If they did not put our troops, our citizens and our country at risk, the Left's fantastic lies about terror and terrorists would be hilarious. 

The problem, of course, is that many of our national leaders have been brainwashed with the same slogans.  The Left has mastered another technique dictators forged long ago: Repeat a lie often enough and it will be taken as truth.    And, of course, our media play along.

So let's give the slogan-hucksters a brief time-out and dissect just seven of their favorite lines:

One:  Killing terrorists only turns them into martyrs.  Nope.  Killing terrorists turns them into dead terrorists. 

So we're down to three this week.  Christie out to no one's dismay - except for his die-hard fans known as "girthers" - and so is Palin to the serious dismay of many.  It's too late for late entries - say goodnight Donald and Rudy - while the other candidates are there just for stubbornness or ego.  Rick, Mitt, or Herman, those are the only choices now.

The next debate is this coming Tuesday, 10/11.  It could be make or break for Perry.  The Forum's resident Perryista, Ella - she's a Texas gal - assures us that, while he wasn't prepared for the first three debates due to his laser focus on raising $17 million in 49 days, he's primed and pumped for this one.  Let's hope so.  I for one am rootin' for Rick to come out with guns blazing.  It's show time.

Will it be show time for Cain?  Will one of his competitors ask him about the fatal flaw in his 9-9-9 tax reform plan?

Financial fraud is one or more intentional acts designed to deceive other people and cause them financial loss. Who is the world's greatest financial fraudster? Bernie Madoff? Not even close.

The unemployment rate just went up again to 9 percent, and the proportion of the adult population at work continues to fall. These dismal numbers are a result of slow economic growth, which is caused mainly by the world's biggest financial fraudster, who robs businesses and individuals of what is rightfully theirs.

The world's biggest financial fraudster is not one person; it is a group composed of those politicians and government bureaucrats who, on a daily basis, ignore the consequences of their actions as they misuse hard-earned taxpayer funds to further their own political or personal agendas. We will call this fraudster the TPHP (for Thoughtless Power-Hungry Politicos). 

Yesterday in Jerusalem (5/09), a new unity Israeli government was created by a deal between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, leader of the Likud Party, and Kadima leader Shaul Mofaz.  Together they have 94 out of 120 seats in the Knesset.

Bibi has made a very smart move.  Netanyahu was presented with an offer he'd be an idiot to refuse. In return for essentially nothing, he built himself the strongest and largest coalition Israel has ever seen.

Here's how it works.

The evidence that the presidential ship, the USS Zero, is sinking like that boat Leo DiCaprio was on continued to pile up this week. 

When Euroweenies publicly call the President of the United States pitiful, sad, arrogant, and absurd, plus stupid; when he can't even beat Ron Paul in a national poll; when predictions mount that he will pull a 1968 LBJ and not run; when libtards like Newsweek Editor Tina Brown abandon him, it's pretty clear his presidency will end up sleeping with the fishes.

He totally clinched it yesterday (9/29) with a pathetic replay of Jimmy Carter's 1979 Malaise Speech, blaming the disaster of his presidency on Americans being "soft." Like Carter, Zero does not possess the moral intelligence to grasp the irony of his claim.

Americans were sunk into a deep malaise after the debacle of Watergate and defeat in Vietnam - and Carter was elected as an expression of it.  If it weren't for the "crisis of confidence" he complained about, Americans would never have placed a nebbishy schlemiel like him in the White House.

And if Americans hadn't gone soft accepting liberal welfare and liberal guilt for decades, they never ever would have elected an affirmative action president, a Marxist Alinskyite attending a Hate America church whose only qualification for office was the color of his skin.

President Obama and many other Democrats - and even a few Republicans - claim that the huge deficits the United States is experiencing result from the George W. Bush-era tax rate cuts.

Is this true, and must we have a tax rate increase? The short answer is no.  First, a little budget history.

