The Stafford Voice

Our little place to talk about and share about life.

Conservative

Can Democracy Cope?

by

by Pat Buchanan

For those who have read about or vaguely remember the stolid British tribe of Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain and the Blitz, which held out in its “finest hour,” last week brought a disgusting sight.

Mobs in Parliament Square set fire to the statue of 19th century statesman Lord Palmerston and urinated on the statue of Winston Churchill. Pink Floyd’s kid was swinging by a rope from the Cenotaph that memorializes the 700,000 British dead of the Great War.

At night, hundreds of these anarchists peeled off to appear on Regent Street as the Rolls-Royce carrying the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, Camilla Parker-Bowles, entered. The Rolls was pounded with boots, bottles, sticks, fists and paintballs, as the mob howled “Tory scum!” and “Off with their heads!”

A sign was pushed through an open window into Camilla’s side. So precarious was the situation, Charles’ security detail was close to drawing guns to protect the first in line to the throne.

What was the mob protesting? Continue reading . . .

Swindle of the Year

by

by Charles Krauthammer

Barack Obama won the great tax-cut showdown of 2010 — and House Democrats don’t have a clue that he did. In the deal struck this week, the president negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 stimulus package. It will pump a trillion borrowed Chinese dollars into the U.S. economy over the next two years — which just happen to be the two years of the run-up to the next presidential election. This is a defeat?
    
If Obama had asked for a second stimulus directly, he would have been laughed out of town. Stimulus I was so reviled that the Democrats banished the word from their lexicon throughout the 2010 campaign. And yet, despite a very weak post-election hand, Obama got the Republicans to offer to increase spending and cut taxes by $990 billion over two years — $630 billion of it above and beyond extension of the Bush tax cuts.

Continue reading . . .

The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush

by

by Larry Elder

The WikiLeaks de facto declassification of privileged material makes it case closed: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction — and intended to restart his program once the heat was off.

President George W. Bush, in the 2003 State of the Union address, uttered the infamous “16 words”: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

Former Ambassador Joe Wilson sprang into action and, in an op-ed piece, in effect wrote, “No, the Cheney administration sent me to investigate the allegation — and I found it without merit.”

Put aside that Wilson’s CIA-employed wife, not the evil Vice President Dick Cheney — as Wilson implied — sent him on the African errand. Put aside that the British still stand by the intelligence on which Bush made the claim. And put aside that the anti-Bush Washington Post, in an editorial, concluded that Wilson had lied about not finding evidence to support the Iraq-in-Africa-for-uranium claim, since he told the CIA the opposite when he reported back from Africa.

Bush claimed that Iraq sought uranium, specifically “yellowcake.” What is yellowcake, and why would its presence or attempted acquisition corroborate the nearly unanimous assumption that Saddam possessed WMD?

Continue reading . . .

DREAM Act Alert

by

In an excellent effort to inform people, Michelle Malkin hits another one out of the park with her most recent write-up.

Rejecting the DREAM Act — and the radical ethnic tribalism of the open-borders lobby; Plus: Sessions’ updated critical DREAM Act Alert

I’ve done what I can on this little blog to keep you informed and mobilized on the illegal alien student bailout that the Alinsky-ites cunningly dubbed the “DREAM Act.”

The Senate vote is scheduled for tomorrow and while it appears dead on arrival there (like every other attempt to pass this massive amnesty over the last decade), you can never take it for granted.

Her plead was posted yesterday, making today the final day to call the goons on Capitol Hill. Michelle has done all the work for you, even offering the phone numbers of those sitting on the fence.

Take some time out today to continue the work of taking back the country.

Rhetoric Rides Again

by

by Thomas Sowell

Let’s face it, politics is largely the art of deception, and political rhetoric is largely the art of misstating issues. A classic example is the current debate over whether to give money to the unemployed by extending how long unemployment benefits will be provided, or instead to give “tax cuts to the rich.”

First of all, nobody’s taxes– whether rich or poor– is going to be cut in this lame duck session of Congress. The only real issue is whether our current tax rates will go up in January, whether for everybody or nobody or somewhere in between.

The most we can hope for is that tax rates will not go up. So the next time you hear some politician or media talking head say “tax cuts for the rich,” that will just tell you whether they are serious about facts or just addicted to talking points.

Continue reading . . .

