 |
 |
||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
America’s Standing in the World I am already quite sick of hearing Democrat candidates say that we have to "improve America’s standing in the world" as if the whole world holds our nation in contempt or disagrees with our actions.
One might conclude from this that democracy is catching on around the world and that in this new century most people want some form of representative government for their nation. This is what inspires Buddhist monks to risk their lives to march against the
military dictators in Burma (now Myanmar). This is what provokes outrage in the
former Soviet satellite of Georgia when the rule of law is suspended or, most
dramatically, when lawyers and judges, along with others, pour into the streets
of Pakistan when its president seeks to extend his term in office by declaring
an emergency and martial law. It’s thousands of Venezuelans filling the streets to try to stop the dictatorial ambitions of Hugo Chavez. Where did these nations and people learn about democracy and representative government? For the most part, the United States of America has been both the example and the instrument for the spread of these concepts. Our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution are studied to learn the basic principles of self-rule and proper governance "of the people, by the people, and for the people." So, when Democrats cry out that America’s image has been tarnished by the decision to rid the Middle East of a threat to every other nation in the region—Saddam Hussein and his Baathist government—I suspect the leaders of the nations most threatened greeted the decision with relief. As to the "Arab street", the print and broadcast media in many nations of the region is aggressively anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and anti-American. An agreement between the Bush Administration and the Iraqi government will ensure a drawdown of our troops there and the long term billeting of 50,000. Iraq is on its way to being a modern, democratic nation. Our common enemy, al Qaeda, has been targeted for elimination and, when Iraq’s oil contributes more fully to the global market, watch the price of a barrel drop in response. Who then openly despises the United States of America? Hugo Chavez, a vile dictator in Venezuela, for one. Recently the King of Spain told him bluntly to "shut up." Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is a vocal opponent of America, but much of his nation’s population would, if they could, rid themselves of the ayatollahs and embrace America as an ally. Vladimir Putin, successor to the leaders of the former Soviet Union, sees America as an obstacle to his ambitions to restore Russia to superpower status. A recent visit to Iran disabused him of the notion that he was dealing with rational leaders there. In contrast, the new president of France, Nicholas Sarkozy, recently gave a stirring speech to our Congress, praising the role of America in the world. Indeed, throughout Europe, the protection that America still extends to that continent is appreciated and many, if only symbolically, sent contingents of military to support our efforts to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban and to assist in Iraq. Asia recognizes the role America still plays in the support of democracy for its nations and the protection of its sea-lanes upon which they depend for the export of goods. Having fostered democracy in Japan following WWII, that nation is quietly assuming a comparable role in the protection of democracy, building a modern military after decades of reluctance to accept that necessity. While North Korea remains a prison to its people, South Korea is a thriving democratic state. China remains Communist, but has accepted Capitalism as its economic engine and will open its doors still further to the world for the 2008 Olympics. Perhaps the best measure of confidence in America is the direct foreign investment (FDI) in our nation. U.S. Department of State figures as of 2004 reveal that, as of three years ago, FDI was $1.5 trillion on a historical cost basis or, as of 2006, $2.7 trillion at market value of publicly traded firms. European firms accounted for 70% of DFI, followed by Asia and Pacific firms. Hardly a day goes by without reports of new foreign investment. Only those vile few who hate freedom wants America to fail. The greatest critics of America are often Americans, forever striving to improve every sector of its national life. America is not above criticism, but it remains a nation that is by far the most dynamic, most innovative, most devoted to the rule of law and equality for all its citizens. Americans need not worry much about "restoring" our standing among the nations of the world. We are held in very good standing, thank you. Please help The National Anxiety Center continue its work in 2008. Your donation is essential to our ability to maintain our research and communications programs. No amount is too small (or too big!), so please take a moment to donate today. Thanks! Anyone who has watched the Greens metastasize since the 1980s into a plethora of organizations all marching to the same drumbeat of lies to achieve the goal of changing everyone’s lives—to "save the earth"—has to be both impressed and appalled by the zeal with which they seek to impose their will on everyone. Starting in 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency is a perfect example of how a government agency that is supposed to tend to keeping the air and water clean, has expanded in size of its employees and the scope of its ever expanding enforcement of changes that, as often are not, make things worse, not better. I suspect our economy could be ever greater and far more dynamic if environmental laws and regulations did not make it virtually impossible to do something as fundamental to our energy needs as building a single new refinery since the late 1970s.
