Blame Barack Obama For All GM Job Losses And Plant Closings

Yesterday we made the case that Obama supporters are to blame for inflicting Obama on the nation. He’s all yours Obama Dimocratic Party, along with the looting of the American economy and the looting for bankers and GM. He’s all yours.

Today, we note that from now on without doubt Obama is personally accountable for all GM job losses and all GM plant closings.

Yesterday’s stinking B.O. deal gives the U.S. government more than 60% of controlling votes in General Motors. All decisions, all job losses, all dealership closings, all plant closings, all failed product lines, all thievery, all bonus payments, all corruption, all embezzlement, any and all mishaps, must be blamed on the owner who is now effectively Barack Obama. It’s called accountability.

The GM Board of Directors, the entire management can be replaced by Barack Obama at will because the U.S. government has an overwhelming controlling interest in GM. In the past, Obama thugged Rick Wagoner, the CEO of GM, into resignation. Now there is no need for talk. With the controlling votes at GM the ukase can now be a direct order equivalent to Vito Corleone “pushing a button” to get a Mafia “soldier” to “exterminate” an unwanted associate.

So from now on every job lost at GM is a direct result of Obama’s action or inaction.

Therein lies the danger to capitalism any student of the defunct Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, what is now Russia, will immediately recognize.

In the Soviet Union factory managers, there were no private owners, produced crap – unwanted items and outdated products with little variation because they were not accountable to the marketplace or what consumers desired. The factory managers only had to satisfy the bureaucrats and produce politically acceptable products. Therefore Soviet consumers had miles of Lenin busts and Lenin books and Lenin films, to purchase. But writers Soviet consumers actually wanted to read or products they actually wanted to purchase were unavailable. When the products were available they were in extremely limited quantities and in limited drab colors.

The Soviet consumers were victims to the reality that the factory managers no longer had to care what the Soviet consumer wanted but rather what the government bosses wanted – which was usually politically safe and ideologically pure – crap.

Wendy’s, the fast food franchise mocked the Soviet consumers’ plight in an infamous commercial which foreshadows the new Obama GM.



An argument can be made that the old GM did not produce products consumers wanted either so the Soviet comparisons fail. But, the old GM was dependent on the marketplace and on the dollars of the consumer. No longer. Obama enabler and former cheerleader David Brooks, is waking up and partially getting the meaning of the new Obama GM:

First, the Obama plan will reduce the influence of commercial outsiders. The best place for fresh thinking could come from outside private investors. But the Obama plan rides roughshod over the current private investors and so discourages future investors. G.M. is now a pariah on Wall Street. Say farewell to a potentially powerful source of external commercial pressure.

The corporate factory managers at the new Obama GM will not be accountable to “external commercial pressure” because the only person they have to please is B.O.

Second, the Obama plan entrenches the ancien régime. The old C.E.O. is gone, but he’s been replaced by a veteran insider and similar executive coterie. Meanwhile, the U.A.W. has been given a bigger leadership role. This is the union that fought for job banks, where employees get paid for doing nothing. This is the organization that championed retirement with full benefits at around age 50. This is not an organization that represents fundamental cultural change.

The “creative destruction” theory of Joseph Schumpeter we have written about previously will no longer operate. Instead, the rot will continue and American taxpayers will pay for products produced they do not want to purchase because now it is the new Obama GM which will only produce B.O. stink.

Third, the Obama approach reduces the fear that impels change. The U.S. government will own most of G.M. It would be politically suicidal for the Democrats, or whoever is in power, to pull the plug on the company — now or ever. Therefore, the current managers can rest assured that they never need to fear liquidation again. There will always be federal subsidies for their own mediocrity.

Our point exactly. Welcome to the Soviet. PINO Big Blogs and Big Media will deride our “welcome to the Soviet” comment as some sort of outdated fearmongering and “pinko” red-baiting from days gone by. But our point stands, the Soviet factory managers are now in charge at the new Obama GM and as Obama enabler Brooks notes, there will always be federal money for mediocrity so that the factory managers need not fear the marketplace, just the government bureaucrats.

Fourth, the Obama plan dilutes the company’s focus. Instead of thinking obsessively about profitability and quality, G.M. will also have to meet the administration’s environmental goals. There is no evidence G.M. is good at building the sort of small cars the administration demands. There is no evidence that there is a large American market for these cars. But G.M. now has to serve two masters, the market and the administration’s policy goals.

Brooks proves once again he is a dunce. No, the new Obama GM will not serve two masters. The new Obama GM will serve one master – government bureaucrats who will demand politically safe and acceptable products which consumers will not want. Again, welcome to the Soviet.

Fifth, G.M.’s executives and unions now have an incentive to see Washington as a prime revenue center. Already, the union has successfully lobbied to move production centers back from overseas. Already, the company has successfully sought to restrict the import of cars that might compete with G.M. brands. In the years ahead, G.M.’s management will have a strong incentive to spend time in Washington, urging the company’s owner, the federal government, to issue laws to help it against Ford and Honda.

Brooks the dunce strikes again. The new Obama GM does not have to worry about Ford or Honda or rivals or consumers. The new Obama GM only has to worry about sugar daddy – the drab government bureaucrats from the Obama Soviet.

Sixth, the new plan will create an ever-thickening set of relationships between G.M.’s new owners — in government, management and unions. These thickening bonds between public and private bureaucrats will fundamentally alter the corporate culture, and not for the better. Members of Congress are also getting more involved in the company they own, and will have their own quaint impact.

The end result is that G.M. will not become more like successful car companies. It will become less like them. The federal merger will not accelerate the company’s viability. It will impede it. We’ve seen this before, albeit in different context: An overconfident government throws itself into a dysfunctional culture it doesn’t really understand. The result is quagmire. The costs escalate. There is no exit strategy.

Brooks the dunce strikes again. Brooks fails to understand the full horror of what has occurred. It is not GM that has changed – it is the U.S. Government that has changed. There is no GM quagmire. The quagmire is the U.S. Government has willingly become the new Soviet.

For the catastrophes to come, including all job losses, at the new Obama GM – blame Barack Obama.

For the new Soviet regime – blame Barack Obama.

Share

151 thoughts on “Blame Barack Obama For All GM Job Losses And Plant Closings

  1. Brilliant, as usual, Admin.

    ‘In the Soviet Union factory managers, there were no private owners, produced crap – unwanted items and outdated products with little variation because they were not accountable to the marketplace or what consumers desired. The factory managers only had to satisfy the bureaucrats and produce politically acceptable products.’

    Sadly, your astute commentary can also be applied to the public school system (one area the soviet union still manages to excel in).

    I spent 20 years in the trenches, trying my best to bring some musical beauty into the lives of the kids, knowing it was often the only class that really engaged and touched them, watching year after year as the
    academic subject’ teachers did less and less to prepare the students – they didn’t care anymore – about educating the kids, just about holding on to high paying do-nothing jobs – and by the time I was forced out of the system coz of bad health I was as disgusted with myself as I was with those colleagues who were gaming the system – disgusted with myself coz i hadn’t realized the futility earlier, that i hadn’t bailed out earlier, that i’d been so friggin deluded in the first place.

  2. Obama Nominates Republican Rep. McHugh to Be Secretary of Army

    By Tony Capaccio and Roger Runningen

    June 2 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama nominated U.S. Representative John McHugh, Republican of New York, as secretary of the U.S. Army. McHugh is a “distinguished public servant who will help keep us safe and keep our sacred trust with our soldiers and their families,” Obama said at the White House with McHugh standing alongside. “John is committed to keeping America’s army the best trained, the best equipped, the best-led land force the world has ever seen,” he said.

    McHugh is the senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, representing since 1993 a district in northern New York that includes Fort Drum, home to the Army’s 10th Mountain Division. He would replace Pete Geren.

    Obama said he wants to include Republicans in his administration. He picked Republican Representative Ray LaHood as transportation secretary, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is a holdover from the Bush administration, and on May 17 he nominated Utah’s Republican Governor Jon Huntsman to be U.S. ambassador to China.

    As Army secretary, McHugh, 60, would be the senior civilian in a force that has been severely stressed by ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Among his biggest challenges would be overseeing the reorganization of the Army’s most expensive weapons program, the $159 billion Future Combat Systems of manned and unmanned vehicles joined by wireless network.

    Manned Vehicles

    The Pentagon’s budget for fiscal 2010 eliminates the system’s manned vehicles, a project valued at $87 billion. Gates said they aren’t suited for conflicts like those in Afghanistan, and a separate program will be started to produce a vehicle that reflects the lessons learned from these wars, he said. Geren and Army Chief of Staff General George Casey were unable to convince Gates that the program should be maintained. Gates also said the contract with Chicago-based Boeing Co. to develop the system is “messed up” because it fails to provide enough incentive to encourage exceptional performance.

    McHugh would be under pressure to negotiate a new contract that ties contractor pay more closely to performance, and he would need to ensure that the new program stays on track.

    Another challenge confronting the new secretary — one that affects morale and training — is to fulfill Gates’s commitment to increase the time soldiers spend at home between deployments.

    Time at Home

    Soldiers during the 2007 surge in Iraq were deployed for 15 months and spent only 12 months on average at home. The schedule has been changed to about 12 months away and 12 months at home. Gates this year said he wants the time at home between deployments to increase to 15 months this year, as much as 24 months in fiscal 2010 and to 30 months in 2011. Geren, a former congressman, became secretary in 2007 after Defense Secretary Robert Gates fired Francis Harvey following disclosures of deficient outpatient care for wounded service personnel at Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington.

    Geren, a Texas Democrat, joined the Bush administration in September 2001, first serving as a special assistant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. He served in several different positions, including Army undersecretary, before his appointment as secretary in July 2007.

    bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aURNY1Mon1o8&refer=us#

  3. Sounds like Hillarys visit to El Salvador went fairly well. The OAS meeting re admission of Cuba was a different story. The commie governments in Latin America like Nicaragua, Venezuela, Bolivia are fronting for Castro in demanding a full renunciation of US policy. Here is what the caption reads:
    ————————–
    El Salvador’s new President Mauricio Funes speaks during a news conference at the presidential house in San Salvador June 1, 2009. Funes focused his inauguration speech on the need to shore up a battered economy, praised Obama as an inspiration and described U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who attended the ceremony, as “brilliant”.

  4. I wonder whether Bill will defend himself from allegations that Obama said he made “bald faced lies” during the primary? How many times can Obama insult his man and his legacy knowing he can’t defend himself b/c of Hillary’s SOS position. It is painful to have to re-live this again and I will avoid all MSM shows the next few days as this will be a prominent feature imo.

  5. I’ve begun to think BO might have had a lot of dirt on the Clinton’s and not vice-versa. What other reason could there be for HRC’s absence from the public stage, for the continual vicious slandering of Bill?????

    When I read that Wolff says in his book that BO accused BC of being a serial liar I felt sick.

    How did this HAPPEN??????

    And with the news today that BO approves of iranian nukes – this is madness!!!!!

    Or is it just me?

  6. 100% correct basil9…something is not adding up. We know Obama has MSM at his disposal and can leak anyuthing at any time to discredit Bill/Hillary. We also know he has Emanuel and other former Clintonites who must have given him a lot of dirt as well. There can be no other explanation for Bill allowing a thug to bully him so publicly and humiliatingly. As for Hillary, she started off being sent to every corner of the earth, but now, seems reduced to 2nd tier issues and as Obama’s “bad cop” when it comes to Israel. Very disturbing and why many off us felt Hillary should not have accepted SOS. At this rate, he will easily be re-elected in 2012 and Hillary will miss , possibly, her last chance to be POTUS.
    On a bright note, there is a great article on Puffington posted on RCP.

  7. Did these people also send a letter to Egypt to allow their border to be OPENED to allow imports? I think not! This is one more chance to embarrass Israel. Perhaps if the TERRORISTS in Gaza would agree that Israel has the right to exist, they would have a better chance. You can’t have it both ways. ( I agree with this comment to the following article in todays Washington Times article):
    ————————————————————
    Group wants Israel pressed on Gaza access
    By Eli Lake (Contact) | Tuesday, June 2, 2009

    ArticleComments ( 1 )Print[-][+] Font Size E-Mail AlertsTell a FriendGot a Question?You ReportClick-2-ListenYahoo! BuzzA fact-finding group led by the widow of former Sen. William J. Fulbright is urging Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to press Israel to allow more people and goods into and out of Gaza and let U.S. diplomats meet government officials from Hamas and Hezbollah.

    A letter to Mrs. Clinton from Harriet Fulbright — whose husband chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and created a scholarship program that sends foreign students to the U.S. and Americans abroad — reflects findings from a 17-day “political pilgrimage” last month to Gaza, Israel, the West Bank, Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon by a group of U.S. citizens.

    The trip was organized by the Council for the National Interest, a nonprofit that, according to its Web site, seeks to “advance the national interest in the Middle East and at the same time help repair the damage being done to our political institutions by the over-zealous tactics of Israel’s lobby.”

    Hamas has ruled Gaza since 2007, when its fighters drove out the other main Palestinian party, Fatah.

    Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in August 2005 but controls border crossings into Israel from the enclave. Israel launched a major offensive on Gaza in December in an effort to stop rocket fire from Gaza onto southern Israeli towns. The Palestinians and human rights groups say more than 1,300 Palestinians were killed. Israel says the death toll was lower than that and that most of the dead were militants.

    Stephen Buck, a retired U.S. diplomat with extensive experience in the Arab world, told editors and reporters of The Washington Times on Monday that Israeli policy toward Gaza constituted a “siege.”

    He said Israel has deliberately deprived Gazans of essential foodstuffs such as lentils and tomato paste, classifying them as “luxuries,” and also prevented the import of construction materials such as cement needed to rebuild after the December-January offensive. He said Israel also has prevented more than 200 Gazan students from leaving to study abroad.

