California’s ‘mystery missile’ has been described as: nothing, an optical illusion, a toy rocket, a misfired US missile, an airplane, a ‘black-ops’ Navy test, and who knows what else. Is it possible that the ‘mystery missile’ was launched by a Chinese submarine?

Three-Star Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas G. McInerney made a convincing case on FOX News’ Hannity that the ‘mystery missile’ was definitely not the contrail form an airplane. General McInerney, a 35-year Air Force veteran, is certain that the ‘mystery missile’ was in fact a missile:

One theory gaining credibility in military circles is that the missile was a JL-2 SLBM (Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile), fired from a Chinese Type 094 Jin-class submarine.

This would hardly be the first time the Chinese have fired a waring shot too close to home. In 2007, the United States Navy deployed a battle fleet on exercises, led by the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk, a 1,000ft supercarrier with a 4,500 person crew. Suffice it to say, the security around these things is tight. During the test maneuvers, a Chinese Song-class submarine surfaced after stalking the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk, breaching all security, and getting within torpedo firing range, completely undetected.

As mentioned above, the ‘mystery missile’ was fired 35 miles away from the California coast. Skeptics of the China theory doubt a Chinese submarine could get that close to California undetected. However, the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk stalking was described as “as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik,” according to one NATO official. The Chinese have invested a great deal of money into modernizing their military. The United States has repeatedly been ‘shocked’ by Chinese military advancements.

Additionally, the Chinese quite regularly threaten the United States. In 1996, Gen. Xiong Guangkai, then the second highest ranking official in the Chinese military, mused about how easy it would be to “vaporize” Los Angeles with nuclear weapons.

Asian intelligence reports claim that the Chinese submarine that launched the ‘mystery missile’ cruised through the weakly deffended South Pacific, getting to 35 miles off the California coast, from where the missile was fired (click here to view the alleged route).

Why would China do this? There are a number of plausible reasons.

The First (and in my opinion most likely) reason China may have fired the ‘mystery missile’ was in anticipation of the G-20 meeting with President Obama. The Chinese have routinely fired warning shots at the United States when they disagreed with American policies. Perhaps the United States’ largest creditor is not crazy about the Federal Reserve’s concerted effort to destroy the value of the United States dollar.

In addition, President Obama intended to lecture the Chinese about manipulating the Renminbi in Seoul. The President’s concerns fell upon deaf ears. Firing a test missile off the California coast before the meeting could have been a signal to President Obama to tread lightly.

The Second potential reason is that China was demonstrating its military prowess. Launching a missile off the coast of the most populace state in the Union sends a very firm message. If the ‘mystery missile’ was fired by the Chinese, they let the President and the military know that the United States cannot stop a Chinese submarine, which can carry up to 12 JL-2 ballistic missiles with nuclear capabilities; a serious shot across America’s bow.

The third and fourth possible motivations, from the China Defense Blog:

To Mr. Obama: “Don’t get too friendly with the Indians, they aren’t going to counterbalance us anytime soon. ”

To the United States Navy: “You want freedom of passage in our South China Sea EEZ for your military? Now we sail in yours. By the way, you better start spending money on anti-submarine defense of the US coastline again, hope you can afford it.”

If you doubt that China would something like this remember: they’re communists.

More information:

Rush Limbaugh

Glenn Beck

Wayne Madsen Report

China Defense Blog Part I & Part II

__________________________________________________

Follow @AriMFine, @AndrewLawton and @RyanWRuppert on Twitter to stay up-to-date on any and all important news.

Click HERE  for information about Mark Steyn’s appearance in London THIS MONDAY.

__________________________________________________

Click HERE to keep track of the GOP tsunami in the House and HERE for the Senate.

__________________________________________________

RGA: Remember November: The Final Act

Remember November: The Final Act from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.

__________________________________________________

A Crossroads Election
By Thomas Sowell

Most elections are about particular policies, particular scandals or particular personalities. But these issues don’t mean as much this year– not because they are not important, but because this election is a crossroads election, one that can decide what path this country will take for many years to come.

Runaway “stimulus” spending, high unemployment and ObamaCare are all legitimate and important issues. It is just that freedom and survival are more important.

For all its sweeping and scary provisions, ObamaCare is not nearly as important as the way it was passed. If legislation can become laws passed without either the public or the Congress knowing what is in those laws, then the fundamental principle of a free, self-governing people is completely undermined.

Some members of Congress who voted for ObamaCare, and who are now telling us that they realize this legislation has flaws which they intend to correct, are missing the point.

The very reason for holding hearings on pending legislation, listening to witnesses on all sides of the issue, and having Congressional debates that will be reported and commented on in the media, is so that problems can be explored and alternatives considered before the legislation is voted into law.

