If There's An Assault On Christians And No One Reports It, Is It Really Happening?

I've always been fascinated by how, if one of America's news outlets reports on an important story, other outlets quickly jump on it.
The story might be about the breakthrough with a new drug, or about an earthquake somewhere, or having to do with a multiple vehicle crash.

I, therefore, found it inexplicable that Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali's article on the war on Christians appearing in the February 2012 issue of Newsweek wasn't immediately picked up by talk shows or elaborated on by other print media.  Or, maybe, I haven't been looking in the right places or listening to the right talk shows?

Here you have Christianity, one of the world's major religions, a belief system to which most Americans are affiliated, being oppression by another of the world's major belief systems and a detailed review of the suffering of the  Christians receives less than a yawn.  What exactly is being discussed at the many Christian-Muslim-Jewish conferences that seem to spring up all over the place?  Where can one read of the protests of the Presbyterians and the Episcopaleans and the Lutherans against the suffering of fellow Christians?

As a Jew, I don't get it.  Jews know what to expect in a Muslim country.  If we happen to find ourselves in an Islamic country, we know all that's left for us to do is get out and leave for either Israel or the USA.  There are a few other places we might consider, but for Jews, Israel and the USA are the best.  But, to be fair, most English speaking countries are reasonable alternatives.

In Israel, we don't turn our Arab-Israeli citizens into second-class citizens the way Jordanians treat Arabs who are not Bedouin, or, for that matter, the way Shiite Iraqis treat Sunni Iraqis, or the Turks treat the Kurds.  Israeli culture doesn't allow it.  No compliments are expected and none are received.  As a Jew, I understand this. 

What I don't understand is how Christians can simply stand by as fellow Christians are being destroyed.

The Federal Reserve And Why It's Got To Be Kept Independant of Congress

Only the truly economically ignorant can fail to appreciate the importance of an independent central bank to a large industrial country.  Hamilton argued the case with Jefferson and Hamilton was right.  Andrew Jackson tore down our central bank and soon the American banking system was in chaos.  And, so, once again, America had to create a central bank.  But, because of the baggage of history, we now called it the Federal Reserve.

I am reminded of this reading of Ben Bernanke's testimony to the House Budget Committee where he urged Congress to enact a plan to reduced the federal debt.  It was reported that Bernanke repeated his caution that Congress should not cut spending too quickly nor raise taxes too quickly.  In other words, Congress should begin to exercise fiscal responsibility but do it in a cautious responsible way.

Again, for those ignorant of how the parts of government work, the Federal Reserve controls monetary policy.  It has no say regarding fiscal policy.  That is the role of Congress and Congress has proven remarkably inept in carrying out its responsibility.  Spending must, I repeat, must be brought down.  But, per Bernanke, not too quickly.  Have no fear dear reader, the last thing Congress will do is bring down spending too quickly.  Damn lucky if they manage to bring it down at all.

But here's what's weird.  The Republicans fear that Bernanke's cautious approach will result in unmanageable inflation, while the Democrats, who generally favor entitlements  -- a prime cause of runaway spending -- defend Bernanke.

What's going on here, or is this just politics as usual?  My greatest fear is not fear itself.  It's that America will turn to Ron Paul's blueprint for financial reform.