Hawaii as North Korea’s Target – Possible - More Probable: Strategic Alaska

Projected Path of North Korean Missile - Hawaii Target image: Daily Mail

From the Daily Mail Japanese Intelligence is fairly certain that North Korea will launch a long-range missile in the direction of the U.S. State of Hawaii on this 4th of July. The article notes that the North Korean missile has a range of approximately 4,000 miles, 500 short of the main Hawaiian islands. Although concerns regarding nuclear weaponry are valid, a greater concern may be the stockpile of chemical weapons held by North Korea, which said missile could be employed to deliver to the U.S.

The North Korean Government has ignored all “strongly worded” condemnations from the United Nations and the U.S. administration, which is, frankly, nothing new. That said, Secretary Gates, has ordered missile interceptors to Hawaii in the hopes of stopping any missile should there be a launch.

On might suggest that Gates also deploy those interceptors to the State of Alaska, which is well within range of the North Korean missile . Further, in March of 2003, a piece of a North Korean missile was found in Alaska:

NEWS BRIEF: "`North Korea Missile Warhead Found in Alaska’, The Korea Times, [Seoul, South Korea] March 4, 2003, By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter, http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200303/kt2003030417272311970.htm
"The warhead of a long-range missile test-fired by North Korea was found in the U.S. state of Alaska, a report to the National Assembly revealed yesterday. 'According to a U.S. document, the last piece of a missile warhead fired by North Korea was found in Alaska,’ former Japanese foreign minister Taro Nakayama was quoted as saying in the report. `Washington, as well as Tokyo, has so far underrated Pyongyang’s missile capabilities.' "

It is now 2009, and Alaska has become a strategic target due to the natural resources (natural gas and oil) which are critical to the U.S. economy as well as defense. One has to believe that the administration and the Pentagon are well aware of the scenario and although there has been no statement issues from the White House regarding this particular threat (as of yet), a failure to protect and defend Alaska or any United States Territory, in this instance, would be not merely politically suicidal but geographically suicidal. Without a direct military intervention at that point, the Peoples Republic of North Korea, as well as other nations holding such weaponry that would see the United States harmed, would be further emboldened and unfettered by any threat of retaliation. That said Barak Obama, regardless of political affiliation, has, at times, shown a moderate approach to issues, and in the case of defense has yet been tested. Silence, or a lack of statement, can prove to be planning and execution of military action: “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far”: Theodore Roosevelt

Letterman Loses Olive Garden Advertising – Conservative Feminism Triumphs

Letterman apologizing to Paris Hilton - from topnews.in

David Letterman may, in the end prove costly to CBS, as advertiser Olive Garden, has pulled its remaining schedule from the late-night television program. Although the company’s official statement denies this move was due to pressure from protests over sexist and inappropriate comments made by Letterman, the news site, Politico, confirmed that the Franchise had bowed to pressure from protester's.

The fact that Sarah Palin, controversial Republican Governor of Alaska and former V.P. presidential candidate, and her 14 year old daughter were the target of the talk-show hosts “jokes" was moot and served to bring attention to the greater issue – which was the crass jokes applied to women across the board. This was evidenced by the remark made about Governor Palin vis a vis a “slutty flight attendant look". Further, the “joke” regarding the Governors’ 14 year old daughter was reprehensible, suggesting that a 14 (or as Letterman claimed an 18 year old) female, would get “knocked up” by a baseball player during a game. This implies that regardless of age, females are “objects”, while the male “superstar” baseball player, is worthy of praise – able to impregnate an “object” while continuing athletic excellence.

Hillary Clinton "demeaned" as flight attendent -photo: blog: bagnewsnotes

The argument pro-Letterman, stemmed from the fact that the object of his ridicule was only a Republican, Conservative, woman – one that is high profile and therefore, not off limits. That argument is fallacious as the terms used by Letterman were rather broad – indicating a general lack of respect for women using generalizations and stereotypes. Therefore, Olive Garden should receive letter of thanks from women regardless of political afflation, because the franchise rose to the occasion in a positive manner.

Whether it is music (lyrics), movies, television sitcoms or variety shows, women are treated as “less than" their male counterparts, and more often than not: “objects” – objects of sexual innuendos, as well as scorn. The protests and letter writing campaign which was initially suggested and organized by the blog Hillbuzz, a cooperation between politically diverse groups, was responsible. They are due the thanks of women everywhere. The result of their campaign, was twofold, one Letterman directly apologies to Governor Palin, who accepted the apology for all women (She is undoubtedly a Conservative Feminist), and one sponsor, of many who are on the Hillbuzz list, has pulled advertising. This message must be sent, to those who are in a position to “entertain” millions - objectifying women is off-limits, regardless of political affiliation, race, religion, or sexual preference.

