Dead Dictator Chides John McCain

It's laughable when a communist leader tries to assert moral superiority over democratic leaders to begin with, but it is quite literally a joke when Fidel Castro, who has been dead for sometime now, comes from beyond the grave to chastise John McCain. The communists beef with Sen. McCain? That Sen. McCain stated that a Cuban agent had helped show some of the Vietnamese guards at POW camps certain torture tactics. I don't doubt that for one minute. First of all, communist nations have always stood together and supported each other, a sort of failure support failure comradery. During the Vietnam and Korean Wars, the Chinese had given military support to the communist regimes be it through intel, weapons sales, etc. The old Soviet Union also gave a great deal of support to the Vietnamese during the war. Knowing how close Cuba was the Soviet Union and the communist movement in general, don't think for one moment that they didn't have agents over in Asia during that time period who would have loved to have dolled out some punishment to American G.I.s. The fact that this criticism being leveled comes from Raul Castro, or another element in the current Cuban government, is laughable. The Cuban government has done extensive damage to the Cuban people. I support the Cuban blockade and the call for the government to move toward democratic changes. The Cubans are a proud, strong people, who deserve to have control of their nation back. We should support the Cubans in their effort to regain control of the government as well as the freedoms that many who have fled the communist island now enjoy here in America. Tyrants and criminals like Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were nothing more than thugs with an undying bloodlust who took great pride inflicting pain against the people. For a much clearer insight into the ongoings in Cuba as well as just who Fidel and Che really were, I encourage you to read the works of Humberto Fontova.

-Caomhin

Powered by ScribeFire.

Follow Up from Yesterday's Post On Global Warming: I Told You So

See now what I mean by the Global Warming Hoax being used to push a Communist agenda. Well today they finally just came right out and said it: We are going to take from the "rich" according to their means and give to the "poor" according to their need. That's communism plain and simple. Hell, they even put a price tag on it for us "rich" Americans, we should all be ponying up:

Without going into the details, the Greenhouse Development Rights Framework (GDR) proposal foresees levying the equivalent of a climate "consumption luxury tax" on every person who earns over a "development threshold" of $9,000 per year. The idea is that rich people got rich in part by dumping carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuels into the atmosphere, leaving less space for poor people to dump their emissions. In one scenario, Americans would pay the equivalent of a $780 per person luxury tax annually, which amounts to sending $212 billion per year in climate reparations to poor countries to aid their development and help them adapt to climate change. In this scenario, the total climate reparations that the rich must transfer annually is over $600 billion. This contrasts with a new report commissioned by the U.N. Development Program that only demands $86 billion per year to avoid "adaptation apartheid."

No, that's not made up, that is real, and very, very terrifying if you actually care about human freedom what-so-ever. First, is there anyone in America who is not making over $9,000 a year? Is there anyone out there making $15,000 a year and would call themselves "rich" in America? Again to my point of micro-analysing wealth in regards to geographical location, does anyone living in North Jersey qualify as "rich" making $40,000, or in NYC making $50,000? This is utter trash and is just a means to strip freedoms and money from the United States, and you can damn sure bet who is going to hand this over to UN on a silver platter, and that's the Moonbat Democrats. Their patron saint Al Gore is making a KILLING off of lying about the effects of global warming and the true cause of climate change. Read this article to inform yourself a bit more, and research it a bit further to check surface temperatures on Venus and Mars over the time frames that the Earth has actually seen increases, and when you see the percentages the same across each of the planets, ask yourself if driving your car is causing Global Warming in Venus, or if maybe that giant glowing sphere in the sky has something to do with it. Read this post over at Hot Air too. Hell, go to town researching more evidence and learn how the Leftist money machine shouts down any dissenters and purposely targets children to attack their parents for researching the actual evidence that prove the farce they're running.

The Bush Administration, for their part is taking a pro-active role in taking on the UN's increased greed and Communist push. The UN, you see, is seeking over a 25% increase over last years budget, while profiteering off of the Global Warming hoax they are involved in, all the while increasing their assets, while adding, exactly what to international security? Think they'll get an endorsement for the people of Myanmar, Rwanda, Iraq, Somalia, Ethiopia, etc? What do we get for hosting the UN and funding them at a clip of 22% and Japan funds them at a clip of 20%? Hell, the UN funds them at a total of 38%, yet they continually put nations openly hostile to world peace and democracy such as Syria, Russia, China, etc to ever increasingly important roles. We see an Iranian stooge in head of the IAEA who is in charge of investigating Iran itself, who would undoubtedly torture and murder his family if he wasn't in lock step with their agenda. Here's a late breaking news item sure to make waves across the world very soon:

The Pope is an Ally of Logic on the Global Warming Issue

Perhaps His Holiness will help bring some calm to the insane hype going on in the world today.