    He said Israeli officials appeared to believe that “if we squeeze Hamas … they will lose” upcoming Palestinian elections, but he said the “premise is falacious.” He said the poor conditions in Gaza were only making it a more fertile ground for violence.

    In addition to the letter to Mrs. Clinton, he said the fact-finding group hopes to brief someone in the office of George Mitchell, the former U.S. senator who is President Obama’s special envoy for Arab-Israeli peace talks.

    “We would like to see an increase in the amount of goods going in and out of Gaza,” Mr. Buck said.

    The movement of people out of Gaza is now 15 percent of what it used to be, he said, and the number of trucks going in and out are down to a handful from about 500 a day in 2005.

    Israeli officials say they have curbed traffic to protect their security and that levels of trade between Israel and Gaza have returned to 2008 figures.

    Israeli and Western officials say Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is considering a United Nations proposal to ease Israel’s blockade of Gaza, Reuters news agency reported.

    Foreign governments have been urging Israel to allow more supplies, especially concrete and steel for rebuilding.

    Johnny Peled, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, said Israel agreed with the Obama administration’s view there should be no contact with Hamas until the group agrees to abide by prior agreements made by the Palestinian Authority, renounces terrorism and recognizes Israel’s right to exist.

    “We agree with the current administration’s policy that three international conditions need to be met before negotiating with Hamas,” Mr. Peled said.

    The U.S. also refuses to deal with Hezbollah, which it classifies as a terrorist group.

  8. Wolff and all the other leeches who have books on the way glorifying hitler II, have secondary reasons for regurgitating the most corrupt election season of all.

    It serves to rehash, over and over and over again, how evil the Clintons are, to permanently paint real and grossly imagined scandals involving them into our consciences, and to twist their wonderful leadership and moral history so that it is no longer recognizable.

    Subliminal hatred is the name of the game here. The Clintons are the victims here. The Obamas are the ugly thugs here.

  9. Honestly, what does anyone really think is gonna happen under BO over the next few years?

    I have that same awful pit-of-the-stomach gnawing I had in the lead-up to the atrocious RBC ruling.

    There is a BM blackout on recent Muslim terrorism from the Arkansas murder of a 24 year-old soldier to the Newburgh 4 bomb-the-synagogues-group –

    Israel is demonized and vilified – Iran and the Muslim countries are butt-kissed – NK is gonna set off missiles from both coasts and Prez pantywaist and jugjaw spend 250g on a night on the town in NYC.
    Predictions, anyone?

  10. Just got to cut wolffes head off by showing he is a bought and paid for whore typical of the kind of journalist that samuleson spoke of yesterday. I sent an email to another journalist last night on this very subject. We should not use the word journalist for this slimy limy. Propagandist is the word.

  11. “over-zealous tactics of Israel’s lobby???

    Since when has the struggle for a Jewish homeland labeled with such sarcastic ugliness? Since when is the minute by minute survival of the Jewish race less important than Gaza trade which is, as history has sadly recorded, simply an opportunity for terrorists to ply their trade?

  12. That’s what I think, JB.

    With all the serious issues in Iraq, NK, Iran, NK, Pakistan, HRC is sent to El Salvador?
    wtf?????

    ‘As for Hillary, she started off being sent to every corner of the earth, but now, seems reduced to 2nd tier issues and as Obama’s “bad cop” when it comes to Israel.’

  13. Jan,
    Not that we need any reminders but chek this interview in Der Spiegel with BO’s great uncle about his experiences in helping liberate concentration camps.

    www dot spiegel dot de/international/germany/0,1518,626703,00

    It is almost beyond comprehesnion to me that ANYONE could question Israel’s right to exist and defend herself.

    I think today was the last of the weeklong nationwide war drills in Israel. I’m sure they’re not just going through the exercises coz they have nothing else to do.

  14. Thanks basil,

    I did read about that a few days back.

    The permanent threat of danger for Israelis never lessens. obama, in just a few months has turned the world upside down. I do not believe that obama gives a damn for them. He is playing right into the terrorists hands and making himself a laughingstock in the process.

  15. basil9, I can’t imagine Obama had anything on the Clintons we haven’t already heard about. No couple in American history has had their public and private lives scrutinized as much as they have, or been subject to as many smears.

    BTW, calling Bill a “bald-faced lair” reflects quite poorly on Obama, not the Clintons. I realize that was in relation to the primary, which seems like ancient history now, but it’s certainly not a very presidential thing to say, to put it mildly.

  16. “BTW, calling Bill a “bald-faced lair” reflects quite poorly on Obama, not the Clintons. I realize that was in relation to the primary, which seems like ancient history now, but it’s certainly not a very presidential thing to say, to put it mildly.”

    ———————–

    And if bambi thinks that all is forgiven for his petty insults to President Clinton, he can think again. I think Bill Clinton is watching and waiting.

  17. OT..but it is interesting that the terrorist attack in Little Rock that left one soldier dead and on wounded is getting minimal attention from the MSM. The story was initially was act alone, “nothing to see here, folks” has now gotten an international flavor.

    “The suspect arrested in the fatal shooting of one soldier and the critical injury of another at a Little Rock, Ark., Army recruiting booth today was under investigation by the FBI’s Joint Terrorist Task Force since his return from Yemen, ABC News has learned.
    The investigation was in its preliminary stages, authorities said, and was based on the suspect’s travel to Yemen and his arrest there for using a Somali passport.
    The suspect, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, 24, had changed his name from Carlos Leon Bledsoe after converting to the Muslim faith.
    (snip)
    abcnews.go.com/print?id=773063

    It’s odd that the first terrorist attack in the US on Obama’s watch, that resulted in the death of a US soldier, get “crickets” from Obama.

  18. I wonder whether Bill will defend himself from allegations that Obama said he made “bald faced lies” during the primary? How many times can Obama insult his man and his legacy knowing he can’t defend himself b/c of Hillary’s SOS position. It is painful to have to re-live this again and I will avoid all MSM shows the next few days as this will be a prominent feature imo.
    ———————–
    Trial attorney Louis Nizer spoke to this issue in his book My Life In Court. He admonished clients not to react at the time the act of slander takes place. Wait and deal with it in the proper forum. He compared it to wiping wet mud off your overcoat which causes it to smear as opposed to waiting it to dry when it can be removed easily with a wisk broom. See the case of Reynolds vs Peglar.

    The legal question in my court would be whether it is slander for a pathological liar like Obama to call someone who is not a liar a liar? I guess the answer is yes but there are alot of whereases.

  19. Honestly, what does anyone really think is gonna happen under BO over the next few years?
    —————————————–
    Basil, that is a broad question. It needs to be broken down into topical areas.

    My refigerator stopped working, it is summer and I find myself in Niagrara falls without being in Niargra Falls.

    I will give you my take on the GM piece when I return, which I shall.

    Where is Brownie when we need him? Or maybe all we need is Cabana Al who is starting to look better the more I see of Holder.

  20. I read that bambi and wife are changing the artwork in the WH to majorly include work done by minority artists.

    I’m not saying this is a bad thing, but I wonder if one of his main purposes is to practice reverse discrimination to the point that the majority will be punished and the minority will be rewarded.

  21. huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/02/treasury-toxic-asset-prog_n_210268.html

    Geithner has his incestuous water carrying conflict of interests with wall st, banks and O

    ******************************************
    just got thru hearing Nancy Pelosi say she assured the Chinese that “we” would not spend any more money we did not have and would have to spend ‘pay as you go’ or with set offs

    ….great, huh…goes along with ADMIN’s post – and now we are so beholden to china that they can treat and dictate to us like we are children

    *************************************

    going along with that theme…I was reading a compliation of the foreign press that blast the Obama’s for their extravangant and costly date to the ‘theatre’ last Saturday…and many are commenting how our US media is silent or worse, defending this unsightly cost when two days later GM collapsed and many of those Americans are now out of work…

    …this goes along with the NYT’s editorial that blast O because foreclosures are going UP AND more jobs are being lost…more job loss=more foreclosures…

    …and then I began to think, especially as it relates to how are media is defending the Obama’s date and all the wasted money they spent (as if they are royalty)

    AND I thought, can you imagine for one second what our ‘liberal media’ would have done if all things were the same and Hillary was President and two days before GM went bust – Hillary decided to take Bill to NY for dinner and the theatre…

    CAN YOU IMAGINE? talk about double standards…that would be a national scandal

    our country is feeling less like the land of the free by the day…

  22. Basil: with respect to bambis takeover of GM the following facts are not in dispute: i) GM has a failing business model, ii) it costs GM more to make a car than it can sell it for, iii) the taxpayers now own more than 60% of that failing business enterprise, iv) the changes he intends to make will not solve the problem, v) labor costs make them non-competitive (not wages, but benefits and work rule restrictions, vi) the union has wanted a job bank for laid off workers, vii) Geithner is now in China, viii) China is capable of producing a fuel efficient car for well under $10,000, ix) China is our largest creditor and we need them to keep lending us money, ix) UAW leaders are less interested in the future of the union, than they are in the protection of their members (active and retirees), x) the practical effect of Taft Hartley was/is to make union leaders more interested in political survival than in the long term survival of the union as an institution, xi) Obama is moving us away from free market capitalism to state capitalism where the signals are given by bureaucrats as opposed to consumers, xii) this will create large political constituencies beholden to them for economic survival.

    Like I said, the game is boil the frog. Obama knows full well that he has bought a company which will utimately fail for the reasons set forth above. The law of economics ensures it. When it fails, he will abandon the company to save the taxpayers money. He will institute a job bank to overcome union objections–guaranteed income and benefits for life for existing members. They will become political constituents beholden to him. As they die those obligations will be severed by attrition. He will then ship those jobs to China. China will mass produce those vehicles and sell them in the United States at a fraction of the cost to customers at bargain prices. Ford, Honda, Chrystler/Fiat will driven out of business. The market will then flow to China. The only question is whether Geithner will lay this entire plan out when he visits China–that is the only thing I am unclear about.

    Obama has other plans more nefarious than this. Keep asking yourself the question what do we have that China wants that Obama can freely give away and you will get a better feel for where this is heading.

    .

  23. Tuesday, June 2, 2009

    State Dept. book explains to the Muslim world why U.S. is not evil

    WASHINGTON — The United States has released a book to meant to rebut claims that it discriminates against Muslims.

    The State Department has released a book for U.S. embassies and consulates in Muslim states. Titled “Being Muslim in America,” the 64-page publication seeks to demonstrate U.S. tolerance of Muslims and their faith.

    “Every significant immigrant group has in the United States faced, and overcame, a degree of discrimination and resentment,” the book said.

    Officials said the State Department could print more than 400,000 copies in 28 languages for distribution in Arab and Muslim states. They said the department has not published similar books for members of other faiths.

    “The struggle against Islamic terrorism is a struggle for hearts and minds in the Muslim world,” Michael Friedman, chief of publications with the State Department’s Bureau of International Information Programs, said.

    The book also contains a color-coded, state-by-state map of mosques throughout the United States. The publication does not cite the prosecution and conviction of Muslims in the United States on charges of working with Al Qaida-aligned operational cells.

    The State Department also reports the activities of Saudi-financed Muslim groups charged with supporting Hamas and Islamic Jihad, classified as terrorist groups. Friedman said mention of such groups as the Council of American-Islamic Relations and Muslim Public Affairs Council was not meant as an endorsement.

    The publication has sparked opposition by independent Muslim groups, which said the State Department was legitimizing jihad. They said the U.S. government has ignored Muslims who embrace democracy and human rights.
    “It boggles my mind how people who are supposed to protect us [the government] are advancing our enemies’ agenda,” Khalim Massoud, president of Muslims Against Sharia, said in an interview to IPT News.

    worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2009/ss_mideast0437_06_02.asp

    ————————-

    I give up!

  24. wbboei – today I heard on tv that it is costing us something like $600,000 a day in interest for the takeover of GM….

    so that makes a lot of sense huh? we would be better off just giving everyone a flat salary/severence pay…

  25. One other thing. Obama is a sociopath who believes he is smarter, more corrupt and can fool everyone else. That is his delusion. What he fails to appreciate is that when he tries his little tricks on China they will fuck him like a housecat–as a late Teamster friend of mine used to say. He is dealing with people who are orders of magnitude more clever conniving and rutheless than he is, people who gave the world both Sun Tzu (The Art of War) and Tiennanan Square.

  26. Paula Says:
    June 2nd, 2009 at 12:49 pm

    wbboei, Thanks for mentioning that Glenn Thrush rebutted that argument that senators wanted Hillary gone. I knew that was crap. Didn’t they have some posts they were going to offer her if she turned down SoS?

    ==============

    I havent read the prevoius but can’t resist saying that doubtless some of them wanted her gone and some did not.

  27. wbboei,
    WOW!.
    By the way you refer to BO it sounds like you expect him to be in power for a long time.

    ‘He will institute a job bank to overcome union objections–guaranteed income and benefits for life for existing members. They will become political constituents beholden to him. As they die those obligations will be severed by attrition.’
    That’s some analysis. What can be done to stop him?

  28. *(#!@#$@!
    Where were tapper’s berries when it would have, could have made a difference. This STINKS! And he probably thinks of himself as some daring courageous investigative journalist with this piece, exposing BO’s Muslim roots. Mother f***ers!

    blogs dot abcnews dot com/politicalpunch/2009/06/abc-news-jake-tapper-and-sunlen-miller-report-the-other-day-we-heard-a-comment-from-a-white-house-aide-that-neverwould-have

  29. The late Senator Fulbright was no friend of Israel so I am not surprised by the report. The Ark connections of course are obvious as Bill was very fond of the late Senator. The difference being that former president Clinton twisted Israel’s arm to achieve a lasting peace. Unfortunately, “Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”(see Abba Eban). Obama is pressuring Israel simply to appease his Muslim brothers and sisters and I doubt he is overly concerned about Israel’s underlying security interests.
    What it really comes down to is that all politicians have huge egos and want to achieve big things. The difference, however, with Obama, is that it is all about him. From being the so called first black president to transforming the way America is viewed by thw world. it’s not being done for the greater good, but rather, for the greater Obama. Pres

  30. He will be in power just as long as the American People are seduced by the brand, the Republican Party remains passive and big media has the courage and integrity to ask the right questions. His game is to boil the frog. Our game is to call the game on him.

