"We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."-JFK
My Thoughts
Democrats have forgotten the truth in this quote. They are very afraid of conservatives ideas. Through the Fairness Doctrine, they want to silence conservatives on the radio. There is also talk of getting another "Fairness" type doctrine for internet bloggers.
They constantly mock and make fun of conservatives. To liberals, conservatives are stupid and aren't worth the effort it requires to debate and compromise on the issues.
They outright lie and bury their significant role in the current financial crisis. From Carter to Clinton to Franks: they had a huge hand in creating the mortgage crisis.
Obama still won't admit that he was wrong about the surge. He won't admit that Bush was right about some his foreign policy even though he has adopted many of his policies as his own.
The enviromentalists refuse to admit or acknowledge that they might be wrong about global warming. They blacklist scientists that dare to challenge the Goracle and his followers.
Liberals in Hollywood and the Mainstream Media show disrimination in their hiring practices against conservatives.
Are the Democrats afraid of its people? Why are they afraid of the truth? Could it be that being completely honest with the American people about the failure of their liberal/socialist ideas in the past would cause the voters to reject those ideas?
Democrats should listen to one of their great leaders. If they keep on this path of deception, they will wind up becoming the minority party again and stay there.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
After Setting March Record: Obama On Pace to Quadruple Previous Deficit Record
Federal budget deficit sets March record $192.3B
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics
Fri Apr 10, 7:02 pm ET
WASHINGTON – The Treasury Department said Friday that the budget deficit increased by $192.3 billion in March, and is near $1 trillion just halfway through the budget year, as costs of the financial bailout and recession mount.
Last month's deficit, a record for March, was significantly higher than the $150 billion that economists expected.
The deficit already totals $956.8 billion for the first six months of the budget year, also a record for that period. The Obama administration projects the deficit for the entire year will hit $1.75 trillion.
A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous annual record of $454.8 billion set last year. The March deficit was nearly four times the size of the imbalance in the same month last year.
Nearly $300 billion provided to the nation's banks and other companies to cope with the most severe financial crisis in seven decades has pushed government spending higher.
The Treasury report said that through the end of March, $293.4 billion had been provided to support companies through the $700 billion bailout fund Congress passed last October. That support has been provided primarily to banks, although insurance giant American International Group Inc. and auto companies General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC also have received assistance.
Besides the bailout fund, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac received $46 billion last month, bringing the total assistance provided to the mortgage finance companies to $59.8 billion since October. The government took control of both last September after they had suffered billions of dollars in losses on mortgage loans.
Through the first six months of the budget year that began Oct. 1, tax revenues have totaled $989.8 billion, down 13.6 percent from the year-ago period. The government's receipts have been reduced sharply by the recession, which is shaping up to be the longest of the post World War II period. The downturn began in December 2007.
Government outlays totaled $1.95 trillion through March, 33.4 percent higher than the year-ago period. Besides higher payments for the financial rescue, the government is paying more in such areas as unemployment benefits and food stamps.
The Treasury report showed benefit payments from the unemployment trust fund totaled $44.6 billion so far this budget year, up from $19.4 billion last year.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated last month that President Barack Obama's budget proposals would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, a figure $2.3 trillion higher than estimates made in February in the administration's first budget proposal.
The CBO review projected Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion annually over the decade ending in 2019.
The administration said it remained confident its forecasts for declining deficits over that same period could be achieved. But private economists have faulted those estimates for relying on economic assumptions they believe are too optimistic.
The administration projects that after hitting $1.75 trillion this year, the gap between spending and tax revenues will dip to $1.17 trillion in 2010, and plunge to $533 billion in 2013. If accurate, that would fulfill Obama's pledge to cut the deficit he inherited in half by the end of his current term in office.
Some economists have expressed concerns that the massive deficits being forecast could push interest rates up sharply, especially if foreign investors worry about the size of the U.S. deficit projections.
Lawrence Summers, director of Obama's National Economic Council, said Thursday there have been no indications that investors are growing worried about the size of the deficits. On the contrary, he said yields on Treasury securities have been pushed lower by increased demand from investors seeking to hold Treasury bonds as a safe haven in uncertain economic times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090410/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/federal_budget
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Well, this is change. It doesn't really instill hope for the future in me, though.
Obama is truly Bush squared. His initial projections were already higher than Bush's, and he can't seem to stay at that high mark. In fact, he isn't even close.
The Californifation of America is on its way, if we don't stop the government and especially Democrats out of control spending.
The first step in cutting down the spending is to stop bailing everyone out. We have seen with Detroit, AIG, and Fannie & Freddie that if you do it once they will come back many more times. It's not a one-time expenditure.
If the spending doesn't stop, taxes will continue to rise. That will at best stall the economy, and at worst, collapse it.
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics
Fri Apr 10, 7:02 pm ET
WASHINGTON – The Treasury Department said Friday that the budget deficit increased by $192.3 billion in March, and is near $1 trillion just halfway through the budget year, as costs of the financial bailout and recession mount.
Last month's deficit, a record for March, was significantly higher than the $150 billion that economists expected.
The deficit already totals $956.8 billion for the first six months of the budget year, also a record for that period. The Obama administration projects the deficit for the entire year will hit $1.75 trillion.
A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous annual record of $454.8 billion set last year. The March deficit was nearly four times the size of the imbalance in the same month last year.
Nearly $300 billion provided to the nation's banks and other companies to cope with the most severe financial crisis in seven decades has pushed government spending higher.
The Treasury report said that through the end of March, $293.4 billion had been provided to support companies through the $700 billion bailout fund Congress passed last October. That support has been provided primarily to banks, although insurance giant American International Group Inc. and auto companies General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC also have received assistance.
Besides the bailout fund, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac received $46 billion last month, bringing the total assistance provided to the mortgage finance companies to $59.8 billion since October. The government took control of both last September after they had suffered billions of dollars in losses on mortgage loans.
Through the first six months of the budget year that began Oct. 1, tax revenues have totaled $989.8 billion, down 13.6 percent from the year-ago period. The government's receipts have been reduced sharply by the recession, which is shaping up to be the longest of the post World War II period. The downturn began in December 2007.
Government outlays totaled $1.95 trillion through March, 33.4 percent higher than the year-ago period. Besides higher payments for the financial rescue, the government is paying more in such areas as unemployment benefits and food stamps.
The Treasury report showed benefit payments from the unemployment trust fund totaled $44.6 billion so far this budget year, up from $19.4 billion last year.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated last month that President Barack Obama's budget proposals would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, a figure $2.3 trillion higher than estimates made in February in the administration's first budget proposal.
The CBO review projected Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion annually over the decade ending in 2019.
The administration said it remained confident its forecasts for declining deficits over that same period could be achieved. But private economists have faulted those estimates for relying on economic assumptions they believe are too optimistic.
The administration projects that after hitting $1.75 trillion this year, the gap between spending and tax revenues will dip to $1.17 trillion in 2010, and plunge to $533 billion in 2013. If accurate, that would fulfill Obama's pledge to cut the deficit he inherited in half by the end of his current term in office.
Some economists have expressed concerns that the massive deficits being forecast could push interest rates up sharply, especially if foreign investors worry about the size of the U.S. deficit projections.
Lawrence Summers, director of Obama's National Economic Council, said Thursday there have been no indications that investors are growing worried about the size of the deficits. On the contrary, he said yields on Treasury securities have been pushed lower by increased demand from investors seeking to hold Treasury bonds as a safe haven in uncertain economic times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090410/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/federal_budget
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Well, this is change. It doesn't really instill hope for the future in me, though.
Obama is truly Bush squared. His initial projections were already higher than Bush's, and he can't seem to stay at that high mark. In fact, he isn't even close.
The Californifation of America is on its way, if we don't stop the government and especially Democrats out of control spending.
The first step in cutting down the spending is to stop bailing everyone out. We have seen with Detroit, AIG, and Fannie & Freddie that if you do it once they will come back many more times. It's not a one-time expenditure.
If the spending doesn't stop, taxes will continue to rise. That will at best stall the economy, and at worst, collapse it.
Local Democratic Government Officials Consider Implementing New, Increased Taxes, Er...Fees
Ohio’s governor has proposed a budget with more than 150 new or increased fees, including a fivefold increase in the cost to renew a livestock license, as well as larger sums to register a car, order a birth certificate or dump trash in a landfill. Other fees take aim at landlords, cigarette sellers and hospitals, to name a few.
Wisconsin’s governor, James E. Doyle, has proposed a charge on slaughterhouses that would be levied on the basis of each animal slaughtered. He also wants to more than triple the application charge for an elk-hunting license to $10, an idea that has raised eyebrows because the elk population in the state is currently too small to allow an actual hunting season.
Washington’s mayor, Adrian M. Fenty, has proposed a “streetlight user fee” of $4.25 a month, to be added to electric bills, that would cover the cost of operating and maintaining the city’s streetlights. New York City recently expanded its anti-idling law to include anyone parked near a school who leaves the engine running for more than a minute. Doing that will cost you $100.
“The most dangerous places on Staten Island are the schools at drop-off and dismissal time, when parents are parked three deep in the road,” says James S. Oddo, a City Council member from Staten Island who voted for the measure. “There is a mentality here that Johnny can’t walk 100 feet, he has to be dropped off right at the front of the school — and frankly that’s why Johnny is as pudgy as he is.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30162245/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Why are these governors and mayors making the same mistakes Hoover did? These new taxes er...fees are ridiculous.
The rise on livestock fees for liscenses and slaughterhouses will drive up the cost of all meat and any food that includes meat or meat by-products further obstructing economic progress.
The “streetlight user fee” and anti-idling law are just absurd.
Wisconsin’s governor, James E. Doyle, has proposed a charge on slaughterhouses that would be levied on the basis of each animal slaughtered. He also wants to more than triple the application charge for an elk-hunting license to $10, an idea that has raised eyebrows because the elk population in the state is currently too small to allow an actual hunting season.
Washington’s mayor, Adrian M. Fenty, has proposed a “streetlight user fee” of $4.25 a month, to be added to electric bills, that would cover the cost of operating and maintaining the city’s streetlights. New York City recently expanded its anti-idling law to include anyone parked near a school who leaves the engine running for more than a minute. Doing that will cost you $100.
“The most dangerous places on Staten Island are the schools at drop-off and dismissal time, when parents are parked three deep in the road,” says James S. Oddo, a City Council member from Staten Island who voted for the measure. “There is a mentality here that Johnny can’t walk 100 feet, he has to be dropped off right at the front of the school — and frankly that’s why Johnny is as pudgy as he is.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30162245/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Why are these governors and mayors making the same mistakes Hoover did? These new taxes er...fees are ridiculous.
The rise on livestock fees for liscenses and slaughterhouses will drive up the cost of all meat and any food that includes meat or meat by-products further obstructing economic progress.
The “streetlight user fee” and anti-idling law are just absurd.
Win A Date With Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton Tries to Pay Down Debt by Raffling Off Day With Her Husband
The secretary of state's long-shuttered presidential campaign is still trying to pay off a steep debt, and has launched a new fundraising pitch urging donors to give money and compete for the chance to win one of three "exclusive prizes." One of those is a day with Bill Clinton.
FOXNews.com Friday, April 10, 2009
Hillary Clinton is so eager to pay off her campaign debt, she's resorted to selling her husband -- for a day, anyway.
The secretary of state's long-gone presidential campaign still is trying to pay off a steep debt and has launched a new fundraising pitch urging donors to give money and compete for the chance to win one of three "exclusive prizes."
The most exclusive prize? A day of "adventure" in the Big Apple with former President Bill Clinton.
"A truly once in a lifetime chance: you and a guest will spend a day with President Clinton and a weekend of fun filled adventure in New York," the online promo says.
The other prizes are nothing to sneeze at either. One lucky winner and a guest with attend the "American Idol" season finale. The other gets a flight to Washington, D.C., for a weekend in the nation's capital, complete with a lunch with Democratic strategists and Clinton loyalists James Carville and Paul Begala.
Carville sent out an accompanying e-mail to supporters Thursday promoting the contest.
"I knew it was going to take an extraordinary effort to help pay off Hillary Clinton's campaign debt. But now, I think we can do it and have some fun at the same time!" the e-mail says. "Enter today to win one of three truly once in a lifetime opportunities and you will also be doing something great to help finish off Hillary's debt."
Anyone who donates money will be entered to win one of the three prizes, according to the rules. Requested donation amounts range from $5 to $2,300, which is the individual contribution limit.
Clinton ended her presidential campaign in June with a debt of more than $20 million, but as of the Dec. 31 financial report deadline, the debt still was $5.9 million. An updated figure was not available, but the campaign is filing a finance report again next week.
President Obama urged his finance team last year, when he was still a candidate, to help pay down Clinton's debt by encouraging donors to give. A representative for Clinton, though, could not provide updated information Friday on how successful that effort was.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/10/clinton-tries-pay-debt-raffling-day-husband/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
It's been quite a journey Hillary has gone on the past 12 months. She went from senator to presidential candidate to secretary of state, now, she is apparently trying her hand at being a pimp.
She better hope that a hot (based on his past interns maybe I should say living instead) woman doesn't win. Because of the way Bill is with women her status as a pimp will go from theoretical to concrete. She needs to think this through a little more.
The secretary of state's long-shuttered presidential campaign is still trying to pay off a steep debt, and has launched a new fundraising pitch urging donors to give money and compete for the chance to win one of three "exclusive prizes." One of those is a day with Bill Clinton.
FOXNews.com Friday, April 10, 2009
Hillary Clinton is so eager to pay off her campaign debt, she's resorted to selling her husband -- for a day, anyway.