-Caomhin

More Global Warming Communist Tactics Pushed at Bali

First, I suggest you go back and read the post I published last month: Going Warming Hoax Update (Where Going Green = Going Red). The UN's pollution spreading conference in Bali is another cover to use Global Warming in order to push a very leftwing agenda upon the world and attack the sovereignty of all nations (please see the Law of the Sea Treaty). The AP has a story on the idiocy and here's a sampling:

The draft lays out three options for how to proceed after Bali -- ranging from non-binding talks over the next two years to a deadline for adopting a new global pact at a U.N. meeting in Copenhagen in late 2009.

Rich nations should consider ways to step up efforts to curb emissions of greenhouse gases by setting "quantified national emission objectives," the draft says.

Poor countries should take "national mitigation actions ... that limit the growth of, or reduce, emissions," it says. It adds that "social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities" for poor nations.

Got that? So "rich" nations need to set emissions standards that will drastically reduce "emissions levels" while "poor" nations will be able to ignore this standard in order to socially and economically develop. See the hypocrisy there? The USA is considered a rich nation, but with a large population of poor people. By buying into this system, we surrender economic freedom over the UN and the damage it will have economically on our nation will do nothing to help the poor people but will in fact, do more, to destroy the middle class and create a larger pool of poor people. Conversely, China (a nation completely exempt from The Kyoto Protocol) is considered poor and can do whatever they want, in fact, their levels of emissions make ours look tiny. So got that? USA bad, China good.

Next, let's look at what exactly the UN is getting at by dividing the world into "poor" and "rich" nations, while completely ignoring the socio-economic differences within a nations borders, be it from East to West, rural to urban, etc. The UN is attempting to mandate that "rich" nations re-distribute the wealth into poorer nations under the guise of "Global Warming":

Currently, adaptation money comes from two global funds that rely on voluntary donations from wealthy nations, but falls far short of what is needed. Rich nations have pledged a combined $220.4 million, but as of September had delivered only $116.6 million – a "pathetic" amount, says Ms. Raworth, who puts the immediate needs among the poorest nations at $1 billion to $2 billion a year.

That's right, we all need to pony up for the failings of other nations to develop themselves, and damn it to hell, if that means making those of us who have politically and socially developed tactics that will allow us to grow foot the bill and let those who have made these choices poorly to have exactly what we have, but not to work for it. Sure there are natural advantages, but how does that matter? Should we feel guilty that we have resourceful land? Absolutely not, we should feel blessed. For as much whining the left does about outsourcing jobs the "carbon credit" industry that Al Gore his cronies are making a killing off of, in part by fueling the fear over this hoax, is doing just that:

Under the protocol, a company can earn emission credits by building emissions-cutting projects in developing countries – dubbed a clean-development mechanism (CDM). CDM credits can be traded on the international carbon market, with 2 percent of the value set aside in an adaptation fund. But by some pessimistic estimates, that levy is only likely to generate several hundred million dollars a year. So developing countries want to expand the levy to cover all carbon credits issued under the protocol – not just those issued via the clean-development mechanism. Their goal here is to put the protocol's adaptation fund squarely on the agenda for the protocol's first operational review, slated for next year. The protocol's first commitment period takes effect Jan. 1. In addition, developing countries are pushing to streamline and cut the high cost of applying for adaptation money.

Meanwhile, you still can't get any Democrats on board for Wind Farms because Teddy Kennedy doesn't like the sight of them while sailing, and Democrats specifically blackballing hydrogen and nuclear energy (the only reliable source of clean energy available) from their doomed-to-fail energy bill, while raising taxes immensely on oil companies. Their efforts are reckless and baseless. They ignore the energy solutions that will work and respond the damaging effects of highly inflated gas prices by trying to shove a tax increase what will be passed along and funded by the tax payers. Luckily, President Bush and the Administration are taking a "thanks, but no thanks" approach to the lunacy in Bali as well as the Democrats latest logic lacking bill. Finally, for your consideration, I give you this excellent post by Stephen Milloy, entitled, The Greenest Hypocrites of 2007, a must read.

-Caomhin

Global Warming Hoax Update (Where Going Green = Going Red)

The more I read about the mass hysteria over global warming, the more it is becoming apparent that global warming is nothing more than a left wing attempt at forcing the rule of communism upon the masses. The first piece of evidence that I have, I have long since documented. The Global Warming alarmists shout down dissent and do not allow for free speech in regards to the issue, rather, forcing their opinion on the masses by utilizing the media, using children to influence and force their parents to their view point (much like Mao's Cultural Revolution), and labeling all those who preach caution as radicals and liars. Classic communist move.

Population control has long been a communist tactic, as I am sure you are aware of how the Chinese go about this element. In fact, the Chinese have touted their "population control" as a way of fighting global warming. The Western Leftists, however, have done their part to essentially brainwash people into not having children in order to achieve this means as opposed to the Chinese way of murdering babies after birth. The Western Leftists, however, just want babies murdered before birth or completely prevented from being conceived. Pay special heed to this article, which details why some women in Western nations are being sterilized or having abortions in order to control the human population, because it is not "eco-friendly." That qualifies as moonbattery to the fullest. Completely idiotic, selfish, and barbaric.

On the home front, the Communist bastion of San Francisco has another grand idea that will help to eliminate the "threat" of "global warming" by creating their own special little nanny-state. The new idea being floated on the Left Coast is that fireplaces should be banned because they are not eco-friendly (please not that breathing is not eco-friendly either, which is why the left loves to dismember babies, stop the breathing, stop the carbon). Another ridiculous idea floated by the hard left as a means to control the rights of the people for the "common good," which is another basic philosophy of Communism.

What is another basic philosophy of Communism? The distribution of wealth to those "in need" as determined by the central government. Yes, Hillary, Edwards, Obama, etc subscribe to this tenant as well, but in this case, the central government in question is the United Nations. For example, just today the United Nations came out and said that if Western Nations do not pony up $86 Billion dollars, then the "poor" nations will be affected heavily by "global warming." Here's a little nugget for you to savor:

Half the cost, $44 billion, would go for "climate-proofing" developing nations' infrastructure while $40 billion would help the poor adapt how the live to cope with climate-related risks, says the panel's report. The other $2 billion would go to strengthening responses to natural disasters.

The report recommends the biggest share be paid by the United States and other rich nations, based on aid targets and financing calculations by the World Bank and Group of Eight major industrialized nations.

Amazed at the idiocy yet? How is President Bush criticized for protecting our freedoms from this Leftist onslaught. In fact, we have Canada to thank for stopping another horrible "Global Warming" international act from passing. This act would have given free pass to India and China to pollute all they want while crippling the economies of developed Western nations, giving the developing nations a competitive advantage over Western nations, destroying the intellectual and patent rights of Western corporations, and greatly undermining the most basic of human freedoms. The fact that the parallels between Global Warming and Communism are becoming more transparent everyday and it's about time those of us who believe in human rights, entrepreneurship, technological advances, democracy, and the Western way of life start to stand up and fight for it or it will all slip away.

-Caomhin

More Attacks on Christians from the Leftists

The Moonbats are a barking, that's for sure. I present two articles I came across today to help illustrate the further assault on Christianity. The first comes from Britain's Daily Mail, where a couple with a lifelong service of foster care have been stripped of their children. What did they do you ask? Hurt the children? Steal money from the government? Commit fraud? Nope, none of the above. Rather, this is their "crime" according to the government:

Earlier this year, Somerset County Council's social services department asked them to sign a contract to implement Labour's new Sexual Orientation Regulations, part of the Equality Act 2006, which make discrimination on the grounds of sexuality illegal.

Officials told the couple that under the regulations they would be required to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and tell them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages.

So they refused to teach the 11-year old child they were caring for what gay is and tell them that's it OK. Ridiculous. First of all, the government is not a religious entity, it has no business telling people what is and what is not right morally. They do, however, tell people what is and what is not criminally wrong. Discrimination is a violation of the law of the government, all fair and well. Now, Christianity teaches that it is immoral to be homosexual, but also teaches to be tolerant (which is not the same as accepting) of homosexuals. It is morally wrong to be homosexual. Again, by no means does the issue of morality translate to just homosexuality. Stealing is immoral, yet many Christians engage in stealing. Do you see what I mean there? The act is immoral, but that does not give anyone a right to go out and beat someone senseless for it. I have a few gay friends, I don't discriminate against them at all. They do, however, know that I believe their position is immoral. But we still get along. For the government to override a person's religious belief, by substituting moral (and not criminal) judgement, they are asserting themselves as a religious organization. You can see this happening in the states as well, as Christians are constantly assaulting while the Left panders endlessly to the Muslims. Watch how many things are taken down around Christmas time, then consider whether the Empire State building would be colored in honor of Christmas and not "The Holidays" the way Eid was for the Muslims.

For another example, let's look at this headline story I stumbled upon while searching Yahoo. "Catholic Condom Ban Helping AIDS Spread in Latam: U.N." Here's an example of the crack journalism displayed in this article:

"In Latin America the use of condoms has been demonized, but if they were used in every relation I guarantee the epidemic would be resolved in the region," said Alberto Stella, the UN AIDS Coordinator for Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.

Well....no shit. I could guarantee that if condoms were used in EVERY RELATION there would be no AIDS...and no babies either. What a genius. Somehow though abstinence is promoted as being "wrong" because if abstinence was practiced fully in EVERY RELATION then there would be no AIDS either. So sure, assault the Catholic Church. The Church is encouraging responsibility and to not engage in sex until marriage. The U.N.'s position is to just throw condoms at everyone walking and let them have at it without any sexual education at all, or to stress personal responsibility. Really, which is worse, preaching abstinence or let's say...giving birth control to 11 year olds? Obviously I'm not exactly the best Catholic in the world, but preaching the right thing is better than preaching up the weaknesses of humans in general and telling everyone there should be no responsibility for your actions unless it goes against the government's wishes. When the hell did Communism win the Cold War?

-Caomhin

Hillary Clinton: We will Own Every Aspect of Your Life

Of course she wants universal health care. What else can you expect from a socialist hack. Everything this woman stands for is personal power grabs and the establishment of all powerful federal government that will run every aspect of your life. How can they even claim to be even mildly supportive of capitalism? She is simply going for the sound bite for votes, and rest assured her liberal media buddies will not put the clamps to her. $110 billion a year, a conservative figure, is insane. Even worse yet, its mandated care. Forget choices and personal responsibility, the government will force you to get health care and routine check ups. Why not cap limits on lawsuits for example, the leading cause of rising health care costs in this nation. While you are at it, take a look to see how many innovative drugs are developed in other nations as opposed to this one. Eliminate the period of time granted to companies who fund R&D into innovative medicines and all incentive is pretty much gone to develop revolutionary new cures. The Weekly Standard does a very nice job, as usual, of getting a great point across in an articulate and concise means on this issue. Let's also keep in the mind the ginormousness of the costs associated with this asinine program. $110 billion does not pop out of thin air, the foot for this bill will come directly from the average citizens. Sure, Hillary can claim she wants to tax the rich, but let's be pragmatic in this discussion. The very rich will always have tax loop holes in which they can escape paying taxes. Should some type of restriction be placed on corporations in order to close a loop hole, rest assured, you will see inflation on a massive march. You can already see inflation increasing since the minimum wage hike took effect. The cost to the average citizen will be enormous.

Worse yet, the Hillary camp is keeping quiet on whether or not illegal aliens will be given the health benefits, which, given Liberal track records is an assurance that they will. Now couple this with the fact that the Libs want to give amnesty to 12 million plus illegals and basically want to take no steps to enforce border security and now you have a swelling population of illegals who will derive health benefits and not have to worry about paying into the system. Now ask yourself, if border security and illegal immigration is a huge issue now, what will happen when we have an unsecured border and the promise of free health care to those who illegally enter our borders? National security indeed. This is a recipe for disaster, not just from a health care stance, but from a security stance.

The Liberals have no intention of honoring the free market, the basis on which this nation was founded. Have they even heard of Adam Smith? What gives them the right to take away from the ordinary citizen the ability to make decisions on which coverage option is best for them. Uninsured people are pretty much screwed, I will grant them that. But what is the better option, a bureaucratic nightmare that will make current premiums seem like spare change, or a free market option with the promise of tax credit with the purchase of health care, much like the one on the Republican side of the debate. This option puts the responsibility on the individual and enables them to make choices while easing the burden of cost. It also keeps this very important aspect of your life, out of the governments hands. Ever dealt with the DMV? You want your health care ran that way?

I also consider you to look at the source who is offering this ridiculous proposal. Hillary is a power monger along the same political lines of the former Soviet Union. The great majority of positions she holds would earn her a Golden Bear award from the former republic. She slams our armed forces, calling them liars, while getting her pockets fed from criminals like Norman Hsu. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure many more corruption charges against her cronies are coming. Let's not forget Vince Foster, which is still mysterious. Of course Whitewater is nice little example of her business practices as well. Perhaps she can get further advice from Madeline Albright, her half wit adviser on foreign affairs...say how does she feel about Kim Jong Il again? If you trust these people with your health care, then you are really beyond reach. What our founders had in mind was a free market economy with a central government that would defend our interests and expressly left the rest of governing the state and local governments. What Marx gave us was the idea of a supremely strong central government with the citizens and all local governments at its mercy, the same model that Liberals are pushing hard for. Communists also crushed all dissent. Well, yes, you see that too from the Liberals as well. This is evidence from pushing for the Fairness Doctrine all the way down to their own liberal attack dog groups going after Brian Baird, Liberal, who had the audacity to support our troops. There are many other examples, many, many, examples. But then, this is the way the Soviets ran their shop as well.

-Caomhin