    What Robert Samuleson said yesterday on this entire subject is correct as far as it goes: Are his proposals practical, even if desirable? Maybe they’re neither? What might be unintended consequences? All “reforms” do not succeed; some cause more problems than they solve. Johnson’s economic policies, inherited from Kennedy, proved disastrous; they led to the 1970s’ “stagflation.” The “war on poverty” failed. The press should not be hostile; but it ought to be skeptical.

    But the biggest question of all is the one Samuelson does not ask: who controls him and what is the real blueprint. It is not the overt agenda that concerns me half as much as the hidden one. It is masked by rhetoric but it has everything to do with the law of economics. Money for his backers, and perpetual power for him. And China is the centerpiece because of the debt, productivity, low manufacturing cost, and there need for things that we can talk about later.

    Finally, I do not ask anyone to believe what I am saying just because I am saying it. But we owe it to ourselves to reflect on this, test it and see if my theory is sound. And when you are inclined to step back and say this is all bullshit, ask yourself whether a year ago you would have believed someone who told you he would nationalize the banks and the auto companies in the first hundred days. This about it as a grand exercise in arbitrage. Today there is a systemic imbalance in the global economic system. It is the dream of every capitalists to produce goods in the cheapest venues and sell them in the highest venues.

  31. Where were tapper’s berries when it would have, could have made a difference. This STINKS! And he probably thinks of himself as some daring courageous investigative journalist with this piece, exposing BO’s Muslim roots. Mother f***ers!

    blogs dot abcnews dot com/politicalpunch/2009/06/abc-news-jake-tapper-and-sunlen-miller-report-the-other-day-we-heard-a-comment-from-a-white-house-aide-that-neverwould-have
    ——————————————-
    basil. I looked up the word coward in the dictionary. The definition was someone who behaves like Jake Tapper. Case closed.

  32. For those who worry about Hillary, I think she is doing fine. She will not be marginalized. No sense worrying about that. For those who worry about Israel she is their best friend. No question about that either.

    The question is when will people wake up.

  33. # jbstonesfan Says:
    June 2nd, 2009 at 4:21 pm

    I wonder whether Bill will defend himself from allegations that Obama said he made “bald faced lies” during the primary? How many times can Obama insult his man and his legacy knowing he can’t defend himself b/c of Hillary’s SOS position. It is painful to have to re-live this again and I will avoid all MSM shows the next few days as this will be a prominent feature imo.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Bill and Hillary are focused on the marriage of their daughter in August. There won’t be any rebuttals coming any time soon at least not until after the wedding.

    Beside calling Bill a “bald faced liar”- When Obama was asked, “If Bill got into his head during the Primary, Obama responded: “Yes, he did- BUT I got into his..”

    After reading his response, I confess to thinking nasty thoughts some of which should not be repeated here. This ne’er-do-well underachiever, presumably the Leader (cough) of the Free World. Obama has never produced anything of benefit to anyone, save for himself, in his shiftless, erstwhile, life.

    Furthermore, I don’t believe in a million years Obama has the capacity to get into Bill’s head.

    Axelrod, on the other hand, is Obama’s Karl Rove. He is the architect who insisted on playing the race card against Bill.

    Axelrod is as great a problem to us as Obama. Remove him from the equation and you reduce Obama to a bowl of Jello sitting on a three legged stool.

  34. Did anyone see Globel magazine? Mo is on the cover. It appears she is trying to stop Larry Sinclair from publishing his book.

  35. wbboei, Thanks for mentioning that Glenn Thrush rebutted that argument that senators wanted Hillary gone. I knew that was crap. Didn’t they have some posts they were going to offer her if she turned down SoS?
    ————————–
    Paula–yes. The initial post they offered her was on one of four subcommitees on health care–which was beneathe her. Reid got heat over that and was in the process of creating a larger post for her. The sos positon pre empted that however. Some of the senators loved her, some are small people who are concerned with their own world and some are Kennedy maggots. Kennedy himself is the grandest maggot in the rotten body politic, and he sucks the blood of the American People.

  36. Axelrod, on the other hand, is Obama’s Karl Rove. He is the architect who insisted on playing the race card against Bill.

    Axelrod is as great a problem to us as Obama. Remove him from the equation and you reduce Obama to a bowl of Jello sitting on a three legged stool.
    ————————
    The strategy here was designed above Axelrods paygrade. He was recrutited to play a role in this and so was Bambi. The real players intend to remain hidden but I will tell you who I am convinced some of them were and are. Soros (and the people behind him), Zarachai, Immelt, and others. The grass roots strategy was designed by Professor Gene Sharpe at the Albert Einstein School at Harvard. It was borrows from Alinsky but goes beyond him.

  37. The strategy here was designed above Axelrods paygrade. He was recrutited to play a role in this and so was Bambi. The real players intend to remain hidden but I will tell you who I am convinced some of them were and are. Soros (and the people behind him), Zarachai, Immelt, and others. The grass roots strategy was designed by Professor Gene Sharpe at the Albert Einstein School at Harvard. It was borrows from Alinsky but goes beyond him.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I can believe it may be above Axelrod’s paygrade. But the snowball thrower has to be as ruthless as the snowball’s creator. I don’t know many on Obama’s team with the exception of Emanuel with the chutzpah to carry the water for those sitting behind the scenes, now that Obama has been exposed publicly as a bold, 2 faced liar people are just beginning to wake up to.

  38. Mrs. Smith: I agree. There is no Nuermberg defense. I forgot to mention the King of Saudi Arabia. To past presidents Israel was the most important country in the middle east–for cultural, religious, historical and geopolitical reasons. To Obama it is Saudi Arabia because of is Muslim roots, and my theory is they have long been his backer. You may recall the revellation during the campaign that a rich Saudi intervened to get him into Harvard. With his short attention span and extracirricular activities in Los Angeles, it is hard to believe his Occidental and Colulmbia grades were anything to write home about which would explain why the transcripts along with his birth certificate are unavailable for public inspection. They would raise questions why he was given special advantage. Again, the lap dog media heeled.

  39. wbboei – today I heard on tv that it is costing us something like $600,000 a day in interest for the takeover of GM….

    so that makes a lot of sense huh? we would be better off just giving everyone a flat salary/severence pay…
    ———————————–
    To him it makes perfect sense. Using our money to create a political base wholly dependent on him.

  40. bambi’s speech in Egypt is nothing more than lip service. If he is trying to speak to the Muslims, why did he pick a country where less than 30% of the population is Muslim? Why not Indonesia?

    His sucking up to Saudi Arabia, the palestinians, etc. has already gone beyond the pale. If he keeps this up, his hands will be bloodied forever.

  41. Big media has BETRAYED the American People. I am not talking about geeks like Matthews, Modo and Olberstrufuerher. I mean those who pretend to be serious people. People like Jeffrey Tubin, David Gerghan, George Stepanopolis, and their ilk. They were the ones who did this to the country.

  42. wbboei:

    “To Obama it is Saudi Arabia because of his Muslim roots, and my theory is they have long been his backer.”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Indeed- Too bad his supporters haven’t figured out he was facing the wrong way when he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia.

  43. 100% correct wbboei…….people like Brian Williams, Couric, Blitzer, Borger, Ifil, and others who werr supposedly real journalists….I don’t seeit stopping and I am very depressed. We had hoped by now the fraud would have been exposed, but seemingly, his popularity is actually increasing. I think we are the very few who truly recognize the danger his presidency means for America.

  44. just when does O do any work? the country is falling apart and he has the time to just run out for burgers with an entourage…getting ready to play tennis – jaunting to NY for plays – happy hours in the WH…flying all over the place…happen to hear Mike Allen hyperventilating that on the last day of this trip they are going to spend an extra night in Paris…on our dime…i am sure O will plan some splashing media thing in Paris…

    no wonder this guy is so dependent on a teleprompter…he definitely does not have the 24/7 work ethic of the Clintons…

    I just keep hearing the word imposter – imposter – showboating poser…the egocentricity of this man is mindblowing…

    he may just overplay his hand…

  45. jbstonesfan Says:

    June 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 pm

    We had hoped by now the fraud would have been exposed, but seemingly, his popularity is actually increasing. I think we are the very few who truly recognize the danger his presidency means for America.

    ——————————
    I think the lights are coming on in the Ralls house, the Hedges house, and even in the maddog coven. Brooks is moving as well, but is still partially in the dark. All of them are leftists who voted for him, and with the possible exception of maddog are facing the painful reality of a god that failed. People in the militiary, the cia and congress are seeing it too. Supporters of Israel who Bronfman assured were okay have found that was not exactly right. Republicans who stayed home to spite their party are regretting it. And even one or two journalist may get tired of the role of lapdog. Will has called him out and so has Krauthammer. FOX has the audience now. And if I could just get guys like Kessler to stop praising WashPo life would be good.

    It is slower process than we had hoped, but you know how it works. If it is not moving the polling needle keep in mind the bias of those polls. The mere fact that they like him but not his policies cannot go on forever. At some point they will converge. When he does things they do not like it will translate. Over exposure and underachievement will be his fate. Words, words and lectures. There is the tipping point beyond which people no longer say give him a chance, or he inherited the problem, or he will solve the problem. It all just cascades. And people say fuck him, he lied to me, my life is worse.

    Personally, I see the signs of movement. I take heart in the article by Samuelson, not just because I respect him but because his word carries real weight. When I tell the media they are not doing their job they say who the fuck are you. When Samulson says it they are more inclined to listen. If we could drag the dark movers behind the scenes into the full light of day that would be good. There have been times in my own career when someone with alot of attitude and not much common sense would crash to party, tell everyone what they are doing wrong, and sometimes the best thing you can do is step back and let him just hang himself. And sometimes you have to forget what everyone else is saying and figure it out yourself.

    I think Mrs. Smith is right. Hillary and Bill have other issues to deal with now, like Chelsie’s wedding. If there was ever a child who stood by her parents in the worst of times and deserves a bright future it is her. By contrast just look at the spoiled Kennedy brats–including the obscene princess Caroline. Its always dawn.

  46. jbstonesfan: notice the structure of the Ralls argument. In order to get off the hook, he claims he is better than a republican who followed bush blindly after bush betrayed the values of his party. Maybe we can use that same argument. In other words:

    Dear Obamalover

    1. you say you are a liberal

    2. you say you supported him

    3. but he has betrayed the very values he stands for

    4. just like Bush

    5. some of his supporters betrayed their values to support him

    6. surely you do not intend to betray your values as the repubs did

  47. wbboei…you may be right…he may just overplay his hand…certainly realities like this will begin to take its toll:

    nytimes.com/2009/06/03/business/03mortgage.html?hp
    Obama’s plan not helping many Americans – still may lose their homes and jobs

    (NYT is starting to hit him on the foreclosures going UP!)

    or

    nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?hp

    federal government releases secret lists nuclear sites

    this is what happens when people are not paying attention and think everything is so la de da and one big adoring party…

    I agree with the comment that Hillary and Bill are above the pettiness…they are secure in who they are – they do not have the need to overcompensate…

  48. I had not heard that Chelsea was getting married. WHen is this happening and who is she marrying. This is great, Mom and Dad need something good in their lives right now.

  49. S says:

    “I agree with the comment that Hillary and Bill are above the pettiness…they are secure in who they are – they do not have the need to overcompensate…”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Yes, the Clintons aren’t petty people. However, when someone calls you a “bald-faced liar” in print… The difficult part is keeping your mouth shut until another time.

    You stand a better chance besting the opposition when you pick the time for a battle rather than having someone pick the time for you.

  50. confloyd here:

    h…

    hillaryunleashed.wordpress.com/2009/05/02/chelsea-clinton-getting-married-in-august/

    great pics of Bill, Hill and Chelsea..

  51. S

    From your NYT link about “the federal government releases secret lists nuclear sites”

    Disgraceful!

    “But David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said information that shows where nuclear fuels are stored “can provide thieves or terrorists inside information that can help them seize the material, which is why that kind of data is not given out.”

    The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.

    President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.

    As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document attributes its publication to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    How irresponsible. Now our 9/11 enemies have their own road map for divesting our country of our National Security. Sounds
    like someone has given them the information they need for Gorilla War fare. Using our own defense stronghold as weapons against us. Obama hands another plum to his second family.

    From the NYT link:

    (snip)

    “The report lists “Tube Vault 16, East Storage Array,” as a prospective site for nuclear inspection. It said the site, in Building 9720-5, contains highly enriched uranium for “long-term storage.”

    An attached map shows the exact location of Tube Vault 16 along a hallway and its orientation in relation to geographic north, although not its location in the Y-12 complex.

    Tube vaults are typically cylinders embedded in concrete that prevent the accidental formation of critical masses of highly enriched uranium that could undergo bursts of nuclear fission, known as a criticality incident. According to federal reports, a typical tube vault can hold up to 44 tons of highly enriched uranium in 200 tubes. Motion detectors and television cameras typically monitor each vault.

  52. This will be bambis viet nam. “Not an easily winnable war”. That is a great understatement by the corrupt AP. How bout a tragic war, a costly war, a stupid war, an unwinnable war. And bambi owns it. Where are the depraved little bots to object to this war. They cannot show their principles becasuse they have none. They are just rubes.
    —————————————————————
    KABUL – U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have risen to 65 so far this year, up from 36 over the first five months of 2008 — though U.S. and coalition troops have also killed hundreds more militants, an Associated Press tally shows.