The secretary of state's long-gone presidential campaign still is trying to pay off a steep debt and has launched a new fundraising pitch urging donors to give money and compete for the chance to win one of three "exclusive prizes."
The most exclusive prize? A day of "adventure" in the Big Apple with former President Bill Clinton.
"A truly once in a lifetime chance: you and a guest will spend a day with President Clinton and a weekend of fun filled adventure in New York," the online promo says.
The other prizes are nothing to sneeze at either. One lucky winner and a guest with attend the "American Idol" season finale. The other gets a flight to Washington, D.C., for a weekend in the nation's capital, complete with a lunch with Democratic strategists and Clinton loyalists James Carville and Paul Begala.
Carville sent out an accompanying e-mail to supporters Thursday promoting the contest.
"I knew it was going to take an extraordinary effort to help pay off Hillary Clinton's campaign debt. But now, I think we can do it and have some fun at the same time!" the e-mail says. "Enter today to win one of three truly once in a lifetime opportunities and you will also be doing something great to help finish off Hillary's debt."
Anyone who donates money will be entered to win one of the three prizes, according to the rules. Requested donation amounts range from $5 to $2,300, which is the individual contribution limit.
Clinton ended her presidential campaign in June with a debt of more than $20 million, but as of the Dec. 31 financial report deadline, the debt still was $5.9 million. An updated figure was not available, but the campaign is filing a finance report again next week.
President Obama urged his finance team last year, when he was still a candidate, to help pay down Clinton's debt by encouraging donors to give. A representative for Clinton, though, could not provide updated information Friday on how successful that effort was.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/10/clinton-tries-pay-debt-raffling-day-husband/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
It's been quite a journey Hillary has gone on the past 12 months. She went from senator to presidential candidate to secretary of state, now, she is apparently trying her hand at being a pimp.
She better hope that a hot (based on his past interns maybe I should say living instead) woman doesn't win. Because of the way Bill is with women her status as a pimp will go from theoretical to concrete. She needs to think this through a little more.
China's Moronic One-Child Policy Predictably Blows Up in Their Face
New Study Shows Extent of Gender Imbalance in China
By SHARON LAFRANIERE
Published: April 11, 2009
BEIJING - A bias in favor of male offspring has left China with 32 million more boys under the age of 20 than girls, creating "an imminent generation of excess men," a study released Friday said.
For the next twenty years, China will have increasingly more men than women of reproductive age, according to the paper published on-line by the British Medical Journal.
"Nothing can be done now to prevent this," the researchers said.
Chinese government planners have long known that the urge of couples to have sons was skewing the gender balance of the population. But the study by two Chinese university professors and a London researcher provides some of the first hard data on the extent and the factors contributing to the disparity.
In 2005 , they found, China had more than 1.1 million excess male births. There were 120 boys born for every 100 girls. This problem seems to surpass that of any other country, they said - a finding they wrote that was perhaps not surprising in light of China's one-child policy.
They blamed the imbalance almost entirely upon decisions by couples to abort female fetuses. The trend toward more male than female children intensified steadily after 1986, they said, as ultrasound tests and abortion became more available. "Sex selective abortion accounts for almost all the excess males," the paper said.
The researchers said the disparity was sharpest among one-to-four year olds, a sign that the worst imbalances among the adult population lie ahead. They also found greater distortion in provinces that allow rural couples a second child if the first is a girl or in cases of hardship.
Those couples were determined to ensure they had at least one son, they noted. Among children born second, there were 143 boys for 100 girls, the data showed.
The Chinese government is openly concerned "about the consequences of large numbers of excess men for social stability and security," the researchers said. But "although some imaginative and extreme solutions have been suggested," they wrote, China will have too many men for a generation to come.
They said enforcing the ban against sex-selective abortions could normalize the sex ratio in the future.
The study was conducted by Wei Xingzhu, a Zhejiang Normal University professor; Li Lu, a Zhejiang University professor, and Therese Hesketh, a University College London lecturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/world/asia/11china.html?ref=global-home
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
You know it's a slow news day when I start talking about China's one-child policy.
I wonder how the geniuses in the Chinese Communist government couldn't forsee this.
By SHARON LAFRANIERE
Published: April 11, 2009
BEIJING - A bias in favor of male offspring has left China with 32 million more boys under the age of 20 than girls, creating "an imminent generation of excess men," a study released Friday said.
For the next twenty years, China will have increasingly more men than women of reproductive age, according to the paper published on-line by the British Medical Journal.
"Nothing can be done now to prevent this," the researchers said.
Chinese government planners have long known that the urge of couples to have sons was skewing the gender balance of the population. But the study by two Chinese university professors and a London researcher provides some of the first hard data on the extent and the factors contributing to the disparity.
In 2005 , they found, China had more than 1.1 million excess male births. There were 120 boys born for every 100 girls. This problem seems to surpass that of any other country, they said - a finding they wrote that was perhaps not surprising in light of China's one-child policy.
They blamed the imbalance almost entirely upon decisions by couples to abort female fetuses. The trend toward more male than female children intensified steadily after 1986, they said, as ultrasound tests and abortion became more available. "Sex selective abortion accounts for almost all the excess males," the paper said.
The researchers said the disparity was sharpest among one-to-four year olds, a sign that the worst imbalances among the adult population lie ahead. They also found greater distortion in provinces that allow rural couples a second child if the first is a girl or in cases of hardship.
Those couples were determined to ensure they had at least one son, they noted. Among children born second, there were 143 boys for 100 girls, the data showed.
The Chinese government is openly concerned "about the consequences of large numbers of excess men for social stability and security," the researchers said. But "although some imaginative and extreme solutions have been suggested," they wrote, China will have too many men for a generation to come.
They said enforcing the ban against sex-selective abortions could normalize the sex ratio in the future.
The study was conducted by Wei Xingzhu, a Zhejiang Normal University professor; Li Lu, a Zhejiang University professor, and Therese Hesketh, a University College London lecturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/world/asia/11china.html?ref=global-home
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
You know it's a slow news day when I start talking about China's one-child policy.
I wonder how the geniuses in the Chinese Communist government couldn't forsee this.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Obama Was For War Spending; Then Against It; Now For It Again
PObama Seeks $83B for War Spending in Iraq, Afghanistan
President Obama's request, including money to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan, would push the costs of the two wars to almost $1 trillion since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to the Congressional Research Service. AP
Thursday, April 09, 2009
President Obama asked Congress on Thursday for $83.4 billion for U.S. military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pressing for special troop funding that he opposed two years ago when he was senator and George W. Bush was president.
Obama's request, including money to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan, would push the costs of the two wars to almost $1 trillion since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to the Congressional Research Service. The additional money would cover operations into the fall.
Obama is also requesting $350 million in new funding to upgrade security along the U.S.-Mexico border and to combat narcoterrorists, along with another $400 million in counterinsurgency aid to Pakistan.
"Nearly 95 percent of these funds will be used to support our men and women in uniform as they help the people of Iraq to take responsibility for their own future -- and work to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan," Obama wrote in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, acknowledged that Obama has been critical of Bush's use of similar special legislation to pay for the wars. He said it was needed this time because the money will be required by summer, before Congress is likely to complete its normal appropriations process.
"This will be the last supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan. The process by which this has been funded over the course of the past many years, the president has discussed and will change," Gibbs said.
Last June, Congress approved $66 billion in advance 2009 funding for military operations. All told, the Pentagon would receive $142 billion in war funding for the budget year ending on Sept. 30.
The request is likely to win easy approval from the Democratic-controlled Congress, despite frustration among some liberals over the pace of troop withdrawals and Obama's plans for a large residual force of up to 50,000 troops -- about one-third of the force now there -- who will train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and personnel and conduct anti-terror operations.
The official request was sent early Thursday evening.
The request would fund an average force level in Iraq of 140,000 U.S. troops. It would also finance Obama's initiative to boost troop levels in Afghanistan to more than 60,000 from the current 39,000. And it would provide $2.2 billion to accelerate the Pentagon's plans to increase the overall size of the U.S. military, including a 547,400-person active-duty Army.
Some Democrats were not pleased.
"This funding will do two things -- it will prolong our occupation of Iraq through at least the end of 2011, and it will deepen and expand our military presence in Afghanistan indefinitely," said anti-war Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif. "Instead of attempting to find military solutions to the problems we face in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Obama must fundamentally change the mission in both countries to focus on promoting reconciliation, economic development, humanitarian aid, and regional diplomatic efforts."
But House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio predicted that Republicans would overwhelmingly support the request, provided congressional Democrats don't seek to "micromanage" the war by adding a timeline or other restrictions on the ability of military officials to carry on the fight.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover from the Bush administration, said, "The reality is the alternative to the supplemental is a sudden and precipitous withdrawal of the United States from both places, and I don't know anybody who thinks that's a good idea." He said, "The reality is it would put everything we have achieved in Iraq at tremendous risk, and I believe it would greatly endanger our troops."
Obama was a harsh critic of the Iraq war as a presidential candidate, a stance that attracted support from the Democratic Party's liberal base and helped him secure his party's nomination. He opposed an infusion of war funding in 2007 after Bush used a veto to force Congress to remove a withdrawal timeline from the $99 billion measure.
But he supported a war funding bill last year that also included about $25 billion for domestic programs. Obama also voted for war funding in 2006, before he announced his candidacy for president.
The request includes $75.8 billion for the military and more than $7 billion in foreign aid. Pakistan, a key ally in the fight against al-Qaida, will receive $400 million in aid to combat insurgents.
The upcoming debate in Congress is likely to provide an early test of Obama's efforts to remake the Pentagon and its much-criticized weapons procurement system. He is requesting four F-22 fighter jets costing about $600 million as part of the war funding package but wants to shut the F-22 program down after that.
The special measure would include $3.6 billion for the Afghanistan National Army.
The White House wants the bill for the president's signature by Memorial Day, said a House Democratic aide.
Obama announced plans in February to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq on a 19-month timetable.
His new request would push the war and diplomatic money approved for 2009 to about $150 billion. The totals were $171 billion for 2007 and $188 billion for 2008, the year Bush increased the tempo of military operations in a generally successful effort to quell the Iraq insurgency.
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/09/obama-seek-b-war-spending/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Major war-funding legislation while Barack Obama was in the Senate, and how he voted:
_May 2005: Congress approved an $82 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and international anti-terrorism efforts. Obama voted yes.
_June 2006: Congress cleared a $94.5 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as provide aid to hurricane victims. Obama voted yes.
_September 2006: Congress cleared a $448 billion Pentagon funding bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama voted yes.
_April 2007: Congress cleared a $124 billion spending bill that provided $90 billion for war costs but mandated the withdrawal of U.S. troops within six months. Obama voted yes, but President George W. Bush vetoed the legislation.
_May 2007: Congress approved a roughly $100 billion spending measure to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and domestic projects, including hurricane relief. Obama voted no.
_December 2007: Congress cleared a $555 billion catchall spending bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama did not vote.
_June 2008: Congress approved a measure to spend $162 billion for war costs as well as provide a 13-week extension of unemployment benefits and emergency relief for the flood-ravaged Midwest. Obama voted yes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090409/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_war_costs_votes_1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
While Obama is doing the right thing funding our troops, it is still a bit confusing because contradictory to his stance on funding the war over the last few years.
He spent two out of the last three years voting against spending on the war. He only voted for it when it was advantageous for him to do so to seem more moderate last year. It again makes me wonder who Obama really is.
I, also, like that he is trying to strengthen security at the US-Mexico border. However, just throwing money at the problem won't fix it. Let's see how they use the extra funds.
President Obama's request, including money to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan, would push the costs of the two wars to almost $1 trillion since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to the Congressional Research Service. AP
Thursday, April 09, 2009
President Obama asked Congress on Thursday for $83.4 billion for U.S. military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pressing for special troop funding that he opposed two years ago when he was senator and George W. Bush was president.
Obama's request, including money to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan, would push the costs of the two wars to almost $1 trillion since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to the Congressional Research Service. The additional money would cover operations into the fall.
Obama is also requesting $350 million in new funding to upgrade security along the U.S.-Mexico border and to combat narcoterrorists, along with another $400 million in counterinsurgency aid to Pakistan.
"Nearly 95 percent of these funds will be used to support our men and women in uniform as they help the people of Iraq to take responsibility for their own future -- and work to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan," Obama wrote in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, acknowledged that Obama has been critical of Bush's use of similar special legislation to pay for the wars. He said it was needed this time because the money will be required by summer, before Congress is likely to complete its normal appropriations process.
"This will be the last supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan. The process by which this has been funded over the course of the past many years, the president has discussed and will change," Gibbs said.
Last June, Congress approved $66 billion in advance 2009 funding for military operations. All told, the Pentagon would receive $142 billion in war funding for the budget year ending on Sept. 30.
The request is likely to win easy approval from the Democratic-controlled Congress, despite frustration among some liberals over the pace of troop withdrawals and Obama's plans for a large residual force of up to 50,000 troops -- about one-third of the force now there -- who will train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and personnel and conduct anti-terror operations.
The official request was sent early Thursday evening.
The request would fund an average force level in Iraq of 140,000 U.S. troops. It would also finance Obama's initiative to boost troop levels in Afghanistan to more than 60,000 from the current 39,000. And it would provide $2.2 billion to accelerate the Pentagon's plans to increase the overall size of the U.S. military, including a 547,400-person active-duty Army.
Some Democrats were not pleased.
"This funding will do two things -- it will prolong our occupation of Iraq through at least the end of 2011, and it will deepen and expand our military presence in Afghanistan indefinitely," said anti-war Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif. "Instead of attempting to find military solutions to the problems we face in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Obama must fundamentally change the mission in both countries to focus on promoting reconciliation, economic development, humanitarian aid, and regional diplomatic efforts."
But House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio predicted that Republicans would overwhelmingly support the request, provided congressional Democrats don't seek to "micromanage" the war by adding a timeline or other restrictions on the ability of military officials to carry on the fight.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover from the Bush administration, said, "The reality is the alternative to the supplemental is a sudden and precipitous withdrawal of the United States from both places, and I don't know anybody who thinks that's a good idea." He said, "The reality is it would put everything we have achieved in Iraq at tremendous risk, and I believe it would greatly endanger our troops."
Obama was a harsh critic of the Iraq war as a presidential candidate, a stance that attracted support from the Democratic Party's liberal base and helped him secure his party's nomination. He opposed an infusion of war funding in 2007 after Bush used a veto to force Congress to remove a withdrawal timeline from the $99 billion measure.
But he supported a war funding bill last year that also included about $25 billion for domestic programs. Obama also voted for war funding in 2006, before he announced his candidacy for president.
The request includes $75.8 billion for the military and more than $7 billion in foreign aid. Pakistan, a key ally in the fight against al-Qaida, will receive $400 million in aid to combat insurgents.
The upcoming debate in Congress is likely to provide an early test of Obama's efforts to remake the Pentagon and its much-criticized weapons procurement system. He is requesting four F-22 fighter jets costing about $600 million as part of the war funding package but wants to shut the F-22 program down after that.
The special measure would include $3.6 billion for the Afghanistan National Army.
The White House wants the bill for the president's signature by Memorial Day, said a House Democratic aide.
Obama announced plans in February to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq on a 19-month timetable.
His new request would push the war and diplomatic money approved for 2009 to about $150 billion. The totals were $171 billion for 2007 and $188 billion for 2008, the year Bush increased the tempo of military operations in a generally successful effort to quell the Iraq insurgency.
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/09/obama-seek-b-war-spending/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Major war-funding legislation while Barack Obama was in the Senate, and how he voted:
_May 2005: Congress approved an $82 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and international anti-terrorism efforts. Obama voted yes.
_June 2006: Congress cleared a $94.5 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as provide aid to hurricane victims. Obama voted yes.
_September 2006: Congress cleared a $448 billion Pentagon funding bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama voted yes.
_April 2007: Congress cleared a $124 billion spending bill that provided $90 billion for war costs but mandated the withdrawal of U.S. troops within six months. Obama voted yes, but President George W. Bush vetoed the legislation.
_May 2007: Congress approved a roughly $100 billion spending measure to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and domestic projects, including hurricane relief. Obama voted no.
_December 2007: Congress cleared a $555 billion catchall spending bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama did not vote.
_June 2008: Congress approved a measure to spend $162 billion for war costs as well as provide a 13-week extension of unemployment benefits and emergency relief for the flood-ravaged Midwest. Obama voted yes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090409/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_war_costs_votes_1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
While Obama is doing the right thing funding our troops, it is still a bit confusing because contradictory to his stance on funding the war over the last few years.
He spent two out of the last three years voting against spending on the war. He only voted for it when it was advantageous for him to do so to seem more moderate last year. It again makes me wonder who Obama really is.
I, also, like that he is trying to strengthen security at the US-Mexico border. However, just throwing money at the problem won't fix it. Let's see how they use the extra funds.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Card Check Puts One Foot in Grave As Another Democrat Bails
Lincoln commits to opposing Card Check posted at 8:49 am on April 7, 2009
by Ed Morrissey
Previously, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) had only wavered in public on Card Check, along with a few other Democrats. Yesterday, she fully and publicly committed to opposing Big Labor’s crown jewel of legislation, which should drive the stake a little deeper into the heart of the Orwellian named Employee Free Choice Act. Unlike Arlen Specter, Lincoln rejected the bill itself as well as its timing:
“'I cannot support that bill,' Lincoln said, according to one attendee. 'Cannot support that bill in its current form. Cannot support and will not support moving it forward in its current form.'
"The measure, better known as the 'card check' bill, has been fought by business groups and championed by labor, after intense lobbying by both factions. …
“'While I may not have been clear about my position in the past, I am stating today that I cannot support Employee Free Choice Act in its current form and I can’t support efforts to bring it to Senate consideration in its current form,' Lincoln said in a statement late Monday afternoon."
Card Check now looks dead enough that Harry Reid may well decide not to bring it to the floor at all. He has no Republican support, and this statement from Lincoln strongly implies that she will join a filibuster to keep Reid from “bring[ing] it to Senate consideration”. Dianne Feinstein has indicated opposition, as have Tim Johnson and Ben Nelson, the latter who has also committed to a no vote. He’s not going to come close to 60 votes, and he may in the end want to spare himself and Obama the embarrassment of Democrats supporting the Republican filibuster.
Thankfully, the secret ballot still means something to Americans.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/07/lincoln-commits-to-opposing-card-check/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is good news for everyone.
Unions that are too strong will topple the companies, industries, and economies that it infests. It was one of the reasons why the Great Depression lasted as long as it did.
Not only is it bad for business, it also opens the door for fraud, corruption, and intimidation. It would bring the Godfather and Sopranos to life for many in this country. Big Labor will come to workers houses to "make them an offer they can't refuse".
We may have dodged a bullet this time.
by Ed Morrissey
Previously, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) had only wavered in public on Card Check, along with a few other Democrats. Yesterday, she fully and publicly committed to opposing Big Labor’s crown jewel of legislation, which should drive the stake a little deeper into the heart of the Orwellian named Employee Free Choice Act. Unlike Arlen Specter, Lincoln rejected the bill itself as well as its timing:
“'I cannot support that bill,' Lincoln said, according to one attendee. 'Cannot support that bill in its current form. Cannot support and will not support moving it forward in its current form.'
"The measure, better known as the 'card check' bill, has been fought by business groups and championed by labor, after intense lobbying by both factions. …
“'While I may not have been clear about my position in the past, I am stating today that I cannot support Employee Free Choice Act in its current form and I can’t support efforts to bring it to Senate consideration in its current form,' Lincoln said in a statement late Monday afternoon."
Card Check now looks dead enough that Harry Reid may well decide not to bring it to the floor at all. He has no Republican support, and this statement from Lincoln strongly implies that she will join a filibuster to keep Reid from “bring[ing] it to Senate consideration”. Dianne Feinstein has indicated opposition, as have Tim Johnson and Ben Nelson, the latter who has also committed to a no vote. He’s not going to come close to 60 votes, and he may in the end want to spare himself and Obama the embarrassment of Democrats supporting the Republican filibuster.
Thankfully, the secret ballot still means something to Americans.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/07/lincoln-commits-to-opposing-card-check/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is good news for everyone.
Unions that are too strong will topple the companies, industries, and economies that it infests. It was one of the reasons why the Great Depression lasted as long as it did.
Not only is it bad for business, it also opens the door for fraud, corruption, and intimidation. It would bring the Godfather and Sopranos to life for many in this country. Big Labor will come to workers houses to "make them an offer they can't refuse".
We may have dodged a bullet this time.
Iran Going After Nuclear Weapons: Who Knew?
Alleged Iranian Nuke Smuggling Plot Involving New York City Banks Uncovered Tuesday, April 07, 2009
A New York district attorney announced a sweeping indictment, charging a businessman with setting up accounts at New York banks to help Iran get nuclear weapons materials.
The 118-count indictment from Manhattan DA Robert Morgenthau's office accused Chinese national Li Fang Wei and his company LIMMT Economic and Trade Co. LLC of violating a United Nations embargo with nearly 60 transactions over the past two years.
The indictment said Li used shell companies and bank accounts with aliases to transfer money for the transactions between November 2006 and September 2008.
Morgenthau said Tuesday that the payments were sent to and from a limited number of Chinese banks that handled accounts for Li and his companies. He said he had jurisdiction because Manhattan banks were used.
"This case will cut off a major source of supply to Iran and it shows how they are going ahead full steam to get a nuclear bomb," a law enforcement source told the New York Daily News. "Long-range missiles they pretty much have already."
On Tuesday, the U.S. Treasury Department designated Li's businesses and six other Iranian companies for their role in the alleged proliferation network.
"We are acting under our Security Council and other international obligations to prevent these entities from abusing the financial system to pursue centrifuge and missile technology for Iran," Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey said.
The U.N. embargo bans the transmission to Iran of certain missile and nuclear technology that would permit the development of nuclear weapons.
The company is headquartered in Dalian, China, where Li resides. Morgenthau said he will ask the government there to extradite him to the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513013,00.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is just more proof that no matter how much smoke Iran blows up our collective backsides they are and always have been trying to get nuclear weapons. We must never forget that and never let up on them from stopping. If they ever do succeed, it won't be bad for those around them like Israel, but they could turn around and give one to a terrorist to detonate in the US.
A New York district attorney announced a sweeping indictment, charging a businessman with setting up accounts at New York banks to help Iran get nuclear weapons materials.
The 118-count indictment from Manhattan DA Robert Morgenthau's office accused Chinese national Li Fang Wei and his company LIMMT Economic and Trade Co. LLC of violating a United Nations embargo with nearly 60 transactions over the past two years.
The indictment said Li used shell companies and bank accounts with aliases to transfer money for the transactions between November 2006 and September 2008.
Morgenthau said Tuesday that the payments were sent to and from a limited number of Chinese banks that handled accounts for Li and his companies. He said he had jurisdiction because Manhattan banks were used.
"This case will cut off a major source of supply to Iran and it shows how they are going ahead full steam to get a nuclear bomb," a law enforcement source told the New York Daily News. "Long-range missiles they pretty much have already."
On Tuesday, the U.S. Treasury Department designated Li's businesses and six other Iranian companies for their role in the alleged proliferation network.
"We are acting under our Security Council and other international obligations to prevent these entities from abusing the financial system to pursue centrifuge and missile technology for Iran," Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey said.
The U.N. embargo bans the transmission to Iran of certain missile and nuclear technology that would permit the development of nuclear weapons.
The company is headquartered in Dalian, China, where Li resides. Morgenthau said he will ask the government there to extradite him to the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513013,00.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is just more proof that no matter how much smoke Iran blows up our collective backsides they are and always have been trying to get nuclear weapons. We must never forget that and never let up on them from stopping. If they ever do succeed, it won't be bad for those around them like Israel, but they could turn around and give one to a terrorist to detonate in the US.
Obama Nominee That Equated Pregnancy to Slavery Faces Strong GOP Opposition
Senate GOP Considers Filibuster of Obama Judicial Nominee Who Compared Pregnancy to Slavery
Republicans are considering a filibuster aimed at blocking the confirmation of Dawn Johnsen, who conservatives claim once compared "forced pregnancy" with slavery. FOXNews.com
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
President Obama's nominee to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel once compared "forced pregnancy" with slavery. Now Republicans are considering a filibuster to block her confirmation.
The controversy stems from comments made 20 years ago by Dawn Johnsen, a law professor at Indiana University, whose nomination is pending before the full Senate.
In a brief filed when she was a lawyer with the National Abortion Rights Action League, Johnsen cited a footnote that said forcing women to bear children was "disturbingly suggestive of involuntary servitude, prohibited by the 13th Amendment, in that forced pregnancy requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state's asserted interest."
At her confirmation hearing last month, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., asked whether Johnsen had said abortion rights should be protected by the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery.
"It seems to me just candidly beyond the pale," said Specter, who supports abortion rights.
But Johnsen said she merely suggested an analogy in the footnote and "never believed the 13th Amendment had any role" in the abortion issue.
At least 45 House Republicans have co-signed a letter to Obama asking him to withdraw Johnsen's nomination because of her "brazen" abortion rights stance.
But supporters of Johnsen are fighting back, most notably her former employer.
NARAL said this week it is mobilizing its nationwide network of activists and supporters to pressure the Senate to confirm Johnsen and two other Obama nominees -- Judge David Hamilton and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius -- and stop what it deems attacks on nominees who support abortion rights. Filibusters won't be tolerated, the group said.
"The use of the 'F' word when referring to any of these nominees is unacceptable -- and this threat will not go unanswered," NARAL president Nancy Keenan said in a press release.
"Our activists will make it clear to their senators that derailing nominees for critical positions in the Obama administration and in the federal court simply because they have taken pro-choice positions is not an option. We will keep up the pressure until we go three for three and see these distinguished nominees confirmed by the Senate."
Ryan Patmintra, a spokesman for Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., a member of the Judiciary Committee, told FOXNews.com that Specter's vote will determine whether Johnsen gets confirmed because of his ranking status on the Judiciary Committee.
His moderate position also gives him considerable influence in the Senate where Democrats hold a 58-41 majority and need at least two Republicans to cross the aisle to block filibusters.
Specter's office did not respond to a request for an interview. But a Senate aide to the Judiciary Committee told FOXNews.com that there's no way Specter will vote for Johnsen's nomination because it could damage his prospects in what is shaping up to be a tough primary next year against conservative Pat Toomey, a former congressman and current president of the Club for Growth.
FOXNews.com Stephen Clark contributed to this report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/04/obama-judicial-nominee-faces-republican-opposition-supporting-abortion-rights/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
While it's true that we shouldn't just filibbuster everyone that is pro-abortion because that would mean that Obama would leave only a small handful of Democrats for him to choose from. However, we should be able to block someone that is outside of the mainstream belief system of America.
Most people would not even think to equate pregancy and motherhood to slavery and involuntary servitude. She may be backing off from that type of language, but she isn't denying it either. This makes her unacceptable.
NARAL needs to come to its senses. They can't just say that the nominees are above reproach because they are one of NARAL's buddies.
The turncoat caucus will play a big role again. While the Maine senators won't be up for re-election until 2012 and 2014, Specter is already in a fight to get re-elected in Pennsylvania. Specter may receive pressure from voters in his state to vote for the filibuster that he may have not received in a non-campaign yeer or at least not such a highly contested one.