Rushing ObamaCare into law too fast for anyone to have read it served no other purpose than to prevent this very process from taking place. The rush to pass this law that would not take effect until after the next two elections simply cut the voters out of the loop– and that is painfully close to ruling by decree.

Other actions and proposals by this administration likewise represent moves in the direction of arbitrary rule, worthy of a banana republic, with only a mocking facade of freedom.

These include threats against people who simply choose to express opinions counter to administration policy, such as a warning to an insurance company that there would be “zero tolerance” for “misinformation” when the insurance company said that ObamaCare would create costs that force up premiums.

Zero tolerance for the right of free speech guaranteed by the Constitution?

This warning comes from an administration with arbitrary powers that can impose ruinous costs on a given business.

Continue

__________________________________________________

National Review: How Big a Wave? Ask Cook and Rothenberg
By Henry Olsen

As we enter the final week of the election, everyone wants to know how big the House GOP wave will be. No one has a precise answer yet, but if past performance is any guide, the gold-standard psephologists when it comes to political fortune-telling are Charlie Cook and Stu Rothenberg — and yesterday, both of Cook and Rothenberg showed a massive shift to the GOP. If we use the accuracy of their 2006 and 2008 predications as an indicator, we will be able get a good idea of exactly how large the wave will be from their final House-race ratings, to be released on Monday.

Both men use similar categories: Some races are “Likely” (Cook) or “Favored” (Rothenberg) to go for one party or another; slightly tougher races to call are labeled as “Leaning” toward a party; those hardest to call are rated as toss-ups, which Rothenberg breaks down into three categories (pure, tilting Democratic, and tilting Republican).

For 2006 and 2008, both men have 100 percent records in their “Likely” or “Favored” categories for the winning party (in both years, the Democrats). Their records in the races they rate as “Leaning” toward the winning party are nearly as good: combined, only two seats in two years. Thus, any Democrat whose opponent is said to be “likely” or “favored” to win come Monday will almost surely go down to defeat.

What about the toss-ups? They break only slightly toward the winning party. In 2008, Cook rated 35 races as toss-ups; Democrats won 19 of them, or 54 percent. In 2006, he rated 39 races as toss-ups; Democrats won 22 of them, or 56 percent.

Rothenberg’s ratings are more complicated, but obtain nearly similar results. In 2008, he said 14 races were pure toss-ups; Democrats won seven of them. Democrats won nine of the 13 races labeled as tilting Democratic, and Republicans won all of toss-ups tilting their way. All together, Democrats won exactly half of the 32 toss-ups. In 2006, Democrats won ten of the 19 pure toss-ups, all of the races that were tilting Democratic, and one of the ten tilting Republican. Combine all the toss-ups and Democrats won 21 of 40, or 52.5 percent.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Hot Air: Kendrick Meek: Charlie of Orange (Crist) offered me his sister’s cross to get me to drop out

Mr. Crist, the Florida governor, had called Mr. Meek, a Miami congressman, earlier that morning, about 4:50 a.m., leaving a voice mail asking if they could meet up at the AIPAC gathering. “I’ll call you later this morning and see if we can work out a time to get together just you and me,” Mr. Crist said in the voice mail, which was played for Washington Wire by Mr. Meek. “Take care, buddy.”

Mr. Meek was scheduled to speak at AIPAC about 8:30 and Mr. Crist at 10, but the governor showed up an hour early in hopes of catching the congressman.

Mr. Meek said he tried to avoid Mr. Crist, but as he left the stage, “there he was, right in front of me.”

“He said, ‘If you were to drop out and work with me and help me we together can beat Marco Rubio,’” Mr. Meek recalled. “I said, ‘Governor, that’s a non-starter.’

“Then he dug down into his pocket and pulled a small cross out,” Mr. Meek continued. “He said his sister gave it to him and he wanted to give it to me so I would think about it.”

Continue

__________________________________________________

Call Me Senator – From David Zucker

__________________________________________________

The Next President (Sarah Palin): Lisa, are you going to shut down my Facebook page for writing this?

Yesterday, Lisa Murkowski’s hired guns threatened radio host Dan Fagan, and more importantly, the station that airs Fagan’s show, with legal action for allegedly illegal “electioneering.” The station, unlike Murkowski, who is flush with millions of dollars from vested corporate interests, does not have a budget for a legal defense. So it did what any small market station would do when threatened by Beltway lawyers charging $500 to $1000 an hour – they pulled Dan Fagan off the air.

