No inflation if you do not eat or drive!

If you do not eat or drive a car you should not worry about increased inflation. However, if you are unfortunate enough to go hungry during the day and need to get to work by car, or even public transportation. you no doubt will soon be paying more for these necessary indulgences.

If you are retired and need to go the the doctor or even the hospital maybe you can get a friend to take you and reduce the impact on your fixed income by off loading the inflationary cost of these irritating budget items. Of course you might alienate what friends you have or you may start by not not having enough.

The government does not include food and energy in the inflation index because these items jump around but history shows they generally move in an upward path and now that Congress has discovered ethanol, as the partial solution to our energy problems,they have become linked. Ethanol production costs reflect themselves in higher corn prices and thus some food staples making the "Jolly Green Giant" sad.

Politicians love avoiding pain and do everything in their power to ignore it. But, pain has a way of finding its way around politicians and hitting constituents in their pocket books whether essentials are indexed or not.

So to assure concerned voters that all is well, some politicians are now devising the next best thing. Spend tax dollars by giving tax payers a rebate. This is a novel way of laundering that only those in Disney East would think of proposing. Since we are in an election year I suspect we will soon witness a bidding contest between certain candidates seeking to top the other's rebate proposals.

Let's face it, the dollar will soon cost more to print than it is worth. This is already true of pennies. The only value of a Roman coin is in its antiquity. Our currency is now backed by our own promise to pay. Nixon,I believe, de-linked our currency with gold which has exploded in value.

Good luck to those foreign suckers who hold our debt!

Lawrence Lindsey wrote an op ed piece in today's Wall Street Journal entitled" The State of The Stimulus Debate." He pointed out the absurdity of Sen. Clinton's recent inane proposals. Lindsey called for something very logical - fundamental tax reform. Good luck Mr. Lindsey. You have asked Congress to gore their pet oxen!

Olmert's government is shaken by Lieberman walkout threat and Isi Leibler speaks out! What Leibler writes could just as easily apply to our own nation's void in leadership (See 1 and 2 below.)

Meanwhile rockets continue to fall on Sderot and an Israeli woman was killed by an automobile while fleeing one of the rockets. (See 3 below.)

Mubarak tells GW the Palestinian-Israeli problem is the underlying cause of all the problems in the Middle East. All terrorists will lay down their weapons if Israel will just give in to whatever the Palestinians want. For this sage advice Bush should fork over a few more billion in aid. Bush praises Mubarak for his help and does not bring up the matter of weapons smuggling.(See 4 and 5 below.)

Another opinion by Eitan Haber on Lieberman's threat. (See 6 below.)

Dick

1) Crack in Olmert government coalition with Israel Beitenu walkout and its call for elections


Party leader Avigdor Lieberman announced Wednesday, Jan. 16, his faction was making good on its promise to quit his government post as strategic affairs minister if talks on “core issues” of the conflict were launched with Palestinian leaders.

He argued that Israel’s conflict with the Arabs was never territorial, rejected the “land for peace” convention as a trap, and urged the adoption instead of the principle of territorial exchange. Lieberman called for an early general election.

Olmert responded that the talks which foreign minister Tzipi Livni and former Palestinian prime minister Ahmed Qureia began on core issues, Monday, Jan. 14, would continue.

Another coalition partner, the ultra-religious Shas, has not indicated whether it will hold to its commitment to exit the government if Jerusalem’s re-division was put on the table.

The departure of Israel Beitenu’s 11 Knesset members cuts the Olmert government’s majority in the 120-strong Knesset to seven. Without Shas’ 12 members, the government would hold only 55. Even if the prime minister can make up some of the missing numbers with the left-wing Meretz (4) and Torah Front (6), his government’s survival would still hang on support from the 10 members of the Arab factions. Olmert might have also to contend with potential defectors from his own Kadima party (29).

In exactly two weeks, Olmert faces the final report drawn up by the Winograd commission on his government’s mismanagement of the 2006 Lebanon War. Justice Eliahu Winograd has advised that his final document will not name names. But after lambasting government leaders in its interim report, the panel is unlikely to deal kindly with any part of the government and military which conducted the war.

Before he took up the defense portfolio, Labor leader Ehud Barak vowed to quit the government if this report were negative. His party of 19 lawmakers is divided over its withdrawal, which would bring the government down and force an early election.

2) A nation that is in search of leadership
By Isi Leibler

With the impending release of the Winograd Report, most Israelis will be mulling over the future of their current leadership. Those old enough will recollect with nostalgia the extraordinary quality of the Israelis who led the country from its inception to the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin in 1995.

Some will be asking themselves why, in recent years, Israel has been afflicted with such a disastrous crop of unsuccessful and failed politicians who to this day remain unwilling to accept accountability for their failures. Indeed, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has brazenly announced that he has no intention of resigning regardless of what Winograd says.

In the past, outstanding leaders who affected the course of history - for better or for worse - were usually men consumed by a vision or a cause. They held views that were often initially unacceptable to the public and obliged to undergo periods as lonely outsiders. Often enough, prior to obtaining popular support, they were marginalized, dismissed as wild visionaries and sometimes even condemned as dangerous extremists.

Take, for example, Winston Churchill. It was only well after Munich, when Neville Chamberlain's policies of appeasement had become utterly discredited, that Britons ceased branding Churchill an irresponsible warmonger.

THE SAME applied to the early Zionist leaders and the founding fathers of Israel.

Theodor Herzl was regarded by most Western and educated Jews as an eccentric, promoting utterly unfeasible Utopian ideas. Even within the Zionist movement itself, David Ben-Gurion faced enormous opposition as he battled unflinchingly for Jewish independence, emerging as the dominant leader only in the wake of the Holocaust.

That also applied to those who succeeded him. The most extreme example was Menachem Begin. Seven times he lost elections and for almost 30 years was all but ostracized, shamefully vilified, and even condemned as a fascist until his extraordinary electoral victory in 1977. Today he is recognized as one of our greatest national leaders.

What did these people of varying political persuasions share? They all had visions and strategies in which they genuinely believed and were convinced would best serve the interests of the nation. They stood their ground and refused to be dissuaded even when public opinion was opposed to their ideas. Rarely did they allow a personal agenda to intrude or influence the formulation of policy.

In many cases, when they recognized that they had reached an impasse and could no longer pursue their objectives, or concluded that they had failed, they voluntarily resigned. That applied to Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir and Begin.

IN OTHER words, until recently, the underlying motivation of most Israeli leaders of all hues was an unhesitating willingness to prioritize the interests of the nation above any personal agenda. Of course, they made mistakes and were at times utterly misguided. But neither public opinion nor a lust to cling to power could conceivably have led them to subordinating what they perceived to be the best interests of the people.

That was as true of Rabin as it was of others. In the course of time, even after Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin had dragged him against his will into endorsing the Oslo debacle, he convinced himself that in order to forestall the impending nuclearization of Iraq and Iran, the national interest required that he make peace with Israel's immediate neighbors even if it entailed a gamble. That the gamble subsequently proved to be a disaster does not detract from the sincerity of his objective. Despite his failures, nobody could conclude that Rabin's failures stemmed from a crass desire to gain popular support or retain power.

IT WAS DURING the leadership of Ehud Barak that the strategic long-term interests of the nation became relegated to a secondary position and were subordinated to a personal agenda. Barak's policy zig-zags reached their climax toward the end of his term, by which time he was already making statements in the afternoon which contradicted those he had expressed in the morning. His policies were increasingly determined not by what he perceived to be in the public interest, but by public opinion. From that point, polls, not principles, determined the national interest.

Ariel Sharon refined this approach into an art form, utilizing the services of pollsters and PR spin doctors as never before. All this has now reached its most cynical climax under Olmert, whose entire agenda gives the appearance of being dominated by his all-too-transparent overriding obsession to remain in office. To promote this, he has been tailoring his policies to blend in with vox populi as reflected in opinion polls. Yet even this has failed to enhance his ratings.

Olmert has also used the Prime Minister's Office and encouraged associates such as Haim Ramon to test the waters on every major issue in order to gauge public opinion before introducing new policies. When there was a strong negative response from the public (as when Ramon suggested handing over jurisdiction of the Temple Mount to the Palestinians), Olmert simply backed down.

Needless to say, it is entirely legitimate and even obligatory for politicians to utilize opinion polls to ascertain the mood of the nation.

But over the past few years this has gotten out of control. Today Israel has become a haven for pollsters and spin merchants. In fact, it is fair to state that today most potentially contentious policies are not being determined on what is considered to be the national interest. They are resolved only after being superficially approved by the fickle public via the medium of telephone opinion polls.

The same also applies to most political parties, with the possible exception of the ideologically motivated religious, hard-Left and ultra-Right.

THUS, TODAY, a large proportion of the political establishment also formulates its policy primarily on the basis of the number of votes it estimates will be gained: National mood as manipulated by spin doctors and not national interest has become the order of the day. We have become like a ship without a rudder.

Today, Olmert's failure as a leader has become transparent. But there is a danger that without renewed recognition of the role that responsible leaders must assume, the underlying problems of leadership could become institutionalized even after he retires.

