MORE CHILLY WINDS FROM SOUTH AMERICA

More news about the ever-brewing Cold War. One theater of this looming threat is in South America, where Hugo Chavez has brought unapologetic Stalinism back to the region that Ronald Reagan liberated from tyranny. Consider this to be an expansion of Cold War? I Blame Global Warming!

Unfortunately, that liberation occurred two decades ago. The Clinton administration, with the usual Democrat/Liberal liking for Marxist dictators, allowed Chavez to ascend to power in Venezuela. Matters were made worse due to the War on Terror, which took American attention off the threat to our South. Soon, the assets of American corporations were nationalized, media outlets critical of this pint-sized thug were closed, sometimes violently.

Chavez has succeeded in getting the Kennedy clan, in the person of Joseph Kennedy, to gain popular support in the US, using oil from the state owned Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., or PDVSA. With smarmy adds, Joe Kennedy uses that tried and true Liberal vision of soup kitchen America, and gives away heating oil to "the poor", all thanks to the "people of Venezuela".

Of course, "the poor" here in America are far better off than the middle class in almost every other nation in the world, but why let mere facts get in the way of a good shibboleth? And does anyone think that giving oil away in America does the actual people of Venezuela any good? Let's go further, are the people any better off if the government sells the oil, let alone gives it away?

From my observations of Marxist "paradises" of the past, I think not!

Venezuela has deepening ties with such lovely nations as Communist China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba. Indeed, Venezuela has teamed up with China and Cuba to drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, a rich oil field that our Democrat friends, along with John McCain, have placed off limits for American oil companies.

To give you an idea of just how out of touch with reality our Friends on the Left are, let's look at their alleged "Energy" Bill, which recently passed the House of Representatives. Michelle Malkin points out that this travesty of legislation would produce no new energy, yet would raise taxes on American oil companies and give breaks and subsidies to PDVSA. In other words, we would make hamstring the development of domestic oil supplies even further than the enviro-weenies have done already, while giving a competitive advantage to a state-owned Communist front company.

But that's not the really bad news yet. Let's look to Venezuela's neighbor, Columbia.

Colombia has had a hard time of it in the past. They are the world's leading source of cocaine and other drugs. Despite their best efforts, and the help of the United States, they have had little success weaning their peasants from the relatively lucrative crop of coca, in favor of more conventional crops. To make matters worse, they have their own Marxist insurgency, an insurgency that has taken over much of the cocaine production from the cartels and is funding its revolution against the Colombian government with profits from the sale of the drug. They supplement their income and their revolution with kidnappings and murder.

These murderous little darlings call themselves the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia, or FARC, and have been supported by the Soviet Union, the Chinese, the Cubans and other Stalinist states for over four decades. Now, they are supported by Venezuela.

On March 1st, 2008, Colombian forces staged a raid against a FARC camp just over the border in Ecuador. Killed in the attack was FARC leader, Raul Reyes and sixteen other of his terrorist "soldiers". This did not sit very well with neither Mr. Chavez nor Ecuador.

Chavez is now amassing troops and armor on the Colombian border, as is Ecuador, another relatively Marxist state. They are now threatening one of our allies in South America. Outright war has become a distinct possibility in South America. This would be the sort of entree that Russia and China would love to exploit. And Chavez, with his decidedly anti-American worldview, would absolutely welcome their support.

What is needed now is to revisit the policies of Ronald Reagan, which had rolled back the Marxist threat in South America, giving nations like El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Honduras a chance to be free. Currently, the trend in the region is toward Stalinism, which must be stopped with great alacrity.

John McCain might be a good president for these uncertain times. However, as I have exhaustively outlined in Montag's World, he just ain't gonna win the election.

So how would Hillary or Saint Obama fair? Think Carter. Think Soviet expansionism. Think of Iran. If they play to type, we will see a Marxist Columbia, with all efforts to curb the growing and exporting of cocaine ended.

Why would I say that? Let's consider each of the leading Democratic candidates.

Hillary's signature campaign issue is nationalized health care. Her biggest supporters have long sung the praises of Cuba's health care system. Michael Moore, for instance, made a movie extolling the benefits of Castro's top-down, government run system. And I guarantee that, when the vote comes up in the Senate, Hillary will vote to give Citgo the breaks that will be denied to American oil companies. The Democrats, especially the modern Liberal Democrats, are historically incapable of defining, let alone defending, America's interests. Hillary will be just another in a long line of Democratic appeasers.

But what about Saint Obama? After all, hasn't he promised to get tough with Pakistan? Yes, he has. But Pakistan is an American ally, and he's already promised to surrender in Iraq and meet with all our enemies for unconditional talks. This will do ... what? How will diplomatic talks keep Columbia from succumbing to a Marxist assault both from within and from their neighbors?

Again, the policies of the Reagan era are what's needed today. We need to confront these Marxist thugs diplomatically, as well as covertly from within. We need to identify groups whose interests correspond with ours and give them all the aide they need to bring their nations back into the democratic mold. Neither Hillary nor Saint Obama are capable, or even willing, to do what is necessary to stop this cancer from spreading.

That being said, let us also remember what old Jimmy Carter made possible: a quarter of a century of Conservative leadership in America. A Democratic win in November will unite and energize Conservatives, while the Democrats will self-destruct, just like Carter. The damage done by the Left to America and her interests will almost guarantee such a Conservative Renaissance.