Does all this sound heavy handed? It is. It is an interference with Dan Fagan’s constitutional right to free speech. It is also a shocking indictment against Lisa Murkowski. How low will she go to hold onto power? First, she gets the Division of Elections to change its write-in process – a process that Judge Pfiffner correctly determined had been in place without change for 50 years. She is accepting financial support from federal contractors, an act that is highly questionable and now pending before the FEC. And today, she played her last card. She made it clear that if you disagree with her and encourage others to exercise their civic rights, she’ll take you off the air.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Us News: W 48% Obama 43%
By Paul Bedard

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, rapped by the White House for pledging to make Barack Obama a one-term president, seems to have the support of a majority of Americans. A new poll provided to Whispers says that 56 percent of likely voters want the president fired.

According to pollster Doug Schoen, whose new poll shows vast support for the Tea Party movement among voters, the president is still liked by about half the nation. In fact, more like him personally than like his policies. Some 48 percent think he’s a nice guy, while just 42 percent approve of his job performance.

But that personal favorability doesn’t translate into re-election support when voters are asked if Obama deserves a second term. Says Schoen: “Despite voters feelings toward Obama personally, 56 percent say he does not deserve to be re-elected, while 38 percent say he does deserve to be re-elected president.” Worse, Schoen adds, “43 percent say that Barack Obama has been a better president than George W. Bush, while 48 percent say Bush was a better president than Obama has been.”

Continue

__________________________________________________

Discovery: What We All Knew – Liberalism is a Mental Disorder
Analysis by Liz Day

Is political ideology derived from a person’s social environment or is it a result of genetic predisposition?

It’s an interaction of both, according to a recent study on our political leanings that boosts both sides of the nature versus nurture debate.

Scientists at the University of California San Diego and Harvard University determined that people who carry a variant of the DRD4 gene are more likely to be liberals as adults, depending on the number of friendships they had during high school. They published their study in a recent issue of The Journal of Politics.

Data was analyzed from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (the same source for a recent study that found intelligent children drink more alcohol as adults).

The four authors, including UCSD’s James Fowler, wanted to explore if politics were heritable by identifying a specific gene variant associated with political leaning. They hypothesized that individuals with a genetic predisposition toward seeking out new experiences would tend to be more liberal.

The 7R variant of DRD4, a dopamine receptor gene, had previously been associated with novelty seeking. The researchers theorized novelty seeking would be related to openness, a psychological trait that has been associated with political liberalism.

However, social environment was critical. The more friends gene carriers have in high school, the more likely they are to be liberals as adults. The authors write, “Ten friends can move a person with two copies of 7R allele almost halfway from being a conservative to moderate or from being moderate to liberal.”

They theorize a larger social network may bring more diverse viewpoints, which could be an influence on the liberal development.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Financial Times: A presidency heading for a fiscal train wreck
By Nouriel Roubini

What has been the fiscal performance of President Barack Obama? He inherited the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, as well as a budget deficit that – after much needed bail-outs and a series of reckless tax cuts – was already close to $1,000bn. His stimulus package, together with a backstop of the financial system, low rates and quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve, prevented another depression. Mr Obama also deserves credit that the US, alone among advanced economies, currently supports a “growth now”, rather than an “austerity now” path.

But this is but one half of the picture; we must also judge his first two years on his ability to anticipate what the economy will need tomorrow. Here the picture is much less positive. Given the likely path of fiscal policy after next Tuesday’s election – with the expiration of existing stimulus and transfer payments, and even with most of the 2001-03 tax cuts being kept – the US economy will soon experience serious fiscal drag just when it needs a further boost. Problematically, the administration’s failures leave it relying on the Fed, which is bent on further QE, likely to be announced next Wednesday. But studies show this will have little effect on US growth in 2011, so fiscal policy should be doing some of the lifting to prevent a double dip recession.

Continue

__________________________________________________

Newsweek: Rush Limbaugh: Always Right
by Zev Chafets

Rush Limbaugh wants Republicans in Congress to send the president a “repeal bill every week.”

People sometimes ask Rush Limbaugh if he has plans to run for public office, and his answer is always the same—he can’t afford the pay cut.

This is a rare understatement by El Rushbo. His annual income is greater than the combined salary of the entire U.S. Senate (and you can toss in a few dozen congressmen and cabinet secretaries for good measure). “I certainly don’t derive my living by what goes on in Washington, and I’m not dependent on what happens there,” he boasted to his radio audience in September. “The further away that city is from my life, the more prosperous I am.”