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) Fundraising Email Regarding Republicans: “History is on their Side”

In a recent fundraising email from the Republican National Senatorial Committee, an excerpt from an email to potential donors to the opposition team was noted in the body of the text as follows:

“The DSCC email went on to say that Republicans "not only have cash, but also history on their side. There are only a handful of times in our nation's past when the party that won the White House hasn't lost big the following midterm election. That would spell disaster for President Obama's agenda."

Although the intent of the RNSC email was fundraising, it also served the purpose of letting its base know that not everything is as bad as the media (constant drumbeat of Republican’s in dissarry) would have it - and with good reason - Apparently, this type of fundraising does not sit well with all Democrats. From the blog Persuasian, Perseverence and Patience: text from the DSCC is demeaned as a “cry-wolf” tactic and additional text is provided by the blogger:

Don't believe what you've heard about a GOP in disarray. They're mad, they're organized, and they're determined to return to what they see as their rightful place: ruling the halls of Congress.

How do I know? $14.4 million.

That's how much Newt Gingrich raised during a fundraising dinner last week for Republican House and Senate committees. One speech. $14.4 million.

They not only have cash, but also history on their side. There are only a handful of times in our nation's past when the party that won the White House hasn't lost big the following midterm election. That would spell disaster for President Obama's agenda.

What is perhaps, the most interesting aspect of this exchange, is that one the one hand, one can find the blogger who favors the Democrat Party in general, dismissing the emails contents:

“I wonder how many people who contribute would be so out of touch to actually buy the argument that the Republicans are organized."

It is interesting because conservatives decry mainstream media bias towards the left, dismissing the strengths of the more conservative party, and touting the invincible Democrat Machine, led by the “American Idol, Rock Star, President Obama. Therefore, the media, seen as a friend to the DNC, may ultimately end up aiding their downfall – by convincing the millions who are so in “lock-step” with a particular party, that they avoid alternative media outlets such as FOX (which is consistently dismissed by the President in speeches given to rally the “troops”.) Unfortunately, the end result is that those who believe that the Democrat Party is invincible are receiving their information from a single-minded source. (Granted, the same could be said of those conservatives who never tune into MSNBC, even for the entertainment factor.)

How far has the “star power” of the Head of the DNC fallen? A Fundraiser slated for today with Obama as the “headliner”, is expected to net 3 million dollars, a pittance for high profile speakers at such events (see Newt Gingrich reference in the DSCC email; which is not verified). Additionally, the campaign promise to ban lobbyist has gone by the wayside, as Democrats are “dodging the ban on cash” from that quarter, as reported upon by Politico.

What is missing in this entire: have and have not, crying for financial help, raffling off personalized photo’s with the President, is the current dismal state of the economy, one which, can no longer be assigned to the Bush Administration or the “Republicans”. Here again, the media came to the rescue. When Obama was pushing his Stimulus Package through the legislature at the speed of light, it was noted in press, local, regional and national, that the Republican’s were simply not cooperating; in fact, they were maligned for not voting for the stimulus. As a student of history, at that point, one had to sit back and admit: tactical error! Specifically if the student has the understanding that the stimulus would go astray, that spending more would end up meaning higher taxes, and that the “Ghost of Jimmy Carter” was in the House.

As the nation takes a sharp swing to the right, the media is still touting the strength of the DNC – which will further affect their fundraising capabilities. One must also take into consideration that the perceived ownership of certain groups, specifically those who are dependent upon the government for financial aid and college students, may have resulted in votes (at the time) but the base is not capable of financial support in the long run – leaving the bulk of the support to come from industry, unions and Hollywood – all of whom are feeling the financial crunch.
On the flip side, the return of Carter, has moved the nation right – those who have had to cut back, will still find $10 to send to the various fundraising arms of the Republican Party – in order to help the nation, both fiscally and in issues of national security. This will, of course, be either proven or disproved with the coming elections: 2009 governorships, 2010 congressional and senatorial races – should the Republican’s gain seats, and it appears that both History, the Media and the DNCC itself are on their side, then there will be a solid return to conservative governance and a reversal of the tax and spend mentality currently found in DC. That said, if this does occur, the Republican members sent by the nation to rescue the country, had best stick to those fiscally conservative principals – and finally, speak up against any bias perceived by those who would seek to usurp the government.

(See: the press as viewed by the Founding Fathers: the Federalist Papers. Reference: The Federalist Papers #84 “From the Federalist Papers: #8, Hamilton

"I go further and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than we granted. Fro why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do Why for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shallot be retrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power, but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power.")