If you find my Memo efforts of interest and maybe even challenging , whether you agree or not with what I write and/or post, then consider this a personal appeal to support my effort to raise money for The Wounded Warrior project. Buy my book expressing my thoughts on raising children.
Please make your check for $10.99/copy to Paul Laflamme for a soft cover version and deduct half the cost as a donation to The Wounded Warrior Project. (Add $2.50 for postage and handling.)
If you want a pdf version you can download the cost is $5.99.
Click on WWW.Brokerberko.com
---
The more I think about the recent election the more I get a picture of a bunch of cattle rustlers with hot branding irons in hand.
I previously posted an article about how Democrats successfully put the bad mouth (re-brand) on their opponents and make it stick by both repeating it and having their media and news friends protect them and validate their charges.
What is afoot is a growing effort on the part of the majority of Americans to ignore results and facts and to concentrate on hype and first impressions, however misleading they may ultimately be . Style has supplanted form, emotion has replaced reasoning. Maybe it has always been that way.
I am not suggesting or ignoring the fact that Romney and Ryan have flaws, flipped flopped and left some confusion in the minds of voters as to what they both believed and intended to do should they have been elected. Nor am I forgetting the Obama crowd's superb tactical and execution efforts.
That said, it becomes obvious, to any objective looker, voters completely ignored Obama's record and simply voted based on what Democrats were able to effectively pitch by way of their early and outlandish attacks on Romney and searing it into the minds of those who were willing to buy into these malicious and spurious charges.
Television has had a major effect on changing the way we think, react and how we perceive alleged facts versus subsequent reasoning through. Pictures allow us to come to early conclusions and once the first impression is established it is difficult to change ones perception. Pictures make an indelible mark on our psyche and then inertia takes over.
As the previous article I posted pointed out, Obama ignored his record, never even felt compelled to defend it when it was used against him by Romney. Favorable impressions of Obama as a likable person transcended any objective analysis.
Perhaps this recent campaign will prove to be a one time thing, a phenomena partly based on the fact that Obama was able to escape criticism because he was the first black president and he had the press and media folks in is pocket.
The revelations of Benghazi and post Petraeus news, the Fast and Furious debacle and even Fema's mishandling of the recent storm that hit New York and New Jersey etc., I daresay, would have been reported in a different manner had GW been president and certainly would not have been basically ignored.
I mention this not as an act of sour grapes but to bring some balance and shed some light. If, in future elections, voters are going to ignore the records of those seeking office we are in for a very different future and no telling where it will take us.
The fact that Obama won handily does not wash away the problems he now faces. Based on his performance in his first four years I find little by way of comfort. Time will tell whether he comes off the mountain and meets Republicans in the valley when it comes to the fiscal cliff we face, time will tell how Obama resolves Iran's nuclear ambitions, time will tell how Obama responds to China's increasing military build up as we reduce our military posture, time will tell how Obama handles the mounting deficits his policies have produced and what response the bond market may have in store for him and time will tell how Obama responds to the implementation of The Affordable Health Act when it begins to result in both more unemployment and escalating costs far beyond projections that it would result in savings. The ' time will tell' list is almost endless.
Will the press and media return to the role they historically played as civic ombudsmen and will voters be able to return to looking at things through a 'fact prism?' I have no way of knowing. I suspect, however, we are in for one hell of a ride.
Stay tuned because I believe things are going to heat up rather quickly and come cascading down upon Obama. Certainly an uprising in the Middle East is bubbling as I write. (See 1 and 1a below.)
Hard to ignore facts. (See 1 b below.)
---
This was sent to me by a fellow memo reader apparently to refute the previous article I posted by Zuckerman that the outlook for better paying jobs is not in the offing near term.
Based on her analysis, America's job income future is brighter than ever as novices replace trained workers who are retiring.. This article was written by someone employed by MSNBC so caveat emptor. (See 2 below.)
---
So much for respecting history. (See 3 below.)
---
Observations from a very old, wise and dear friend, fellow memo reader. "Hello Dick: Aminoff’s piece exactly parallels my own thinking about this. The Left is winning because they’ve won the culture, which is another way of saying that the US is falling ever further into decadence and will have to relearn all the important lessons the hard way. I’ve been saying for years that our problem is not Obama, but that we have a country that could elect Obama and now, even worse, re-elect him.