    As newly arriving Marines enter the violent Afghan south — the spiritual home of the Taliban and the country’s major drug-producing region — the military said Tuesday that U.S. deaths will likely increase even further this summer.

    “We’re doing everything we can to ensure the deaths occur on the militants’ side, but there is a potential there will be an increase in U.S. deaths,” said Col. Greg Julian, the top U.S. military spokesman in Afghanistan.

    Story continues below ↓
    ——————————————————————————–
    advertisement | your ad here

    ——————————————————————————–

    No easily ‘winnable’ war
    In Washington, the U.S general chosen to take over as commander of American and NATO troops in Afghanistan said he believes the war is “winnable, but I don’t think it will be easily winnable.” Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal said at his confirmation hearing that avoiding civilian casualties is key to success.

    Civilian deaths, long a contentious issue in Afghanistan, are also higher this year because of militant attacks and U.S. and NATO operations.

    The latest U.S. death came Tuesday during an insurgent attack in the east that killed one soldier. On Monday, two roadside bombs ripped through two military vehicles in the same convoy, killing four Americans in Wardak, one province west of Kabul.

    U.S. counter-IED experts say they expect IED attacks — roadside bombs and suicide attacks — to rise 50 percent this year, contributing to the increase in casualties.

    The death Tuesday brought to 65 the number of U.S. forces killed in Afghanistan this year, according to an AP count based on military figures. Not counting the five deaths in June, U.S. deaths are up 66 percent the first five months of the year over the same period last year.

    Violence and attacks
    President Barack Obama has ordered 21,000 more troops into Afghanistan to bolster the roughly 40,000 already in the country. U.S. officials predict a rise in violence this summer as the troops enter militant-controlled areas where they haven’t previously operated.

    Sami Kovanen, a security expert in Kabul, said casualties among international troops are rising partly because Taliban attacks are becoming more effective. He said insurgents now have better — and more — weapons, and he too predicted violence would peak this summer.

    “We will see a steady increase of violence and attacks, which will be at the highest level during July-August, with an additional spike during the election,” said Kovanen, of Tundra Strategies. The country holds presidential elections on Aug. 20.

    The increase in violence has come at a high cost for militants as well. Insurgent deaths are up 90 percent so far this year, from 815 over the first five months of 2008, according to the AP count, which relies on statements from the Afghan government and international militaries.

    Click for related content
    NYT: Report finds errors in airstrike deaths
    General: War in Afghanistan is ‘winnable’

    Julian said more militants are fighting in Afghanistan now.

    “And primarily it’s more activity in areas where we haven’t had a permanent presence and directed activities at eliminating Taliban and al-Qaida leadership and their immediate associates,” Julian said.

    “I think there were quite a number (of insurgents) that have been there for a while that simply haven’t been engaged, and now there are head-on confrontations. And I think we’re going to see quite a bit more in southern Afghanistan, where the drug resources come from,” he said.

    Top Taliban leader believed dead
    In southern Afghanistan on Tuesday, British forces announced that they had killed an alleged Taliban commander called Mullah Mansur the previous day. The British described him as a major figure in the insurgency who was behind several bloody suicide bombings.

    Video

    McChrystal: Afghan ‘situation is serious’
    June 2: Speaking at his Senate confirmation hearing, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal says the challenge in Afghanistan is considerable and he expects casualties will likely increase.
    MSNBC

    Last month, U.S. and Afghan forces killed 60 militants and seized 102 tons of opium poppy seeds, drugs and chemicals during an operation in Marjah in Helmand province. NATO and U.S. officials have said they will increase operations against the country’s drug syndicate. The Taliban and drug lords pocket hundreds of millions of dollars from the trade.

    Thousands of Marines are now entering Helmand province, the world’s largest opium-poppy producing region. British forces have previously been the primary force in Helmand.

    In Washington, McChrystal stressed the importance of minimizing Afghan civilian casualties as allied forces apply counterinsurgency tactics designed to gain the confidence and support of the local population.

    “How we conduct operations is vital to success. This is a critical point. It may be THE critical point,” McChrystal stressed. “This is a struggle for the support of the Afghan people. Our willingness to operate in ways that minimize casualties or damage — even when doing so makes our task more difficult — is essential to our credibility. I cannot overstate my commitment to the importance of this concept.”

    The AP count shows that U.S., NATO and Afghan forces have killed 173 civilians this year, compared with 26 the same period last year. The tally also shows that militants have killed 242 civilians this year, down from 343 the first five months last year.

    However, 126 civilian deaths are in dispute in the AP count. The Afghan government says 140 civilians died in U.S. airstrikes May 4-5 in Farah province, but the U.S. says that 20 to 30 civilians died. The AP count attributed 30 deaths to U.S. forces from that battle and labeled 110 deaths as being in dispute.

  53. Was the “bold faced lie” quote recent? I can’t imagine Obama being so stupid. Okay, wait, maybe I can. Anyway, this sure won’t sit well with the Big Dog.

    *BTW, the Clintons denied Chelsea was engaged.

  54. Here are some of the reasons obama will fail

    1. brand fatigue

    2. sociopathological profile

    3. policies do not address lost jobs and housing

    4. flamboyance at taxpayer expense

    5. adversaries inside and outside govt.

    6. threatens powerful interests

    7. runaway inflation

    8. Afghanistan=Viet Nam

    9. elevating Saudi Arabia over Israel

    10. Bob Woodward

    11. Media Backlash\

    12. High taxes on everything

    13. illegal immigration

    14. lying on some critical issue

    15. new revelations

    5. deteriorating

  55. 16. revolt by the hard left to his betrayal of principles

    17. weak on security

    18. growing perceptions that his is unamerican

    19. realization that he is anti white, women, gays

    20. surrender of our sovereignty to world bodies

    21. gun control

    22. suppression of congressional primaries (Sestak)

    23. the general motors debacle

    24. the mortagage derivative cure coming

    25. Rezko, other shady deals

    26. the diminishing value of the race card

    27. more bank bailouts

    28. counterproductive health care policies

    29. mismanagement of China relationship

  56. # Kingsgrove Says:
    June 3rd, 2009 at 2:41 am

    Was the “bold faced lie” quote recent? I can’t imagine Obama being so stupid. Okay, wait, maybe I can. Anyway, this sure won’t sit well with the Big Dog.

    *BTW, the Clintons denied Chelsea was engaged.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    The quote was taken from Wolf’s new book.

    “*BTW, the Clintons denied Chelsea was engaged.”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I would too, if I were in the their position.

    The only disingenuous comment I found in the Boston Globe article mentiong Chelsea’s wedding was- “The wedding is to be in Martha’s Vineyard a normally sleepy hideaway-

    “Normally sleepy hideaway”? Yeah, maybe in January. The rest of the year the place is crawling with New Yorkers and you need a 2nd mortgage to get a martini and a meal.

  57. wbboei,

    Looks like Soros has been earmarked by the Obama Cartel for a short bus trip.

    bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=atr4DKRKsxzA

  58. I could not get to the link Mrs Smith, but if there appears to be a conflict between the two of them, it is definitely staged. At one of the fundraising events Obama attended in early 2008 with a Jewish audience, he and Soros played a little punch and judy routine, wherein Soros attacked AirPac so Obama could defend it before that audience and come off as pro Israel to that audience which he most definitely is not. As a result, they opened their wallets.

  59. The people who told me about this event senior LaRouche people whom I happen to believe. They assure me that Soros is one of his masters, but they also say that Soros himself represents a group called The City of London and the principal of that group is Lord Highcross. There is so much dirt in Soros history, he was educated at the London School of Economica, is the money man in the dimocratic party according to insider Don Iverson, and the open border, legalization of drugs and documented support for bambi that I find this information to be credible.

  60. Lord Ralph Harris of Highcross (1924 – 2006)

    “The assumption that every market ‘imperfection’ can be remedied by political intervention depends on the elementary non sequitur of perfect government.”

    Born in Tottenham in 1924, Lord Ralph Harris was a foremost champion for free markets in twentieth century Great Britain. After a first in Economics at Cambridge and a subsequent teaching stint at St. Andrew’s University, Lord Harris became general director of the Institute for Economic Affairs in 1957 (Lord Harris would hold the post of founding director until 1987). This institute would lay the intellectual groundwork for the vast free-market reforms in late 1970s and 1980s Great Britain. For this, Lord Harris earned the moniker “The Architect of Thatcherism.” A famous story relates how Harris teased Margaret Thatcher about this moniker, insisting that, in fact, Thatcher was an IEA-ite since the IEA had been promoting free-market ideas decades before Thatcher’s assent to the role of Prime Minister. To this, Thatcher is reported as replying, “Ralph, the cock may crow, but it’s the hen that lays the egg.” In 1979, Thatcher raised Harris to a peerage.

    The power of Lord Harris came not only from his intellect, but from the more intangible talent to translate economic arguments into pithy, commonsensical phrases and proverbs such as “the vote motive”, “prices effect quantities”, and “if it’s free, I’ll take six.” His joviality and good nature won the devotion of his friends and the admiration of his enemies.

    Lord Harris was also well known as a pipe-smoke enthusiast. As an active campaigner and the honorary president of Forest, a group that defends the right to smoke, he fumed against strict regulations on citizens’ freedom to smoke. His defense of freedom also took form as staunch opposition of the European Union, what he feared was European socialism reborn.

    A member of the Church of England, Lord Harris believed that the poor were best served by creating wealth and that such activity occurred most efficiently in a liberalized market. However, Lord Harris did not oppose governmental “safety nets” for the poor, only “hammocks.”

    From the founding of the IEA (which has inspired some one hundred similar think tanks in some seventy countries), to his involvement in the founding of Britain’s only private university, the University of Buckingham (rated tops in student satisfaction, due to the fact, said Lord Harris, that the student, not the state, was the customer), to his numerous writings, Lord Harris’s influence truly has been worldwide, and its effect truly revolutionary.

  61. The most brutal capitalists I ever saw were Thatcherites. Reganites on steroids. For awhile I worked for a German company who had some of them in its employ. They are like the flotsam and jettisom of the British Empire and have access to its wealth. Good old Highcross was somewhere to the right of nero despite his pithy hale fellow well met demeanor.

  62. The above posting must be an obituary. The people who write these sorts of things need to be subjected to a lie detector.

  63. wbboei,

    You express the situation brilliantly and I am in complete agreement with most of what you write.

    The thing I love about your analyses is that you seem able to predict some of the eventual outcomes which is way beyond my ‘paygrade.”

    Personally, I’d love to hear more about what you think is in store for the country during the next 3 years.

  64. A couple of other so-called journalists are beginning to point out BO’s campaign hypocrisy about his Muslim roots.
    “BO Say US is one of the Biggest Muslim Countries in the World.”
    blogs dot telegraph dot co dot uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/06/03/barack_hussein_obama_us_one_of_the_largest_muslim_countries_in_the_world

    This is revolting.
    What about the Newburgh 4 and the Arkansas soldier-killer?
    At least the local Catskill news is covering the Newburgh terrorists THOROUGHLY and officials are conducting large-scale Emergency Response Team exercises just in f***ing case!

  65. OMG!!!!!!!!
    Muslims are the new heros!
    Drudge fstory about a NYC Muslim deli-owner who takes opity on a would-be robber, gives him $40 and priomises not to turn him in as long as the guy converts to islam, which the robber vows to do.

    Sohail has a soft heart for a man down on his luck and he’d struggled in the past, too. So he struck a deal with the crying crook. He told him to promise he’d never rob anyone again.

    With that, Sohail pulled $40 out of his cash register and threw it at the thief.

    And then something even more remarkable happened.

    “He said he wanted to convert to Islam, that he wanted to be Muslim like me,” Sohail said, pointing to the video. “See? He is raising hand here, and taking oath.”
    I am NOY an islamophobe but i can NEVER forget 911, the town where I lived that was home to 3 or 4 of the hi-jackers, everything I’ve read, studied and seen about the lack of women’s rights in those societies.

  66. Clinton Fails to Win Cuba Consensus at OAS Meeting

    By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan

    June 3 (Bloomberg) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton left the Organization of American States general assembly yesterday without persuading the group to endorse a U.S. plan to welcome back Cuba as a member only after it meets democratic standards. “We have moved the debate very dramatically, but there is no consensus,” Clinton told reporters after emerging from a closed-door afternoon session with foreign ministers.

    The debate over Cuba’s status in the OAS reflects a festering divide between the U.S. and most of its Latin American and Caribbean neighbors over half a century of American isolation of the communist island 90 miles (145 kilometers) south of Florida. Negotiations continued into the night after Clinton left, and although a text that satisfied the majority seemed within reach, talks broke down.

    Assistant secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon said the U.S. had “worked with all the countries” and “thought we had a constructive document.” Not everyone could agree on a memorandum that would have lifted Cuba’s suspension if it adhered to the OAS’s principles of democracy and human rights, Shannon said.

    Strained Relations

    President Barack Obama has relaxed restrictions on family travel and remittances to the island and initiated talks on migration and direct mail links. Clinton underscored those shifts in her talks with OAS members as proof that the U.S. was no longer isolating Cuba. The U.S. imposed a trade embargo on the communist nation in 1962. “The Obama administration believes in reaching out to democratic and non-democratic nations alike,” Clinton said in remarks prepared for delivery to Latin American and Caribbean foreign ministers. “With the one nation in our hemisphere that rejects democracy, we are committed to pursuing a new approach.”

    The U.S. “will always defend the timeless principles of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law that animate our societies,” Clinton said in an emergency 10-nation working group to address the Cuba issue, according to a prepared text provided by her staff.

    The group, including Venezuela, Mexico and Brazil, was formed yesterday afternoon to try to bridge the gap between the U.S. and other OAS members.

