Category Archives: Venezuela

No Free Speech Here

Free speech today has nothing to do with freedom or liberty. Today, free speech in schools has morphed into the antithesis of freedom and liberty.

Schools have turned into progressive indoctrination centers that are taking on Marxist tendencies, the seeds of which were planted 100 years ago. Today, William Ayers gives voice to using schools as the means to wage this revolution.

With Chavez at his side, Ayers voiced his support for ‘the political educational reforms under way here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution…”

Here is how The Association of Teacher Educators (whose guest speaker for their 2013 Convention was William Ayers) feel about their role as “educators” . . .  (emphasis added)

Without attention to culture, social conditions, environmental roadblocks, and economics, lasting change will not happen. Educators, schools, and institutions of higher education must step up and become empowered as agents of change, not as recipients of mandates for change that come from outside of the education community. Change can start with one teacher, one classroom, one school, one college of education, and should be tailored to the local environment and its needs. Learn how you can take action and make a difference from pioneers in the field of Education for Sustainable Development.

See anything there about teaching our country’s founding principles? Me neither. Their goal is the dilution of America. The “fundamental change” President Obama had in mind, being a disciple of Bill Ayers, is what is going on. And, must be stopped.

We are witnesses of its “success” today when speakers are shouted down on campuses, and physically assaulted. All of which is condoned by the educational establishment and administrations by virtue of the lack of discipline and consequences for such unruly behavior.

Great article HERE details the disintegration of our education system. The American Experience has its roots in the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. Limited government, power of the individual, private property, individual freedom and liberty. Over the last 60 years, those principles have stopped being taught. Progressives now occupy the educational system, the entertainment industry, the news industry, where the collective, not the individual, has taken priority. Marxism to a tee.

Link: Understanding the Campus Free-Speech Crisis  |  Bill Ayers To Teachers, It’s A ‘Movement’

Cost Of Socialism

So the revised cost of the border wall, before Trump works on getting it lower, is now $21.6 Billion. Up from $15 Billion. At this “cost,” that comes to $173 per household. Up from $120. OK fine. Where do I send my check?
 
That is far less than the $113 Billion a year we are paying now to sustain illegal aliens already here. And that translates to $904, per year per household.
 
The financial burden on education, health care, infrastructure, prisons, jobs and unemployment is not the only cost. That $113 Billion does not count the people illegals have killed, raped, robbed, and assaulted. That is the social cost you can’t put a price on.
 
Kudos to President Trump for doing what he said he would do. Enforce the law. Like he’s been doing since he was inaugurated.

You can’t blame Mexicans to want to escape their country, where the average wage is $4 per day. Venezuelans and Chinese are also flocking to enter the United States, legally.

Why is that?  Corruption isn’t the only reason Mexico is in sorry shape. It’s their quasi-socialist economic system. It doesn’t sustain, it doesn’t work. Mexico, like Venezuela, is rich in natural resources, like oil. Nothing a little capitalism can’t fix. What else can explain why the disparity on one side of the border is so great?

Mexicans are not happy with their government and the corruption in it. Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto’s approval rating is 12%. But it’s their problem to fix.

Socialism Fails

Socialism requires walls to keep people from leaving. Like in Venezuela.

Venezuelans seeking a visa to leave to the United States for the first time will no longer be able to apply for one, the U.S. embassy in Caracas announced, due to the socialist government’s forced reduction of the number of American staff working there.

While Obama is bad-mouthing America in the Far East, he should be touting our success in capitalism and freedom. He is the first president to hate this country, rejects its founding principles.

There’s a reason people from all over the world want to come here. No one is trying to leave. Not yet anyway. Some Hollywood types keep promising to leave but they lie

If the direction of this country does not get turned around 180 degrees, we will look like Greece, like Cuba, like Venezuela. Then there will be no place to go.

America really is the last place on earth where freedom and liberty reign It is the reason people want to come here. To achieve the American Dream. That’s fine, but not unless you also want to assimilate to become American. Not to live here to use America and not assimilate.

Link: Venezuela Forces U.S. Embassy to Downsize, Stop Accepting First-Time Visa Requests

China Gets Control By Law

China approves far-reaching counter terrorism law. Virtual control and access to all internet and electronic communications, to be able to get terrorists who use encryption.

The term, according to Xinhua, is “defined as any proposition or activity — that, by means of violence, sabotage or threat, generates social panic, undermines public security, infringes on personal and property rights, and menaces government organs and international organizations — with the aim to realize certain political and ideological purposes.”

“However, some analysts feel that the purpose of the bill is aimed at control of the Chinese population, rather than curbing domestic and international terrorism.”

BINGO! Well, it’s a twofer.

