The ripples are already being felt around the world. But is anyone watching and really paying attention? Check out the following from Yahoo News:
| Asian markets plunged Wednesday on growing speculation the U.S. economy -- a vital export market -- is sliding into a recession that could lead to a global slowdown. Investors dumped stocks after an overnight sell-off on Wall Street and on news that Citigroup Inc. had lost nearly $10 billion in the fourth quarter as it wrote down mountains of bad mortgage assets -- the latest fallout from the credit crisis. Weak U.S. retail sales figures added to the gloom. ... In Hong Kong, the benchmark Hang Seng index sank 5.4 percent -- its biggest percentage drop since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- to 24,450.85. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index fell 3.4 percent to 13,504.51 points, its lowest in more than two years. Markets in Australia, China, India, South Korea, New Zealand and the Philippines also dropped sharply on uncertainty about the U.S. economic outlook and the full extent of the subprime mortgage crisis. |
The signs are all there. What more do you need? Call you financial advisor and ask about how you can weather the coming storm. It will not be a small one.
You can access the complete article on-line here:
Asian Stock Markets Plunge
Dikky Sinn
Associated Press via Yahoo News
January 16, 2008
Those who practice the idiotic philosophy of political correctness are going to get hundreds, if not thousands, of people hurt or killed. Jeopardizing the safety of American citizens seems to be of no concern to some, especially if that is the price we have to pay for not offending some particular group. From Cybercast News Service:
| Members of Congress are seeking more information regarding the firing of a top terrorism expert at the Pentagon following reports that he was dismissed for being too critical of Islamic law. Earlier this month, the Pentagon Joint Staff told Stephen Coughlin, a specialist on Islamic law at the Pentagon, that his contract would not be renewed in March. The firing apparently resulted from pressure by pro-Muslim officials working in the Department of Defense, according to numerous news reports. Meanwhile, members of Congress have not had much success in getting answers from the Pentagon either, said Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.), co-chair of the bi-partisan House Anti-Terrorism Caucus. |
Why is this necessary? Becasue of this:
| Coughlin - who supporters say had one of the most important jobs in analyzing how Jihadists think -- crossed Hasham Islam, an aide to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, according The Washington Times. The paper reported, without attribution, that the aide told Coughlin to "soften his view" on radical Islam. When Coughlin refused, Hasham Islam called him a Christian zealot "with a pen," according to the report. The incomplete reports and near silence from the Pentagon creates the need to get at the truth, Myrick said. |
But apparently, all Coughlin did was state the obvious about a religion that is inherently violent:
| Coughlin's 333-page thesis, " To Our Great Detriment: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad," was accepted last year by the National Defense Intelligence College. The report describes an Islamic culture that teaches violence from an early age. It says, for instance, "So how does one explain the prevailing assumption that Islam does not stand for such violence undertaken in its name with the fact that its laws and education materials validate the very acts undertaken by 'extremists' in Iraq?" And continues, "The first 'radicalizing' lessons Saudi youth receive that motivates them to travel to Iraq and fight coalition forces does not come from 'extremist' groups like al Qaeda, but rather is taught as part of Saudi Arabia's standard secondary school curriculum." The sentiments of Coughlin's research apparently were too much for some in the Pentagon, said Andrew Bostom, an author and lecturer on Islam, who has known Coughlin for more than three years. |
So, according to some misguided fools, it is better to ignore the problem altogether rather than at least admit that the problem exists?
You can access the complete article on-line here:
Congressmen Seek Answers About Terror Expert's Firing
Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
January 16, 2008
And finally, we have a very insightful column by Kathleen Parker from TownHall. For decades, the Dems have built their party around race-baiting and sex-baiting in the hopes to a) capture the black and women's vote and b) play on the collective white/masculine guilt of America.
From her column:
| Despite their protests to the contrary, both Obama and Clinton have been playing to their respective demographics. Obama hasn't overtly made his campaign about race, but he didn't have to. In Clintonian tradition, he has let surrogates make the case for him. Oprah Winfrey laid it out plainly enough when she told a throng in Columbia, S.C.: "We don't have to just dream the dream anymore. We get to vote that dream into reality. I believe that now is the time for somebody like Barack Obama." "Somebody like Barack" and "the dream" don't require much elaboration. The dream was the Rev. Martin Luther King's, of a future when blacks and whites lived in harmony. And though Obama is unique in his broad appeal, Winfrey was clearly urging voters to put an African-American in the White House. For her part, Clinton has insisted that women shouldn't vote for her just because of gender. "I am not asking you to vote for me because I am a woman," she told a crowd in New Hampshire. "I am asking you to vote for me because I believe I am the most qualified person to hit the ground running in 2009." Except when she is urging women to vote for her because she's a woman. Speaking at her all-female alma mater, Wellesley College, Clinton called upon women to rally against "the all-boys club of presidential politics. We're ready to shatter that highest glass ceiling." |
But in order to be a victim, you have to have come from a victim's background, which neither Clinton nor Obama can claim. As such, they have to re-invent themselves as victims and play to their own fabricated victimhood. But that means that each one must now pit their own "victimhood" against the other's. Not a good combo, especially considering how blatantly the Dems pander to such "victims." It will split their party.
Of course, an election should be about issues, but the Dems have yet to offer any real soultions to any of the most important issues (economy, immigration, terrorism, etc.).
| In the end, the Democratic Party may be hostage to its own noble intentions. By co-opting equality as their party's identity and making victimhood their rallying cry, the battle for race and gender necessarily has become a fight between race and gender. If a Clinton victory is viewed as a victory for all women, then her defeat can only be viewed as a defeat for women. The same goes for Obama and African-Americans. It shouldn't be about race and gender, but it is. And the Democratic Party made it this way. |
You can access the complete column on-line here:
The Perils of Pandering
Kathleen Parker
TownHall.com
January 16, 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment