VIDEO: Normalizing relations with Cuba is appeasement

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

A system conceived in failure ~ By Robert Ringer

This morning, I am going to try to do this post a little differently than I have in the past. Change can be good sometimes, right? First, let me me suggest that you read Robert Ringer's column in full by clicking on the link below, and then return to this page to read my analysis.

A system conceived in failure

By Robert Ringer

Posted: September 17, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010



Fidel Castro's recent statement that communism doesn't work in Cuba anymore was a stunning admission on his part – kind of a deathbed conversion to the efficacy and morality of freedom and free markets. It was, of course, a horrific blow to the far left, particularly in the United States. Here we are, hurtling full speed toward a communist utopia in America, while Cuba, Vietnam, China and other previously hard-core communist countries are moving just as rapidly toward capitalism.

Castro Criticizes Cuba's Communist System

Video provided by FoxNewsChannel

Some may have warm and fuzzy feelings toward good ol' Fidel, kind of like a Charlie Rangel "retire-in-dignity" thing. But what about the untold numbers of Cubans who have been imprisoned, tortured and executed since Castro's takeover of Cuba in 1959? And the hundreds of thousands of Cubans who had to flee their homeland and leave most of their possessions behind?

If I were a Cuban-American who lost family members – or wealth – during Castro's reign of terror, I would be very angry right now. Fifty years of oppressing an entire nation, and now he says communism doesn't work? Sorry, Fidel, but your old-age enlightenment doesn't bring back all the lost family members and stolen wealth. Nor does it bring back the youth of those who have lived under his oppressive regime for more than 50 years.

Like other communist countries, Cuba will increasingly implement "reforms" that will move it more and more in the direction of freedom and free markets. And, as in most other communist countries that have collapsed under the weight of an unworkable system, Fidel, brother Raul and their fellow thugs will slip into the night and "retire with dignity."

This part reminded me of what my 7th grade "Social Studies" teacher, Mr. Trotter, told us many, many years ago (in the 1960's). He told us that the United States would gradually move toward Communism, or at least more government control of the economy and less freedom for the people, while the Soviet Union would move away from Communism and toward more freedom for the people, and eventually the two superpowers would meet somewhere in the middle. That was very prophetic. However, Mr. Trotter never mentioned what would happen after we met in the middle. Would the United States keep moving toward Communism?

So, where does this leave the Michael Moore, Sean Penn, Oliver Stone crowd? Embarrassed? Never. Leftists have a stand-pat response whenever they are confronted with yet another communist failure. They simply argue that Karl Marx's model has never been implemented correctly, which is why all communist countries have failed.

A nice, convenient excuse, to be sure. But the real reason why every communist regime in history has brought death, enslavement and economic disaster to its people is because communism is a political and economic system that was conceived in failure. Plain and simple, it defies human nature. People – all people – seek to better their existence, and it takes the brute force of a Joseph Stalin or Kim Jong Il to suppress that instinct.

When people are punished for producing, they simply stop producing. Within a few years after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, conditions were so bad in Russia that Lenin was on the verge of being confronted with a counter-revolution.

"Uh, oh, now what do we do?" Lenin was wondering. "Maybe this Marxism thing isn't going to work out so well..." But, Lenin came up with a plan.

To ward it off, he invited Western capitalists to help industrialize the Soviet Union. And, sadly, many major U.S. corporations accommodated Lenin and saved him from his own communist system. (Which leads one to think of Herbert Hoover's all-too-true statement that "The only thing wrong with capitalism is capitalists.")

Dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn, author of "The Gulag Archipelago," explained that without the help of the United States, Russia's communism would almost certainly have collapsed much sooner:

It is American trade that allows the Soviet economy to concentrate its resources on armaments and preparations for war. Remove that trade, and the Soviet economy would be obliged to feed and clothe and house the Russian people, something it has never been able to do. Let the socialists among you allow this socialist economy to prove the superiority that its ideology claims. Stop sending them goods. Let them stand on their own feet, and then see what happens.

Yeah, well, we know how it works. In capitalism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer! At least that's what Democrats have always told me. In fact, that is what just about everybody tells me that isn't making very much money. However, Robert Ringer tells me a different story. It seems that capitalism is not all that bad for the poor broke masses, especially for those that would LIKE to be do better in life:

Where otherwise well-meaning people get off track is when they buy into the far-left rhetoric that "the poor" are exploited under capitalism. The truth, of course, is that those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder benefit more from capitalism than from any other system, for a variety of reasons.