    Clinton left the meeting to join Obama in Cairo, where he will give a major address to the Muslim world.

    No Agreement

    While representatives of each country will remain through the end of the two-day OAS assembly in San Pedro Sula, Honduras, many foreign ministers will have left. A senior Obama administration official said last night’s impasse made an agreement during the final session today unlikely.

    The U.S., along with Brazil, Chile, Mexico and a number of other nations, wanted to avoid a vote on a resolution that doesn’t have consensus approval. Nicaragua, Venezuela and other countries have pushed for a vote, even if the U.S. is left alone to oppose the lifting of Cuba’s suspension from the group.

    In the opening public session yesterday, Honduran President Manuel Zelaya said the OAS must “correct the error” committed in suspending Cuba. “Were we to leave this place without rescinding that decision taken in 1962, we would be complicit” with the mistake.

    Cold War Symbols

    Zelaya added that Cold War symbols must be “eliminated once and for all from this assembly.” The U.S. trade embargo against Cuba is “a useless blockade,” he said.

    The U.S. imposed the embargo on Cuba after Fidel Castro, who came to power in a 1959 revolution, expropriated land of U.S. citizens and companies and allied with the Soviet Union. Raul Castro succeeded his brother as president last year.

    “President Obama is taking a completely new approach to our policies toward Cuba,” Clinton said. She made similar remarks in El Salvador, where she attended the inauguration of President Mauricio Funes two days ago.

    Fidel Castro called her comments “humiliating and arrogant.”
    “What is the democracy and human rights that the U.S. defends?” Castro wrote in a column published yesterday on the Cuba Debate Web site.

    Two months ago, Obama opened the way for U.S. communications companies to set up mobile-phone roaming agreements with providers in Cuba. The administration is maintaining the trade embargo on Cuba that covers most goods, with exceptions for agricultural shipments from the U.S.

    U.S. Alone

    In advance meetings ahead of the assembly, OAS representatives had tried without success since last week to hash out a compromise resolution. Clinton acknowledged yesterday that the U.S. was “pretty much by itself” in insisting that Cuba’s return to the group be predicated on the release of political prisoners and democratic reforms.

    In San Salvador two days ago, Clinton stressed that the Obama administration is embarking on a new era in its relations with Latin America, highlighted by its decision to hold talks with Cuba and to engage the new president of El Salvador, who defeated a U.S.-allied rival party that ruled for two decades.
    “Some of the difficulties that we’ve had historically in forging strong and lasting relationships in our hemisphere are a result of our perhaps not listening, perhaps not paying close enough attention,” she said at a gathering for embassy employees in San Salvador.

    bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=avUed2.zTDHs&refer=us

  67. ADMIN!
    Can you embed!!!!

    Here’s the video clip of the murdered Arkansas soldier’s father talking about how he found out his son, William Long, had been killed.
    The story we DON’T see in the news.
    This is heart-breaking. Where is the press coverage? Where is the outrage?
    www dot blackfive dot net/main/2009/06/private-william-longs-father-in-interview-with-little-rocks-katv dot html

  68. BTW,

    Our treasury secretary still isn’t too good at managing his finances.

    ‘After reducing the price on his house in a tony New York City suburb to less than he paid for it, Geithner still couldn’t sell and recently rented it out instead, according to real estate agents familiar with the deal.’

    👿

  69. What Senator Obama said was important in Supreme Court nominees

    One of the most interesting aspects of any Supreme Court nomination is trying to read into the choice revelations of what the president is thinking, his values and goals.

    We’ve got two revealing videos below that help do that.

    With the recent nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the top court — she began her confirmation campaign courtesy calls on top senators Tuesday — President Barack Obama began his sales pitch to the nation and Congress by describing her important character as the finest, tried and true. And he described her rise from the public housing projects of the Bronx as an ultimate American success story.

    Republicans wisely hailed that too. Who can oppose the evergreen American hero Horatio Alger, even if he’s a she?

    Although Sotomayor’s eventual Senate confirmation is hardly in doubt as of today, the GOP will likely focus its examination and any possible political assault on Sotomayor’s allegedly activist judicial views and decisions. In coming weeks they’ll be poring over her hundreds of decisions seeking telltale clues. But perhaps more importantly for the longterm, what does her selection say about the man in the White House, the man who wants this confirmation process to move along quickly?

    Here, from the riches of C-SPAN’s video archives are two wonderful clips. Both are of then-Sen. Obama on the Senate floor opposing, first, Judge John Roberts’ nomination as Chief Justice and then Judge Samuel Alito as a justice. They are both revealing videos. They show the freshman senator (with speech text on…….paper, no TelePrompter) expressing admiration for and no reason to doubt the fine character of either man.

    But, ultimately, Obama explains on Sept. 22, 2005, a nominee’s character alone is insufficient to earn his support because both men, he alleges without detailing the merits of specific cases, too often side with powerful interests over others, with large companies against individuals, with prosecutors over defense attorneys.

    He says he’s seeking a judge who wants to “even” the playing field and that in a private meeting Roberts agreed. But Obama states that Roberts’ words are unconvincing and contradicted by his decisions. “Ultimately,” Obama says, “we need give more weight to his deeds than his reassuring words.”

    Something Sotomayor may hear thrown back at her during this summer’s hearings.

    Of additional significance is Obama’s outrage over Alito’s outright dismissal of some ordinary complainants’ appeals without a court hearing. Which, of course, is precisely what Obama’s nominee, Judge Sotomayor, did to the white firemen’s appeals in the increasingly famous New Haven reverse discrimination case. Hmmm.

    Now here’s Obama talking about his views on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Alito, another Obama Nay. These remarks on the Senate floor on Jan. 29, 2006, are especially interesting because the freshman Illinois Democrat criticizes Alito for too often “siding with the powerful against the powerless.” Again, we do not learn the merits or arguments of the unnamed cases Obama cites.

    scroll down and you can see the videos here:

    latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/06/barack-obama-supreme-court.html

  70. Sorry for multiple posts but I am livid about this.

    From Jeffrey goldberg.

    The eight a.m. NPR news update today included word of the fatal shooting of one soldier and the wounding of another outside an army recruiting station in Arkansas. The news reader, Nora Raum, outlined the incident and stated that the shooting appeared to have “religious motivations.” She did not name the suspect, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, or tell NPR listeners what those religious motivations might be. In other words, it could have been a radical Unitarian who gunned down the soldiers, or possibly a violent Presbyterian.

    Why the shyness? Why not tell people what is actually happening in the world? We saw this a couple of weeks ago, when the press only gingerly acknowledged that the malevolent though incompetent suspects in the synagogue bombing-conspiracy case in New York were converts to Islam. How is the public served by this kind of silence? The extremist Christian beliefs of George Tiller’s alleged murderer are certainly relevant to that case, and no one in my profession is hesitant to discuss them. Why the hesitancy to talk about the motivations of the man who allegedly killed Pvt. William Long?

  71. If there is a wedding, I hope Bill and Hillary leave off the Kennedy’s, Judas, and anyone else who betrayed them off the list.

  72. In San Salvador two days ago, Clinton stressed that the Obama administration is embarking on a new era in its relations with Latin America, highlighted by its decision to hold talks with Cuba and to engage the new president of El Salvador, who defeated a U.S.-allied rival party that ruled for two decades.
    “Some of the difficulties that we’ve had historically in forging strong and lasting relationships in our hemisphere are a result of our perhaps not listening, perhaps not paying close enough attention,” she said at a gathering for embassy employees in San Salvador.
    ——————————————–
    It looks like Bambis embrace of Chavez did not quite do the trick. He and his marxist counterparts are still marxists. Hillarys suggestion that the guy who took over the banks and ge is viewed as a leftist by some in the United States so he is in effect one of them did not seem to quite carry the day with that crowd either. Cuba and Venezuela continue to be the bastion of anti American sentiment despite all the hope and change he promised. Say what you will about those marxists, at least they know a con man when they see one, and that is more than you can say for his army of bots and our benighted press corps.
    One can only hope that when and if this whole thing crashes we hold certain journalists who were his enablers fully responsible for their treason. Surely that is not asking too much. Is it? Without them, this destruction of our country would not have happened. I do not absolve Bush, but he is now ancient history. It is Mr. Obama and his enablers who are responsible now, and there is no way to deny it. They are wrecking the system, the currency, and our liberty. That is the issue in my humble opinion.

  73. The Arkansas Muslim shooter had HELP! FBI found plans, contacts, sites on his computer!

    He said he would have killed more soldiers if he could have. Now the FBI is trying to find out more about this guy who TRAINED in YEMEN, and is looking for others.

  74. wbboei Says:

    June 2nd, 2009 at 10:52 pm
    wbboei – today I heard on tv that it is costing us something like $600,000 a day in interest for the takeover of GM….
    &&&&&&&&&&

    …and yet the layoffs continue. At least most of the upper management stillhave their jobs. Oh, their bonuses will be reduced, that makes me feel better. And the union heads now have some more clout, even though there will be less people in the unions after the layoffs.

    So the tax payer is getting hosed, the job losses continue.

    Well played, Mr. Obama, well played!!!

  75. My understanding is that a Clinton spokesperson firmly denied sometime back that there was going to be any wedding this summer. It could be that it is still a go but they are trying to keep it private, or that the rumor mill is at it again.

  76. TOE LICKER: THE CURE IS WORSE THAN THE DISEASE

    Morris sees obama’s popularity tied to perception that this is still “Bush’s Recession”, but how long can that last? And that obama’s cures are making it worse.

    realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/03/whats_keeping_obama_up__96803.html

    What’s Keeping Obama Up?
    ====================

    By Dick Morris
    June 3, 2009

    The Rasmussen poll conducted over the weekend of May 30-31 asked a key question designed to give us perspective on Obama’s current popularity. The question was whether the current problems “are due to the recession that began under the Bush administration or to the policies Obama has put in place since taking office.” In other words, who’s to blame, Bush or Obama?

    By 62-27, voters say Bush is still the culprit.

    As long as this opinion remains prevalent, Obama will continue to enjoy high popularity. But when it changes, as it inevitably must, we will see him begin a long, long fall.

    And this is the key measurement to watch.

    The real recession – dating from the stock market collapse – began four months before Bush left office. And it is now four months since Obama was inaugurated. From this vantage, it still looks to voters like Bush’s recession.

    But it will become increasingly obvious that the large deficit Obama has incurred while pursuing his cure for the recession is, on its own, causing more problems than it solves. As high interest rates and, most likely, inflation, begin to set in – with no relief in unemployment – it will be obvious that Obamanomics isn’t working and is, in fact, aggravating the economic trouble.

    Obama, recognizing the danger, has recently begun to speak out – without even cracking a guilty smile – against the huge budget deficit he created. He is trying to blame the deficit, too, on Bush. But voters will not overlook the huge spending sprees of January and February, when Obama quadrupled the 2009 deficit. They will come to see that spending as a huge mistake and will shift their blame to the new president who proposed it.

    Obama now faces a choice of poisons.

    He can leave taxes as they are and take the poison of high interest rates, rapid inflation and a new recession, all caused by the massive borrowing he has forced on the Treasury. If the Treasury cannot sell enough bonds at a reasonable interest rate, it will, of course “monetize the deficit” – economics-speak for printing money so that there will be enough to buy the Treasury debt at moderate interest rates. But the process of so vastly expanding the money supply (or even just leaving the current expansion in place without trying to soak up the extra money) will cause its own runaway inflation.

    Or Obama can break his pledge and raise taxes on everybody. His soak-the-rich approach will not be enough to cover the deficit. Especially when one factors in his healthcare proposals, big tax increases on the middle class become an increasing likelihood. And when we consider his cap-and-trade legislation, huge increases in utility rates also loom.

    Either poison will make it clear that the economy is suffering from the medicine Obama administered, rather than the original disease that started under Bush.

    And, of course, while we cannot predict precisely the start date of the Obama-generated misery, it’s pretty clear that it will be a long-lasting pain. Neither inflation nor the pain of higher taxes is going to go away soon. And either approach will probably kindle a new recession.

    Some economists think we will have an L-shaped recession from which we do not emerge for years and years. Others think it will be a W-shaped recession (not Bush’s W) in which we emerge briefly and then go back down again. But a U-shaped recession, in which we go down and then come bouncing back, probably cannot happen with Obama’s deficits now firmly in place. Then it will become clear that the cure was worse than the disease.

  77. His I am the alpha omega, the new heaven and the new earth, the prince of peace meme has a limited shelf life. People are starting to ask is he the messiah or the trustee in bankruptcy? What role if any did he and his benighted legions play in turning a recession into a depression? And did he do this negligently or intentionally–as part of a shock doctrine plan? These are the kind of questions I am hearing people ask usually in whispered tones. The point is his aria is no longer selling, particularly to people who think for themselves. When you have to wrestle with hard issues, the age of acquarius recedes into the background. But it is the moves that I believe he will make in the future that concern me the most. They will be the most destructive of our country. Again, keep your eye on China. In particular, watch for the deal–the faustian pact he makes with them to provide relief for our beleaguered economy, and to keep him in power through welfare state dependency. Then you can decide for yourself whether this is bullshit or not. The main thing to do now is stay focused.

  78. wbboei,

    So do you think he can succeed with “the faustian pact he makes with them (China) to provide relief for our beleaguered economy, and to keep him in power through welfare state dependency.”

    BTW, the new GM head is a 31 year old college dropout!

  79. White House: No ‘rancor,’ ‘ultimatums’ for Israel

    The White House is reassuring Jewish groups that it will strive on good terms with Israel’s government, handling the issue of settlements “quietly, professionally, and without rancor or ultimatums.”

    “While we may have some differences of view with Israel at the moment over settlements, we are trying to work through them quietly, professionally, and without rancor or ultimatums, as befits a strong relationship with an important ally,” a White House official wrote to an official for the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. “We are confident we can do that.”

