The English Speaking Peoples


The United States, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand should begin to cooperate more as a group, build a common market, coordinate on defense and diplomacy, and work to promote a common vision in the world.  I know, it sounds a lot like what Europe has been trying to do since the end of World War II.  While I do support better cooperation between these countries, perhaps even having it institutionalized to a degree I am not advocating going nearly as far as those in the EU have tried.  These countries should build a free trade zone to spur trade and investment between members.  They should also work out a common vision for what they would like to achieve in the world and work together to bring this about.  The security interests of the member countries should be channeled into a formal military alliance similar to NATO and they should endeavor when agreement can be reached among the countries to act as one on concerns of global security.  They should also coordinate a common policy on issues of global significance like regulating trade, climate change (I’m no tree hugger but it might be useful for the US to have some backup keeping european radical environmentalists at bay), combating terrorism and piracy, etc.

Each nation will retain full sovereignty, to include their own currency and central bank (not looking to repeat the Euro debacle here).  The idea is to at least try to come up with a common policy, it will not always work and that is okay.  The rationale for this is simple, think of it as a hedge against an ever-changing world where it is getting harder to predict what the world will look like in the near future.

The US would appear to be the country that had the most to lose by doing this because at least for now it is the world’s lone global power.  This US would stand to benefit in several areas.  For instance, the US already has a large well developed market, even larger if you throw in NAFTA, but compared to the rising powers of India and China it is small by comparison.  When member countries can come to agreement on global policy it will add legitimacy to each countries position, including America.  Closer cooperation on defense would lead to pooled resources to employ in future global crisis.  Also the cost of expensive weapons projects could be spread among member states.

The other member countries would have the benefit of access to one of the largest markets in the world, America.  Yes, they would be expected to help police the globe to some degree but if popular opinion at home was ever against it then they could always just not agree to it within the alliance.  America would just do what it is already doing anyway, going it alone or with ad hoc coalitions.  Of course, a nation couldn’t use the veto all the time but selectively used on critical situations would be acceptable.  Also by cooperating on defense projects these members would have the chance at getting a shot at the massive American defense budget, which I dare say is probably bigger than all the other countries combined.  Perhaps the key reason for Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to do this is because as individual nations they are all to small either act decisively or have their voice heard on the global stage.  Think of this, Britain the largest of the four would today have problems redoing the Falklands War because their military is nowhere near as capable as it was 30 years ago.  Now throw American military power into the mix and all you would probably have to do is sail one carrier battle group there and the Argentinians would surrender.  Similar benefits would come to Australia and New Zealand as they deal with China rising in the Pacific.  In a world that is ever more unpredictable it seems to me that we are better off united with countries that share similar culture, language, and world view than we are as just individual nations.  An alliance built on respect for national sovereignty, but also an appreciation for strength in numbers would seem to be the direction we should all head.

The Real Case Against Obamacare


 

Healthcare in the United States certainly needs reform, and I am sure there may even be something positive in that regard in Obamacare.  What that might be is not plainly obvious to me, but I do concede that there is at least a chance that maybe there is something in there that might help people, maybe.  What I am absolutely sure about though are two reasons why the bill as a whole is a disaster for the country.  First, we can’t afford it.  Doesn’t anybody else see this, hello were broke.  Our deficit for 2012 is roughly 1.3 trillion dollars, does anybody really think we can add to that.  At some point investors (think China) are going to decide that American governmental debt is a bad investment, when that happens it’s game over.