What is needed? First and foremost, genuine leaders as opposed to self-gratifying politicians. Leaders who will determine policies and respond to challenges on the basis of only one criterion - and it isn't how many votes such policies will generate, or whether "the street" approves of them. Long-term strategies must be based exclusively on national interests, even if that requires campaigning to persuade the nation to consider its collective destiny rather than personal or sectional aggrandizement.

3) An Israeli woman fleeing from a Palestinian missile blast in Sderot was run over by a car and seriously injured. It was the 43st of 50 missiles fired from Gaza Wednesday


The 44nd smashed into a Sderot home. Most were aimed at this battered town and Ashkelon to the north. Two exploded in villages of the Eshkol region.


Thirty were fired in a single hour from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m., injuring another two people in Sderot. One exploded in Kibbutz Nir Am.

Tuesday a kibbutz volunteer, Carlos Chavez, 20 from Ecuador, was killed and four Sderot residents injured, including two children. The day saw 41 missiles, a Katyusha rocket exploding in southern Ashkelon, heavy machine fire against the homes of Kibbutz Alumim and 16 mortar rounds, many falling at Netiv Ha’asara.

In Sderot, more families are getting packed to flee their small beleaguered town, as emergency medical services sustain top-level alert for further assaults on Israeli targets within a wide radius from Gaza.

Israeli counter-terror operations in Gaza Tuesday left up to 20 armed Palestinians dead, and more than 40 injured.

Seventeen months after a month-long Hizballah rocket bombardment of northern Israel, the Israeli military and air force are again frustrated in their efforts to staunch the Palestinian cross-border missile assault on southwest Israel. Their operations lead only to intensified bombardment. High casualties do not deter Hamas and its jihadist partners.

For this reason, many of the IDF field officers commanding Gaza operations complain that as long as their sorties are confined to the fringes of the Palestinian bastions in the refugee camps and mortar positions, the Hamas' missile-launching capabilities will not be seriously affected.

For now, Israeli policy-makers are using the thunder of battle to create an optical illusion of progress towards this objective when, in fact, very little is achieved.

As soon as the troops pull back to the Israeli side, the Palestinians go back to their former forward positions and let loose with rockets, mortars, heavy machine guns and explosive devices, and the missiles, which are fabricated and cached in safety inside the camps. All Israeli troops are allowed at the moment is to keep control of the border fence under constant Palestinian pressure to breach it.

4) Mubarak to Bush: Palestinian issue is core of Mideast conflict


The Palestinian question is the core of conflict in the Middle East and Egypt very much hopes for a peace deal by January 2009, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said on Wednesday during talks with U.S. President George W. Bush in Sharm el-Sheikh.

Mubarak told reporters he updated Bush on Egypt's position that "the Palestinian question, of course, is the core of problems and conflict in the Middle East, and it is the entry to contain the crisis and tension in the region, and the best means to face what's going on in the world, and our region - I mean by that, the escalation of violence, extremism and terrorism."

"I emphasized through our presentations the Egyptian situation, underscoring and supporting peace, and our aspirations that Mr. Bush follows up on negotiations between both Israeli and Palestinian sides, and also said that I wish to reach a peace agreement before the end of his term."

During their talks, Bush prodded Mubarak to cede more freedom and applauded the work of journalists, bloggers and judges seeking independence from interference.

On the final stop of a long Middle East tour, Bush said that such civil society voices had taken the lead in promoting freedom in the Arab world's most populous country.

"Progress toward greater political openness is being led by the Egyptians themselves, by pioneering journalists ... bloggers or judges insisting on independence," he said in a statement at an appearance alongside Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

"You (Egyptians) have taken steps towards ... democratic reform, and my hope is that the Egyptian government will build on these important steps and give the people of this proud nation a greater voice in your future," he added.

Bush's remarks evoked his administration's vigorous campaign in 2005 to bring about political change in Egypt, where Mubarak has been in power for 26 years and where his son Gamal is widely expected to succeed him.

That campaign helped persuade Mubarak to allow the country's first multi-candidate presidential elections in 2005, which he won. His main opponent in that race, liberal Ayman Nour, was later jailed on what he says are fabricated fraud charges.

In parliamentary elections the same year the opposition Muslim Brotherhood won one fifth of the seats in parliament. Analysts said that after the strong Islamist showing, Washington stopped pressing Mubarak so hard on democracy.

Bush did not mention the subsequent crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood, which has had up to several hundred members at a time in detention without charge or trial.

The crackdown also put an end to a campaign by judges for more independence from the executive. Some of them had spoken out against abuses and irregularities in the elections, which they had a constitutional duty to supervise.