There’s an old Victorian English saying: “Experience keeps a dear school, but a fool will learn in no other.”
Well, you and I will probably check out before the roof caves in. However, I can’t help worrying about the world my children (and possible future) grandchildren will inhabit.
I think the most insightful portrayal of Nazism in popular culture is Bob Fosse’s “Cabaret”; there’s the wonderful scene in the beer garden when an angelic-looking youth stands to sing, starting with “The stag in the forest runs happy and free…” and only by degrees, and as other young people join in, do we see the swastika armbands and hear the real theme, “The future belongs to me.” More relevant to our present situation is the reaction of an old man in the garden; his disbelief and consternation at this outbreak of madness conveys the bewilderment of an older, and differently schooled, generation. I’m that old man, in Obamaland.
I hope you’re as well as can be expected in these disturbing times."S--
---
Dimon upbeat if Cliff avoided. (See 4 below.)
---
Dick----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)
FBI Suppressed Petraeus Scandal to Protect President Obama
The White House claims President Obama and his national security advisors were first informed of the Petraeus' affair on Thursday, two days after the election.
But the official timeline strains credulity. Senior FBI officials suppressed disclosure of the highly sensitive case, apparently to avoid embarrassment to Obama during his re-election campaign.
On Oct. 10, I was contacted by a longtime FBI source who told me that a bureau investigation had uncovered Petraeus’ affair with a journalist and that it could potentially jeopardize national security.
The veteran agent related to me that FBI agents assigned to the case were outraged by what were they were told by senior officials: The FBI was going to hold in limbo their findings until after the election.
“The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source told me. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.”
My source said the FBI had been investigating the matter since last spring and the probe was considered among the most sensitive investigations the bureau was handling.
Both FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and the Justice Department were aware of the investigation, according to my source. The source did not specifically know whether Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder or FBI Director Mueller had given the order to delay taking action until after the election.
However, Mueller meets at least once a week with the president and routinely informs him of highly sensitive investigations and threats. An FBI investigation of the CIA director should have been at the top of that list.
In fact, it would have been a scandal if the FBI had not informed the president or the attorney general of an investigation of the CIA director.
Last Friday, the White House announced that Petraeus had resigned over an extramarital affair. At the time, I was completing my own investigation into the matter based on what my source had told me.
On the same day, my report for Newsmax, "FBI Investigation Led to Petraeus Resignation," revealed for the the first time that an an FBI investigation of Petraeus' emails had triggered his resignation.
Since then, the White House has claimed that the president was surprised when told of the FBI investigation two days after the election.
If the president genuinely did not know about the probe, it would constitute malfeasance by the White House. But my FBI sources doubt the order to suppress the probe’s findings until after the election — while taking a chance with the nation’s security — was made by the bureau.
For my recently published book, “The Secrets of the FBI,” FBI Director Mueller gave me unprecedented access to the bureau, including to agents who told me normally classified details of how FBI agents break into homes and offices to plant bugging devices in terrorist, espionage, Mafia, and political corruption cases.
In my opinion, Mueller is a man of impeccable integrity. He would not have acquiesced to delaying action on the bureau’s findings unless ordered to do so by the attorney general or by the president.
Since this was not a criminal matter, Mueller may have justified his decision by saying it is up to the government agency who employs the individual or the White House to take action. But the decision to delay action on the Petraeus case — when the fact that he had placed himself in a compromising position was known by the FBI for months — clearly created a security risk.
As FBI agents and CIA officers tell me, such a delay could have meant that foreign intelligence service officers or criminals who may have learned of the affair could have blackmailed Petraeus into giving up the country’s most sensitive secrets. Given his position, those secrets would have included penetrations of Russian communications, bugging of foreign embassies, identities of assets risking their lives to give the U.S. valuable information on terrorists, and identities of terrorists who are about to be killed by drones.
My source told me that the investigation into Petraeus’ affair began when FBI agents mistook a reference in one of his emails to “under the desk” to mean corruption, as in payments under the table.
While the source’s information was correct, news reports later said the broader FBI investigation began last spring when Paula Broadwell, with whom Petraeus was allegedly having an affair, allegedly began sending threatening emails to another woman she viewed as a potential threat to her relationship with Petraeus.
