Safuto.com

The events of the past week in Iran have reminded many just how precious freedom is. The government of Iran offers the illusion of freedom and democracy via presidential elections. But the elections are a sham. The religious leaders (aka the mullahs) that run Iran will ultimately decide who wins. And in this case they decided that the status quo of Ahmadinejad was just fine for the Iranian people. But the people have other ideas in mind.

The opposition leader Mousavi probably wouldn't be much better than the current president of Iran. After all, he would still be a puppet of the mullahs. So in terms of a change in foreign policy towards the United States or Israel, we can't really hope for any breakthroughs. Still, the people seem to be sick of Ahamdinejad and the mullahs who decide how everything goes in Iran. The people want their votes to count and their voices to be heard. Their voices are being heard now and the price of speaking out is a high one.

The thugs of the Iranian regime have unleashed their muscle on the populace. The message is clear. The mullahs will tolerate small bit of dissent and nothing more. People outraged at the initial response to the protests have continued to press the issue for the past week, staging repeated demonstrations and general acts of defiance against the powers that be. The Iranian regime has responded in a violent matter by having their thugs beat, brutalize and murder those who oppose the official position of the state. Yet, as of today the protests still go on.

After taking in the events of the past week a few things are obvious to me. The elections in Iran are a sham and not even worth investigating. The fix is always in there. The opposition candidate wouldn't be much better than the current president so there's no reason to make him a symbol of Iranian independence. The people of Iran want democracy.

I'm under no illusions that democracy in Iran would mean great improvements in relations with the U.S. or Israel. But I think democracy would provide the people of Iran with a chance to chart a course that allows their country to re-join the community of peace loving nations. A democratic Iran may still end up with nuclear weapons. But I would bet that the threat of Iran using those weapons would be much smaller. And I also think that a democratic Iran would eliminate state support for terrorism.

I'd like to say that freedom is on the march in Iran but I don't think that's likely. The regime has a strong hold on the country and they're likely to continue to crack down until resistance appears to be futile. The people of Iran are also lacking support from the United States that is so crucial in their attempts to be free.

I have a hunch that Iranians look to their western border and see that Iraqis now at least have a vote that counts. The U.S. and our allies in toppling Saddam made that possible. President Obama has made it clear since day one of his Presidency that the U.S. is not in that business anymore. Rather than agitate for freedom and advocate regime change the U.S. will double our efforts to seek common ground with the various despots that dot the landscape of the earth. Obama has made the point loud and clear that the likes of Castro, Chavez, Kim Jong Il, Ahmadinejad and others are to be bargained with.

The new U.S. approach will certainly reduce friction in the short term, but in the long run the festering wound that is totalitarianism will continue to breed hatred, violence and poverty in the nations that house those sorts of regimes. Dissidents and true opposition leaders won't find comfort in the new "go along to get along" doctrine of the Obama administration.

And so the roll of nations that support freedom and democracy is not likely to increase anytime soon. But I salute those who fight the good fight even if they don't get the support they need from our current administration.

At the present time there are three Americans being held for the alleged crime of espionage in both Iran and North Korea. All three are women. All three are journalists. All three are almost certainly innocent. The U.S. government must do something about this.

Ronald Reagan's very famous "tear down this wall" speech included another crucial quote that speaks to the virtues of using strong (some might say stubborn or arrogant) foreign policy when dealing with adversaries.

"Because we remained strong the Soviets came back to the table."

  A lot of people said at the time that Reagan would start a nuclear war as a consequence of his strong pro freedom stance during the Cold War. It turns out that he won the thing without having to fire a shot.

Yesterday thousands of fellow conservatives and many otherwise disgruntled Americans from across the political spectrum got together to protest excessive government spending, corporate bailouts and massive taxation of the citizenry. As you could probably imagine any event like this, especially one being cheered on and heavily covered by those dogs at Fox News was bound to get out of control. Check out this video I found on YouTube of the right-wing extremists setting fire to a mannequin in the streets.



Oh wait a minute that was at the G20 in England. Things did get a little crazy though. In thos other video I found there was lots of chanting and a bit of chaos as the marchers blocked the streets.
 


Okay that was an anti-Israel protest in San Francisco. One of the real tea parties went down in San Antonio where to the horror of law enforcement officials people waved (gulp!) American flags and Ted Nugent played the Star Spangled Banner in front of a large crowd that looked to be very peaceful and having a good time.



Jeez, things really got crazy. To hear (or see) the comments from news reports and angry bloggers you would think that these organized protests were organized by the devil himself.