Limbaugh, who lives like a pasha in an oceanside estate in Palm Beach, Fla., doesn’t need to go to Washington to be heard there. His voice carries to the nation’s capital and beyond, to every state and congressional district in the country. The Rush Limbaugh Show is on the air three hours a day, five days a week, carried by some 650 radio stations. Industry estimates put his weekly audience somewhere between 15 million and 20 million. Talkers Magazine recently named him the most important radio host of all time.

Limbaugh has wielded political influence since his show first went national 22 years ago. In 1994 he was so important to the Republican congressional landslide that the GOP House freshman class made him an honorary member. But never before in his long career has Limbaugh had the degree of political influence he currently enjoys. It is not an exaggeration to say, as former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel did, that Limbaugh is “the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party.” He intends to use that force and energy to shape the Republican side of the next Congress.

In a recent e-mail exchange, Limbaugh laid out his to-do list, which includes repeal of the health-care law and the financial-regulatory-reform bill; ending the ban on offshore drilling; the reprivatization of General Motors, Chrysler, and the student-loan program; a spike in the heart of cap-and-trade legislation (he regards global warming as a hoax); the elimination of the capital-gains tax; a reduction of the corporate tax rate to 20 percent; and replacement of the progressive income-tax code with a flat or “fair” tax.

Continue

__________________________________________________

National Review: Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?
By: Jonah Goldberg (a recent guest on Strictly Right Radio)

I’d like to ask a simple question: Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?

In case you didn’t know, Assange is the Australian computer programmer behind WikiLeaks, a massive — and massively successful — effort to disclose secret or classified information. In a series of recent dumps, he unveiled thousands upon thousands of classified documents from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Military and other government officials insist that WikiLeaks is doing serious damage to American national security and is going to get people killed, including brave Iraqis and Afghans who’ve risked their lives and the lives of their families to help us.

Even Assange agrees. He told the New Yorker earlier this year that he fully understands innocent people might die as a result of the “collateral damage” of his work and that WikiLeaks may have “blood on our hands.” WikiLeaks is easily among the most significant and well-publicized breaches of American national security since the Rosenbergs gave the Soviets the bomb.

So again, I ask: Why wasn’t Assange garroted in his hotel room years ago?

It’s a serious question.

In almost every corner of the popular culture, there are people who assume incredible competence on the part of our intelligence agencies. We take it as a given that spooks can, in the immortal words of Elvis, take care of business in a flash. In the Jason Bourne movies, say the wrong word into your cell phone, and assassins will find you at the train station in minutes. In AMC’s Rubicon, if you pay too close attention to crossword puzzles, your train will be “accidentally” derailed. In Three Days of the Condor, if you ask your bosses the wrong question, a postman with an ice-bullet-shooting machine gun will pay you a visit.

Continue

__________________________________________________

You can listen to this episode online here or subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.

You can listen to this episode online or subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.

Sarah Palin last week made the bone-headed move to endorse RINO Carly “Demon Sheep” Fiorina in the GOP primary race to replace Barbara “Don’t Call Me Ma’am” Boxer’s California seat in the U.S. Senate. Thankfully Chuck is making ground. And 24 fans can proudly unite behind him.

Note that the military experience discussed in this video is actually real, unlike some people’s…

Administrators at a California high school sent five students home on Wednesday after they refused to remove their American flag T-shirts and bandannas — garments the school officials deemed “incendiary” on Cinco de Mayo.

The five teens were sitting at a table outside Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Calif., on Wednesday morning when Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez asked two of them to remove their American flag bandannas, the Morgan Hill Times reported. The boys told the newspaper they complied, but were asked to accompany Rodriguez to the principal’s office.

The five students [...] were then told they must turn their T-shirts inside-out or be sent home, though it would not be considered a suspension. Rodriguez told the students he did not want any fights to break out between Mexican-American students celebrating their heritage and those wearing American flags.

The article also said that the kids were told they could wear their American flag t-shirts and bandannas any other day of the year, just not on a day that Mexicans are wanting to celebrate their heritage. The fact that the principal is of Hispanic descent makes this story a little more amusing as it’s generally white liberals who insist on injecting political correctness into any known crevice of the universe. However, how can you set a different standards for what’s allowed one day than you do for 364 other days?

If someone wants to go to school on the Fourth of July wearing a Saudi Flag wrapped around them, that’s absolutely fine (though I probably wouldn’t let them near the AV room or the Chemistry lab.) If someone wants to celebrate the Fourth of July by singing Rule Brittania and waving a Union Jack around, that’s completely their choice as all. The premise of this decision made by the school is that there is something about Mexican values and American values that are mutually exclusive. If that premise existed, there would be 100+ Mexicans at that school learning about American history and American values on a day-to-day basis.

Being patriotic is not offensive, so get stuffed Miguel.