It turned out that “under the desk” was a reference to having sex under the desk with Petraeus, who is married.
Broadwell, who is married to a radiologist, was “embedded” with Petraeus while writing a book about him when he was stationed in Kabul. A triathlete, she has degrees from West Point and Harvard and holds the rank of major in the Army Reserve. She has not commented on her role in Petraeus’ resignation.
Michael Kortan, the FBI's assistant director for public affairs, had no immediate comment.
Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com. He is the New York Times bestselling author of books on the Secret Service, FBI, and CIA.
1a)Advice From a Lonely College Republican
The GOP is like a supermodel who's been doing photo shoots under fluorescent bulbs without any makeup.
By SARAH WESTWOOD
If the election results told us anything, it's that the GOP has some serious soul searching to do. On paper, Mitt Romney's history of accomplishment towered over President Obama's train wreck of a record, so his loss seemed nearly inexplicable. But Mr. Obama carried his key groups so easily that Republicans should give him props for such a feat— and start taking notes.
In politics, as in life, perception is key. The Chicago machine and the Democratic National Committee as a whole have perfected the art of marketing, even when they've got nothing to sell. They're like a used-car salesman who pushes lemons on unsuspecting drivers and never gets caught. Democrats can home in on Latinos, blacks, single women, young voters—and have them chanting "Four more years!" before they know what hit them.
I happen to be one of the latter, a college student at a time when youth is a hot political commodity. Most kids my age bristle at the word "conservative," and I don't blame them. The right has done nothing to welcome young people.
If Republicans hope to win in 2016 and beyond, they need to change everything about the way they sell themselves. They're viewed by the 18-24 set as the "party of the rich" and as social bigots. That harsh, flawed opinion could be rectified if Republicans started presenting their positions in a different way. The GOP is like a supermodel who has been doing photo shoots under fluorescent bulbs without any makeup. But fix the lighting, dab on some foundation and highlight her good side, and she can take the most attractive picture.
My age group is one pocket of voters who Republicans should be carrying with ease. Youth is all about rebellion and freedom and independence—things the Democratic Party preaches but doesn't deliver. Behind their clever one-liners lurks a government shackle waiting to be slapped onto the wrists of every young voter they ensnare.
The left proudly shouts "stick it to the rich," which naturally draws the rambunctious college crowd into its fold. But Democrats fail to mention how broadly they define the rich—or that in reality, they want to dip into everyone's wallets, not just Bill Gates's.
Associated Press
Shame on Republicans for not seizing the opportunity this time around. They could so easily define their brand as the true advocate of rebellion; a "stick it to the government" movement in the spirit of the 1960s hippie wave.
It wouldn't be a smoke-and-mirrors, bait-and-switch trick either, like what goes on across the aisle. Republicans truly are the party of a less intrusive ruling class. Frame the Republican fundamentals—tax less, spend less—as a fresh populist approach instead of Grandpa's adage, and the party is back in business.
Another leg up that the left has is its claim to the moral high ground. The party of pro-choice, pro-gay has such a hold on young people because those are issues they can care about easily. Not many 20-year-olds can hold a coherent conversation about Social Security reform or double taxation, but all of them can argue passionately for gay rights.
As a member of this all-important demographic, I know that neither I nor (almost) anybody else coming of age today supports the Republican social agenda. That's the way the country is moving—so just deal with it. Modernize and prioritize.
Though it may be painful, though it may be costly at the polls in the short run, Republicans don't have a future unless they break up with the religious right and the gay-bashing, Bible-thumping fringe that gives the party such a bad rap with every young voter. By fighting to legally ban abortion, the party undercuts the potential to paint itself as a rebel against the governmental-control machine.
Embracing a more liberal social agenda doesn't require anyone to abandon her own personal values; it's possible to keep faith and the party too. But the evangelical set essentially hijacked the Republican Party in the 1970s; now we need to take it back. Thawing the icy attitude of our most vocal, radical voices—including the raucous right (a la Limbaugh)—could let a fatally fractured party put the pieces together again.
The GOP won't survive if it doesn't start courting young voters. Simple math dictates that the Republican Party can wrest power away from the left only if it builds an army of fresh young members into its base. Democrats are the ones doing that now.
Ms. Westwood will be a sophomore at George Washington University in January.