In the 40 years prior to the 2007-09 Great Recession, tax revenues as percentage of gross domestic product were remarkably constant, never varying more than 2.3 percent above or below 18.3 percent of GDP.  This fact is all the more remarkable given that the maximum individual income tax rate during this period varied from a low of 28 percent to a high of 70 percent.

Federal government expenditures also were remarkably constant during this same 40-year period, never lower than 18.2 percent or higher than 23.5 percent of GDP, and deficits averaged about 2.5 percent. The debt-to-GDP ratio rose and fell during this period and was a manageable 36 percent as late as 2007. Yet, in the past four years, the debt-to-GDP ratio has almost doubled.

I received a number of raised eyebrows regarding Hanoi John and Slick Willie, wherein I questioned Kerry’s patriotism but not Clinton’s. Here’s one from Sandra Adams:

“I am wondering why you would not question Clinton's patriotism considering Chinagate. I have always thought that he allowed the transfer of America's nuclear technology secrets to the Chinese in exchange for money with which to run his campaign for re-election. I have read that he allowed the Chinese to advance at least a couple of decades, with the knowledge gained, thereby hugely increasing the threat to America. I admit to being puzzled by your statement upholding Clinton's patriotism. Other than this, what I have read so far on your site has been fascinating. Thank you very much.”

Sandra’s point is well-made. I was wondering how many TTPers would call me on the carpet about Chinagate, and now I know! Yes, it’s true, as Congressman Chris Cox, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security determined, that Clinton authorized high-tech transfer to the Chicoms in exchange for campaign donations to the Democrat Party. Sleazy and illegal and impeachable, yes. Treason? Here’s why I’m not completely sure.

On April 1 and May 27 of last year, two tiny tremors were detected by seismographs with magnitudes of 2.3 and 1.5 in England's Blackpool region of Lancashire.  They are being blamed on fracking.  The same claim is being made in Ohio.

It is now official: drilling for shale gas by fracturing rock with water may rattle the odd teacup. But is highly unlikely to cause damaging earthquakes. That much has been obvious to anybody who has followed the development of the shale gas industry in America over the past ten years. More than 25,000 wells drilled have caused a handful of micro-seismic events that can barely be felt.

To call a two-magnitude tremor an earthquake is a bit like calling a hazelnut lunch. Such tremors happen naturally more than 15 times a year in Blackpool but go unnoticed and they are a common consequence of many other forms of underground work such as coalmining and geothermal drilling.

So can we now get on with fracking and get over fear of it? The economic and environmental benefits are vast.

Question of the week:  How do we reconcile Perry's incredible President Zero ad - the most powerful political ad of modern times -

{youtube}8EL5Atp_vF0{/youtube} 

with his botched debate performances, which keep getting worse, as we saw last night?  Isn't he supposed to be a kick-em-in-the-groin take-no-prisoners Texas Aggie?  And what's up with the you-have-no-heart schmaltz if you deny in-state tuition to illegals? 

Perhaps, however, you think the question should be:  What about Sarah?  When Perry announced and she refrained, it was clear she was waiting to see how Rick would do.  She was never worried about Bachmann, knowing that MB would flame out and she has.  Now that Perry might also, will she jump in?

The HFR has learned there is another reason for her hesitation beyond the patience of a huntress.

Keep this column until April 2013.

In the accompanying table, you will see two forecasts for federal debt-related items: the official Congressional Budget Office's forecast (which is close to the Obama administration's) and a pessimistic forecast (mine).

No forecast is perfect, but it is likely that I will be closer to the mark than the CBO/administration because my assumptions are more realistic.

The Federal Reserve will be under continuing pressure to keep up "quantitative easing," i.e., printing money. This is likely to result in a continuing fall in the dollar, which will cause inflationary pressures to grow, and/or a continuing fall in real wages, as has been the case in recent months.

If the administration and Congress were suddenly to reduce spending enough to reduce the deficit from roughly 10 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to 3 percent, the Fed could stop printing money and inflationary pressures would ease. But that is not going to happen.