    The JCPA’s Washington director, Hadar Susskind, said the White House told him he could share the email, without attributing it to a named official. The statement of policy comes as the White House’s Jewish allies seek to quell concern in the community regarding a looming confrontation over settlements.

    “The President’s commitment to Israel’s security is as firm as ever,” the official wrote.

    Here’s the full email, which also reiterates Israel’s commitment in the Road Map to stop settlement growth:

    The President has been very clear that he believes all parties have obligations and responsibilities to live up to if peace efforts are to have a chance to succeed. He does believe Israel has an obligation to stop settlements – that is clearly what Israel agreed to in the Roadmap. He also believes (and said when he met with President Abbas) that the Palestinians have obligations to end incitement and continue improving their security capabilities to confront terrorism. He also has talked about the Arab states’ responsibilities to make serious gestures of normalization under the Arab peace initiative now, not at the end of the process.

    While we may have some differences of view with Israel at the moment over settlements, we are trying to work through them quietly, professionally, and without rancor or ultimatums, as befits a strong relationship with an important ally. We are confident we can do that.

    The President’s commitment to Israel’s security is as firm as ever, which he has emphasized many times. In fact, his belief in pushing for two states and stopping settlements is significantly motivated my his concern for Israel’s future as a secure, democratic, Jewish state, which he strongly believes is in the United States’ interests.

    politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/White_House_No_rancor_ultimatums_for_Israel.html

  80. Point of clarification: the China deal I believe he will enter into will involve far more than the auto industry jobs I mentioned yesterday. Again, I am not asking you to believe. I am merely suggesting that if you want to understand what is really happening, then it will be productive to focus on this scenario, and ignore the distractions.

  81. BTW, the new GM head is a 31 year old college dropout!
    —————————————————-
    the perfect puppet.

  82. How is it that Drudge has had a headline that states that Air France flight had a bomb threat just before take off. It was searched and nothing was found.
    Why is it that MSM is not even bringing this up?? This had been up on Drudge since yesterday.

  83. wbboei,

    I have had a number of friends from Mainland China over the years. I think your hypothesis is completely plausible, not to mention fascinating.

    ‘Again, I am not asking you to believe.’ .

  84. So do you think he can succeed with “the faustian pact he makes with them (China) to provide relief for our beleaguered economy, and to keep him in power through welfare state dependency.”
    —————————————————–
    Basil: the answer is contingent on a number of factors, the largest one being whether we wake up soon enough. His game is to push things to the brink and then offer a solution we would not otherwise accept.

    In negotiations it is called the pig pot tactic. It heakens back to the Russian story of the woman who complained to her husband about the cow in her living room, but instead of removing the cow he brought in a pig, and when she complained about the cow and the pig, he brought in a screech owl and when she complained about the cow, the pig and the screech owl, he removed the screech owl and she was grateful and asked him ever so politely if he would remove the pig, and he consented and she thanked him profusely and said after do consideration I do not mind the cow in my living room nearly as much as I thought I did.

    That is how the game is played. And that is what I believe people like Mr. Obama, Axelrod and Emanuel have in mind for us. Of course, I am just a guess’n. What do you think?

  85. wbboei Says:
    June 3rd, 2009 at 4:33 am

    I could not get to the link

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Here is the story posted by Bloomberg:

    Soros Was Interested in Buying AS Roma Soccer Club, MF Reports

    By Flavia Krause-Jackson

    May 19 (Bloomberg) — Billionaire hedge-fund manager George Soros had been interested in buying Italian soccer team AS Roma SpA, MF reported, citing a letter and e-mails seen by the newspaper.

    Soros backed out when a group of Arab investors touted a much higher offer, the newspaper reported. Contact between Soros and AS Roma lasted between October and May, MF said.

    Last Updated: May 19, 2009 01:36 EDT

  86. White House: No ‘rancor,’ ‘ultimatums’ for Israel
    __________________________________________

    Please. Spare me the false assurances. It comes down to three questions.

    1. do the Israeli people trust Obama to protect their security?

    2. is the gameplan he proposes realistic, viable and reciprocal?

    3. if it does not work what is the exit strategy?

    I cannot tell them what to do. But if it were me, it would be no sale. I would explore the opportunities and not cross the rubicon.

  87. online.wsj.com/article/SB124398447730679113.html

    If Obama Had Carter’s Courage . . .
    Lessons from setting the freight railroads free.
    ================================

    By HOLMAN W. JENKINS, JR
    June 3, 2009

    Barack Obama is no Jimmy Carter. The latter really did face the unraveling of an indispensable industry. Mr. Obama faces not a collapse of the domestic auto industry, but collapse of two companies miserable enough to have been extant in the 1930s when the Wagner Act was foisted upon the industry.

    We have a second auto industry, founded after the political and legal system had thought better of mandatory unionization, born of foreign parents, mostly in the South. It’s surviving the recession without extraordinary help.

    In Mr. Carter’s day, bankruptcies were scything through the railroad sector, hurtling toward a rendezvous with nationalization. Conrail, an amalgam of failed Northeastern lines, had already been taken over and analysts foresaw a $300 billion bill (in today’s dollars) in the likely prospect that Washington would soon have to operate the rest of the nation’s freight railroads.

    A disaster must be truly sizable before Congress will correct its own errors — and the railroads were such a case.

    Rail executives and economists had been arguing since the 1920s, when competition from trucks and planes began to emerge, that comprehensive federal regulation had only distorted the industry’s pricing, driven away investment, and made competitive adaptation impossible. But the argument had a new ring now that Washington would have to bear the political risk of operating and subsidizing the nation’s rail services.

    It still took some doing on Mr. Carter’s part. When the bill stalled, a hundred phone calls went from the White House to congressmen, including 10 by Mr. Carter in a single evening. The bill essentially no longer required railroads to provide services at a loss to please certain constituencies. It meant going up against farmers, labor, utilities, mining interests, and even some railroads — whereas Mr. Obama’s auto bailout tries to appease key lobbies like labor and greens, which is why it can’t work.

    In his message to Congress, Mr. Carter warned of a “catastrophic series of bankruptcies” and “massive federal expenditure” unless deregulation was allowed to “overhaul our nation’s rail system, leading to higher labor productivity and more efficient use of plant and equipment.”

    Involving Congress meant the plan had to be explained and rationally coherent — features missing from Mr. Obama’s contradictory auto policies.

    In 1980, Congress passed the Staggers Act, ending a century of federal regulation and leading to the railroad industry’s renaissance. Leo Mullin, then a young Conrail veep, would later look back and praise all involved for having the fortitude to recognize that salvaging the taxpayer’s investment in Conrail meant more than fixing a single broken company — it meant fixing a defective regulatory environment.

    That fortitude is exactly what’s missing today, as it was missing from Mr. Obama’s statement on Monday, which attributed GM’s failure to sins by everyone but Washington.

    We’re still waiting for the brave, original thinking that we were told Mr. Obama represented. Like Washington circa 1978, he has landed for once in a situation where something more than symbolism is required of him. He has finally glided into the land of the real, where the key measurable outcome is no longer whether an audience is glowing with self-approval when he leaves the room.

    To wit, will GM become self-sustaining and profitable, as he promises, or a bottomless drain for taxpayer subsidies? (The same question applies to Chrysler and, likely, Ford, which may have only prolonged the Ford family’s run at the top by mortgaging the company to the hilt just before the lending markets closed down.)

    Nothing really will be solved, even by GM’s bankruptcy, until Washington recognizes its own policy incoherence — namely the impossibility of reconciling stiff fuel mileage mandates with gasoline prices set by the market, with a domestic labor monopoly, with a high degree of openness to international trade. (You can have three, but not four.)

    It took 103 years after the Interstate Commerce Act for Congress to junk the regulatory apparatus that destroyed the railroads. To get rid of CAFE after only 34 years would be some kind of record — if Mr. Obama had Mr. Carter’s courage.

    Let’s face it: CAFE has done nothing to reduce gasoline usage or oil imports (car owners just end up driving more miles). In 34 years, not a whisper of testimony has come from any quarter that the policy actually works. It only causes U.S. manufacturers to make small cars and dump them at a loss on the public, subsidized with the profits of pickups and SUVs.

    Detroit doesn’t have to match the transplants in wages and benefits, but CAFE distorted what would have been the Big Three’s natural path of adaptation to the natural fact of growing diversity in the marketplace with the arrival of foreign manufacturers. Detroit would have focused on market segments where it could compete profitably even with its higher labor cost — on bigger, pricier vehicles where labor cost is a lower share of value added.

    Unfortunately, Mr. Obama, that freethinker, took to the CAFE fraud like a bat to a belfry. He signaled his arrival on the presidential stage by sternly demanding higher mileage standards early in his campaign. The “change” candidate who might have broken with a generation of political cant about CAFE instead appropriated the fraud for his own careerist purposes.

    That tangled web now catches him in a fatal contradiction as he pours tens of billions of taxpayer dollars into the failed business model that CAFE foisted on Detroit.

  88. We’re still waiting for the brave, original thinking that we were told Mr. Obama represented. Like Washington circa 1978, he has landed for once in a situation where something more than symbolism is required of him. He has finally glided into the land of the real, where the key measurable outcome is no longer whether an audience is glowing with self-approval when he leaves the room.
    ————————————–
    Yes they are proud self congratulatory rubes who foisted this fraud on the country. As he fails to deliver on his promises, they will be inclined to lie for him, because to do otherwise is to admit they were wrong.

    But in the land of real world consequences, quantifiable outcomes are what count, not airy feel good symbolic exercises.

    Thus, when the consequences of Obama policies are negative they will have no choice but to fudge the figures as Jack Welch says Obama is now doing.

    Unfortunately, that does not solve the problem. It merely exacerbates it and moves matters to critical mass. Despite all that grace under pressure which Hollywood attributes to him.

    I read it differently. I see it as a sign of withdrawal, a reluctance to engage in problemsolving, and a perverse focus on his own ambitions.

  89. Still nothing on MSM sites about the terrorist attack in Little Rock…Wouldn’t want to interfere with the latest Obama trip.

    “WASHINGTON (AP) – The man charged with the Arkansas military recruiter shooting might have considered other targets, according to law enforcement officials.

    A joint FBI-Homeland Security intelligence assessment obtained by The Associated Press said officers found maps to Jewish organizations, a child care center, a Baptist church, a post office and military recruiting centers in the southeastern U.S. and New York and Philadelphia.
    (snip)
    Authorities said Muhammed targeted soldiers “because of what they had done to Muslims in the past.”

    ww.fox16.com/news/local/story/Little-Rock-shooter-may-have-had-other-targets/j8eY2nj3hkCex9duX7Pm2w.cspx

  90. wbboei Says:

    June 3rd, 2009 at 11:34 am

    ———————–

    I agree. They are trying to cover their tracks just like during the elections. It is my fervent prayer that these Jewish groups stop being duped by this terrorist-in-training president and his buddies once and for all.

  91. Jan–what can you tell me about a law in Canada which allowed foreign nationals from places like China to emigrate to Canada and be granted automatic citizenship if they made an investment in real estate over and above a certain threshhold amount? How many people emigrated to Canada under this provision? Did this eventuate in any incidents of spying? Was it part of the reason why French Canada expressed separatist sentiments at one time? Can you provide any details on this? A neighbor of mine told me about this precedent a few minutes ago.

  92. wwoebi,

    My memory about this is somewhat hazy. I remember that the French were quite bitter at the time about a lot of things. I will find out and get back to you.

    As far as the separatist issue is concerned, it was one of numerous reasons specific to Quebec feeling they were/are entitled to a free ride at all of Canada’s expense.

  93. basil9 Says:
    June 3rd, 2009 at 9:35 am

    BTW,

    Our treasury secretary still isn’t too good at managing his finances.

    ‘After reducing the price on his house in a tony New York City suburb to less than he paid for it, Geithner still couldn’t sell and recently rented it out instead, according to real estate agents familiar with the deal.’

    ==================

    New Mexico Fan has been posting about homeowners in NM having trouble selling their houses. Are all homeowners with this problem “not too good at managing their finances”?

  94. JanH -that statement by some unidentified white house aide is simply b/c a finally some, but not all, Jewish Congress members are finally hearing from their constituents whom they all assured that Obama was Isreal friendly. Just like Wexler, my representative, who backed BO from the start and is pushing BO’s Middle East agenda as aggressively as possible.

  95. OBAMA DESPARATE TO BE SEEN AS “DECISIVE”

    Obama is always asking for “quick action” on major legistlation, that inevitably
    a) are overly complicated
    b) contain gifts for pork barreling politicians
    c) pretend to be for the public’s good
    d) pretend to have transparency, but are crafted in secret with lobbyists filling in the details
    e) wind up making a bad situation worse

    He and his partners in crime in Congress have in just a few months already botched financial industry bailouts, closing Guantanamo, disclosing Bush terror and torture policies, the auto industry bankruptcies, and credit card reform. Why not rush through health care reform?

    Obama Urges Quick Action on Insurance
    ============================

    By ROBERT PEAR and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
    Published: June 2, 2009

    WASHINGTON — President Obama on Tuesday affirmed his support for the creation of a government-sponsored health insurance plan, but he acknowledged that such a plan would sharply reduce the chances for Republican support of legislation to overhaul the health care system, Democratic senators said.

    The senators, who met with Mr. Obama at the White House, said he also set forth a timeline, calling on Congress to send him a comprehensive health care bill by October.

    “He wants the bill through the Senate and the House before the August recess, so we can conference and have it done in September and signed in October,” said Senator Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. “He said we need to be unflinching and unflagging.”

    In remarks just before the meeting, Mr. Obama said: “This is going to be a heavy lift. I think everybody understands that. But I’m also confident that people want to get this done this year.”