This is not at all the future that I would prefer, but we got stuck with Juan Pablo McCain, as Billy Cunningham has taken to calling him. Therefore, we Conservatives are left with the Conservatives-in-the-wilderness gambit.

I am always an optimist. For all the trouble I have with McCain, the glass is still half full!

Copyright March 2nd, 2008

COLD WAR? I BLAME GLOBAL WARMING!

No, this isn't about the climate change nonsense. Although, I must point out that NewsMax reports that the Arctic has regained almost all the ice lost over the past year and the Antarctica has a third more ice than in the past. Then again, the Drudge Report notes heavy snow in Greece and Jerusalem, so maybe we can work out the Global Warmism angle after all.

It is, however, becoming apparent that the announcement of The End of The Cold War was a bit premature. The signs are ominous as they are almost omnipresent.

• Kosovo has just declared its independence, prompting Russia to try and block said independence in the UN, with an emergency closed-door meeting of the Security Council.


• Russia's premier, Vladimir Putin has been quietly ratcheting up his belicose rhetoric while simultaneously clamping down on the rights of the Russian people.


• China has been playing chicken with American fleets, at one time surfacing a submarine in the middle of a US carrier fleet. Russia has recently taken to buzzing our operations with their aircraft.


• China has been launching large numbers of missions into space, including the planned destruction, last year, of one of their own satellites. Clearly, they are planning for a potential war in space.


• The American announcement that we will shoot down one of our own satellites has been met with concern from both China and Russia, who, after China's demonstration of this capability, now want the US to ban all research into militarizing space.


• Russia has been aiding and abetting Iran's nuclear development, as well as selling large amounts of conventional weaponry to both Iran and Syria. Meanwhile, both Russia and China are blocking all attempts to isolate Iran for their intransigence.

These are just a few data points, but the trend is clear: both China and Russia are gearing up to blunt American influence in the world. China and Russia, despite the efforts of Richard Nixon, are teaming up again. Both are looking to increase their sphere's of influence. And both have taken stances in opposition to the United States.

Many of my Friends on the Left would say that this is a good thing. Many of them actually believe either a) that we deserved to be attacked on 9/11 or b) the attacks were an inside job by a president who never really won the election.

But those of us in the Real World know that the world is a dangerous place. There really are folks who would do us harm, just because our system of governance, our national interests, and our cultures are different from theirs. We, in the Real World, also understand that if America doesn't stand up for herself and for our allies, there really isn't anyone else who will.

Of course, our Friends on the Left will say that we can't be the policeman of the world, that we have no right, that it will only fan the flames of hatred for America.

That, put plainly and simply, is utter nonsense. The surest way to open America up to attack and retreat is to adopt the defeatist attitudes of the Left. Do you need Real World examples? Well then, here are two, both within the lifetimes of many of us:

• With the wholesale retreat from Viet Nam and the collapse of the Republican Party following Watergate, the US adopted the retreat and appease policies of Jimmy Carter. Simultaneously, we had the radicalization of Iran and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Only the latter was corrected (by Ronald Reagan) and we are still paying the price of Carter's fecklessness in Iran today.


• Bill Clinton's pitiful performance vis a vis Osama bin Ladin and al Qaeda. First, he sent the message, by retreating from Somalia, that we will cut and run when things get tough. Then, despite repeated al Qaeda attacks, he refused to actually treat bin Ladin's actions as the acts of war that they were. Indeed, he refused several opportunities to take bin Ladin into custody and, somehow, he was always unavailable to give the go-ahead to our operatives to assassinate him.

I'd give more examples by -- THANK GOD! -- the Left hasn't had so many opportunities to undermine our nation. Of course, should the election in November go the way I suspect it will, we'll see a repeat of these glorious days of Liberalism run amok.

And just how do we know that these things will come to pass? Consider Michelle Obama who said yesterday, “Hope is making a comeback and, let me tell you, for the first time in my adult life [ italics are mine], I am proud of my country." Does this mean that she and, by extension, Barak have been ashamed of America until now? And how can we expect a president who isn't proud of America and all we've done for the world, to defend us, since we, ostensibly, don't deserve to be defended?

Yes, Friends! The world is indeed a very dangerous place. And there is only one nation that folks can turn to for Liberty, wealth, and defense with no strings attached. That nation is the United States. No, we never asked to become the "policeman of the world". But we did have that responsibility thrust upon us. We dare not turn our backs on that responsibility.

I do not, honestly, know enough about military and diplomatic matters to formulate a cogent opinion as to solutions to the conundrum we face. But I do know that we retreat at our own peril.
Almost 2000 years ago, the Roman Empire turned its back on much of the world, allowing much of civilization at the time to collapse, all in an attempt to keep the last sparks of Empire alive. Well, the barbarians came anyway, and first Rome then Byzantium were destroyed.

The barbarians will come for us as well, should we turn our backs to the world. Do we dare repeat the insanity that was Rome?

In the 1980's there were three people who stood tall against Communism: Ronald Reagan, Pope John-Paul II, and Margaret Thatcher. Mrs. Thatcher once famously said to Reagan, "Don't go wobbly on us, Ronnie!"

Timely advise for us to remember in the 21st Century.

Copyright Feb. 19th, 2008