The authorities have also targeted journalists, at least 11 of whom have been sentenced to jail terms since last September in connection with their writings. None of them are yet in jail because their cases have gone to appeal.

The police have harassed several Egyptian bloggers, human rights groups say. One of them, Abdel Karim Suleiman, is serving a four-year jail term for insulting Mubarak and making blasphemous comments.

Bush's stop in Egypt was one of the shortest of his tour, at less than three hours, and many Egyptians said the brevity reflected a decline in U.S. interest in Egypt.

5) President Bush Meets with President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt "I really appreciate Egypt's support in the war on terror" [smuggling not mentioned]
From Office of the Press Secretary


PRESIDENT MUBARAK: (As translated.) I'd like to welcome President Bush here
in Egypt, and particularly in Sharm el Sheikh City. It is the City of Peace.

We briefed Mr. Bush -- he briefed us on the outcome of his visits in the
region, and we had very important presentations which dealt with the
security situation now, and bilateral and mutual efforts for the sake of
peace, security and stability in the Middle East.

I emphasized through our presentations the Egyptian situation, underscoring
and supporting peace, and our aspirations that Mr. Bush follows up on
negotiations between both Israeli and Palestinian sides, and also said that
I wish to reach a peace agreement before the end of his term. I emphasized
that the Palestinian question, of course, is the core of problems and
conflict in the Middle East, and it is the entry to contain the crisis and
tension in the region, and the best means to face what's going on in the
world, and our region -- I mean by that, the escalation of violence,
extremism and terrorism.

I also underscored the strategic importance we focus on here in Egypt, that
because its peoples -- sisterly peoples and states, they are part and parcel
of the national security of Egypt, the security of the Middle East and the
world. The Egyptian-American relations actually have been very important,
and this importance has been getting more important. And this importance
addressed the interests of both the people and also the region's interests
in the Middle East.

Our consultations today showed that we believe and understand the mutual
interests of both sides in continuing our dialogue and consultations -- and
I mean by that, strategic consultations -- for the sake of peace, security
and stability of the Middle East, and the development of its states and
prosperity of its people. I also emphasized that we in Egypt, we are keen on
supporting peace efforts that we're ready, hand-in-hand with the United
States of America and the Quartet, and all other regional and international
stakeholders of parties, for the sake of comprehensive and just peace, to
put an end to this Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and finally, to open new
horizons for the Middle East, for a more peaceful and security future --
more justice and security in the region.
I reiterate our welcome words for Mr. Bush, and I hope that his efforts in
the sake of peace will reach a success. And I'll give you the floor, sir.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Mr. President, thank you, sir. It's a pleasure to be back in
Egypt. This is such a beautiful sight, Mr. President. Thank you for hosting
my visit here. As you mentioned, I've been on a long trip and I can't think
of a better place to end it than right here with you in this beautiful
setting.

PRESIDENT MUBARAK: You need much more days.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes -- he wants me back -- okay. (Laughter.) He's extended
an invitation, and thank you for that, sir.

It's an important stop for me because the United States has a longstanding
friendship with Egypt. It's important for the people of Egypt to understand
our nation respects you, respects your history, respects your traditions and
respects your culture. Our friendship is strong. It's a cornerstone of --
one of the main cornerstones of our policy in this region, and it's based on
our shared commitment to peace, security and prosperity.

I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. President, to give you an update on my
trip. And I appreciate the advice you've given me. You've seen a lot in your
years as President; you've got a great deal of experience, and I appreciate
you feeling comfortable in sharing that experience once again with me.

I really appreciate Egypt's support in the war on terror. I appreciate the
fact that you've given peacekeepers for Sudan. I did brief you on my talks
in Israel and with the Palestinians, and they were positive talks. And I
said I'm optimistic an agreement can be reached. And the reason I am is
because I believe the leadership in Israel and the leadership of the
Palestinians is committed to a two-state solution. And I know nations in the
neighborhood are willing to help, particularly yourself. And I appreciate
your strong, constructive support for the process.

And I told the President I'm going to stay -- there's a wonder whether or
not the American President, when he says something, whether he actually
means it. When I say I'm coming back to stay engaged, I mean it. And when I
say I'm optimistic we can get a deal done, I mean what I'm saying. And so I
appreciate the chance to talk.

We also talked about Lebanon, and we agree it's important for nations in
this region to support Prime Minister Siniora. It's important to encourage
the holding of immediate and unconditional presidential elections according
to the Lebanese constitution, and to make it clear to Syria, Iran and their
allies they must end their interference and efforts to undermine the
process.

