Pro-Constitution, Anti-Globalist, Anti-Socialist, Anti-Communist, and usually with an attempt at historical and economic context ************************13th Year ----- 2009-2021*****
The immigration (or invasion) of millions of Muslim “refugees” into Germany is changing that country's society and weakening their German identity to the point that, according to Paul Joseph
Watson, represents total capitulation and surrender to the Islamization of Germany as an inevitability. Other countries in Europe have similar situations. Watson presents a compelling argument which should serve as a warning
to those who want to open their borders to massive Muslim immigration. The following video explains:
Germany's experience shows the dangers of mass immigration of people in the name of humanitarianism and “diversity” when many of those people are out to destroy the host society and impose
an alien way of life, while bringing greatly increased violent crime and no assimilation. President Trump is right to demand “extreme vetting” and substantially reduce the intake of refugees.
Socialist Paradise Fails
Let’s see – The nation of Greece has spent itself into near-default by social welfare programs that enable people to retire early at near-full salary, to work under the most generous conditions, and have many things provided to them by the government. This has naturally led to crushing debt, endless deficits and the supposed need for a large-scale bailout. Since the bailout providers want some assurance that Greece will put its fiscal house in order, some austerity measures have been approved. This has resulted in riots by angry union members, and has caused deaths.
There are so many things wrong with this situation, it’s hard to understand how wrong it is. And the proposed cure is worse than the disease.
When Greek politicians were approving these unaffordable, deficit-incurring benefits for everyone, and people were enjoying them, was no thought given to the ultimate cost? Politicians buy votes by providing government benefits to people who will gratefully vote for them. As for the long-term consequences, they’ll be dealt with later. Political successors will handle it. Except that this fiscal mess is coming to a head and has to be dealt with now.
To the Rescue with Big Bailouts
The European Union, the European Central Bank, the IMF, and the central banks of other countries, including the U.S., have concocted a bailout plan that not only is supposed to save Greece, but head off possible default by other fiscally weak European nations. After stock markets momentarily seemed to panic, causing the Dow to lose 1,000 points during one session, then regain most of it before the close, news of the latest bailout efforts sent euphoria through the markets, but apparently only for a day.
Don’t worry, soft-hearted liberals are coming to the rescue, printing money to pour into the problem, money that must ultimately be provided by taxpayers of other nations, including the United States. Should foreign bailouts be a big item in America’s budget? A great many people were and are opposed even to domestic bailouts, as they should be.
The plan is like a long-term European version of the TARP bailouts the U.S. provided in 2008. Banks considered “too big to fail” were forcibly given bailout money and the government took equity positions in them. The financial regulatory bill now in the Senate is basically a continuation of the U.S. TARP authority of the Treasury Secretary, and despite the claim that it will stop “too big to fail,” it will actually perpetuate bailouts of large banks.
Moral Hazard
As a New York Times article points out,
Another big issue is whether bailing out economies creates moral hazard. Other countries may continue to skirt the kinds of actions that would lower their budget deficits and debt loads — steps painful to the public and dangerous to politicians — because they too can expect to be rescued. [1]
If any large entity, be it bank, business, or nation, is assured that it will be rescued in case of trouble, a moral hazard is unavoidably created. “No matter what happens, we’ll be OK. Sure, there will be restrictions on us, but what if we don’t completely follow them? We’ll still be OK, because our benefactors don’t want to be in the position of having wasted all that money without an ultimate bailout,” the beneficiaries would be tempted to think, and to some extent, would think.
An Investors Business Daily editorial of 05/10/2010 states the following:
By bankrolling irresponsible governments and firms, a new generation will learn that virtuous behavior will be punished and bad behavior rewarded. This is a recipe for future meltdowns, when the next generation's failures will expect that they too will be rescued.
Except they won't be. They can't be. That's the real tragedy here…. [2]
The bailout itself is a moral violation, because it unjustly forces nations’ taxpayers to pay for the huge mistakes of other nations which should be held accountable for their own actions. There generally are no government bailouts available for individuals or small companies who face financial failure – only bankruptcy, as it should be.
Until governments lose the concept of “too big to fail,” which they show no sign of doing, we will see a continuing string of large bailouts until the bailers themselves need a bailout, and there will be no one to provide it.
Currency Crisis in the Making
Ron Paul says that the Greek problem is a world problem and is not only a financial crisis, but a currency crisis (YouTube via Below the Beltway blog):
Predictable Result
The lesson that should be learned here, but probably won’t be, is that we are seeing the inevitable natural result of socialism. The basic path that led Greece to this point is being followed in America by the Obama Administration and the Fed: “Keynesian” spending, new entitlements, vast welfare spending, huge deficits, massive growth of government, probable high unemployment for years, and all taxpayers soon to be made poorer through high taxes. America urgently needs a change of direction toward limited government, sound money, low taxes, and encouragement of private sector economic activity.
Who do we turn to when our fiscal and monetary house of cards collapses?
“End death penalty, EU tells U.S.” – Headline The European Union wants the United States to abolish the death penalty. They cite examples of people wrongly convicted and sentenced to death and maintain that the death penalty is subject to errors and doesn’t help human dignity.