1b)The Hard Fiscal Facts
Individual tax payments are up 26% in the last two years.
While the rest of America was holding an election last week, the gnomes at the Congressional Budget Office released the final budget totals for fiscal 2012. They're worth reporting because they illuminate the real fiscal choices that confront the country, as opposed to the posturing you'll be hearing over the next few weeks.
The nearby table lays out the ugly details. The feds rolled up another $1.1 trillion deficit for the year that ended September 30, which was the biggest deficit since World War II, except for each of the previous three years. President Obama can now proudly claim the four largest deficits in modern history. As a share of GDP, the deficit fell to 7% last year, which was still above any single year of the Reagan Presidency, or any other year since Truman worked in the Oval Office.
Tax revenue kept climbing, up 6.4% for the year overall, and at $2.45 trillion it is now close to the historic high it reached in fiscal 2007 before the recession hit. Mr. Obama won't want you to know this, but this revenue increase is occurring under the Bush tax rates that he so desperately wants to raise in the name of getting what he says is merely "a little more in taxes." Individual income tax payments are now up $233 billion over the last two years, or 26%.
This healthy revenue increase comes despite measly economic growth of between 1% and 2%. Imagine the gusher of revenue the feds could get if government got out of the way and let the economy grow faster.
Now let's look at outlays, which declined a bit in 2012. That small miracle was achieved thanks to a 4% fall in defense spending, a 24% fall in jobless benefits, and an 8.9% decline in Medicaid spending.
Note, however, that federal spending remains at a new plateau of about $3.54 trillion, or some $800 billion more than the last pre-recession year of 2007. One way to think about this is that most of the $830 billion stimulus of 2009 has now become part of the federal budget baseline. The "emergency" spending of the stimulus has now become permanent, as we predicted it would.
When Beltway politicians claim they want a "balanced" approach to reducing the deficit, what they really mean is raising taxes to finance this new higher spending level. And the still-higher level that is coming with ObamaCare.
The reality is that the fastest way to raise revenue is with faster economic growth. To the extent that raising tax rates will reduce the rate of growth, it will slow the flow of tax revenue and increasethe deficit.
Even if Mr. Obama were to bludgeon Republicans into giving him all of the tax-rate increases he wants, the Joint Tax Committee estimates this would yield only $82 billion a year in extra revenue. But if growth is slower as a result of the higher tax rates, then the revenue will be lower too. So after Mr. Obama has humiliated House Republicans and punished the affluent for the sheer joy of it, he would still have a deficit of $1 trillion.
Most of our readers know all this, but we thought you'd like some new evidence to rebut the kids who voted for your taxes to go up when they return from college for Thanksgiving. Maybe they'll figure it out when they have a job, if they can find one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
By Eve Tahmincioglu
Murgan Salem al-Gohary, an Islamist leader twice-sentenced under former President Hosni Mubarak for advocating violence, called on Muslims to remove such “idols.”
“All Muslims are charged with applying the teachings of Islam to remove such idols, as we did in Afghanistan when we destroyed the Buddha statues,” he said on Saturday during a television interview on an Egyptian private channel, widely watched by Egyptian and Arab audiences.
“God ordered Prophet Mohammed to destroy idols,” he added. “When I was with the Taliban we destroyed the statue of Buddha, something the government failed to do.”
His comments came a day after thousands of ultraconservative Islamists gathered in Tahrir Square to call for the strict application of Sharia law in the new constitution.
But in retaliation to Gohary’s remarks, the vice president of Tunisia’s Ennahda party, Sheikh Abdel Fattah Moro, called the live program and told Gohary that famous historic military commander Amr ibn al-Aas did not destroy statues when he conquered Egypt.
“So who are you to do it?” he wondered. “The Prophet destroyed the idols because people worshiped them, but the Sphinx and the Pyramids are not worshiped.”
Gohary, 50, is well-known in Egypt for his advocacy of violence, Egypt Independent reported.
“He was sentenced twice, one of the two sentences being life imprisonment. He subsequently fled Egypt to Afghanistan, where he was badly injured in the American invasion. In 2007, he traveled from Pakistan to Syria, which then handed him over to Egypt. After Mubarak's fall in early 2011, he was released from prison by a judicial ruling,” the newspaper added.