Republicans are considering a filibuster aimed at blocking the confirmation of Dawn Johnsen, who conservatives claim once compared "forced pregnancy" with slavery. FOXNews.com
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
President Obama's nominee to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel once compared "forced pregnancy" with slavery. Now Republicans are considering a filibuster to block her confirmation.
The controversy stems from comments made 20 years ago by Dawn Johnsen, a law professor at Indiana University, whose nomination is pending before the full Senate.
In a brief filed when she was a lawyer with the National Abortion Rights Action League, Johnsen cited a footnote that said forcing women to bear children was "disturbingly suggestive of involuntary servitude, prohibited by the 13th Amendment, in that forced pregnancy requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state's asserted interest."
At her confirmation hearing last month, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., asked whether Johnsen had said abortion rights should be protected by the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery.
"It seems to me just candidly beyond the pale," said Specter, who supports abortion rights.
But Johnsen said she merely suggested an analogy in the footnote and "never believed the 13th Amendment had any role" in the abortion issue.
At least 45 House Republicans have co-signed a letter to Obama asking him to withdraw Johnsen's nomination because of her "brazen" abortion rights stance.
But supporters of Johnsen are fighting back, most notably her former employer.
NARAL said this week it is mobilizing its nationwide network of activists and supporters to pressure the Senate to confirm Johnsen and two other Obama nominees -- Judge David Hamilton and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius -- and stop what it deems attacks on nominees who support abortion rights. Filibusters won't be tolerated, the group said.
"The use of the 'F' word when referring to any of these nominees is unacceptable -- and this threat will not go unanswered," NARAL president Nancy Keenan said in a press release.
"Our activists will make it clear to their senators that derailing nominees for critical positions in the Obama administration and in the federal court simply because they have taken pro-choice positions is not an option. We will keep up the pressure until we go three for three and see these distinguished nominees confirmed by the Senate."
Ryan Patmintra, a spokesman for Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., a member of the Judiciary Committee, told FOXNews.com that Specter's vote will determine whether Johnsen gets confirmed because of his ranking status on the Judiciary Committee.
His moderate position also gives him considerable influence in the Senate where Democrats hold a 58-41 majority and need at least two Republicans to cross the aisle to block filibusters.
Specter's office did not respond to a request for an interview. But a Senate aide to the Judiciary Committee told FOXNews.com that there's no way Specter will vote for Johnsen's nomination because it could damage his prospects in what is shaping up to be a tough primary next year against conservative Pat Toomey, a former congressman and current president of the Club for Growth.
FOXNews.com Stephen Clark contributed to this report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/04/obama-judicial-nominee-faces-republican-opposition-supporting-abortion-rights/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
While it's true that we shouldn't just filibbuster everyone that is pro-abortion because that would mean that Obama would leave only a small handful of Democrats for him to choose from. However, we should be able to block someone that is outside of the mainstream belief system of America.
Most people would not even think to equate pregancy and motherhood to slavery and involuntary servitude. She may be backing off from that type of language, but she isn't denying it either. This makes her unacceptable.
NARAL needs to come to its senses. They can't just say that the nominees are above reproach because they are one of NARAL's buddies.
The turncoat caucus will play a big role again. While the Maine senators won't be up for re-election until 2012 and 2014, Specter is already in a fight to get re-elected in Pennsylvania. Specter may receive pressure from voters in his state to vote for the filibuster that he may have not received in a non-campaign yeer or at least not such a highly contested one.
N. Korea's "Dear Leader" Allegedly Cried Because He Wasted Money On Dud Rocket Instead of Food
North Korean Media: Kim Jong-Il Sobbed During Rocket Launch
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
North Korea's state-run media reported Tuesday that Kim Jong-Il shed tears of regret during the country's controversial rocket launch because he could not use the launch funds to provide aid to his people, the AFP reported.
The country on Tuesday also released footage of the weekend launch, along with the first video of Kim since his reported stroke in August, according to South Korean media.
Kim "felt regret for not being able to spend more money on the people's livelihoods and was choked with sobs," AFP quoted ruling communist party paper Rodong Sinmun as saying.
"Chants of jubilation are reverberating throughout the country on the news that our satellite is beaming back the 'Song of General Kim Il-Sung' and the 'Song of General Kim Jong-Il,'" the paper said, according to AFP.
State-run television aired video of an apparently healthy leader mingling with farmers and watching bears at the zoo.
What the TV didn't show was just as notable: footage of the "Dear Leader" during the 3 1/2 months after he is believed to have suffered a stroke that sparked fears of a succession crisis in the poor, nuclear-armed nation.
Kim, 67, is expected to make a triumphant public return when he presides over the first session of the country's new parliament Thursday for re-election as chairman of the powerful National Defense Commission.
North Korea claims Sunday's rocket launch shot a satellite into space, where it allegedly is playing melodious odes to Kim and his late father, who founded the reclusive communist country.
The U.S. and South Korea, however, say the rocket's second and third stages fell into the Pacific Ocean with the payload still attached. They say the launch was a cover for testing long-range missile technology.
Exclusive footage obtained Tuesday by APTN in Pyongyang showed a white rocket with "Chosun," the name North Koreans use for their country, emblazoned on the side in red. The 20-second clip shows the rocket blasting off, then blazing eastward across the sky.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513019,00.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Supposedly, "Dear Leader" cried because he wasted money on his rocket rather than on food for the starving poor in his country. That made me laugh so hard I spit out my coffee. It is a joke to think that he actually cared when every action says the complete opposite.
If you ask any of the starving peasants in N. Korea, which would you rather have a satellite in space or food for dinner. I guarantee you that most would go for the food. If N. Korea's dictator really cared about his people, he wouldn't of wasted the money he's using for his "space program" and gave the money instead to his impoverished citizens. The truth is that their "Dear Leader" couldn't care less about whether or not his people's stomachs were full everyday.
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
North Korea's state-run media reported Tuesday that Kim Jong-Il shed tears of regret during the country's controversial rocket launch because he could not use the launch funds to provide aid to his people, the AFP reported.
The country on Tuesday also released footage of the weekend launch, along with the first video of Kim since his reported stroke in August, according to South Korean media.
Kim "felt regret for not being able to spend more money on the people's livelihoods and was choked with sobs," AFP quoted ruling communist party paper Rodong Sinmun as saying.
"Chants of jubilation are reverberating throughout the country on the news that our satellite is beaming back the 'Song of General Kim Il-Sung' and the 'Song of General Kim Jong-Il,'" the paper said, according to AFP.
State-run television aired video of an apparently healthy leader mingling with farmers and watching bears at the zoo.
What the TV didn't show was just as notable: footage of the "Dear Leader" during the 3 1/2 months after he is believed to have suffered a stroke that sparked fears of a succession crisis in the poor, nuclear-armed nation.
Kim, 67, is expected to make a triumphant public return when he presides over the first session of the country's new parliament Thursday for re-election as chairman of the powerful National Defense Commission.
North Korea claims Sunday's rocket launch shot a satellite into space, where it allegedly is playing melodious odes to Kim and his late father, who founded the reclusive communist country.
The U.S. and South Korea, however, say the rocket's second and third stages fell into the Pacific Ocean with the payload still attached. They say the launch was a cover for testing long-range missile technology.
Exclusive footage obtained Tuesday by APTN in Pyongyang showed a white rocket with "Chosun," the name North Koreans use for their country, emblazoned on the side in red. The 20-second clip shows the rocket blasting off, then blazing eastward across the sky.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513019,00.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Supposedly, "Dear Leader" cried because he wasted money on his rocket rather than on food for the starving poor in his country. That made me laugh so hard I spit out my coffee. It is a joke to think that he actually cared when every action says the complete opposite.
If you ask any of the starving peasants in N. Korea, which would you rather have a satellite in space or food for dinner. I guarantee you that most would go for the food. If N. Korea's dictator really cared about his people, he wouldn't of wasted the money he's using for his "space program" and gave the money instead to his impoverished citizens. The truth is that their "Dear Leader" couldn't care less about whether or not his people's stomachs were full everyday.
Congressional Black Caucus Shmoozes With Cuban Dictators While Chastising America
U.S. Lawmakers Meet With Castros,
Push for New Policy on Cuba Three lawmakers who are members of the Congressional Black Caucus traveled to Cuba this week to encourage greater dialogue between the U.S. and the communist nation. By Chad Pergram FOXNews.com
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
WASHINGTON -- Former Cuban President Fidel Castro was "very engaging, very energetic," U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee, a California Democrat, said following a congressional delegation's meeting with the ailing revolutionary.
The delegation that traveled to Cuba featured six members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., and they returned to Washington late Tuesday afternoon and urged the United States government to begin steps to alter its relationship with Cuba.
"For the past 50 years, the United States has been swimming in the Caribbean Sea of delusion," said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., who described the United States as "the isolated nation" compared to European countries which have diplomatic ties with Havana.
"This is the dawning of a new day," Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., declared. "Fifty years of foolishness is over. It's time for the children to sit in the corner and the adults to take over."
Rush was one of three members of the delegation to meet with Fidel Castro. A meeting with his brother, Cuban leader Raul Castro, took place Monday.
Tuesday afternoon, the Cuban government released a statement that it indicated was Fidel Castro's assessment of a session he had with the lawmakers. In the statement, Castro said that one of the Members of Congress told him that the United States should "apologize" to Cuba. And another lawmaker told the former leader that despite the victory by President Obama, U.S. society is still "racist."
All members of the delegation denied that those two exchanges took place during their time with Fidel Castro.
The lawmakers encouraged the U.S. to launch a dialogue with Cuba and relieve trade and modify a 47-year-old American trade embargo against the island nation.
"You can't not talk to people and expect to get a desirable result," said Rep. Mel Watt, D-N.C., who added that the embargo "was not effective."
Rep. Laura Richardson, D-Calif., was one of three lawmakers who requested and met with Fidel Castro. She described him as alert and said the former Cuban dictator "looked directly into our eyes, quite aware of what was happening. He said to us, 'how can we help President Obama?'"
Rush indicated that it was time for Washington to remove Cuba from the list of terrorist nations. Rush dismissed Cuba as a security threat to the United States. He said that when he was a member of the Black Panthers in the 1960s, former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover warned that his organization as "the number one threat to national security.
"So I know foolhardy approaches and asinine labels when I see them, " said Rush. "American people need to be told the truth and they have been lied to for too long about the threat from Cuba."
Both Rep. Rush, an ordained Baptist minister, and Rep. Cleaver, a Methodist pastor, delivered sermons at churches while in Cuba.
The CBC members conceded there were limited discussions about human rights abuses in Cuba.
"We didn't talk about it much," said Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio. "You don't go into someone's house and insult them."
But Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Barbara Lee, D-Calif., who led the delegation said that Raul Castro indicated to her that "everything's on the table."
"Two sovereign nations should be able to sit down and talk about their differences, " Lee said.
The U.S. Air Force flew the Congressional Black Caucus delegation directly to Havana and not the American military base at Guantanamo Bay. The Air Force then gave each lawmaker a pin featuring adjoining American and Cuban flags to help identify them as members of the delegation.
FOX News' Mosheh Oinounou contributed to this report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/07/black-caucus-members-meet-fidel-castro/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is what Democrats do best: appeasing and cajoling despots. Heaping lavish amounts of praise to a tryrant while they attack their own country.
Is the "Caribbean Sea of delusion" anything like the Atlanitic Ocean of fantasy the Democrats seem to be living in, if they think that Castro and his ilk are going to change just because we say pretty please with sugar on top?
"It's time for the children to sit in the corner and the adults to take over."- Bobby Rush.
This is rich comin from the man who threw a temper tantrum like a 2-year old when Roland Burris wasn't going to be sat as a senator because of his involvment in Blago's scandals.
"I know foolhardy approaches and asinine labels when I see them."-Bobby Rush
Ha! Again, this is ridiculous coming from the man who throws around the "race card" like a weapon in order to get what he wants. To most people his antics are both foolhardy and asinine.
Why must we always be labeled as "racist"? Yes, we have racism in our past, but we've come a long way. As a whole, this country is not as racist as those that hurl those claims at us. We don't need to apologize to Castro for anything. I'm still waiting for the apology from him regarding his role in the Cuban Missle Crisis.
We probably should take Cuba off the terrorist list, if they aren't aiding terrorists. I would agree to giving more availability to Americans that have family in Cuba to visit their families. However, the trade embargo should stay in place.
I wish Democrats spent half the effort on making the British and other allied leaders happy than they do people that hate us.
Push for New Policy on Cuba Three lawmakers who are members of the Congressional Black Caucus traveled to Cuba this week to encourage greater dialogue between the U.S. and the communist nation. By Chad Pergram FOXNews.com
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
WASHINGTON -- Former Cuban President Fidel Castro was "very engaging, very energetic," U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee, a California Democrat, said following a congressional delegation's meeting with the ailing revolutionary.
The delegation that traveled to Cuba featured six members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., and they returned to Washington late Tuesday afternoon and urged the United States government to begin steps to alter its relationship with Cuba.
"For the past 50 years, the United States has been swimming in the Caribbean Sea of delusion," said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., who described the United States as "the isolated nation" compared to European countries which have diplomatic ties with Havana.
"This is the dawning of a new day," Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., declared. "Fifty years of foolishness is over. It's time for the children to sit in the corner and the adults to take over."
Rush was one of three members of the delegation to meet with Fidel Castro. A meeting with his brother, Cuban leader Raul Castro, took place Monday.
