get those kids alearnin', but we all know if George W. Bush had even had one little thought of doing something like this he would have been impeached for sure.

Eugenics? Yes or No?

A Wall Street Journal article (27 August) reviewed the President’s health adviser (commonly called czars) Emanuel’s recent publication in the Lancet on health care needs. A graph showed where the relative amount of health care by age should be allocated. It started very low at age 0 rising steeply to maturity, decreasing slowly until the early 50's, then steeply declining until 60, then continuing slowly down past age 70. It may roughly be a maturity/menopause model.

As a biologist this seemed peculiar to me and it was pointed out that this was the serfdom/slavery model, where you are more concerned with your serfs/slaves through their most productive years, throwing them away in old age. Reproductive age individuals are especially important to produce more young and product. Ethical considerations aside, if it has a scientific basis, as claimed, that is one thing, but if not, it is thrown into the social/political realm.

First, old age. Of course, diminishing abilities produce less physically, but in general, animals and plants are quite variable in what could be called natural survival. We have very old trees, occasional old fish, but in general there are many less older individuals, partly due to the fact that any age group can only decrease in numbers, if only by accident. Why keep the old? They are less productive, cannot reproduce, and consume things that younger individuals could use. Without getting into what an old tree might do, mammals generally use elders in a very complicated way. Is the wisdom of accumulated experience and care available to the family more valuable than the costs of keeping the old alive and, at least mentally, contributing? Emanuel’s curve values a 65 year old about the same (in terms of their right to medical care) as a four year old and a 75 year old about the same as a two year old. Peculiar.

Second, youth. Trees and fish produce lots of acorns and larvae. Very few can survive, otherwise filling the earth. Parental care is rare and when it occurs the number of young produced is small. In mammals, parental care is the rule, making each juvenile tremendously more valuable numerically than single acorns or larvae. In humans the juvenile stage is greatly extended, and some would say, now much beyond sexual maturity. Emanuel’s graph does not acknowledge the necessity of protecting this long maturing process. Peculiar.

Modern Eugenics is often thought to have begun with Charles Darwin’s cousin, Sir Francis Galton, who, if he had a political agenda, it is not apparent. Neither did Darwin’s ideas, however later used. Apparently conscripted by later geneticists and activists, eugenics is sometimes identified as a contributor to the development of the social democratic movement, part of it leading to the holocaust. After WWII it seems to have retreated into more statistical demographic treatments, except for the modern environmental movement, which actively still promotes birth and population control.

It seems fair to identify a scientific eugenics, merely a genetical/demographic analysis, and an advocacy/activist portion using at least some of the data for social/political purposes. Which is the Emanuel curve? First it is very simplistic and second it seems directly contradictory to human biology, which places especial value on birth and adolescence. Put in evolutionary biology terms, what is termed the probability that a newborn will survive to a given age, often reproductive, is used by actuaries to determine the expectation of further life. This also can be used to determine what evolutionists call the “Net Reproductive Rate” and “Reproductive Value,” which is what determines the potential for replacement of the population. Reproduction does not occur until maturity, so these values, a somewhat complicated formula, depends heavily on the survival of these non-reproductive individuals. In most animals, including humans, these are relatively high mortality years, especially early. Parental care is highest here, again especially early. The Emanuel curve is the opposite.

Therefore, it is difficult to see the biological basis of the Emanuel curve, especially for the young, perhaps less so for the old. Although other factors (medical, economic) could be involved, the evidence seems to force the conclusion that the curve has little scientific basis, again ethics aside. A maturity/menopause model could be argued as biological, but only in the strict individual physiological sense, ignoring all surrounding factors. The surrounding factors are what the model claims is important as a basis for the ration of medical care, as is also the potential survival of the individual. Therefore, this curve must lie outside the strict eugenics scientific basis, although some argue that control of populations are ecologically necessary.

That is another question.