I tell you. This is the kind of stuff that makes Obama envious. He and Hugo Chavez (Venezuela) were soul brothers. That is, in a political sense. Watch for China’s president, Xi Jinping, to be visiting The White House. Oh wait, Xi Jinping was there in September, 2015.

It’s pretty obvious that China wants a part of everything their people do. And sets the standard for what “terrorism” is, to include un-friendly sectors of the country. Like the (ethnic minorities) Muslim sectors.

In the U.S., it would be an Obama wet dream, to have government-mandated access to watch what you do. Especially those bitter clingers you know. IRS, DOJ, EPA . . . imagine the thrill of government intimidation by a visit from some of those letters of the Executive branch. Xi Jinping and Obama have a lot in common in their idea of government and its role. China doesn’t have a Constitution and Obama will not follow the Constitution. Going by China’s definition, it’s not a stretch.

Actually, Obama already uses those letters to intimidate political opponents. Using China’s definition of what terrorism is would make it more fun (from his perspective) and easier to do.

Link: China approves wide-ranging counter terrorism law

World Leaders Differ On ISIS

British Prime Minister Cameron says the ISIS threat is “a poisonous ideology of Islamic extremism”. Clueless Pres. Obama says it’s political.

Why would President Obama deny that ISIS, alQaeda, all those cowardice cave men clinging to their guns and religion, is political and therefore requires a political solution? That there is no military solution and, btw, we don’t have a plan on how to deal with (terrorism) them. If that isn’t music to the terrorists’ ears, I don’t know what is.

Great Britain is learning what an open door Politically Correct driven immigration policy is getting them. Suicide bombers, citizens being decapitated in broad daylight. Unfortunately, President Obama is likewise genuflecting to the Islamic goons by ignoring border security here. Which begs another question. Do you think Obama has weighed the benefit of millions of undocumented democrats against the terror threat that exists? To put it another way, do you think Obama thinks that the sacrificing of untold number of Americans to terrorist attacks is worth the price for the perpetual Democrat control of government?

From the frame of mind of someone who wrote the book “Dreams from my (Communist) father,” I have no doubt that he thinks it is worth it.

As an aside, and not totally unrelated to Obama and terrorism, let’s review his actions of late.

  • Illegally sends reinforcements to the Taliban, ostensibly after spending a year in Qatar, by trading five of their top generals for one deserter.
  • Gives further aide and comfort to the enemy (that’s also illegal) by announcing that the US has no plan to deal with them.

I don’t know about you, but I’m not feeling confident that this president knows what is best for America.

Somebody tell me, what happened to, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for”? (h/t to Rush Limbaugh for that one)

Links: David Cameron stands up to Islamists |  Terror target Britain  |  Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap was illegal, says US government watchdog

Caracas Burning, Army Sent In, Maduro Blames U.S.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro says “fascist” forces financed from the United States were plotting against his government. Probably has caracas-burning_unrestnothing to do with corrupt elections and election campaigns, seizing media outlets that print or say anything against him or his party, empty shelves in stores, high crime and unemployment. It other words, the failing of another socialist/communist state.

Maduro ordered the arrest of a top opposition leader and a former military chief as he claimed “fascist” forces financed from the United States were plotting against his government.

Here’s the plan President Nicolás Maduro should follow. Stop selling oil to the United States. Immediately. He can do that. He owns the oil industry. But Maduro needs our money. So Plan B is for the U.S. to stop buying Venezuelan oil. We don’t need their oil. We have access to plenty of our own. It’s time to turn the tables and use our oil to our advantage. Not Venezuela, not Saudi Arabia, or anywhere else besides home.

Link: Army sent in to Venezuelan cities as unrest prompts coup warning

aSide Order

keystone_pipeline_protest_11_07_2011

XL Pipeline Reduces Overall Carbon Emissions, State Department Environmental Impact Report

Seems the long-awaited environmental impact analysis of the XL Pipeline has environmentalist shorts in a wad.  Turns out, having the XL Pipeline will reduce carbon emissions compared to not having it. In transportation alone, whether by trucks, trains, or barges and ships, the pipeline emits no carbon emissions whereas all the alternative means of transportation do. When you consider that Venezuelan oil which we buy is shipped in oil tankers, the pipeline could not only end our need to buy it from them, but would cut the global carbon emissions by not using their tankers or Warren Buffet’s trains, which derail, explode, and burn. (How’s that for an environmental impact?)

It’s ironic that their excuse for nixing the pipeline just went away. Not only that, but since it creates a reduction in carbon emissions, they find themselves to be scientifically (but not politically) in favor of it. To make matters worse for them, Democrats are now calling for the President to use that pen he was talking about in his SOTU and approve it.