    The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said he believed that the full Senate should be able to take up the health care bill and “hopefully finish it” next month.

    “But, you know, I don’t know,” Mr. Reid added. “We’ll have to see how long things take.”

    In response to a question from Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, Mr. Obama said that it was important to include a public plan option and that such a plan could help control health costs.

    Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, one of two dozen Democratic senators who met with Mr. Obama, said the president “spoke very enthusiastically about a public plan” that would compete directly with private insurers. The president’s words were comforting to Democrats like Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

    “The sentiment in the room, with the president and the rest of us, was that a public plan option will keep the insurance industry honest, will give people more choices in their health care and can save significant amounts of money,” Mr. Brown said.

    But other senators at the meeting reported that Mr. Obama also said he wanted a bipartisan health care bill, and they said he recognized that Republicans were strenuously opposed to a government-sponsored plan.

    Reid H. Cherlin, a White House spokesman, declined to characterize the president’s comments.

    Other Democrats said Mr. Obama suggested that as “a show of good faith,” Democrats might work with Republicans on other issues, like medical malpractice. Many Republicans would like to limit the amount or types of damages available to patients who sue doctors, hospitals and other health care providers.

    Another topic at the White House meeting was how to pay for covering millions of the uninsured.

    Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana and chairman of the Finance Committee, said Mr. Obama indicated that he “might consider” the idea of taxing some employer-provided health benefits, a proposal favored by Mr. Baucus.

    “It’s on the table,” Mr. Baucus said. “It’s an option.”

    The White House pushed back, saying Mr. Obama “made it very clear” that he preferred his own revenue proposals. Mr. Obama campaigned against taxing health benefits last year. Labor unions and many employers adamantly oppose a limit on tax-free health benefits.

    But in a report on Tuesday, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning research and advocacy group, said, “Congress is unlikely to be able to finance health reform legislation that includes universal coverage unless it limits the exclusion of employers’ health insurance payments from workers’ income and payroll taxes.”

    Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, who is battling brain cancer, did not attend the White House meeting and is not expected on Capitol Hill this week. But the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, of which he is chairman, met for more than an hour Tuesday to sift through options.

    To help control costs, the administration indicated support on Tuesday for a proposal to strengthen a federal panel that recommends how much Medicare should pay doctors, hospitals, nursing homes and other health care providers.

    Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, recently introduced a bill that would expand the role of the panel, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, and give its recommendations the force of law. Senators said Mr. Obama and his aides had expressed general support for such a change, which would establish the panel as an independent rate-setting body in the executive branch.

    Several senators said Mr. Obama had conveyed a sense of urgency and spoken emphatically about the importance of revamping the health care system in a way that would reduce costs.

    “The president made clear that history will judge us by whether this bill controls health costs,” said Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon.

  96. JanH -that statement by some unidentified white house aide is simply b/c a finally some, but not all, Jewish Congress members are finally hearing from their constituents whom they all assured that Obama was Isreal friendly. Just like Wexler, my representative, who backed BO from the start and is pushing BO’s Middle East agenda as aggressively as possible.
    ————————————–
    I have a visceral distaste for the loud, arrogant, obnoxious, and ethically challenged Mr Wexler. I remember too well the role he played in the RBC hearing stabbing Hillary candidacy. Seems like he had some problems with an investment scheme, there was some question about his residency, and some inside dope on him that I cannot quite recall. I am not in his district, but a long distance away, he looks to me like someone who should not be in congress at all. Does anyone here see it differently?

  97. Obama tells congress to stabilize faltering banks: “Get ‘r done”

    Obama urges legistlators to come up with a plan for credit card reform: “Get ‘r done before my Memorial Day vacation”

    Obama tries to get Repubs and Dims to play nice in health care: “Mix it up real good, but don’t land any punches. Come up with a bill that I can sign, which offends no one including the health insurance industry. Git ‘r done. Yee haaaa”.

  98. ANOTHER “PIVOT”??

    Pivot = Lie

    washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/02/AR2009060201491.html

    President Pivots on Taxing Benefits
    Obama Is Willing to Consider Move to Gain Health Reform
    ========================================

    By Ceci Connolly
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, June 3, 2009

    President Obama, in a pivot from some of his harshest campaign rhetoric, told Democratic senators yesterday that he is willing to consider taxing employer-sponsored health benefits to help pay for a broad expansion of coverage.

    Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Obama expressed a willingness to consider changing the existing tax exclusion. The decision would probably anger liberal supporters such as labor unions, but such a tax change would raise enormous sums of money as Congress and the White House are struggling to find the estimated $1.2 trillion needed to pay for health-care reform over the next decade.

    “Yeah, it’s something that he might consider,” Baucus told reporters after the meeting between Obama and Democratic lawmakers. “That was discussed. It’s on the table.” Obama had summoned about two dozen senators to the White House to keep up the pressure to enact a comprehensive health-care overhaul this year.

    White House officials moved quickly to clarify that taxing the health insurance provided by businesses is not Obama’s first choice, but aides refused to rule out the possibility.

    “The president made it clear during the campaign that he has serious concerns about taxing health-care benefits, and he has introduced his own revenue proposal, which he reiterated in today’s meeting,” spokesman Reid Cherlin said.

    Obama instead urged senators to reconsider his proposal, which would raise federal revenue by reducing itemized deductions such as charitable contributions and mortgage payments for the wealthiest Americans, according to one adviser in the meeting. Obama included that idea in his budget, reporting that it would raise $317 billion over 10 years, a sizable “down payment” on the cost of health-care reform. But Congress immediately labeled the proposal a non-starter.

    Private-sector businesses spend about $518 billion a year on their workers’ health insurance, benefits that are not taxed. If workers had to pay taxes on their health coverage, it would raise $246 billion in revenue each year, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

    Tax treatment of employer-sponsored health care cuts across party lines: Prominent Republicans such as Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.) support imposing a tax on certain health plans, while Democrats such as Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio) say that a tax would unfairly hurt middle-class workers with good benefits.

    Health analysts from across the political spectrum have pressed for changing the tax treatment, arguing in part that the exclusion provides the greatest tax relief to high-salaried workers with generous insurance plans.

    Last month, Baucus said he did not support eliminating the exclusion but was eyeing a benefit cap. Experts have outlined two likely approaches: taxing health benefits for workers above a certain income level; or taxing benefits over a certain value, perhaps $14,000 a year.

    Administration officials meeting with lobbyists in recent days have projected that a benefit cap might generate $35 billion a year, though Finance Committee staffers said the number could be much higher.

    Nevertheless, the issue represents treacherous politics for Obama, given his attacks on Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who advocated a similar approach during the campaign.

    “For the first time in American history, he wants to tax your health benefits,” Obama said in September. “Apparently, Senator McCain doesn’t think it’s enough that your health premiums have doubled. He thinks you should have to pay taxes on them, too.”

    Strongly desiring to declare a health-care victory this year, Obama is now taking a more nuanced approach, aides said. “His style of leadership is to say, let’s not get bogged down; let’s keep moving forward,” said one senior adviser who was in yesterday’s meeting. “He’s not ruling anybody’s ideas out.”

  99. “DUDE, IF WE ELECT OBAMA, WE’LL HAVE WORLD PEACE…”

    politico.com/news/stories/0609/23263.html

    War funding fight gets complicated
    ========================

    With new requests from the White House Tuesday night, a wartime spending bill could soon exceed $100 billion, adding to the risks of an already tense fight in the House over the addition of new financing for the International Monetary Fund.

    In a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, President Barack Obama said he was acting out of an “abundance of caution” in asking that $2 billion be added to the package to address the potential threat of the H1N1 flu next winter.

    The president also asked for an additional $200 million in foreign aid to address the refugee crisis amid the fighting in Pakistan, where an estimated 2.5 million people are now displaced.

    Democrats, who spent Tuesday hammering out the final details of the bill, had been shooting for a target just under $99 billion. But it will be very difficult now to avoid breaching the $100 billion ceiling if the president is to be accommodated.

    The fight comes as Obama begins a Mideast trip. The wartime measure is crucial to the success of his new Afghanistan-Pakistan policies as well as his standing as a leader in the global economic crisis.

    But to get to his goal, the new president will have to first swallow a dose of the same old-school Capitol politics he had pledged to change after moving into the White House.

    As part of the final House-Senate bargaining, hundreds of millions of dollars are expected to go to home-state Mississippi projects favored by Republican Sen. Thad Cochran, who was crucial to helping the bill move through the Senate. Billions more in foreign aid and defense funds are being added as part of a thinly veiled budget game shifting costs from 2010 into the current fiscal year.

    Just months ago, the White House had vowed to accept no earmarks or excess spending in the bill. But Cochran’s projects — including $489 million to restore barrier islands important to Mississippi’s vulnerable coast — were stubbornly defended by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), an Obama ally but also a realpolitik operator not willing to desert his partner in this fight.

    “This poses some interesting choices for Obama,” Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) told POLITICO. “He said, ‘No earmarks.’ Will he backtrack and sign it?”

    The administration appears more focused on just getting past the House, where Republicans have threatened to pull back their support for the war funds if the package includes IMF funding. The Senate approved the administration’s request as part of its debate on the war funding bill in May. But the issue has never been tested in the House, where Obama also faces unhappiness among Democrats over his decision to expand the U.S. military commitment to fighting Taliban forces in both Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan.

    All the warning signs have been there for weeks, but the fight quickly escalated Tuesday into a bare-knuckled exchange of insults. Republicans accused Democrats of crassly cutting defense money to make room for the IMF financing. Pelosi replied in kind, accusing the minority of refusing to support U.S. troops in combat.

    “We’re working it. We’re working it,” Pelosi told POLITICO before heading to a White House meeting with Obama. “The Republicans are saying they are not going to vote for the bill, the funding of the troops. They’re not going to support the troops.”

    “Let’s be clear: A troop funding bill should fund our troops, period,” Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in his statement. “I will oppose this legislation if it is loaded up with billions in spending that is unrelated to our military’s core mission of protecting our nation and our interests. Additional funding for the IMF should be judged on its own merits and in its own legislation. Our men and women in uniform are doing tremendous work to protect our security in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they should not be forced to carry billions in unrelated spending.”

    When the House first debated the war funding in May, it passed easily, 368-60, but with the support of 168 Republicans. If Boehner were able to reverse this as part of his IMF protest, Pelosi and Obama would be left with just 200 votes, or 18 short of a majority.

    A $100 billion-plus price tag for the bill will help Boehner make his case. And the 51 Democrats who opposed the war funding last month then become more of a target for Pelosi.

    Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is slated to meet with the House Democratic whip organization Wednesday. And in a taste of things to come, Pelosi looked across the room at her friend, Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), at a leadership meeting Tuesday and gently reminded him he would be a first target for her as one who had opposed the bill last month.

    In this atmosphere, liberal activists such as the American Civil Liberties Union were making their own demands for changes in the proposed agreement. At the same time, the IMF’s increased role as a source of credit financing for developing countries makes it appealing to some of the same liberals opposed to the war funds.

    House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who met recently with Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF’s managing director, said Tuesday he would support passage after opposing the bill last month. And Frank has the potential of bringing along other liberals from the Massachusetts delegation as well as his committee.

    “The only remaining issue is the IMF. The war funding is a foregone conclusion,” Frank told POLITICO. “There are a lot of poor people in the world, and while the IMF has not been a bastion of progressivism, Strauss-Kahn is trying to make it better, and this is a chance to show support for him.”

    Negotiators are hoping to complete drafting the bill by Wednesday, allowing for a formal House-Senate conference Thursday and possible House vote as early as Friday.

    While the final details had not been released, the core elements of the package will include about $77.1 billion for the Pentagon and another $9.5 billion for the State Department and foreign aid accounts.

    The defense funds are chiefly to pay for ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan but also reflect a greatly expanded U.S. commitment to Pakistan, including a new $400 million counterinsurgency fund to help train Pakistan’s military to better fight Taliban insurgents.

    The final defense bargaining focused chiefly on about $4.1 billion — added to the initial Senate bill but also requiring some cuts by the House. An estimated $800 million was expected to be dedicated to correcting a funding shortfall in military personnel accounts; the remainder, parsed out among major contractors seeking new purchases of planes and armored vehicles.

    Boeing was favored to get $2.2 billion for the purchase of eight C-17 transports. Lockheed, which makes C-130s, and General Dynamics, which manufactures the Army’s Stryker armored vehicle, were competing for the remainder, which they also had to share with funding for purchases of new heavily armored MRAPs in the 2010 budget.

    Both in the defense bargaining and foreign aid, many of the add-ons are an attempt by Congress to steal a step now on the coming budget year. In the case of foreign aid, for example, the final bill is expected to be about $2.6 billion more than the president’s request, and much of that money will go to advance already planned aid payments to countries such as Israel, Jordan and Mexico.

    This is an approach greatly favored by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey (D-Wis.) because it leaves him more room under the 2010 budget caps to write his domestic spending bills this summer.

    Obama’s latest request for Pakistan refugee aid can be accommodated in this framework without increasing the cost of the bill. But the $2 billion to address the flu threat — a priority as well for Obey– would be harder to absorb without going higher.

  100. rgb: do you remember that show–I think it was the Dukes of Hazzard, where they had that foghorn leghorn mayor who when confronted with any question that required serious decision making would wave his arms in the air and say “Handle it, handle it, handle it!” Decisive? Not hardly! Disengaged? Absolutely!! With Obama there is always a better gig. The Chicago Bulls are in town, some town, somewhere, etc. A very busy man he is. Busy speechifying, kissing ass and giving the country away Chicago style.

  101. turned-down,

    Why are you attacking me?

    I thought this forum was loose enough and I’d been posting long enough that the regulars would realize my criticism was of geitner, not of the average homeowner.