First, every person is free to take a job at any wage available to him, and, in fact, both employment and wages normally increase in a free market.

Second, in a free society devoid of most government regulations, a person with little or no capital is able to start a business much easier, without the necessity of obtaining a license or having to comply with costly regulations that only large companies can afford.

Third, free-market capitalism keeps prices down, which allows a low-income person to buy things he would not be able to afford in a government-controlled economy.

Fourth, the more profitable a company is, the more it is able to invest in expansion of its business, which results in more employment, higher wages, more products being produced and lower prices – all of which are good for low-income people.

That all seems to makes sense, doesn't it? Of course it makes sense, because it is the way things actually work in economics, despite what some pinhead college professor may have told you. But, unfortunately, some people are harder to convince of the truth. Let's take a look from a different angle:

As a country moves toward socialism (which Karl Marx defined as a transitional stage between capitalism and communism), the only way government can prevent producers from revolting is through the use of force. That is why all socialist/communist revolutions and evolutions end in enslavement and bloodshed.

We see it now in Greece, where the spoiled masses are, in effect, saying to the government: "We don't give a damn if you don't have enough money to pay our entitlements. We want them anyway!"

Right now, the United States is a "mixed-economy" country – i.e., part socialist and part capitalist. But it is now moving rapidly toward more and more government control of both the economy and people's lives.

If Fidel Castro has decided that Communism isn't working in Cuba, do you now see why it is so important for us to move America in a different direction? If Mr. Trotter, the teacher I mentioned above, had realized that America and the Soviet Union were going to end up like each other at some point in time, could he have also believed that America would eventually keep on going toward Communism? Or, did Mr. Trotter hope and pray that America would eventually wake up and realize the direction we were heading wasn't where we would want to go?

It's possible, if that is the case, that America IS waking up. That seems to be what the Tea Party Movement is all about. And not only are we waking up, many people are bothering to get up and do something about it. And you can, too, if you should choose to stay free. We have a chance to get this country back on the right path in just a few weeks. We have the most important election ever facing us coming along on November 2, 2010. It is time to pay close attention to who is on the ballot. It is time to pay attention to the candidates' character. It is time to understand where they stand on the issues. It is time to believe that you can make a difference, and change the direction this country is going, with your vote, and if possible, your assistance with campaigns and/or educating the voters.

You need to make a choice, while you still have the freedom to choose. Just sayin'...

If Americans do not hold the next Congress' feet to the fire and demand that the government get out of people's lives and out of the economy – if they allow the progressives in the Republican Party to co-opt the new tea-party members in the House and Senate – it will surely [b]ring down the curtain on the last best hope of mankind.

Perhaps Don Meredith, of Monday Night Football fame, was prescient when he sang, "Turn out the lights, the party's over." Just the thought of Meredith being remembered as the Nostradamus of our time would be enough to make Howard Cosell turn over in his grave.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

The last communist ~ By Robert Ringer

Robert Ringer gives America a stern warning, letting us know that there isn't any such thing as "The Last Communist" (the nickname for Fidel Castro). Every last American needs to read this column, and ones like it, and needs to be aware of how close we really are to losing our freedom.

Don't allow your logic to get sidetracked by oil spills, union-inspired riots in Arizona, or BHO's wisecracks at elegant media functions about his birth certificate and his socialist policies. What is happening in Washington is not just another little shift to the left. It's a prelude to the coming insurrection.

If you don't believe me, by all means feel free to join the walking dead and cheer on BHO and his comrades as they continue with their plan to nationalize whole industries and collapse the U.S. economy through deficit spending.

Make no mistake about it: Criminal government in Washington is on a roll and moving forward at full throttle – and its momentum can be stopped only by a defiant and vigilant populace, a populace that clearly understands there is no last communist.

Wake up, America!

By Robert Ringer

Posted: May 07, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

I recall when I was a teenager asking the question, in a civics class, "What's to stop the president or Congress from ignoring the Constitution and doing whatever they please?" Predictably, the class laughed and the teacher patronizingly explained to me that our system of "checks and balances" made such a scenario impossible. I clearly remember that I was totally unconvinced by his dismissive answer.