It can be argued that the federal government has now grown so large (and wasteful) that the very liberties and freedoms it was intended to protect are in jeopardy as bureaucrats and legislators find new things to regulate. The current global warming craze, the complete invention of the environmental movement for which there is no scientific justification, is devoted to reducing "greenhouse emissions" in general and carbon dioxide in particular. The problem for all of us is that there is no global warming other than the quite natural warming that has occurred since the last mini-ice age ended in 1850. No Green will ever admit to this, citing their many computer models while avoiding any reference to the meteorological data that has been created since the first satellites were put into outer space to take measurements and perform other miracles of modern technology. On Thursday, November 29, just as on every day, I received yet another news release from yet another Green group. In this case it was Environmental Defense and, in particular, the Climate and Air Program headed by Peter Goldmark. Turns out they have just release yet another utterly bogus "study" called "Reducing US Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost?" Don’t bother to ask. Like all such Green pronouncements it is filled with the most bilious calculations, but the one that is not mentioned is the one that demonstrates there is no global warming. Thus, reducing greenhouse emissions is a giant waste of time and money. Simply stated, CO2 constitutes 0.038% of the earth’s atmosphere. Moreover, increased atmospheric concentrations of CO2 actually lag behind global temperature increases anywhere from 800-to-2,000 years according to the Antarctic ice core record covering a 650,000-year span of time. CO2 doesn’t produce global warming; it follows in the wake of any warming. Like those who used to read between the lines of Pravda, the Soviet era newspaper, in order to decipher what might actually be the new policies of Kremlin gremlins, reading a Green news release is replete with the usual brainwashing doublespeak. "It’s up to Congress now to help companies grab the low-hanging fruit with a smart, market-driven policy," Goldmark said. Translation: It’s up to some pusillanimous, pandering congressman or woman to require further emissions reductions by yet more environmental legislation and regulation. Since ordinary people will not go along with the global warming hoax, it will be necessary for Congress to coerce them into doing unnecessary things. The Environmental Defense proposal calls for "an economy-wide strategy." Translation: The price of everything must go up to quell consumerism. Energy must be made more expensive to force people onto mass transit. Et cetera. And, of course, the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions will focus on "the main carbon-emitting sectors of the U.S. economy." Translation: Anything that requires coal, natural gas or oil to operation. I suspect that every "environmental" or "science" reporter who received this news release began to salivate like a Pavlovian dog. The fact that the news release is about something that is not happening and responses that are unneeded, costly, and harmful to the economy, will not even cross their minds. For an excellent book, "A Primer on CO2 and Climate" by Howard C. Hayden ($13.95 plus $3.00 postage) go to www.energyadvocate.com. Learn the true facts from this easy-to-understand softcover, written by a Professor Emeritus of Physics from the University of Connecticut. To gain insights to many of the complex issues at home and around the world, visit Alan Caruba’s daily blog .
©
2007 Alan Caruba. |
||||||||||||||||||||
All nations act upon what they believe to be their best interests and those
interests are often shaped by their political philosophy. These things are
subject to change. For example, there are some 200 sovereign nations in the
world. Of these, 120 are multi-party democracies. Compare this with 1970 when
there were fewer than 35 nations that were not outright dictatorships or
operating under the iron fist of the single party rule of Communism.
When you include some idiocy as mandating how much water a toilet can have
for the purpose of flushing (too little in many cases, thus requiring two
flushes) or the present contemplating of banning the incandescent light bulb,
one can begin to grasp how, in literally thousands of ways, the Greens intrude
on our lives and, most importantly, on our choices.