Tuesday afternoon, the Cuban government released a statement that it indicated was Fidel Castro's assessment of a session he had with the lawmakers. In the statement, Castro said that one of the Members of Congress told him that the United States should "apologize" to Cuba. And another lawmaker told the former leader that despite the victory by President Obama, U.S. society is still "racist."
All members of the delegation denied that those two exchanges took place during their time with Fidel Castro.
The lawmakers encouraged the U.S. to launch a dialogue with Cuba and relieve trade and modify a 47-year-old American trade embargo against the island nation.
"You can't not talk to people and expect to get a desirable result," said Rep. Mel Watt, D-N.C., who added that the embargo "was not effective."
Rep. Laura Richardson, D-Calif., was one of three lawmakers who requested and met with Fidel Castro. She described him as alert and said the former Cuban dictator "looked directly into our eyes, quite aware of what was happening. He said to us, 'how can we help President Obama?'"
Rush indicated that it was time for Washington to remove Cuba from the list of terrorist nations. Rush dismissed Cuba as a security threat to the United States. He said that when he was a member of the Black Panthers in the 1960s, former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover warned that his organization as "the number one threat to national security.
"So I know foolhardy approaches and asinine labels when I see them, " said Rush. "American people need to be told the truth and they have been lied to for too long about the threat from Cuba."
Both Rep. Rush, an ordained Baptist minister, and Rep. Cleaver, a Methodist pastor, delivered sermons at churches while in Cuba.
The CBC members conceded there were limited discussions about human rights abuses in Cuba.
"We didn't talk about it much," said Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio. "You don't go into someone's house and insult them."
But Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Barbara Lee, D-Calif., who led the delegation said that Raul Castro indicated to her that "everything's on the table."
"Two sovereign nations should be able to sit down and talk about their differences, " Lee said.
The U.S. Air Force flew the Congressional Black Caucus delegation directly to Havana and not the American military base at Guantanamo Bay. The Air Force then gave each lawmaker a pin featuring adjoining American and Cuban flags to help identify them as members of the delegation.
FOX News' Mosheh Oinounou contributed to this report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/07/black-caucus-members-meet-fidel-castro/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is what Democrats do best: appeasing and cajoling despots. Heaping lavish amounts of praise to a tryrant while they attack their own country.
Is the "Caribbean Sea of delusion" anything like the Atlanitic Ocean of fantasy the Democrats seem to be living in, if they think that Castro and his ilk are going to change just because we say pretty please with sugar on top?
"It's time for the children to sit in the corner and the adults to take over."- Bobby Rush.
This is rich comin from the man who threw a temper tantrum like a 2-year old when Roland Burris wasn't going to be sat as a senator because of his involvment in Blago's scandals.
"I know foolhardy approaches and asinine labels when I see them."-Bobby Rush
Ha! Again, this is ridiculous coming from the man who throws around the "race card" like a weapon in order to get what he wants. To most people his antics are both foolhardy and asinine.
Why must we always be labeled as "racist"? Yes, we have racism in our past, but we've come a long way. As a whole, this country is not as racist as those that hurl those claims at us. We don't need to apologize to Castro for anything. I'm still waiting for the apology from him regarding his role in the Cuban Missle Crisis.
We probably should take Cuba off the terrorist list, if they aren't aiding terrorists. I would agree to giving more availability to Americans that have family in Cuba to visit their families. However, the trade embargo should stay in place.
I wish Democrats spent half the effort on making the British and other allied leaders happy than they do people that hate us.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Obama Channels Biden: Thinks Austrians Speak Austrian
American President thinks ‘Austrian’ is a language
Can you say Dohbama? I knew you could. Posted by Josh Painter
Sunday, April 5th at 5:50PM EDT
President Barack Obama made a world-class gaffe in front of the entire planet’s press during his news conference in Strausbourg, France. Here’s an excerpt from the transcript released by the White House on April 4, 2009. Notice the part which I have put in bold type:
Q "Sonja Sagmeister from a little country, Austria, from Austrian Television. Mr. President, you said you came here to learn and to listen. So a quite personal question — what did you learn from your personal talk with the European leaders? And did this change in a certain way your views on Europe and its politics?"
PRESIDENT OBAMA: "It’s an interesting question. I had already formed relationships with many of them. Some of them I had met when I traveled through Europe before my election. Some of them I had met because they came to Washington after the election. This is the first time I’ve been in a forum with so many of them at the same time.
"I’m extraordinarily impressed by the quality of leadership. I am constantly reminded that although there are cultural differences that are important and that we have to be sensitive to, what we have in common between Europe and the United States so vastly exceeds any differences that we have; that we should not forget why we are allies, and we should be careful about some of the easy stereotypes that take place on both sides of the borders.
"It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate. There’s a lot of — I don’t know what the term is in Austrian — wheeling and dealing — and, you know, people are pursuing their interests, and everybody has their own particular issues and their own particular politics.
"But I think it’s a testimony to the success of the European Union, as well as NATO, that on very important issues, each leader seems to be able to rise above parochial interests in order to achieve common objectives. And I think that has accounted for some of the extraordinary success and prosperity of Europe over the last several years."
So what’s so embarrassingly wrong about what the president said? Only this:
"German is the official language of Austria. Worldwide, 10 million native speakers speak German and it ranks as the tenth most spoken language in the world. The total number of German speakers leaps to around 130 million people if non-native speakers are included. Linguists class German as an Indo-European language. It is also the official language of Germany, Belgium, Liechtenstein, and part of Switzerland, Luxembourg, and others."
In other words, this is no such language as “Austrian.” Isn’t there someone on the White House staff, a director of Protocol or something, whose job it is to make sure the leader of the free world knows these things? Or did no one say anything because they assumed that it was reasonably common knowledge?
You probably recall the howls from the drive-by media and the leftosphere when Fox News’ Carl Cameron said that he was told “by folks” - folks without names, apparently - that Sarah Palin didn’t know that Africa was a continent. The press and “progressive” bloggers had a field day with it, even though it was only a rumor and had never been confirmed by anyone willing to put their name behind it.
For that, Gov. Palin was maligned. A “dubious grasp of geography,” sniffed HuffPo’s Nicholas Graham. Wonkette, dripping with superiority, posted, “And did we mention that she thought Africa was a country, and not a continent? Wait until she hears about Australia: it’s both.” Salon’s Anthony Freed wrote:
“Stunningly, but not surprisingly, the gal who was 3% of the vote and an old man’s heart beat away from the presidency thinks Africa is a country in and of itself.” It would later come to light that the “Martin Eisenstadt” who took credit for passing the tidbit along to Fox News does not exist. It was a hoax. But many Palin critics still believe the continent meme, even though it’s never been more than a rumor.
Obama’s ignorance of Austria and what language is spoken there, however, is a unicorn of a different hue. It’s on the official White House transcript. It’s on video (at the 28:30 mark). Many people know that German is spoken in Austria, and they didn’t have to look it up. So where are the Obama-worshippers on this? They are curiously silent. No snickering from HuffPo, no acidic Salon snorting, no “dumb as a bag of hammers” diaries from Wonkette. The double standard runs deep and wide, and there’s no ceiling, glass or otherwise, limiting the heights to which the Left’s hypocrisy can soar.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.redstate.com/josh_painter/2009/04/05/obama-thinks-austrian-is-a-language/
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
That's as stupid as saying American is the official language of the United States.
While it is a minor gaffe on its own, the amount of gaffes seem to be mounting. It makes Obama look like as much of an idiot as the left thought Bush was. He does seem to be a bit clueless about stuff like this that he really should know better. It's getting a bit embarrassing.
As much the left and media pummeled Bush for every little mispronunciation and syntax error he made, they are curiously silent about every gaffe made by The One. There are not any snide comments in editorials or any jokes by late night comedians.
David Axelrod: Bush More of a "Statesman" Than Cheney, To Axelrod: Define Statesman
My Thoughts
This again shows what it actually takes for a Democrat to compliment and like a Republican. They need to shut up and let them do what they want.
The main difference between what Bush and Cheney have done since leaving office is that Bush has refused to say anything about what he thinks of Obama's plans and policies. On the other hand, Cheney hasn't been shy to tell anyone that will listen that he doesn't like what Obama has been doing so far.
In response to what Axelrod actually said about Al-Quaeda still being around after 7 years, it is a fact that they haven't been able to hit us domestically since 9/11. Is that fact lost on him? While it is true that they are still around, their ability to actually pull something significant off has been severely crippled. They have been virtually impotent over the last 7 years. They've been mostly cornered in a small part of Pakistan. The only reason why we can't go into Pakistan and retrieve them is that it would mean invading a third country and adding another stage to the War on Terror. We are just not able to pull it off militarily or willing to ostracize an ally.
Jury Still Out on Obama's First Electoral Test of His Performance as NY-20's Election Goes Into OT
New York Congressional Election Tied as Officials Prepare for Absentee Count
Democrat Scott Murphy and Republican Jim Tedisco have 77,225 votes each, according to the New York Board of Elections.
FOXNews.com Friday, April 03, 2009
The special U.S. House election in an upstate New York congressional district is now exactly tied.
Democrat Scott Murphy and Republican Jim Tedisco have 77,225 votes each, according to the New York Board of Elections.
Murphy previously was leading Tedisco by 25 votes, but that lead narrowed as officials conducted a mandatory check of voting machine results.
John Conklin, spokesman for the state elections board, told FOXNews.com the outcome of the race will not be known for "several weeks at least."
"The lawyers are now involved, so everything will get much slower," he said.
Conklin said officials probably will begin Tuesday counting the absentee ballots, more than 10,000 of which were sent out.
He said a recount, though not mandatory under New York law, is a possibility.
The election in the 20th Congressional District was held to select a replacement for Kirsten Gillibrand, who replaced Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate when Clinton took over as secretary of state.
-----------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/03/new-york-congressional-race-tied-officials-prepare-absentee-count/
-----------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
No matter how much Ashley was trying to belittle what Tedisco's achievement in the election so far, it was a good showing for Jim Tedisco, GOP, and to a certain extant Michael Steele.
It is true that more people in the district does have more registered Republicans than Democrats, but it is also a district that has voted for Democrats more often in the last few elections. They voted for Kirsten Gillibrand and Barack Obama. In addition, the district voted for Democrats in federal senate elections for Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton since 2000.
Given the momentum the Democrats have had in the district and Obama's deflating but still strong popularity, Murphy should have been able to ride Obama's coattails and win pretty comfortably. He shouldn't have tied and possibly lose in overtime.
It isn't good news for Obama to be having so much trouble holding onto his party's popularity so early in his term. This could be another example of a possible shift back to Republicans. The very heavily Democratic New Orleans district also went red in December. Obama's policies have consistently not seen the approval of voters in recent polls. Eventually the disapproval of his individual policies will catch up to his overall job performance numbers. His overall numbers are gradually starting to reflect that.
"Gird Your Loins": N. Korea Sends Obama Message in a Rocket to Test His Mettle
NKorean rocket appears to fizzle, prompts outcry
By PAUL ALEXANDER, Associated Press Writer Paul Alexander, Associated Press Writer – 17 mins ago
SEOUL, South Korea – The rocket launched by nuclear-armed North Korea on Sunday appears to have fizzled in the Pacific Ocean, but positioned a defiant Kim Jong Il to make demands from an international community worried that it indicates the capacity to fire a long-range missile.
President Barack Obama and other national leaders immediately criticized the Korean leader for threatening peace and stability of nations "near and far." The U.N. Security Council approved an emergency session for Sunday afternoon in New York, following a request from Japan just minutes after liftoff.
"North Korea broke the rules, once again, by testing a rocket that could be used for long-range missiles," Obama said in Prague. "It creates instability in their region, around the world. This provocation underscores the need for action, not just this afternoon in the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons."
Pyongyang claims it launched an experimental communications satellite into orbit Sunday and that it's transmitting data and patriotic songs. U.S. and South Korean officials claim the entire rocket, including whatever payload it was carrying, ended up in the ocean.
But it doesn't really matter how successful the rocket launch was. Kim's critics claim he really was testing a ballistic missile capable of hitting U.S. territory.
While the rogue communist state has repeatedly been belligerent and threatening — as it was when it carried out an underground nuclear blast and tested ballistic missiles in recent years — Pyongyang showed increased savvy this time that may make severe punishment more complicated than ever.
Unlike its previous provocations, the North notified the international community that the launch was coming and the route the rocket would take. Using a possible loophole in sanctions imposed after the 2006 nuclear test that barred the North from ballistic missile activity, the government claimed it was exercising its right to peaceful space development.
Since it will be hard to positively prove otherwise, objections from Russia and China — the North's closest ally — will almost certainly water down any strong response. Both have Security Council veto power.
Iran, which also has a contentious relationship with the international community over its nuclear program and is believed to have cooperated extensively with North Korea on missile technology, defended the launch.
"North Korea, like any other country, has the right to enter space," Iran's state TV said in a commentary, adding that the "pressure on North Korea to give up its undisputable right" was "unfair and dishonest."
Analysts say sanctions imposed after the North's underground nuclear test in 2006 appear to have had little effect because implementation was left up to individual countries, some of which showed no will to impose them.
Kim is reportedly a big film buff, and his strategy appears to have borrowed heavily from the 1959 movie "The Mouse That Roared," about a fictional poor country that declares war on the U.S., expecting to lose and get aid like the Marshall Plan that Washington used to help rebuild its World War II foes.
In Kim's case, negotiation has always been about brinksmanship — develop nuclear weapons and tell everybody you're ready to use them. Rather than risk confrontation, world leaders have offered aid and concessions, figuring that such costs are better than finding out if the mouse really can roar.
Despite its policy of "juche," or "self-reliance," communist North Korea is one of the world's poorest countries, has few allies and is in desperate need of outside help. The money that flowed in unconditionally from neighboring South Korea for a decade dried up when conservative President Lee Myung-bak took office in 2008.