Balancing Rights: Privacy v. Life

by

by Ken Connor

There’s been much controversy in recent weeks over the issue of full body scans and pat-downs at airport security checkpoints across America.  Individuals from all points on the political and ideological spectrum are angry and speaking out against practices that they assert violate civil liberties and undermine human dignity.  Much in the same way that the Patriot Act thrust the “privacy v. security” conundrum into the foreground of the public’s attention, the kerfuffle begun by John “Don’t Touch My Junk” Tyner has ignited a national debate about how far our society is willing to go to ensure the safety of air travel in America.  President Obama, for his part, acknowledges the inconvenience posed by the new TSA procedures, but insists that they are necessary to ensure our safety in an era of pervasive terror threats.Abortion protest

Upon hearing the President’s rationalization of full body scans and vigorous pat-downs, I can’t help but be struck by this Administration’s inconsistent and unprincipled approach to personal privacy issues.  Ever since the Supreme Court issued the Griswold v. Connecticut decision in 1965, the American Left has vigorously defended the constitutional “penumbras” guaranteeing an individual “right” to privacy.  This understanding of individual privacy led the Court to decide in 1973 that a woman’s right to privacy trumps her unborn child’s right to life.

Continue reading . . .

Federally Funded Islam

by

by Austin Hill

It’s disturbing that we even need to have this conversation.

It’ll be more disturbing if the Obama Administration doesn’t intervene and stop the process.

The people behind the controversial “Park 51” Islamic mosque project in Lower Manhattan have apparently applied several times for federal grant money with the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. LMDC is officially a New York state agency, but the money that this agency doles-out for the purposes of “reconstructing New York city” in 9-11’s aftermath is nonetheless federal tax money.

The money is administered through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, while “HUD” itself is overseen by President Obama’s hand-picked cabinet officer, Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Thus, it is accurate to say that President Obama and his Administration have a very direct connection with this project – and somebody from the Administration needs to take a stand, do the right thing, and put a halt to it.

Continue reading . . .

Risking a New Cold War

by

by Patrick Buchanan

Before Republican senators vote down the strategic arms reduction treaty negotiated by the Obama administration, they should think long and hard about the consequences.

In substance, New START has none of the historic significance of Richard Nixon’s SALT I or ABM treaty, or Jimmy Carter’s SALT II, or Ronald Reagan’s INF treaty removing all intermediate-range missiles from Europe, or the strategic arms reductions treaties negotiated by George Bush I and Bush II.

The latter cut U.S. and Russian arsenals from 10,000-12,000 nuclear warheads targeted on each nation to 2,000 — a huge cut.

If Republicans could back those treaties, what is the case for rejecting New START? Barack Obama’s treaty reduces strategic warheads by 450, leaving each side 1,550.

Is this not enough to deter when we consider what the Chernobyl disaster did to the Soviet Union and what the knockdown of two buildings in New York has done to this country? Ten hydrogen bombs on the United States or Russia could set us back decades, let alone 1,000.

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona is holding up the treaty until he gets more assurances that the administration will do the tests and upgrades necessary to maintain the reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons. He should receive those assurances.

Maintaining the credibility of the U.S. deterrent is a vital national interest. But does this justify holding the treaty hostage?

Continue reading . . .

Airport “Security”?

by

by Thomas Sowell

No country has better airport security than Israel– and no country needs it more, since Israel is the most hated target of Islamic extremist terrorists. Yet, somehow, Israeli airport security people don’t have to strip passengers naked electronically or have strangers feeling their private parts.

Does anyone seriously believe that we have better airport security than Israel? Is our security record better than theirs?

“Security” may be the excuse being offered for the outrageous things being done to American air travelers, but the heavy-handed arrogance and contempt for ordinary people that is the hallmark of this administration in other areas is all too painfully apparent in these new and invasive airport procedures.

Can you remember a time when a Cabinet member in a free America boasted of having his “foot on the neck” of some business or when the President of the United States threatened on television to put his foot on another part of some citizens’ anatomy?

Yet this and more has happened in the current administration, which is not yet two years old. One Cabinet member warned that there would be “zero tolerance” for “misinformation” when an insurance company said the obvious, that the mandates of ObamaCare would raise costs and therefore raise premiums. Zero tolerance for exercising the First Amendment right of free speech?

Continue reading . . .

Oklahoma Sharia Ban in Court

by

by Connie Hair

A federal court judge is slated to hear arguments today on an injunction blocking Oklahoma’s new constitutional amendment prohibiting the use of foreign systems of law in reaching legal decisions.

On November 2, Oklahoma voters passed a ballot initiative banning the use of Sharia and international law in Oklahoma courts by a whopping 70%. The new law explicitly reaffirms the supremacy of the federal and the Oklahoma state constitutions. 

Just days after the vote, Muneer Awad, a member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), filed suit to block the law’s implementation, claiming that it violated his constitutional rights. 

Continue reading . . .