We talked -- and by the way, when it came to the Israeli-Palestinian peace
talks, I want to thank you for your support of Annapolis. It was important
that you were there. As a matter of fact, you didn't hesitate, because you
knew that both those parties had to have supportive people in the region.
And I thank you very much for that.

We spent time on Iraq. The President asked me how I thought things were
going there. The decision to send more troops is working. Violence is down.
Secretary Rice came back from Iraq yesterday and briefed me that she was
able to see life returning back to the streets. The moms are out with their
children, normal life is coming back. And political life is moving.

Mr. President, I'm sure you followed the fact that the Council of
Representatives passed the deBaathification law as part of an important
reconciliation package. The government isn't perfect, but nevertheless
progress is being made, and I assured you, Mr. President -- I want to share
this with the press corps -- that the United States will continue to help
the Iraqi people secure their democracy.

I also talked about Egypt's role in the world. Egypt is an important
nation -- that sends a clear signal. People watch Egypt. I appreciate very
much the long and proud tradition that you've had for a vibrant civil
society. I appreciate the fact that women play an important role in your
society, Mr. President. I do so because not only I'm a proud father of two
young professional women, I also know how important it is for any vibrant
society to have women involved in constructive and powerful ways. And I
appreciate the example that your nation is setting.

Progress toward greater political openness is being led by the Egyptians
themselves, by pioneering journalists -- some of whom even may be here --
bloggers, or judges insisting on independence, or other strong civic and
religious leaders who love their country and are determined to build a
democratic future.

Because of the predominate role you play, and because I strongly believe
that Egypt can play a role in the freedom and justice movement -- you and I
have discussed the issue, you have taken steps toward economic openness --
and I discussed that with your Prime Minister -- and democratic reform. And
my hope is that the Egyptian government will build on these important steps,
and give the people of this proud nation a greater voice in your future. I
think it will lead to peace, and I think it will lead to justice.

Our friendship with Egypt is deep and broad. Egypt will continue to be a
vital strategic partner of the United States. We will work together to build
a safer and more peaceful world. And, Mr. President, I thank your leadership
on the issue of peace and security.

I've had a great trip. I've been impressed by the warmth and the energy of
the people I have met. It's a dynamic part of the world that is seeing
significant changes. I wish my fellow citizens would be able to come and see
firsthand the vibrancy and excitement in the Middle East. People here are
working to embrace the opportunities of a modern global economy, and in
doing so, are not abandoning their traditions or cultures or their faith.

This isn't easy work, as we head into the 21st century, and it's going to
require social, economic and political reform. And it takes time for people
to resolve the challenges in their respective societies -- same in my
country. But I'm absolutely confident the people of the Middle East are
working hard to build a society based upon justice. And I've assured them
that as they make the journey, the United States will be a steady friend and
partner.

6) Slave to the words: Lieberman likely regrets past promise to quit government over ‘core issues’
By Eitan Haber

Late Prime Minister Levi Eshkol was the one who said “I promised – yet I didn’t promise to deliver,” and it appears that Avigdor Lieberman and Ehud Barak would have liked to adopt this lovely message. Lieberman and Barak fell captive to the words they uttered, so it appears, ages ago, and now even a rescue operation by a commando unit cannot help them. In the eyes of many, credibility comes before anything else.



We see this tragedy unfolding before our eyes: At a difficult time for the State of Israel (The cynics will say: When isn’t it a difficult time for the State of Israel?), with a broad and stable government being backed by an almost record number of Knesset members, the coalition is about to fall apart just because Avigdor Lieberman promised to break it up should the prime minister deal with the core issues pertaining to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (Jerusalem, refugees, etc.) Meanwhile, Ehud Barak promised to join the opposition upon the publication of the second part of the Winograd Report.


The politicians and journalists forgave former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir after he signed a coalition agreement and then suggested to another Knesset member to “frame the agreement and hang it on the wall.” The journalists forgave former PM Menachem Begin after he promised to build a house in the Sinai and to “pack up my bags and go back home” should he be asked to evacuate communities in Camp David, and then proceeded to hand back the Sinai to Egypt. But now the politicians and journalists want Lieberman and Barak to stay true to their word “all the way.”


Political mess

There is no doubt, times have changed. The experience of recent years taught citizens, some politicians, and the media to demand credibility, credibility, and more credibility from our leaders. You promised? Now deliver!



It is very possible that both Lieberman and Barak are willing to take back their words and would enthusiastically support the words of an anonymous politician who once said: I’ve never regretted words unspoken. They both very likely regret the things they said.


The only way they may have been able to get out of it was to agree with the prime minister on a date for the next elections, say November 2008. However, it now looks like we’re headed for a political mess, in a country that has not known even one quiet day.