Pyongyang has little collateral, and for years has used its nuclear weapons program as its trump card, promising to abandon its atomic ambitions in exchange for aid and then dangling the nuclear threat when it doesn't get its way.
It's been an effective strategy so far, with previous missile launches drawing Washington to negotiations. The North also has reportedly been selling missile parts and technology to whoever has the cash to pay for it.
So what does Kim want? The list is long: food for his famished people, fuel and — perhaps most importantly — direct talks and relations with Washington.
Right now, the main contact is through six-nation talks aimed at getting Pyongyang to give up its worrisome nuclear weapons program. But that means dealing with two neighbors that the North despises most, Japan and South Korea.
It probably isn't a coincidence that the rocket was fired over Japan. North Korea had warned that debris might fall off Japan's northern coast when the rocket's first stage fell away, so Tokyo positioned batteries of interceptor missiles on its coast and radar-equipped ships off its northern seas to monitor the launch. Nary a shot was necessary.
Obama warned the launch would further isolate the reclusive nation. But pragmatism calls for engagement, especially with efforts to get North Korea back to the negotiating table for the six-party talks.
"We must deal with North Korea as we find it, not as we would like it to be," Stephen Bosworth, the U.S. envoy on North Korea, said Friday. "I've long since suppressed my tendency toward frustration. What is required is patience and perseverance."
Kim Keun-sik, a North Korea expert at South Korea's Kyungnam University, said the launch would chill ties between Pyongyang and Washington, but likely not for long.
"Wouldn't they eventually come to hold talks? There is no other way," Kim said.
U.S. officials also are trying to obtain the release of two American journalists recently detained by the North along its border with China. Paik Hak-soon, an analyst at the Sejong Institute think tank, predicted they would be used as bargaining chips, with the North likely "to try to link them to the nuclear and missile talks."
___
Associated Press writers Jean H. Lee, Hyung-jin Kim and Jae-soon Chang in Seoul contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_nkorea_missile
------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
N. Korea obviously wants something. It has been their MO to act nuts and willing to create and use a nuclear bomb. I'm sure he wants money especially since S. Korea cut them off. Obama can't let Kim Jong Il run all over him though. If he does, everyone will try and walk all over him.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
N. Dakota: Bill Giving Unborn Basic Human Rights Goes Down in Senate
'Personhood' bill defeated in North Dakota Senate
By DALE WETZEL Associated Press Writer
Apr 4, 3:50 AM EDT
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) -- North Dakota's Senate has rejected legislation to bestow human rights on fertilized human eggs, whether they be in the womb or in a laboratory.
Senators voted 29-16 Friday to reject legislation that sought to define as a human being "any organism with the genome of homo sapiens." The "personhood" status would include a developing embryo from the moment of conception, whether inside or outside the womb.
A handful of states are considering similar proposals, and the measure generated an intense lobbying campaign from abortion opponents and people who favor abortion rights.
Sen. Curtis Olafson, a Republican, spoke out frequently against the bill, saying it would make it difficult for doctors to treat problem pregnancies that could threaten the woman's life because both she and her unborn child would have equal status under the law.
At a Senate hearing on the legislation, two reproductive endocrinologists testified that the bill would complicate the practice of in vitro fertilization, which involves removing eggs from a woman's body, fertilizing them in a laboratory, and implanting a fertilized egg inside the womb.
The bill's sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, a Republican, sent an e-mail message to Democratic senators before Friday's vote, offering to write letters to the editor to vouch for their anti-abortion credentials if they backed the legislation.
"I will demonstrate my belief that this issue is more important than partisan politics," Ruby wrote.
© 2009 The Associated Press.
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ABORTION_RESTRICTIONS?SITE=PASUN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
---------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
N. Dakota has had pro-life bills like this voted on many times over the last few years by both the legislature and the people. They've been defeated everytime. Many believe that it is because they don't want to be the first to challenge Roe V. Wade. If another state took the lead, N. Dakota would be more likely to follow suit.
The result isn't unexpected, but there is some hope for the future that the travesty of abortion holocaust will end, and the unborn will receive basic human and civil rights that we all enjoy.
By DALE WETZEL Associated Press Writer
Apr 4, 3:50 AM EDT
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) -- North Dakota's Senate has rejected legislation to bestow human rights on fertilized human eggs, whether they be in the womb or in a laboratory.
Senators voted 29-16 Friday to reject legislation that sought to define as a human being "any organism with the genome of homo sapiens." The "personhood" status would include a developing embryo from the moment of conception, whether inside or outside the womb.
A handful of states are considering similar proposals, and the measure generated an intense lobbying campaign from abortion opponents and people who favor abortion rights.
Sen. Curtis Olafson, a Republican, spoke out frequently against the bill, saying it would make it difficult for doctors to treat problem pregnancies that could threaten the woman's life because both she and her unborn child would have equal status under the law.
At a Senate hearing on the legislation, two reproductive endocrinologists testified that the bill would complicate the practice of in vitro fertilization, which involves removing eggs from a woman's body, fertilizing them in a laboratory, and implanting a fertilized egg inside the womb.
The bill's sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, a Republican, sent an e-mail message to Democratic senators before Friday's vote, offering to write letters to the editor to vouch for their anti-abortion credentials if they backed the legislation.
"I will demonstrate my belief that this issue is more important than partisan politics," Ruby wrote.
© 2009 The Associated Press.
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ABORTION_RESTRICTIONS?SITE=PASUN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
---------------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
N. Dakota has had pro-life bills like this voted on many times over the last few years by both the legislature and the people. They've been defeated everytime. Many believe that it is because they don't want to be the first to challenge Roe V. Wade. If another state took the lead, N. Dakota would be more likely to follow suit.
The result isn't unexpected, but there is some hope for the future that the travesty of abortion holocaust will end, and the unborn will receive basic human and civil rights that we all enjoy.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Obama to CEOs: My Administration is the Only Thing Between You and the Pitchforks
Inside Obama's bank CEOs meeting
By EAMON JAVERS | 4/3/09 1:34 PM EDT
The bankers struggled to make themselves clear to the president of the United States.
Arrayed around a long mahogany table in the White House state dining room last week, the CEOs of the most powerful financial institutions in the world offered several explanations for paying high salaries to their employees – and, by extension, to themselves.
“These are complicated companies,” one CEO said. Offered another: “We’re competing for talent on an international market.”
But President Barack Obama wasn’t in a mood to hear them out. He stopped the conversation, and offered a blunt reminder of the public’s reaction to such explanations. “Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn’t buying that.”
“My administration,” the president added, “is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”
The fresh details of the meeting – some never before revealed – come from an account provided to POLITICO by one of the participants. A second source inside the meeting confirmed the details, and two other sources familiar with the meeting offered additional information.
The accounts demonstrate that despite the public comments on both sides that the meeting was cordial, the tone in the room was in fact one of mutual wariness. The titans of finance – men used to being the most powerful man in almost any room – sized up a new president who made clear in ways big and small that he expected them to change their ways.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20871.html
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Obama couldn't even try to hide his contempt for the CEOs. Could he? It was pouring out of him like water out of a soaked sponge.
Does he not know how difficult it is to run a multi-billion dollar corporation? Probably not! He hasn't been an executive for anything significant ever. He has never run a business, city, or state. Nothing!
This is class warfare at its dirtiest.
By EAMON JAVERS | 4/3/09 1:34 PM EDT
The bankers struggled to make themselves clear to the president of the United States.
Arrayed around a long mahogany table in the White House state dining room last week, the CEOs of the most powerful financial institutions in the world offered several explanations for paying high salaries to their employees – and, by extension, to themselves.
“These are complicated companies,” one CEO said. Offered another: “We’re competing for talent on an international market.”
But President Barack Obama wasn’t in a mood to hear them out. He stopped the conversation, and offered a blunt reminder of the public’s reaction to such explanations. “Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn’t buying that.”
“My administration,” the president added, “is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”
The fresh details of the meeting – some never before revealed – come from an account provided to POLITICO by one of the participants. A second source inside the meeting confirmed the details, and two other sources familiar with the meeting offered additional information.
The accounts demonstrate that despite the public comments on both sides that the meeting was cordial, the tone in the room was in fact one of mutual wariness. The titans of finance – men used to being the most powerful man in almost any room – sized up a new president who made clear in ways big and small that he expected them to change their ways.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20871.html
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Obama couldn't even try to hide his contempt for the CEOs. Could he? It was pouring out of him like water out of a soaked sponge.
Does he not know how difficult it is to run a multi-billion dollar corporation? Probably not! He hasn't been an executive for anything significant ever. He has never run a business, city, or state. Nothing!
This is class warfare at its dirtiest.
Oklahoma: Bill That Gives Mothers Right to Defend Unborn One Step Closer to Law
Oklahoma Could Allow Pregnant Women to Kill to Save Unborn Children
State lawmakers passed the Use of Force for the Protection of the Unborn Act this week and if the Senate approves it in a final vote, as expected, it will be sent to the governor's desk.
FOXNews.com Friday, April 03, 2009
Oklahoma lawmakers are close to approving a bill that allows pregnant women to use deadly force to protect their unborn children.
State lawmakers passed the Use of Force for the Protection of the Unborn Act this week and if the Senate approves it in a final vote, as expected, it will be sent to the governor's desk.
The bill was crafted after a Michigan woman who was carrying quadruplets stabbed and killed her boyfriend after he struck her in the stomach. The woman lost the babies and was convicted of manslaughter.
"Pregnant women who refuse to abort their child are too often attacked by their partner in an effort to force a miscarriage," said state Rep. Mike Thompson, who co-authored the bill after Americans United for Life asked him. "Women put in this position should have the legal right to defend themselves, with lethal force if necessary."
State Sen. Glenn Coffee said the measure will allow victims of domestic violence defend themselves and their unborn children.
"Unfortunately, the unborn child is often the primary target of domestic violence," Coffee said in a statement. "Domestic violence has been acknowledged as a primary cause of stillbirths and miscarriages."
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/03/oklahoma-allow-pregnant-women-kill-save-baby/
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is going to be an interesting bill, if it gets passed. It throws a huge monkey wrench into the whole abortion debate.
On one hand, it gives the mother the right to protect her unborn children from intentional harm. This is a good thing. Too many men are abusing their significant others in order to force an abortion. This is a disturbing trend that I, for one, am ecstatic about the pending passage of the new law. It is a long time coming.
However, it gives credibility to the argument that the unborn is more than "just a fetus". It could open the door to further anti-abortion laws.
I, also, wonder if it might lead the way to give the fathers the right to protect their unborn and keep abortion from happening if the mother wants it but the father does not.
State lawmakers passed the Use of Force for the Protection of the Unborn Act this week and if the Senate approves it in a final vote, as expected, it will be sent to the governor's desk.
FOXNews.com Friday, April 03, 2009
Oklahoma lawmakers are close to approving a bill that allows pregnant women to use deadly force to protect their unborn children.
State lawmakers passed the Use of Force for the Protection of the Unborn Act this week and if the Senate approves it in a final vote, as expected, it will be sent to the governor's desk.
The bill was crafted after a Michigan woman who was carrying quadruplets stabbed and killed her boyfriend after he struck her in the stomach. The woman lost the babies and was convicted of manslaughter.
"Pregnant women who refuse to abort their child are too often attacked by their partner in an effort to force a miscarriage," said state Rep. Mike Thompson, who co-authored the bill after Americans United for Life asked him. "Women put in this position should have the legal right to defend themselves, with lethal force if necessary."
State Sen. Glenn Coffee said the measure will allow victims of domestic violence defend themselves and their unborn children.
"Unfortunately, the unborn child is often the primary target of domestic violence," Coffee said in a statement. "Domestic violence has been acknowledged as a primary cause of stillbirths and miscarriages."
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/03/oklahoma-allow-pregnant-women-kill-save-baby/
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
This is going to be an interesting bill, if it gets passed. It throws a huge monkey wrench into the whole abortion debate.
On one hand, it gives the mother the right to protect her unborn children from intentional harm. This is a good thing. Too many men are abusing their significant others in order to force an abortion. This is a disturbing trend that I, for one, am ecstatic about the pending passage of the new law. It is a long time coming.
However, it gives credibility to the argument that the unborn is more than "just a fetus". It could open the door to further anti-abortion laws.
I, also, wonder if it might lead the way to give the fathers the right to protect their unborn and keep abortion from happening if the mother wants it but the father does not.
Biden Wants Working Families to 'Share' Their 'Increased Productivity'
My Thoughts
"The American people, working class families, have to share in the increased productivity."
Isn't that just another way that we need to "share the wealth"? This is a poorly repackaged idea from the most socialistic administration in US history.
What is somewhat surprising is that Biden actually admitted their true agenda of having more than just the top 10% of the wealthy "share".
I guess "sharing" is "patriotic" just like paying higher taxes. Right, Joe.
Iran: Venezuela's Chavez Declares Capitalism "Needs to Go"
Venezuelan leader: 'Capitalism needs to go down'
By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer Fri Apr 3, 7:52 am ET
TEHRAN, Iran – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ridiculed the G-20 summit's attempts to deal with the global financial meltdown, saying that the "values of capitalism are in crisis" and capitalism "has to end."
Speaking to Venezuelan state television late Thursday, Chavez said the United States and Britain are "the most guilty" for the financial crisis sweeping the globe because of the financial model "they've been imposing for years."
"It's impossible that capitalism can regulate the monster that is the world financial system, it's impossible," Chavez said. "Capitalism needs to go down. It has to end. And we must take a transitional road to a new model that we call socialism."
The Venezuelan leader's comments came during a trip to Iran. In recent years, Chavez and Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — both well-known for their anti-U.S. rhetoric — have boosted economic and political ties.
During Thursday's summit in London, leaders from the Group of 20 industrial and developing countries promised $1.1 trillion for lending to poorer countries. They also vowed major efforts to clean up banks' tattered balance sheets, get credit flowing again, shut down global tax havens and tighten regulation over hedge funds and other financial high-flyers in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Chavez belittled the summit's efforts and said the International Monetary Fund must be eliminated.
Chavez's own economic program to institute socialism in Venezuela could slow as his country's oil-dependent economy suffers from falling crude prices. Inflation there has soared above 30 percent, eroding Venezuelans' salaries.
In his decade in power, Chavez has boosted state control over the economy and spent heavily on social programs meant to increase his popularity.
On Friday, Chavez and Iran's president inaugurated a joint commercial bank meant to speed trade and industrial projects between the two nations. Chavez said he will travel to Japan in the coming days to meet with the prime minister as well as business leaders and intellectuals.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090403/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_chavez_g20_summit_2
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Our enemies are forging alliances in order to bring down our way of life. It may not be through military means, but it is happening just the same. We must not forget that fact. Many, including Obama, seem to think that we can talk them out of it. Unfortunately, there many dictators out there that only know the language of violence and strength.
By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer Fri Apr 3, 7:52 am ET
TEHRAN, Iran – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ridiculed the G-20 summit's attempts to deal with the global financial meltdown, saying that the "values of capitalism are in crisis" and capitalism "has to end."
Speaking to Venezuelan state television late Thursday, Chavez said the United States and Britain are "the most guilty" for the financial crisis sweeping the globe because of the financial model "they've been imposing for years."
"It's impossible that capitalism can regulate the monster that is the world financial system, it's impossible," Chavez said. "Capitalism needs to go down. It has to end. And we must take a transitional road to a new model that we call socialism."
The Venezuelan leader's comments came during a trip to Iran. In recent years, Chavez and Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — both well-known for their anti-U.S. rhetoric — have boosted economic and political ties.
During Thursday's summit in London, leaders from the Group of 20 industrial and developing countries promised $1.1 trillion for lending to poorer countries. They also vowed major efforts to clean up banks' tattered balance sheets, get credit flowing again, shut down global tax havens and tighten regulation over hedge funds and other financial high-flyers in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Chavez belittled the summit's efforts and said the International Monetary Fund must be eliminated.
Chavez's own economic program to institute socialism in Venezuela could slow as his country's oil-dependent economy suffers from falling crude prices. Inflation there has soared above 30 percent, eroding Venezuelans' salaries.
In his decade in power, Chavez has boosted state control over the economy and spent heavily on social programs meant to increase his popularity.
On Friday, Chavez and Iran's president inaugurated a joint commercial bank meant to speed trade and industrial projects between the two nations. Chavez said he will travel to Japan in the coming days to meet with the prime minister as well as business leaders and intellectuals.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090403/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_chavez_g20_summit_2
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Our enemies are forging alliances in order to bring down our way of life. It may not be through military means, but it is happening just the same. We must not forget that fact. Many, including Obama, seem to think that we can talk them out of it. Unfortunately, there many dictators out there that only know the language of violence and strength.
Barney Frank Derides Price (R-GA), GOP About Having "Psychological Disorder"
My Thoughts
I have a few comments. First of all, Franks says that he isn't qualified to say what kind of psychological disorder the Republicans have, but apparently he's qualified to diagnose that they have a disorder. What? If he isn't qualified to diagnose what specific disorder it is, he can't be qualified to diagnose that they have one in the first place.
Second, Franks keeps on saying that Rep. Price is missing the point, and it fighting an issue that is over a month old. In doing so, Franks implies that Price and the Republicans are trying to stop the bill that cancels out the Dodd-AIG amendment.
However, it seems to be Rep. Franks that is missing the point. It isn't that they are against it. It is that they want to keep this type of thing from happening again and make Obama, Pelosi, and the Democrats' keep the promise they made of being the most transparent government ever.
They want time to be able to read 1,000 page bills to find stuff that shouldn't be in there and take it out. Congress just wasted time having to draw up another bill canceling out the Dodd-AIG amendment that wouldn't have been wasted with a little more prudence on the Democrats' part. If the Democrats wouldn't have been in a hurry to shove their porkulus bill down our throats before we knew what they were really up to, there would've been no need to "beat the dead horse". Obama promised that any bill before Congress will be available to the public for at least five days before it was signed into law. That was definitely not the case with the porkulus bill.
Biden Takes Credit For Bush's Plan
Biden brags about stimulus in N.C.
By Mark Johnson - Staff Writer
Published: Thu, Apr. 02, 2009 02:00AM
PIKEVILLE -- Vice President Joe Biden brought a clear message to this tiny Eastern North Carolina town Wednesday: The federal recovery money isn't just for big banks and auto companies.
Biden and U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced a new wave of $10.4 billion in federal stimulus money for home loans across the country, and billions more for essential services in rural communities such as Pikeville, which is getting money for a new fire station. Biden used the outdated, current station as a backdrop. Pikeville is just north of Goldsboro in Wayne County.
"We're investing in places like this all across the country," Biden said, "to demonstrate the vital role towns like this play in the recovery."
Most of the money for the station that was announced Wednesday, however, had been secured last year under the Bush administration, according to fire department officials.
State Sen. David Rouzer, a Republican who represents Pikeville and worked in the Agriculture Department under President Bush, said he helped secure the fire department money last year out of the federal agency's regular programs.
"They're coming in and cherry picking the best projects and switching out the money, saying it's stimulus money," Rouzer said. "But it was already approved and in the pipeline. It's totally disingenuous to come down here and say this is stimulus money, when regardless of whether a stimulus bill passed, they were getting the money."
The Obama administration is working to draw attention to money for rural communities, where gravel roads and volunteer fire departments are the norm. The moves come as irritation and anger are rising over federal money that has been streaming to Wall Street, banks and car companies.
Biden and Vilsack talked Wednesday about grants that are being parceled out for water systems, police stations, hospitals and fire stations. Earlier in the day, they visited Goshen Medical Center in Faison, where $635,000 in federal money will help hire two doctors, two nurses and three administrative workers.
Pikeville, where nearly all residents live below the poverty line, will receive $150,000 in grants and a $1 million loan toward the $1.3 million cost of the new fire station, said Fire Chief Wesley Wooten.
It is expected to create several months of work for the contractor, who has sat idle since late last year, he said.
A few volunteer firefighters perched on their trucks to watch Biden and snap photos. Fewer than 80people squeezed into metal folding chairs in the bays that normally hold pumper trucks."
These people are smart people," Wooten said. "Eventually, they'll see the effect."
Biden and Vilsack also talked about money being made available through the Department of Agriculture for low-cost home loans in rural areas.
A wave of new loans, though, sounds like a repeat of what created the recession, said John Tyndall, a volunteer firefighter and corn and soybean farmer who attended the Biden event.
"They gave out loans to people who couldn't pay 'em back," Tyndall said.
Wilbur "Andy" Anderson is the county commissioner for the district that includes the fire department, and one of two Republicans on the board of commissioners. He was not invited to the event in Pikeville, but offered his take later on what Biden had said.
"It'll help people," Anderson said, "but I don't see where it'll create a lot of jobs in the immediate future."
UPDATE
Officials at the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday disputed statements by officials from a volunteer fire department in North Carolina and a state senator about when the fire department's recently announced loan and grants for a new fire station were approved.
Leaders of the Pikeville Pleasant Grove Volunteer Fire Department and N.C. Sen. David Rouzer, a Republican, said Wednesday that the department had requested the $1 million loan and at least some of the $150,000 in grants last year and was working through the application process with the Bush administration.
The fire department's president, Russell Robertson, said he was told the loan was approved in December. Contract bids for the new station were put out in January, he said. Rouzer, who worked for the Agriculture Department in the Bush administration, accused the Obama administration of being disingenuous because Vice President Joe Biden, who visited the fire department Wednesday, announced that the fire department was receiving stimulus money through the Obama administration.
Robertson reiterated his December time frame Thursday morning. But after speaking with USDA officials, Robertson said later in the day that he had misunderstood the process. He said the fire department did not officially apply for the money until March 5. USDA provided a copy of the application with that date.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1468042.html
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
So, I guess the Obama administration give Bush all the blame for their bad behavior and take the credit for things Bush may have done right. They might as well. The Mainstream media will minimize and bury the story. Of course, as Dan Rather found out you can't misrepresent the facts for long these days with the rise of new media and bloggers like me calling them out on it. They will be found out in the end.
By Mark Johnson - Staff Writer
Published: Thu, Apr. 02, 2009 02:00AM
PIKEVILLE -- Vice President Joe Biden brought a clear message to this tiny Eastern North Carolina town Wednesday: The federal recovery money isn't just for big banks and auto companies.
Biden and U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced a new wave of $10.4 billion in federal stimulus money for home loans across the country, and billions more for essential services in rural communities such as Pikeville, which is getting money for a new fire station. Biden used the outdated, current station as a backdrop. Pikeville is just north of Goldsboro in Wayne County.
"We're investing in places like this all across the country," Biden said, "to demonstrate the vital role towns like this play in the recovery."
Most of the money for the station that was announced Wednesday, however, had been secured last year under the Bush administration, according to fire department officials.
State Sen. David Rouzer, a Republican who represents Pikeville and worked in the Agriculture Department under President Bush, said he helped secure the fire department money last year out of the federal agency's regular programs.
"They're coming in and cherry picking the best projects and switching out the money, saying it's stimulus money," Rouzer said. "But it was already approved and in the pipeline. It's totally disingenuous to come down here and say this is stimulus money, when regardless of whether a stimulus bill passed, they were getting the money."
The Obama administration is working to draw attention to money for rural communities, where gravel roads and volunteer fire departments are the norm. The moves come as irritation and anger are rising over federal money that has been streaming to Wall Street, banks and car companies.
Biden and Vilsack talked Wednesday about grants that are being parceled out for water systems, police stations, hospitals and fire stations. Earlier in the day, they visited Goshen Medical Center in Faison, where $635,000 in federal money will help hire two doctors, two nurses and three administrative workers.
Pikeville, where nearly all residents live below the poverty line, will receive $150,000 in grants and a $1 million loan toward the $1.3 million cost of the new fire station, said Fire Chief Wesley Wooten.
It is expected to create several months of work for the contractor, who has sat idle since late last year, he said.
A few volunteer firefighters perched on their trucks to watch Biden and snap photos. Fewer than 80people squeezed into metal folding chairs in the bays that normally hold pumper trucks."
These people are smart people," Wooten said. "Eventually, they'll see the effect."
Biden and Vilsack also talked about money being made available through the Department of Agriculture for low-cost home loans in rural areas.
A wave of new loans, though, sounds like a repeat of what created the recession, said John Tyndall, a volunteer firefighter and corn and soybean farmer who attended the Biden event.
"They gave out loans to people who couldn't pay 'em back," Tyndall said.
Wilbur "Andy" Anderson is the county commissioner for the district that includes the fire department, and one of two Republicans on the board of commissioners. He was not invited to the event in Pikeville, but offered his take later on what Biden had said.
"It'll help people," Anderson said, "but I don't see where it'll create a lot of jobs in the immediate future."
UPDATE
Officials at the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday disputed statements by officials from a volunteer fire department in North Carolina and a state senator about when the fire department's recently announced loan and grants for a new fire station were approved.
Leaders of the Pikeville Pleasant Grove Volunteer Fire Department and N.C. Sen. David Rouzer, a Republican, said Wednesday that the department had requested the $1 million loan and at least some of the $150,000 in grants last year and was working through the application process with the Bush administration.
The fire department's president, Russell Robertson, said he was told the loan was approved in December. Contract bids for the new station were put out in January, he said. Rouzer, who worked for the Agriculture Department in the Bush administration, accused the Obama administration of being disingenuous because Vice President Joe Biden, who visited the fire department Wednesday, announced that the fire department was receiving stimulus money through the Obama administration.
Robertson reiterated his December time frame Thursday morning. But after speaking with USDA officials, Robertson said later in the day that he had misunderstood the process. He said the fire department did not officially apply for the money until March 5. USDA provided a copy of the application with that date.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1468042.html
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
So, I guess the Obama administration give Bush all the blame for their bad behavior and take the credit for things Bush may have done right. They might as well. The Mainstream media will minimize and bury the story. Of course, as Dan Rather found out you can't misrepresent the facts for long these days with the rise of new media and bloggers like me calling them out on it. They will be found out in the end.
Far-Left Groups Pulling Blue Dogs Further Left Could Hurt Dems In 2010
Democratic leader tempers expectations for 2010
By BEN EVANS Associated Press Writer
Apr 2, 10:09 AM EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Liberal groups targeting moderate congressional Democrats should "beware of forming a circular firing squad" that could hurt the party in 2010 elections, says the head of the Democrats' House campaign efforts.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said at a news conference Wednesday he has personally talked with certain individuals from liberal organizations who have begun raising money to finance challenges to centrist Democrats. He warned the efforts threatened to split the party and allow Republicans to pick up seats.
The Maryland congressman is trying to defuse heady expectations in his party for more gains in next year's midterm elections. He spoke after too-close-to-call results in this week's election for a vacant Democratic seat in New York.
Van Hollen presided over his party's 2008 House campaign, which added 18 seats to the Democrats' majority. While there will be some opportunities for knocking off House Republicans in 2010, he said the focus will be on "playing defense" to protect freshmen Democrats and other vulnerable members who won by close margins in November.
Noting that the president's party has traditionally lost seats in midterm elections, Van Hollen said Democrats' fortunes in 2010 rest largely on how the public judges President Barack Obama's handling of the economy.
"Our prospects are obviously tied to how well the president is doing," he said.
The election Tuesday was for the House seat vacated in January when New York Gov. David Paterson appointed Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand to the Senate to succeed Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The Democratic candidate, political newcomer Scott Murphy, was locked in a tight race with longtime Republican state legislator Jim Tedisco in a district that has a Republican advantage of about 75,000 voters. The race will be decided by absentee ballots.
Murphy ran as a strong supporter of Obama's economic policies, while Tedisco criticized Murphy for supporting Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan.
Democrats currently have a 76-seat advantage in the House.
© 2009 The Associated Press.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/H/HOUSE_DEMOCRATS_2010?SITE=ININS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
I have no problem with this. MoveOn, ACORN, and the like can do this for the next four years for all I care. It'll just bring their real socialist agenda into the light, and the American people will reject it as they always have. This is still a center-right not left country, and they will find this out shortly, if they continue to overreach and push America into a more socialist system.
By BEN EVANS Associated Press Writer
Apr 2, 10:09 AM EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Liberal groups targeting moderate congressional Democrats should "beware of forming a circular firing squad" that could hurt the party in 2010 elections, says the head of the Democrats' House campaign efforts.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said at a news conference Wednesday he has personally talked with certain individuals from liberal organizations who have begun raising money to finance challenges to centrist Democrats. He warned the efforts threatened to split the party and allow Republicans to pick up seats.
The Maryland congressman is trying to defuse heady expectations in his party for more gains in next year's midterm elections. He spoke after too-close-to-call results in this week's election for a vacant Democratic seat in New York.
Van Hollen presided over his party's 2008 House campaign, which added 18 seats to the Democrats' majority. While there will be some opportunities for knocking off House Republicans in 2010, he said the focus will be on "playing defense" to protect freshmen Democrats and other vulnerable members who won by close margins in November.
Noting that the president's party has traditionally lost seats in midterm elections, Van Hollen said Democrats' fortunes in 2010 rest largely on how the public judges President Barack Obama's handling of the economy.
"Our prospects are obviously tied to how well the president is doing," he said.
The election Tuesday was for the House seat vacated in January when New York Gov. David Paterson appointed Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand to the Senate to succeed Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The Democratic candidate, political newcomer Scott Murphy, was locked in a tight race with longtime Republican state legislator Jim Tedisco in a district that has a Republican advantage of about 75,000 voters. The race will be decided by absentee ballots.
Murphy ran as a strong supporter of Obama's economic policies, while Tedisco criticized Murphy for supporting Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan.
Democrats currently have a 76-seat advantage in the House.
© 2009 The Associated Press.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/H/HOUSE_DEMOCRATS_2010?SITE=ININS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
I have no problem with this. MoveOn, ACORN, and the like can do this for the next four years for all I care. It'll just bring their real socialist agenda into the light, and the American people will reject it as they always have. This is still a center-right not left country, and they will find this out shortly, if they continue to overreach and push America into a more socialist system.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Blagojevich, You Were Just Indicted; What Are You Going To Do Now? Go To Disney World
Blagojevich Indicted on Federal Corruption Charges
A federal grand jury handed down the 19-count indictment against Blagojevich, his brother, two former aides and two businessmen Thursday.
FOXNews.com Thursday, April 02, 2009
Former Ill. Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was impeached and ousted, has been indicted on charges he engaged in a "wide-ranging scheme to deprive the people of Illinois of honest government."
A federal grand jury handed down the 19-count indictment against Blagojevich, his brother, two former aides and two businessmen Thursday. It accuses Blagojevich of corruption involving billions of dollars in state pension bonds.
U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitgerald had until Tuesday to get an indictment against Blagojevich but Thursday was the last day for the grand jury to meet.
FBI agents arrested the Chicago Democrat in December on allegations that also include trying to auction off President Barack Obama's vacant U.S. Senate seat.
Illinois lawmakers impeached him and threw him out of office in January.
Blagojevich has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and has promised to fight the charges in court and has a book contract to tell his side.
The former governor is not in Chicago; he's with his family at Walt Disney World in Florida.
A spokeswoman for Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., whom Blagojevich defiantly appointed to replace Obama in the Senate, told FOX News the senator nor his staff will have no comment on the indictment.
Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., who was one of several Senate appointees Blagojevich considered, told FOX News Blagojevich's indictment is "a sad day for the state of Illinois. It's a sad day for politics.
"I'm still hoping that the governor is not guilty," he added. "I think the voters and the citizens must put this behind them as quickly as they can."
Illinois Republican Party seized on Blagojevich's indictment to denounce Democrats.
"Today's indictment opens another tragic chapter in the national embarrassment of Blagojevich Democrats have brought on the people of Illinois," state Republican Chairman Andy McKenna said in a statement.
"This is another sad day in our state's history, but Republicans are ready to bring change and reform to government and are fighting to bring a new beginning for the people of Illinois," he said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/blagojevich-indicted-federal-corruption-charges/
----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
The next installment of Corruptacrats: Chicago-Sytle.
Hello, My Name Is Hillary Clinton! "Feel Like Getting Nasty?"
White House Corrects Conference Call Number After Directing Reporters to Sex Line
In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a phone sex number for journalists seeking an "on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit."
FOXNews.com Thursday, April 02, 2009
Journalists seeking to talk a little foreign policy with high-profile Obama administration officials live from the G20 meetings in London this week were solicited for phone sex instead after ringing up the toll-free number given by the White House.
In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a sex line number for journalists seeking an "on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit."
But after dialing, a soft-voiced female recording that was clearly not Clinton asked for a credit card number if you "feel like getting nasty."
After several efforts to make sure that the phone number was correctly dialed, a call to the White House resulted in a corrected press release. "If you are having trouble dialing into the call, please try this number as an alternative," and listed the international line included for reporters abroad to dial.
By this time, the conference call was already under way.
Asked for comment about this mishap, Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton responded: "A corrected phone number on a press release is probably one of the stupider things FOX News has covered lately."
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/02/white-house-corrects-toll-free-number-mishap/
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
"A corrected phone number on a press release is probably one of the stupider things FOX News has covered lately."
How about giving the out the wrong phone number to a press conference, and that wrong number ends up being a sex chat line? Is that one of the stupidest things the White House press corps has ever done? They don't need to flip the script on Fox because they were embarrassed by their own incompetentcy and were caught doing something doltish.
In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a phone sex number for journalists seeking an "on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit."
FOXNews.com Thursday, April 02, 2009
Journalists seeking to talk a little foreign policy with high-profile Obama administration officials live from the G20 meetings in London this week were solicited for phone sex instead after ringing up the toll-free number given by the White House.
In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a sex line number for journalists seeking an "on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit."
But after dialing, a soft-voiced female recording that was clearly not Clinton asked for a credit card number if you "feel like getting nasty."
After several efforts to make sure that the phone number was correctly dialed, a call to the White House resulted in a corrected press release. "If you are having trouble dialing into the call, please try this number as an alternative," and listed the international line included for reporters abroad to dial.
By this time, the conference call was already under way.
Asked for comment about this mishap, Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton responded: "A corrected phone number on a press release is probably one of the stupider things FOX News has covered lately."
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/02/white-house-corrects-toll-free-number-mishap/
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
"A corrected phone number on a press release is probably one of the stupider things FOX News has covered lately."
How about giving the out the wrong phone number to a press conference, and that wrong number ends up being a sex chat line? Is that one of the stupidest things the White House press corps has ever done? They don't need to flip the script on Fox because they were embarrassed by their own incompetentcy and were caught doing something doltish.
Democrats Pitch Fabrication: Say 90% of Guns in Mexico From US, Actually It's Only 17%
The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.
While 90 percent of the guns traced to the U.S. actually originated in the United States, the percent traced to the U.S. is only about 17 percent of the total number of guns reaching Mexico.
By William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott
FOXNews.com
Thursday, April 02, 2009
EXCLUSIVE: You've heard this shocking "fact" before
-- on TV and radio, in newspapers, on the Internet and from the highest politicians in the land: 90 percent of the weapons used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States.
-- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it to reporters on a flight to Mexico City.
-- CBS newsman Bob Schieffer referred to it while interviewing President Obama.
-- California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said at a Senate hearing: "It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico and used to shoot judges, police officers and mayors ... come from the United States."
-- William Hoover, assistant director for field operations at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, testified in the House of Representatives that "there is more than enough evidence to indicate that over 90 percent of the firearms that have either been recovered in, or interdicted in transport to Mexico, originated from various sources within the United States."
There's just one problem with the 90 percent "statistic" and it's a big one:
It's just not true.
In fact, it's not even close. The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.
What's true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency's assistant director, "is that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S.
"But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.
"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.
A Look at the Numbers
In 2007-2008, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Close to 6,000 were successfully traced -- and of those, 90 percent -- 5,114 to be exact, according to testimony in Congress by William Hoover -- were found to have come from the U.S.
But in those same two years, according to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered at crime scenes.
In other words, 68 percent of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. And when you weed out the roughly 6,000 guns that could not be traced from the remaining 32 percent, it means 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S.
So, if not from the U.S., where do they come from? There are a variety of sources:
-- The Black Market. Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar, with fragmentation grenades from South Korea, AK-47s from China, and shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc manufacturers.
-- Russian crime organizations. Interpol says Russian Mafia groups such as Poldolskaya and Moscow-based Solntsevskaya are actively trafficking drugs and arms in Mexico.
-- South America. During the late 1990s, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) established a clandestine arms smuggling and drug trafficking partnership with the Tijuana cartel, according to the Federal Research Division report from the Library of Congress.
-- Asia. According to a 2006 Amnesty International Report, China has provided arms to countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Chinese assault weapons and Korean explosives have been recovered in Mexico.
-- The Mexican Army. More than 150,000 soldiers deserted in the last six years, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo. Many took their weapons with them, including the standard issue M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium.
-- Guatemala. U.S. intelligence agencies say traffickers move immigrants, stolen cars, guns and drugs, including most of America's cocaine, along the porous Mexican-Guatemalan border. On March 27, La Hora, a Guatemalan newspaper, reported that police seized 500 grenades and a load of AK-47s on the border. Police say the cache was transported by a Mexican drug cartel operating out of Ixcan, a border town.
'These Don't Come From El Paso'
Ed Head, a firearms instructor in Arizona who spent 24 years with the U.S. Border Patrol, recently displayed an array of weapons considered "assault rifles" that are similar to those recovered in Mexico, but are unavailable for sale in the U.S."
These kinds of guns -- the auto versions of these guns -- they are not coming from El Paso," he said. "They are coming from other sources. They are brought in from Guatemala. They are brought in from places like China. They are being diverted from the military. But you don't get these guns from the U.S."
Some guns, he said, "are legitimately shipped to the government of Mexico, by Colt, for example, in the United States. They are approved by the U.S. government for use by the Mexican military service. The guns end up in Mexico that way -- the fully auto versions -- they are not smuggled in across the river."
Many of the fully automatic weapons that have been seized in Mexico cannot be found in the U.S., but they are not uncommon in the Third World.
The Mexican government said it has seized 2,239 grenades in the last two years -- but those grenades and the rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) are unavailable in U.S. gun shops. The ones used in an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Monterrey in October and a TV station in January were made in South Korea. Almost 70 similar grenades were seized in February in the bottom of a truck entering Mexico from Guatemala.
"Most of these weapons are being smuggled from Central American countries or by sea, eluding U.S. and Mexican monitors who are focused on the smuggling of semi-automatic and conventional weapons purchased from dealers in the U.S. border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California," according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.
Boatloads of Weapons
So why would the Mexican drug cartels, which last year grossed between $17 billion and $38 billion, bother buying single-shot rifles, and force thousands of unknown "straw" buyers in the U.S. through a government background check, when they can buy boatloads of fully automatic M-16s and assault rifles from China, Israel or South Africa?
Alberto Islas, a security consultant who advises the Mexican government, says the drug cartels are using the Guatemalan border to move black market weapons. Some are left over from the Central American wars the United States helped fight; others, like the grenades and launchers, are South Korean, Israeli and Spanish. Some were legally supplied to the Mexican government; others were sold by corrupt military officers or officials.
The exaggeration of United States "responsibility" for the lawlessness in Mexico extends even beyond the "90-percent" falsehood -- and some Second Amendment activists believe it's designed to promote more restrictive gun-control laws in the U.S.
In a remarkable claim, Auturo Sarukhan, the Mexican ambassador to the U.S., said Mexico seizes 2,000 guns a day from the United States -- 730,000 a year. That's a far cry from the official statistic from the Mexican attorney general's office, which says Mexico seized 29,000 weapons in all of 2007 and 2008.
Chris Cox, spokesman for the National Rifle Association, blames the media and anti-gun politicians in the U.S. for misrepresenting where Mexican weapons come from.
"Reporter after politician after news anchor just disregards the truth on this," Cox said. "The numbers are intentionally used to weaken the Second Amendment."
"The predominant source of guns in Mexico is Central and South America. You also have Russian, Chinese and Israeli guns. It's estimated that over 100,000 soldiers deserted the army to work for the drug cartels, and that ignores all the police. How many of them took their weapons with them?"
But Tom Diaz, senior policy analyst at the Violence Policy Center, called the "90 percent" issue a red herring and said that it should not detract from the effort to stop gun trafficking into Mexico.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/
-----------------------------------------------------------
My Thoughts
Can politicians in general and Democrats specifically ever tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I'm beginning to lose faith in them.
However, this isn't just a slight embellishment or exaggeration. It's an outright figment of the Democrats' imagination. This an outrageous example of anti-gun propaganda to "cue the outrage" among the public to make it easier for them to take away our 2nd amendment rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)