I think it's true that in the United States we've become a bit of a spoiled lot of people. Phil Gramm got slammed last year for saying that the country needed more leadership and less whining. I'll buy that. These are amazing times we're living in. 

It seems that for many people President Obama's declaration that combat operations in Iraq would end on August 31, 2010 the moment was a joyous one. After all, the end of a long war (going on six years now) that has cost the lives of tens out thousands of Iraqis and several thousand American forces should be a welcome development to every American. I'm not feeling too joyous though.

Last night the U.S. House of Representatives passed the largest spending bill in the history of the world. On Monday morning the President will sign the bill into law and kick off what I call stimulus-a-go-go. You see there's this sound I'm hearing. It's the sound of a thousand wing tipped lobbyists rushing down Pennsylvania Avenue to get in line to spend that money. Depending on your political affiliation you may think that's a beautiful thing or it may make you sick to your stomach. I'm inclined to the latter position.

I don't have much confidence that the spending plan will do much to improve things for the average working person I do know that government money, which is our money, will be spent in large quantities. Where it will end up going to is something that no one can guarantee for sure. It will go somewhere and it will be spent on something but that does not mean that the overall economy will benefit from these expenditures. I'm a big believer in the possibilities of unintended consequences.

For example, our legislators will spend billions of dollars on alternative energy projects. The intention in this act is to develop technologies that will allow for carbon free power generation. But some (probably most) of the money invested in such technologies will be wasted on things (like ethanol for example) that do little to generate cleaner energy and wean us off dependence on foreign oil.

Another example of unintended consequences involves how people will spend their stimulus benefit money over the next couple of years. Politicians want people to take their minuscule tax cuts ($800 a year for a married couple) and spend them in the economy. They want people to take the money they earn from their jobs and spend it on televisions and cars and houses and exorbitant college tuition for their kids. All of those actions would help to "stimulate" the economy. But what if people don't do that?

Wow, 2009. I remember when Prince sung about partying like it was 1999. We're ten years past that now. Party like it's 2009?I know a lot of people are hung over coming out of 2008 with the financial crisis, recession, presidential election and now war between Israel and Hamas. I believe that things will get better though.

The U.S. is still at war (or something between war and nation building) in Iraq and Afghanistan. Major media doesn't write about Iraq much anymore. That's been my signal that things are going much better over there. I recently saw a documentary about Afghanistan that showed what the U.S. Special Forces are doing over there. It's a very dangerous situation in Afghanistan. Getting fully engaged there would be a mistake because the terrorists could fight a long, protracted war of attrition out of those mountains. My best to our forces fighting the good (and sadly forgotten) fight in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

I'm looking forward to continuing my MBA education in 2009. I found it difficult going to classes at night while working this past fall. I got through it though with an A and A- in my two classes. I'm forging ahead with two more classes in the spring with a goal of completing my MBA at the end of 2010 or mid-2011 at latest. Jeez, 2011. I can't even begin to think about it.

The family is doing well. We're healthy. The girls (Mia and Rosetta) are growing. Juliet is working hard to handle two little ones. Mia goes to school three days a week for half a day while Juliet's Mom and Aunt have contributed a lot to help around our new house.

We're getting some serious snow here in Albany this weekend. I guess that you could say it's beginning to feel a lot like Christmas! Check it out below.

Hank Paulson and his band of merry squanderers of our children's future have a new fancy. They want to un-freeze the consumer credit markets so that people can borrow more money to buy cars they can't afford, education they can't afford, houses they can't afford. Ah what the heck the latest "plan" is meant to help people buy anything they can't afford.

From the Wall Street Journal today, "Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, seeking to ease strains in the consumer credit market, plans to announce Tuesday the formation of a program to increase the availability of auto loans, student loans and credit cards, according to people familiar with the matter. The lending facility, which will be operated by the Federal Reserve, is expected to provide loans to investors who want to buy securities backed by credit cards, auto loans and student loans, these people said. Treasury will contribute between $25 billion to $100 billion to the facility from its $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program."

All I can say is heaven help us. This should be a time when people learn their lessons about debt and begin to live differently. The government is doing all it can to prevent that by intervening in the debt markets. And guess what. They're doing it with your money! That's right. Hank "Santa Claus" Paulson is spending your money so that someone can get credit at 15% interest to buy an X-Box on Black Friday.

There's a name for this. It's called robbing Peter to pay Paul. These phony machinations will continue to distort the markets, prevent people from getting out of debt and punish those who have managed to live a prudent lifestyle even as most people lost their minds.

Thanks for nothing Hank.