Their new arguments against it are now in development. How they will justify not supporting the reduction in carbon emissions should be interesting, if not entertaining.

endofstory

Dinesh D’Souza / Bill Ayers Debate at Dartmouth College

They begin by each taking 18 minutes to state their positions. After that is complete they respond to each others positions for 5 or 10 minutes each, and then they begin asking each other questions directly. After that ends the Q&A begins.

If you don’t have too much time I’d recommend skipping the 18 minute speeches and begin where they are responding to each others speeches at around the 42 minute mark. But you’ll be missing out on some great stuff, I assure you, especially D’Souza’s view of the greatness of America.

h/t the rightscoop

endofstory

Charles Krauthammer Explains Obama’s Lawlessness In 50 Seconds

If a Republican president tried what Obama has already done, he would have been impeached already, and with bi-partisan support.

So where are House Republicans on this? Spineless, that’s where.

Venezuelan President Nicola Maduro Seizes Stores Ahead Of Elections

Venezuelan President Nicola Maduro is at least more honest with his corruption than President Obama is in cultivating a low-information voter base. Maduro is flat-out taking over private businesses and demanding they sell their merchandise at levels that will put them out of business.

Where health insurance companies in the United States go, Obama is more subtle and devious about it. He passes laws then selectively enforces them to disguise his spread-the-wealth agenda in order to get elected and keep his political party in power.

Link: Venezuela seizes more stores ahead of local elections

“In America’s Interest” Is Not Enough

Listening to “the case” that the president and the ‘bomb Syria’ crowd is making is an answer to the wrong question. The only question to ask when it comes to using military force on another country is this, are we under direct threat of attack or under attack? Is our national security being compromised or about to be compromised? That’s all our constitution calls for when it comes to a standing military as commanded by the president.

Listening to my favorite financial guy Stewart Varney say how it is in America’s interest to strike Syria almost made me physically ill. Citing the death and destruction going on there. Citing that because we have the power to intervene, then we should.

Not picking on Varney, he has a lot of company in this kind of thinking. Where does this thinking come from? It comes from the belief that we should be the policeman of the world. That we should interfere in another country’s civil war by waging war on them. Not only is life not that simple, but more importantly, someone else’s civil war does not constitute an immediate threat to our national security. Nor does it mean we have to step in and get involved. They need to fight their civil war to its conclusion. Just like, without foreign intervention, we fought our own civil war.

Would it be in America’s interest if the fighting would stop? Not necessarily. Especially if alQaeda were to be the ones filling the vacuum created by our military strike.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume it to be true that it would be in America’s interest for us to use military force in Syria. Let’s also assume that Iran and Syria would not attack Israel like they said they would. I can think of other situations where it would be in America’s interest to deal with problems in another country. Wouldn’t it be in America’s interest to put an end to the Mexican drug cartels that are invading our country and killing our citizens? Aided in many ways by the corrupt politicians in Mexico. The same politicians, their president included, that facilitate illegal immigration across our southern border. Let’s bomb them. Let’s send in some drones to wipe out the drug kingpin’s homes. Take out Mexico’s command and control. Because it’s in America’s interest. Then there’s Venezuela, hosting terrorist training camps. Nationalizing the oil industry, confiscating Exxon, an American company. Well, it’s in America’s interest to stop that. Bomb them.

See the difference between “national security” and “America’s interest?” When the U.S. uses its military for what is in America’s interest, instead of for protecting its national security, it’s not hard to see why the terrorists and the axis of evil refer to the U.S. as war mongering imperialists. To their lame brain followers, those kind of actions make a compelling case.

Further, the people who want to go to war for “America’s interest,” label those who only want to go to war for “national security” as “isolationists.” As opposed to what, war mongering imperialists?

Having a president that couldn’t take a stand and be responsible for anything is bad enough where our reputation around the world is concerned. When, merely adhering to our constitution, instead of our national ego, would so more to regain the respect in the world that the bomb Syria crowd says bombing Syria would get. It’s their answer to the wrong question.

Venezuela, Government Knows Best

Have you noticed the competition between the current pols in the United States and Venezuela? If you are a statist that believes that the government knows best, and is obligated to assume (usurp) responsibility for running citizens private lives, so you don’t have to, then you might like the effort underway in Venezuela to ban no_bottlebottle feeding your baby. The only difference between them is that Venezuela doesn’t have a Constitution to ignore. That “charter of negative liberties” as Obama calls it.

To show they have compassion, they have an exception in the case of the death of the mother. But you know, their heart is in the right place. Can we legislate some love here?

Legislator Odalis Monzon said the proposal would “prohibit all types of baby bottles” as a way to improve children’s health.

We want to increase the love between mother and child because this has been lost as a result of these transnational companies selling formula.

Oh right. It’s those evil corporations. It’s activism of the kind to make Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama jealous.

Link: Venezuela considers taking bottles from babies mouths – Yahoo! News.