In recent months, fears have surfaced that the ultra-conservative Salafi political powers may soon wish to debate new guidelines over Egyptian antiquities.
Islamists have swept the recent presidential and parliamentary elections in the country’s post-revolutionary stage, with the Muslim Brotherhood and the ultra-conservative Salafi Islamists rising to political power.
“The fundamental Salafis have demanded to cover Pharaonic statues, because they regard them to be idols,” Egyptian author on ancient history Ahmed Osman told Al Arabiya English, explaining that Salafi Muslims follow conservative religious principles which view statues and sculptures as prohibited in Islam.
“But so far the government has done nothing to indicate what is the future of Egyptian antiquities,” adds Osman.
Many hope that Egypt’s new President Mohammed Mursi will help usher better preservation of Egypt’s proud cultural heritage. Egyptian officials have recently announced the country will reveal more of its ancient buried treasures.
The tomb of Queen Meresankh III, the granddaughter of Khufu, of Great Pyramid fame, is set to be opened to tourists later this year, with the last resting places of five high priests also slated to be put on show.
Officials are also believed to be reopening the underground Serapeum temple at Sakkara, to the south of Cairo.
msnbc.com contributor
Eve Tahmincioglu writes the weekly "Your Career" column for msnbc.com and chronicles workplace issues in her blog, CareerDiva.net.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)‘Destroy the idols,’ Egyptian jihadist calls for removal of Sphinx, Pyramids
An Egyptian jihad leader, with self-professed links to the Taliban, called for the “destruction of the Sphinx and the Giza Pyramids in Egypt,” drawing ties between the Egyptian relics and Buddha statues, local media reported this week.
Murgan Salem al-Gohary, an Islamist leader twice-sentenced under former President Hosni Mubarak for advocating violence, called on Muslims to remove such “idols.”
“All Muslims are charged with applying the teachings of Islam to remove such idols, as we did in Afghanistan when we destroyed the Buddha statues,” he said on Saturday during a television interview on an Egyptian private channel, widely watched by Egyptian and Arab audiences.
“God ordered Prophet Mohammed to destroy idols,” he added. “When I was with the Taliban we destroyed the statue of Buddha, something the government failed to do.”
His comments came a day after thousands of ultraconservative Islamists gathered in Tahrir Square to call for the strict application of Sharia law in the new constitution.
But in retaliation to Gohary’s remarks, the vice president of Tunisia’s Ennahda party, Sheikh Abdel Fattah Moro, called the live program and told Gohary that famous historic military commander Amr ibn al-Aas did not destroy statues when he conquered Egypt.
“So who are you to do it?” he wondered. “The Prophet destroyed the idols because people worshiped them, but the Sphinx and the Pyramids are not worshiped.”
Gohary, 50, is well-known in Egypt for his advocacy of violence, Egypt Independent reported.
“He was sentenced twice, one of the two sentences being life imprisonment. He subsequently fled Egypt to Afghanistan, where he was badly injured in the American invasion. In 2007, he traveled from Pakistan to Syria, which then handed him over to Egypt. After Mubarak's fall in early 2011, he was released from prison by a judicial ruling,” the newspaper added.
In recent months, fears have surfaced that the ultra-conservative Salafi political powers may soon wish to debate new guidelines over Egyptian antiquities.
Islamists have swept the recent presidential and parliamentary elections in the country’s post-revolutionary stage, with the Muslim Brotherhood and the ultra-conservative Salafi Islamists rising to political power.
“The fundamental Salafis have demanded to cover Pharaonic statues, because they regard them to be idols,” Egyptian author on ancient history Ahmed Osman told Al Arabiya English, explaining that Salafi Muslims follow conservative religious principles which view statues and sculptures as prohibited in Islam.
“But so far the government has done nothing to indicate what is the future of Egyptian antiquities,” adds Osman.
Many hope that Egypt’s new President Mohammed Mursi will help usher better preservation of Egypt’s proud cultural heritage. Egyptian officials have recently announced the country will reveal more of its ancient buried treasures.
The tomb of Queen Meresankh III, the granddaughter of Khufu, of Great Pyramid fame, is set to be opened to tourists later this year, with the last resting places of five high priests also slated to be put on show.
Officials are also believed to be reopening the underground Serapeum temple at Sakkara, to the south of Cairo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment