From RZHOM@aol.com Sun Sep 19 14:59:19 2010 Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 14:58:55 EDT From: RZHOM@aol.com To: hal@panix.com Subject: Re: Charles Krauthammer Hi, Dad seems to be making very good progress with the knee. We see the surgeon tomorrow, and hopefully he'll have some answers as to what we can expect and when he can resume more activities. He'll walking well, and for the most part without a cane or other help. He has some rebuilding to get back into shape after sitting for such a long time. I don't remember sending or seeing this before, and had always wondered about him, not knowing about his disability that's described here. I have listened to him in some debates before and I find I do like him, however during the elections I didn't think he leaned heavy enough on Obama, because I have not trusted him from the beginning. You do the best job of changing that for me of anyone, but I still don't trust him, but keep trying to learn more about him to take that away. I did think when I got into this that it was someone taking another persons talk and putting their slant on it, and from what you say that is the case. When I have listened to Krauthammer before I thought it was difficult to know just where he did stand on issues. He seemed very guarded. At any rate, thanks for clearing much of it up for me. As always what he's (Obama) done so far seems much less threatening when you explain it. I just hope and pray that you're more right about him than I am. I think that means I still don't like or trust him, but I hope I'm wrong. Love you................mom PS. It's a beautiful day here and I hope you do something you enjoy before the day is over. In a message dated 9/19/2010 1:54:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hal@panix.com writes: Thanks, as always. I hope things are going well for you and Dad. You sent me this once before, but I'm glad you sent it again. Note the lack of a date of this supposed event, just "last Monday", and the elaborate description of the setting, implying an eyewitness probably just a few feet away from him. The first time I saw it, I think I took for granted that these were Krauthammer's words; don't recall if I sent a reply or not. This time I did a search on one of the phrases, and got this link: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/k/Charles-Krauthammer.htm from which I quote: Summary of the eRumor: A forwarded email with comments by journalist, Pulitzer Prize winner and Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer about President Obama. The Truth: Charles Krauthammer has issued a statement about this eRumor saying it is "neither accurate nor authoritative." He said the email is "somebody putting his own ideological stamp on and spin on my views." Krauthammer said, "One giveaway of the superimposition of someone else's views on mine is the rather amusing use of phrases that I never use. To take just a few examples randomly: 'God forbid,' 'far left secular progressive,' 'this is the first president ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!' 'no country had ever spent themselves into prosperity,' and, the real doozy, 'states rights.'" He said his views are clearly spelled out in a series of columns that can be found on his web site. Krauthammer writes for the Washington Post and his articles are nationally syndicated. Krauthammer is a regular contributor on the Fox News Network and can almost be seen daily on the Special Report program anchored by Bret Baier. Now I don't like Krauthammer, from what I've read, and he's probably hard enough on Obama, so it might seem puzzling one of these hidden group(s) of propagandists would do this. My take on it -- there is a need to produce something fresh every day. I think it sounds right to you because it's consistent with so much of what you've read. But addressing some of the points, regardless of who wrote them: "He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism." I can't see why anyone thinks Obama is out to dismantle capitalism. He took office in the middle of a terrible crisis where most economists think something strenous had to be done. The bank bailouts are debatable, but Obama resisted nationalizing the banks despite many respectable economists saying that he should. The gov't gave loans to many financial institutes, and as creditor, set some conditions. The alternative for at least a critical mass of financial institutions was bankruptcy. Money is not based on gold bars in Fort Knox or Switzerland that will be there whatever happens to the institutions; money is more of a collective state of confidence. If the idea was planted in everyone's mind simultaneously that the dollar had dropped to 10% of yesterday's value, this collective change of mind would actually be self-fulfilling. Storekeepers would mark up their prices, workers would perceive they were getting a small fraction of a livable wage, and go on strike. People would stop working; things would stop being made or distributed, and become hard to get and expensive. So some kind of attempt had to be made to stabilize the system in my opinion. It is hard to say if it was done in the best way or not, but there was a surprising consistency in Bush and Obama actions towards the banks, the difference being that with Obama you had a lot of people shouting that it was the end of the world and part of the Marxist "power grab" or some such. Now the banks are largely back as they were except much less free in making loans (potential borrowers are out of work or apt to lose their jobs, and there is little confidence that real estate values will rise, or at least not fall -- the whole basis of secured loans), and the gov't has I believe been repaid most of its loans. Financial reform will mostly take us part of the way back to where we were 20 or 30 years ago before massive deregulation. We weren't on the verge of becoming totalitarian back then, and we're not today with the lastest reforms. Now health care reform is a large change, though not as large as it might seem because the gov't already pays for half of health care through Medicare. But it's been attempted about every 20 years since Truman, and I think it the main thing that stopped it under Truman was Southern fear of integrated hospitals. There is much to dislike about the current Health care bill, but the main battle was to get some kind of bill. The filibustering insured that the last 2 or 3 votes had to be bought at a very high price, which is part of the reason bills from the current congress tend to look somewhat deformed in general. In the future, if the system needs improvement, no one will have as much to gain by obstructing that process. Keeping Obama from having any legislative victory, or making the victory as ugly as possible has been the name of the Republican strategy in this Congress. Hal Morris: hal@panix.com -- Editor of: * Jacksonian Miscellanies: Archive at http://www.jmisc.net/jmisc * Tales of the Early Republic web site: http://WWW.EarlyRepublic.ORG On Sun, 19 Sep 2010, RZHOM@aol.com wrote: > Well I haven't sent you one for a while. I will say up front I