“‘For the EU, it’s a matter of principle,’ said, John Bruton, former Irish prime minister and the EU ambassador to the United States.’” [1]
“‘The EU believes that the elimination of the death penalty is fundamental to the enhancement of human dignity and to the progressive development of human rights,’ [Swedish Ambassador Jonas] Hafstrom said on behalf of the 27-member political union.” [2]
“EU wants death penalty halted; Perry says butt out” – Headline Governor Rick Perry of Texas, the leading state for executions in the U.S., has been unmoved by the EU’s calls for death penalty abolition. Replying to an EU request to him in August 2007, was the following: “The governor's spokesman, Robert Black, said in a statement that ‘230 years ago, our forefathers fought a war to throw off the yoke of a European monarch and gain the freedom of self-determination.
“‘Texans long ago decided that the death penalty is a just and appropriate punishment for the most horrible crimes committed against our citizens. While we respect our friends in Europe, welcome their investment in our state and appreciate their interest in our laws, Texans are doing just fine governing Texas.’” [3]
Some Arguments There have been a few cases of the death penalty being applied in the U.S. in recent years in which DNA evidence did not support the guilt of the person executed, or prosecutors illegally withheld mitigating evidence. These cases are regrettable and actions are being taken to use DNA evidence where possible and judges are likely more sensitive these days to use of evidence against defendants. But these items, unfortunate, tragic, as they are, do not present a convincing case against capital punishment.
Any law can be mistakenly applied. If the death penalty were being illegally or erroneously applied in many cases, there would be an argument for making it illegal. But such is not the case. The philosophical and legal arguments should be the basis of decisions on the death penalty. Here are some reasons I support it:
1. There are cases in which the death penalty represents the only possibility of approaching a just punishment. Many crimes are extremely horrendous and any punishment short of the death penalty appears to almost excuse them.
2. The state does not offend human dignity by properly applying the death penalty. It offends human dignity by not punishing serious crimes sufficiently.
3. The state has every traditional, legal, and moral right to execute perpetrators of very serious crimes, provided they do so in accordance with the law.
4. Some object to the death penalty on biblical grounds. But the Bible indicates that use of the death penalty under strict rules is not only acceptable, but was sometimes mandatory. While we do not have the same laws as ancient Israel, nor should we, the aforementioned fact shows that scripturally, the death penalty is not, ipso facto, wrong, although it can be wrongly used.
People interested in the legality of the death penalty may find the following exchange between Alan Keyes and Barack Obama of interest. This is from a debate when both were candidates for the Illinois Senate seat which Obama won:
President Obama has said that he is in favor of the death penalty in certain extreme cases, such as child rape. He has also said he would support the death penalty for Osama bin Laden. My own views are quite in agreement with Mr. Keyes on both the death penalty and abortion. Dealing with life and death issues stirs emotions on all sides. While I can see an execution as a tragic event, it normally follows an even more tragic crime. Sometimes, justice simply cannot be served with a lesser punishment. But in any case, serious deliberation and careful consideration of the evidence is needed. Otherwise, one crime is compounded by another.
Does the EU Know What’s Best? The other issue involved in the EU call for ending the death penalty is that of the appropriateness of the EU getting involved with American laws:
“The EU said it was helping capital punishment foes in the U.S. by filing amicus curiae briefs in appellate courts hearing death-penalty appeals. The EU also has funded studies by the American Bar Association to investigate the fairness of specific cases.” [4]
I see this as somewhat inappropriate, similar to the Supreme Court using foreign laws to help them adjudicate cases.
In a prior case, as commented upon by Debra J. Saunders at sfgate.com,
“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger gave Our Betters in Europe a taste of their own bitter medicine. Angry at the governor's refusal to stop the Dec. 13 execution of convicted four-time murderer Stanley Tookie Williams, city leaders of Graz, Austria, mobilized to remove Austria’s most famous son's name from a stadium. Schwarzenegger responded with a ‘Dear Hans’ letter. In it, he revoked the city's permission to use his name on the stadium and promote Graz as a tourist destination. Schwarzenegger also returned a ‘ring of honor’ bestowed by his hometown in 1999....
“It apparently takes a European-born American to see what the Euro-elites are -- so desperate to promote themselves as better than Americans that they kowtow to thugs.
“One ‘human rights’ group, the Association of Christianity and Social Democracy, proposed that the stadium be named after Williams. That makes sense: Flaunt how your opposition to capital punishment makes you superior by honoring a felon who shot an unarmed man in the back, then later shot a father, mother and their adult daughter and left them to die slow, painful deaths.” [5]
Americans are not always fond of being preached to by European authorities, whom many view has having little moral authority to lecture the U.S. We do not need to make pleasing Europeans on this issue a high priority. We have already compromised our national sovereignty in too many other ways.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v5P8yxoEWjE-Q9y9ucewVEls105iZvX46TQ8xDUpqwNiVTjmg73PoppkKwoHgyYyPb3x7xMq30-3aiMXEhw90HEhFNET2Ck7HxTSUGNjkucIZ3-zt2bGsl7cTVYBhGJVK1H06rt59ZgnUedYAQwqFM=s0-d)