Second, besides adding to our already obscene deficit this administration decided to push this legislation on a skeptical American public when our nation was at its weakest time economically since the Great Depression.  When Americans were crying out for leaders to fix the economy this administration gave them Obamacare instead.  The debate in congress on Obamacare originally took over a year, time that could have been better spent helping the economy.  It was so divisive that now we get the chance to take even more time on trying to get rid of it instead of fixing the economy.  Don’t get me wrong we do have to revisit the problem and try to fix it.  It’s just that the country would have been better off if this president had never had anything to do with healthcare.  Now instead of debating how to fix the economy during the presidential campaign we get to have a referendum on healthcare again, thanks Mr. president.  It seems to me our time could have been better spent reforming tax laws, reaching a compromise on long-term entitlement spending, enforcing our trade agreements, you know doing the things that will make the economy more competitive to ensure all of our future livelihoods.

Election ‘Just Became About Obamacare’

History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United States

CBO: Obamacare = at least $109 Billion in Deficit Spending

Played For A Fool


 

The Obama administration’s much touted “reset” with Russia that began in 2009 has finally and unequivocally revealed itself to be a total disaster, literally this president has been played for a fool and people have noticed.  The idea behind “reset” was to wipe the slate clean with Russia in an attempt to gain their help in the UN Security Council so the West could confront Iran diplomatically instead of militarily.  Any rational human being remotely interested in foreign policy knew it was doomed to fail.  In fact, the only really legitimate argument that could be made in support of it would have been that it had to be tried to see if it was at all possible to avoid war with Iran over their pursuit of the bomb.  Most would still have believed it was doomed to fail but at least the one last try argument to prove to the world we are not insane war mongerers made some sense.  The problem has been that even though the Obama administration has been faced with near overwhelming evidence that Russia was not really going to help with Iran the Obama administration has continued along with “reset” for three and half years with no change in sight.

It’s not just Iran where this has become a problem, the Russians emboldened by America’s weakness under Obama have challenged the US in Syria, Georgia, Eastern Europe and so forth.  Syria just happens to be the latest in a long string of black eyes for the US courtesy of the Russians.  The most disturbing fact about Syria is that this administration actually seems surprised by Russian intransigence there.  Until Obama realizes that Putin is not a willing partner but is instead the head of state of a country that is determined to undermine US policy at every possible turn he will never get anywhere with the Russians.

Putin’s Got America Right Where He Wants It

Judgement Day, Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare


 

In a surprising move the Supreme Court upheld the majority of the Obama administration’s most significant piece of legislation today when it ruled 5-4 in favor of Obama Care.  Many were stunned, myself included, that Chief Justice Roberts sided with liberal justices to support the legislation.  Now the question is will this ruling fire up the base of the republican party to get rid of Obama?  This should make an already close election that much more interesting.

 

Reconciliation, Queen Shakes Former IRA Leader’s Hand


 

Queen Elizabeth II of England publicly shook the hand of former IRA leader Martin McGuinness.  The event was the latest attempt at reconciliation between the British government and ex-IRA members.  The violence in Northern Ireland was said to have killed around 3,600 people including more than 1,000 British Security Forces.  In 1998 The Good Friday peace accord was signed helping to bring an end to the conflict.  However, some splinter groups have carried on the violence against British rule over Northern Ireland.  Sinn Fein, the former political arm of the IRA is seeking a referendum eventually on North Ireland’s independence from Great Britain.

Britain’s queen shakes hands with ex-IRA chief

: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120627/NATION/206270391

End Of America


 

Could the Supreme Court’s controversial ruling yesterday on Arizona’s immigration law that will allow the federal government to continue to do nothing to stop illegal immigration spell the end for America?  Never say never, the reason it might happen would be that it puts border states into the unmanageable position of having the federal government default on fulfilling its constitutionally mandated role of securing the borders while also not being able to fill the vacuum themselves.  It’s just plain wrong that the feds do not enforce the border but it is even more shocking that the states are barred from trying to pick up the slack in an attempt to protect themselves from being overrun.  This puts border states into the odd position of having conflicting interests with the federal government.  Because of this it won’t be long before some in these states will begin to ask why do we send our tax dollars to Washington when they will not even enforce the border and also keep states from doing enforcement too.

HURT: Obama’s court victory sets up bigger defeat later