Segue to 2010, and, by golly, we have a president and a Congress that ignores the Constitution and does whatever they please! Darn it – where's your high-school civics teacher when you need him most?

How can this be happening in America? Let's back up a few steps and get some background on the matter. For years, the clueless media loved to refer to Fidel Castro as "the last communist." This perplexed me no end, because history has made it clear that communism has always existed and will continue to exist until "life after people."

A belief in communism is an envy-based flaw that is programmed into the human psyche. Fortunately, through education, logic and a sound moral structure, a majority of people in modern, civilized societies are able to overcome the serpent-like temptation of "to each according to his need."

But early man had no formal education and, one would assume, had no time to reflect on philosophical issues. The evidence suggests that savages lived communal lives where the individual was sacrificed to the "collective good." Often, this even resulted in cannibalism. Satisfying one's appetite by munching on a fellow tribe member's arm must have seemed quite natural to men who, like animals, spent most of their time hunting for food.

Nevertheless, communism has never been eradicated, because there are always plenty of people who cannot repress their envy. Thus, throughout the 20th century, communism reared its ugly head in such disparate places such as Russia, North Korea, North Vietnam and Mozambique. And now, in the 21st century, it's bringing down Venezuela, with the U.S clearly the next big target of those who yearn for "social justice."

Even so, after the fall of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall, communism became kind of passé. As the economies of Western countries boomed, many of those who were most susceptible to the allure of the communist fantasy of wealth without work became distracted by the good life handed to them by their thriving semi-capitalistic systems.

So what, exactly, is communism? Communism is technically defined as "a theory advocating elimination of private property; a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed; a totalitarian system in which a single authoritarian party controls state‑owned means of production with the professed aim of establishing a stateless society." Swell.

But what about socialism? Well, if you look it up, you'll find that the only significant difference between the definitions of socialism and communism is that socialism is referred to as "a transitional stage of society between capitalism and communism." Which means, according to Newsweek ("We Are All Socialists Now"), that the U.S. must be on its way to communism.

But many countries, particularly in Europe, try to stop at socialism and not finish the journey to pure communism. The reason they do this is because they realize that under socialism, politicians can still rely on the remnants of capitalism to prop up their redistribution schemes.

So, is Chairman Obama a communist or a mere socialist? No one can say with certainty what's in his heart, but my own feeling is that he would quite enjoy establishing a totalitarian government where the state owns all means of production with the aim of establishing a stateless society.

I believe that one of the mistakes well-meaning but naïve folks unwittingly make is buying into "the last communist" myth, which causes them to become lax. It's so comforting to simply waive aside unpleasant thoughts and insist that "It could never happen here."

The truth is that there will never be a "last communist." Why? Because Reille Hunter's lover boy was right: There really are two Americas! One America believes in self-responsibility, hard work and the primacy of the individual. The other – probably close to one-third of the population – believes in the primacy of "the common good" and the fantasy of living off the efforts of others.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

Haiti's avoidable death toll ~ By Walter E. Williams

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Walter E. Williams Posted: January 20, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Some expect Haiti's 7.0 earthquake death toll to reach over 200,000 lives. Why the high death toll? Northern California's 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake was more violent, measuring 7.1 on the Richter scale, resulting in 63 deaths and 3,757 injuries. The 1906 San Francisco earthquake measured 7.8 on the Richter scale, about eight times more violent than Haiti's, and cost 3,000 lives. As tragic as the Haitian calamity is, it is merely symptomatic of a far deeper tragedy that's completely ignored, namely self-inflicted poverty. The reason why natural disasters take fewer lives in our country is because we have greater wealth. It's our wealth that permits us to build stronger homes and office buildings. When a natural disaster hits us, our wealth provides the emergency personnel, heavy machinery and medical services to reduce the death toll and suffering. Haitians cannot afford the life-saving tools that we Americans take for granted. President Barack Obama called the quake "especially cruel and incomprehensible." He would be closer to the truth if he had said that the Haitian political and economic climate that make Haitians helpless in the face of natural disasters are "especially cruel and incomprehensible." The biggest reason for Haiti being one of the world's poorest countries is its restrictions on economic liberty. Let's look at some of it. According to the 2009 Index of Economic Freedom, authorization is required for some foreign investments, such as in electricity, water, public health and telecommunications. Authorization requires bribing public officials and, as a result, Haiti's monopolistic telephone services can at best be labeled primitive. That might explain the difficulty Haitian-Americans have in finding out about their loved ones. READ FULL STORY >

It's time for a war on leftist celebrities ~ By Erik Rush

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Erik Rush Posted: December 17, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Last week, I had the extreme pleasure of attending a talk given by Cuban dissident Alina Fernández, the daughter of Fidel Castro. Ms. Fernández is, as are many Americans of Cuban descent, a vocal critic of her father's regime. Ms. Fernández delivered the account of Cuba's upheaval during the early 1960s with humanity and even humor. In fact, she used a great deal of humor throughout, from marriage having become "a sport" in Cuba, to Castro's program of distributing live chickens and pigs to apartment-dwellers to raise because the government couldn't afford to do so. I was awestruck that someone could retain a measure of sanity after having been forced to watch televised executions from the age of 4, let alone lightheartedly relate the story. Then, on Monday of this week, I read the review (if you will) of a recently aired television program entitled "The People Speak" by WND's Drew Zahn. I had seen the trailers for "The People Speak" (which aired on the History Channel on Dec. 13), so I knew it was going to be a boilerplate, Hollywood America-sucks-fest, but I had no idea until I read Zahn's edifying story how coordinated the larger effort of the Hollywood left – of which "The People Speak" was only a component – has become. I have come to the conclusion that it's pretty much time for a war on the Hollywood left and their political affiliates. I find it terribly sad that I must relegate individuals whose work I truly love to the class of those who, in a perfect America, would be in prison; thus, I surmise that many Americans, even those who understand how imperiled we are, might be reticent when it comes to this war of which I speak. These must come to realize that we have entered a time, similar to that during the Civil War, when "brother will be pitted against brother." Emotional affinity cannot be a factor; in truth, emotion has been one of the left's greatest weapons. Were a politician, or a group thereof, to pose as considerable a threat as do Hollywood elites, many Americans would mobilize to neutralize such a party or parties. This is, in fact, what the tea-party movement and the various 9/12 groups are all about. As outlined in Zahn's article, this putrid propaganda piece ("The People Speak") was the brainchild of a long-established communist guru named Howard Zinn. On his website, the "acclaimed historian" has a photograph taken at the Lincoln Center premiere of "The People Speak" in New York. Grinning out at the camera along with Zinn is a handful of Hollywood celebs, millionaires all. Among them are Matt Damon, Viggo Mortensen, Danny Glover and Jasmine Guy (who held up a fist in a "power" salute). At least we know who to start with, now don't we? READ FULL STORY >

Big Brother in your car ~ By Henry Lamb

By Henry Lamb Posted: July 18, 2009, 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Last week's column about the coming shift to tax-by-the-mile devices in automobiles brought many interesting letters. One writer says he was working on this project way back in the 1980s when he was building special Buicks that would run on methanol for the Department of Energy, with on-board computers to control the car's operation. By 1993, test cars in Colorado were controlled from Pontiac, Mich. The popular "OnStar" system, promoted by Government Motors, is an outgrowth of this work. Another writer listed 15 different possible applications, such as shutting down the vehicle when its allotted emissions cap had been reached. Why not? The current cap-and-trade bill would limit industrial emissions and force each business to pay an extra tax for the privilege of emitting additional carbon dioxide. Why not arbitrarily assign a weekly or monthly cap on auto emissions and shut down the vehicle when that limit is reached? The new Global Positioning Satellite device would have that capability. Every American ought to be outraged that such a system is even contemplated. This system is the tool that makes slaves of every person who depends upon a vehicle. Every person should consider just how his life would be changed if he were required to get approval from the federal government to start his car. Another writer argues that the government has the authority and the right to impose whatever conditions it wishes, since driving on public roads is a privilege, not an individual right. His argument says the government may impose any condition it wishes on the license to use public roads. What will it take to restore common sense and rein in out-of-control government? Get Glenn Beck's latest book, inspired by Founding Father Thomas Paine This argument completely ignores the Fourth Amendment guarantee of the right to be secure from government intrusion without probable cause and due process. Does the government's right to tax trump the constitutional right to individual privacy? The proposed GPS road tax system could easily be programmed to listen to and record conversations inside any vehicle. It could stop a vehicle, lock the occupants inside and notify the "jack boots" that the occupants were en route to a tea party. We would hope that the federal government would never sink to the level of paranoia that gripped Nazi Germany. But then, we also hoped that the federal government would never sink to the level of labeling legal, peaceful assemblies, such as the recent tea parties, as gatherings of potential terrorists. Who would have believed, even five years ago, that the federal government would take over GM, much of the banking industry, and appoint more than 30 "czars" to administer government without congressional oversight? Who would have believed that Congress could be bullied into adopting a cap-and-trade program that deliberately increases the cost of energy for every American, with absolutely no offsetting benefit – except increased government control over the life of every citizen? Who would have believed that Congress would even consider allowing the government to take over the health care industry and create a system that allows government to ration health care and make life-and-death decisions for individual citizens? The Democratic socialists who have taken control of the federal government are giddy with their power. Their view of utopia is government control of virtually everything. In Cuba, people who owe their livelihood to Castro are not about to vote for anyone but Castro. The Democratic socialists are creating a society in which the vast majority of people are dependent upon the government for their livelihood. These are the people who are most likely to keep the Democratic socialists in power. [CONTINUE READING]