find this > very believable. Am I wrong? Can you convince me? > Love, mom > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Charles Krauthammer > > Charles Krauthammer > Fast Facts : > > 1. Born: _March 13_ (http://www.mahalo.com/march-13) , _1950_ > (http://www.mahalo.com/1950) > > 2. Birthplace: _New York City_ (http://www.mahalo.com/new-york-city) > , _New York_ (http://www.mahalo.com/new-york-state) > > 3. Raised in _Montreal_ (http://www.mahalo.com/montreal) , _Canada_ > (http://www.mahalo.com/canada) > > 4. Attended _McGill University_ > (http://www.mahalo.com/mcgill-university) and _Harvard Medical School_ (http://www.mahalo.com/harvard) > > 5. _1972_ (http://www.mahalo.com/1972) diving accident left him a > paraplegic > > 6. Directed _psychiatric_ (http://www.mahalo.com/psychiatry) > research for the _Carter_ (http://www.mahalo.com/jimmy-carter) administration > > 7. Began writing career in _1981_ (http://www.mahalo.com/1981) with > The New Republic > > 8. Helped develop the "_Reagan_ (http://www.mahalo.com/ronald-reagan) > Doctrine" in the _80s_ (http://www.mahalo.com/1980s) > > 9. Appointed to Presidential Council on Bioethics in _2002_ > (http://www.mahalo.com/2002) > > > > > > > > > Dr. Charles Krauthammer > > > We see him on TV every weekday on the Fox news channel (not Channel 5) at > 6:30pm. I didn't know he was an MD nor did I know he is paralyzed. He's > quite a man. > > Dr. Krauthammer is on Fox News . He is an M.D. and a lawyer and is > paralyzed from the neck down. A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He > listened with 25 others in a closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand > but 1st. The ramifications are staggering for us, our children and their > children. > > Last Monday was a profound evening, Dr. Charles Krauthammer spoke to the > Center for the American Experiment.. He is a brilliant intellectual, > seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never > resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an > extremist in his comments and views . He is a fiscal conservative, and has > received a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox > News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. > > The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have summarized > his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and > internationally. Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you > feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the > Kool-Aid, feel free.... > > > > Summary of his comments: > > 1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be > underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's > very hard to know what's behind the mask. The taking down of the Clinton > dynasty was an amazing accomplishment The Clintons still do not understand > what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time. > > 2.. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton . He has > a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, > while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch > what he DOES! > > 3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington > to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including > dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as > the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the > playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers > of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada . > > > 4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and > NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto > or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap > and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE > college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because > if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type > single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control > costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada........God > forbid! > > 5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one > around him has ever even run a candy store. But they are going to try to > run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can't > work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left > secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a > moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not > what he says. > > 6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the United States, but > more as a ruler over the world.. He sees himself above it all, trying to > orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees > moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was > a prime example of how he sees America, as an imperialist nation that has > been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made > errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and > appeased our enemies! > > 7. Obama is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) > will not come due until after he is reelected in 2012. He would like to blame > all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the > future. Obama has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a > narcissist. > > 8... Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge > strong. Republicans are pining for another Reagan, but there will never be > another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl > (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. > Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and > intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if > she is to be a serious candidate in the future... We need to return to the > party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong > national defense, and state's rights. > > 9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are > spending trillions that we don't have.. This could lead to hyperinflation, > depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. > The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their > agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the > huge bailouts didn't work, nor will the stimulus package.These were > trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions and the Congress to placate the > left, so he can get support for #4 above. > > 10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, > fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was > grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and > the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have > won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was. > > 11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be > swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's > between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I > hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and > Congress. > > > > > > There is a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and > he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work > will be hard, but we're right on most issues and can reclaim our country, > before it's far too late. > > Educate your friends and neighbors!!! > > > > > > > > >