Obama: Wrong again ~ By Oliver North

By Oliver North Posted: July 03, 2009 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 WASHINGTON – It took the Obama administration eight days to figure out whether Iranians being gunned down for protesting a fraudulent election and demanding basic civil liberties deserved to be acknowledged by the president of the United States. It took the O-Team less than eight hours to side with Cuba's Fidel Castro, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega over the ouster of Manuel Zelaya in Honduras. As we now have come to expect, Mr. Obama got it wrong again, but this time, nobody noticed. The U.S. news media, preoccupied with the sudden demise of Michael Jackson, ignored the event in Central America. For those who care about things more important than the passing of a "pop music legend," here's the rest of the story: Manuel Zelaya, a wealthy rancher and agribusiness executive and a self-described "poor farmer," won a four-year term as Honduran president in November 2005, with 49.8 percent of the vote. Article 374 of the Honduran Constitution bars the nation's chief executive from serving consecutive terms. Apparently, one term wasn't enough for Zelaya, a protégé of Venezuela's strongman, Hugo Chavez and Nicaragua's phobic anti-American leader, Daniel Ortega. Late last year, as the Honduran economy tanked and unemployment grew to nearly 28 percent, Zelaya forced Elvin Santos, the country's elected vice president, to resign and began holding conversations with Chavez and Ortega on how to hold on to power. In lengthy Chavez-like populist speeches, he denounced the U.S. and wealthy landowners and linked himself with leftists in the Honduran labor movement. On March 23, he issued an executive decree directing a national referendum on a Venezuela-style constituent assembly to rewrite the country's constitution in time for presidential and legislative elections in November. The Obama-Clinton State Department was mute about all of this. Unfortunately for Zelaya's aspirations, the Honduran Constitution requires that amendments be passed by a two-thirds vote of the country's unicameral Congress during two consecutive sessions. By late May, the Honduran Congress, the Honduran Supreme Court, the commissioner for human rights and the Honduran electoral tribunal all had overwhelmingly declared the referendum unconstitutional. Zelaya ignored the people's representatives, had ballots printed in Venezuela, and announced that the vote would take place June 28. Again, the O-Team was silent. In keeping with the rule of law, Honduran Attorney General Luis Alberto Rubi took the case to court. The Honduran Supreme Court ruled the referendum to be illegal and ordered the ballots to be confiscated. Late on June 23, Zelaya countermanded the court order and directed the army to distribute the ballots. Gen. Romeo Vasquez, the chief of staff of the Honduran military, sought legal opinions and decided not to distribute them. The following day, Zelaya accepted the resignation of the minister of defense, Edmundo Orellana, and fired Vasquez. The Honduran Supreme Court unanimously ruled the Vasquez firing illegal and reinstated him June 25. That prompted Zelaya and a group of supporters to seize the ballots and issue another executive decree, which directed government officials to set up 15,000 polling stations at schools and community buildings across the country. In response to a request from Attorney General Rubi, the Honduran Congress – controlled by Zelaya's own Liberal Party – opened an investigation into the president's mental stability and fitness to govern. Zelaya replied with a two-hour broadcast harangue, in which he claimed: "Congress cannot investigate me, much less remove me or stage a technical coup against me, because I am honest. I'm a free president, and nobody scares me." [CONTINUE READING]