    Having been in the position of owning a home no longer worth what I initially paid for it I’m quite sympathetic to anyone else in that predicament.

    i am NOT, however, the slightest bit sorry for tax-cheat Timmeh and for me this is just more proof of his unfitness in heading treasury.

  102. I do not know why anyone, with any sense, would believe anything that Obama says. Typically it is nothing more than a cover story. Instead, watch what he does.

  103. By Ceci Connolly
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    —————————–
    She is one of the worst ideologues at WashPo. I have no doubt she reached for Frank Lunz or Roget to come up with the most benign word she could find for betrayal.

    If this dimwitted journalist wants to invoke marching terminology bequeathed to us by Fredrick The Great, she needs to understand that a pivot is different than an about face. The military command is not by the right flank march (a pivot), but countermarch, hup (an about face). Okay fine blame it on a misspent youth. But in her case, her ignorance of marching terminology is exceeded only by her ignorance of political reality, and refusal to tell the truth.

  104. Rep. King: Probe ACORN’s Financial ‘Spiderweb’

    Tuesday, June 2, 2009 8:24 PM

    By: David A. Patten Article Font Size

    Iowa GOP Congressman Steve King is calling for simultaneous FBI and congressional investigations into what he calls a “spiderweb” of shadowy financial and business relationships linked to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

    “With ACORN, it’s pervasive,” King tells Newsmax, referring to criminal allegations and malfeasance leveled at ACORN’s low-income, voter-registration operation. “It’s everywhere. It’s 12 or 14 states where there are investigations going on for voter registration [fraud].

    “ACORN has admitted to … around 400,000 fraudulent voter-registration forms being introduced. They claim they don’t hire people on commission, but they do hire people on commission,” King tells Newsmax in an exclusive interview.

    See Video: Rep. Steve King discusses his probe into ACORN – Click Here Now

    King says ACORN has over 270 corporate affiliates and business units that have received more than $53 million in federal tax dollars. Recent stimulus legislation, he tells Newsmax, could give the organization access up to $8.5 billion.

    According to a recent Fox News report, over 250 nonprofit groups list ACORN’s New Orleans headquarters as their address. One of those groups is Citizens Services Inc., which received $800,000 from the Obama administration in return for a get-out-the-vote program during last year’s campaign.

    Although King charges that ACORN is “in the business of electing Democrats,” he says its impact transcends politics. He tells Newsmax the organization has intimidated bank executives into making risky mortgage loans to people who shouldn’t have received them, adding that is “a contributing factor, I believe, to this financial meltdown that we have.”

    King, who has represented Iowa’s fifth congressional district since 2002, describes ACORN as “an organization that erodes the integrity of the election process,” adding: “I believe it has completely the face of a criminal enterprise, and it should be thoroughly investigated by Congress and the Department of Justice. And it should happen simultaneously.”

    Although King says ACORN is responsible for “hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registration forms,” the type of investigation he wants would go far beyond current state and FBI investigations for alleged voter fraud. Rather, it would look into the interlocking financial connections between ACORN and its affiliate organizations.

    To date, there have been four post-election prosecutions by state authorities involving ACORN. All focus on voter fraud rather than finances.

    “We need to do a lot more. We cannot let them bring down our election process,” King tells Newsmax.

    In the exclusive Newsmax interview, King also addressed the controversy surrounding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s allegations that the CIA lied in stating she had been briefed on “enhanced interrogation” methods, such as water-boarding.

    He says Pelosi’s security clearance should be withdrawn until her assertions can either be verified or disproven.

    King says the controversy stirred up by Pelosi’s assertion “puts our national security at risk,” because the CIA and 14 other U.S. security agencies no longer can have the “level of trust” they need to liaison effectively with the Speaker of the House. King blames this on Pelosi’s “wild allegations.”

    He also points out that the speaker follows only the vice-president in the order of succession, should anything happen to the president.

  105. wbboie
    I think the show was Carter Country
    Know idea why I can recall that obscure little show

  106. okay, I was too rough on her. If bambi backs off on a proposal to tax benefits, that is not a betrayal. A betrayal is more like telling constituents you support public financing and then reneging, saying you support civil liberties and then signing FISA, opposing torture and then favoring renditions, supporting civil court adjudication and then supporting a continuation of military tribunals, etc. This is simply an about face, backing away from a unfathomably stupid proposal, like releasing torture tapes, etc. I apologize for the lack of clarity.

  107. wbboie
    I think the show was Carter Country
    Know idea why I can recall that obscure little show
    —————————————
    Thanks Henry. You are right. They are planning a sequel: Obamanation.

  108. Basil said:

    Having been in the position of owning a home no longer worth what I initially paid for it I’m quite sympathetic to anyone else in that predicament.

    i am NOT, however, the slightest bit sorry for tax-cheat Timmeh and for me this is just more proof of his unfitness in heading treasury.

    ===================

    But why would it mean he is unfit, when many others, including you, are in the same situation?

  109. “It’s everywhere. It’s 12 or 14 states where there are investigations going on for voter registration [fraud].”

    ————————–

    Time for bambi and his thugs to get out the muzzles again.

  110. I e-mailed Wexler during the primary voicing my outrage for his support of Obama…he sent me back sdome taling points e-mail on how supportive BO was towards Israel. I pointed out that our district voted overwhelmingly for Hillary and he was not representing his constituents(mostly elderly Jews). About 2 months ago, I e-mailed him again voicing my displeasure, but to date, have not heard back from Mr. Wexler. What puzzles me about him was that he made a name for himself appearing virtually every night on some talking head show defending Clinton during the impeachment crap. I wonder what caused him to switch alliances ti BO.

  111. This is very smart strategy by Hillary. There are hardliners and moderates in China today. The hardliners are mostly in the military. Notice this is not a condemnation which the extremists in this country wanted by an invitation for China itself to re examine its past and set some appropriate ground rules. This gives the moderates some additional leverage. You can be sure Bambi never thought of this, nor the sychophants around him, eg powers, rice, craig et al.
    ——————————————————
    Washington – US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urged China on Wednesday to provide a public accounting of the violent suppression in 1989 of the democracy movement that took place on Tiananmen Square. Thursday marks the 20 anniversary of the Chinese government’s bloody crackdown on a student-led movement that left hundreds of people dead. Clinton issued a statement calling on Beijing to provide its citizens with basic rights embraced by the international community.

    “A China that has made enormous progress economically, and that is emerging to take its rightful place in global leadership, should examine openly the darker events of its past and provide a public accounting of those killed, detained or missing, both to learn and to heal,” Clinton said.

    Clinton urged China to release any prisoners still locked up for activities related to Tiananmen and to end the harassment of participants and their families.

    “China can honour the memory of that day by moving to give the rule of law, protection of internationally-recognized human rights, and democratic development the same priority as it has given to economic reform,” she said.

    Clinton came under sharp criticism from human rights groups during her first trip to Asia in February when she said that rights issues should not interfere with working with the Chinese to address pressing problems like the global financial crisis and climate change.

    The Chinese government has intensified security around Tiananmen in anticipation of possible protests, and has cut off access to news websites like BBC and networking ones like Twitter. US State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said the increased security is not the change the United States hopes to see from China.

  112. I e-mailed Wexler during the primary voicing my outrage for his support of Obama…he sent me back sdome taling points e-mail on how supportive BO was towards Israel. I pointed out that our district voted overwhelmingly for Hillary and he was not representing his constituents(mostly elderly Jews). About 2 months ago, I e-mailed him again voicing my displeasure, but to date, have not heard back from Mr. Wexler. What puzzles me about him was that he made a name for himself appearing virtually every night on some talking head show defending Clinton during the impeachment crap. I wonder what caused him to switch alliances ti BO.
    ———————–
    Good job. I suspect others in your district are doing the same thing. His feet must be held to the fire, so that he can hold Bambis feet to the fire. I suspect the closest he gets to Bambi will be Emanuel.

  113. I’m having some health problems that leave me little time and energy for long or softened posts. I’m not attacking any poster, just pointing out unclarity or possible logic points.

    (Hypertension and post-prandial drowsiness,etc.)

  114. White House Consulted American Religious Leaders on Muslim Speech

    June 03, 2009
    By Dan Gilgoff

    In preparing for the president’s speech tomorrow from Cairo, the White House did something it hasn’t previously in preparing Obama to engage Muslims abroad: It called on American religious leaders and experts, including many Muslims, for advice.

    In a conference call last month, Obama’s foreign policy speechwriter, Ben Rhodes, and aides in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships took input from Muslim, Christian, and Jewish figures concerning what the president should say in Cairo. “The White House did a very good job at taking advantage of the available expertise,” says Dalia Mogahed, executive director of Gallup’s Center for Muslim Studies, who participated in the call.

    It’s unclear how much of that advice will be reflected in the president’s speech. But those who were part of the call said the White House has already responded to a request from Muslim participants to invite an overtly Muslim organization to cosponsor Obama’s speech, to be delivered from Cairo University. The White House, the participants said, has since gotten Al Azhar University—a religious school, unlike Cairo University—to cosponsor the event.

    The White House declined to respond to a request for comment. But in a briefing for reporters on Friday, Denis McDonough, a White House deputy national security adviser, emphasized the importance of Al Azhar as a cosponsor. “The president very much appreciates the hospitality of Cairo University,” McDonough said, “but also appreciates the willingness of Al Azhar, one of the oldest universities in the region, to jointly host the event, underscoring the storied history and learnedness of Islam.”

    The roughly dozen participants on the call, who are affiliated with the White House faith advisory council’s task force on interfaith dialogue, were not previously consulted on Obama’s Muslim outreach offensive, which has included an interview on the al Arabiya television network and a speech and mosque visit while in Turkey in April. After the call, participants followed up with E-mails and memos to the White House.

    The competing priorities of the faith leaders and experts involved in the process illustrate the intense cross-pressures and political risks Obama faces in delivering what aides have described as a “Muslim speech.”

    About a half-dozen Muslim representatives involved in the process encouraged Obama to speak directly to Muslim grievances about U.S. foreign policy, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the American role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “I shared polling that shows that three major issues drive anti-American sentiment among Muslims around the world,” says Gallup’s Mogahed. “Perceptions of disrespect, perceptions of political domination and exploitation, and anger at acute conflicts.”

    At least one Jewish representative who was in on the call, meanwhile, discouraged Obama from tackling the Mideast conflict in the speech. “I raised the concern about whether the president would be able to spend enough time on the Arab-Israeli issues to make it worthwhile,” says Nathan Diament, who directs public affairs for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America. “If he is just going to shorthand it, he’ll probably generate more criticism over what he does not say.”

    Joel Hunter, an evangelical leader involved in the process, voiced an entirely different concern: that the president needs to keep his American audience in mind. “From a conservative evangelical viewpoint, this kind of speech causes a good deal of apprehension,” Hunter said. “He has to make us glad to be Americans and bring us along even as he’s making a policy statement to the rest of the world.”

    usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/06/03/white-house-consulted-american-religious-leaders-on-muslim-speech.html

  115. Turnedownobama,

    “I’m having some health problems that leave me little time and energy for long or softened posts.”

    I understand. Feel better.

    (I also know I’m not always the most precise poster)

  116. We’re still waiting for the brave, original thinking that we were told Mr. Obama represented.
    ——————-
    This one’s not new either. Rather, it’s Hillary.

    Obama open to Plan requiring everyone to get insurance.

    www dot nytimes.com/2009/06/04/health/policy/04health.html?hp

  117. Obama open to Plan requiring everyone to get insurance.
    —————————————————–
    What a slimy bastard. This is precisely what Obamation criticized Hillary for in the primary.

  118. Of course, someone has to pay for all that largesse. But as long as the check writers are in the minority, the majority can have its merry way. (Perhaps this is why Thomas Jefferson is reputed to have said, “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”)
    —————————————————————

    Wednesday, June 3, 2009

    Government Motors Is Dead. Long Live Government Motors…
    by Justice Litle, Editorial Director, Taipan Publishing Group

    It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent [sic] into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed…
    – Pravda Online, “American capitalism gone with a whimper”

    Pravda is the Russian word for “truth.” It is also the name of Russia’s most famous daily newspaper, with roots dating back to 1908.

    Boris Yeltsin shut down the original Pravda in 1991. It perhaps seemed fitting that, after 79 years as the official organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, the voice of the Soviet Union would die with the Soviet Union.

    But by the end of the ‘90s, the paper had resurrected itself in multiple new forms – including a tabloid version and an online version – thanks to the tenacity of former Pravda employees.

    The irony is exquisite, don’t you think? At a time when the American free press is unabashedly fawning in its coverage of the White House and the overall handling of the financial crisis, a former Soviet-era broadsheet sees fit to lecture the United States on its embrace of Marxism.

    “Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then [sic] the drama in DC that directly affects their lives,” thunders Pravda Online. “They care more for their ‘right’ to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights.” Oh, ouch…

    But does the “Marxist” charge (see opening quote) really have merit? Or is it just a combination of sour grapes and hot air?

    In answering that question, the General Motors saga – for all intensive purposes now Government Motors – seems a fair focal point.

    The Origin of Government Motors

    GM was once seen as a bastion of pride… a standard bearer of quality (if you can believe it), and even a hotbed of innovation… a shining example of all that was good and noble in the U.S. free market system. For a very long time, what was good for General Motors was, indeed, good for America.

    The Beach Boys once sang songs about GM cars. Can you imagine the songs that would be sung now?

    For nearly eight decades, GM was the largest carmaker in America (and thus the world). But for the last three of those decades at least, GM was on a trudging death march… a long, slow, denial-fueled slide into stagnation and decay.

    So what happened?

    The way to think about this, in your humble editor’s opinion, is to recognize that the transformation from “General Motors” into “Government Motors” actually began a long time ago. It has been a long, long road. This whirlwind of cram downs and rule changes and bailout billions is merely the coup de grâce.

    In many ways, General Motors wound up hostage to its own good fortune. At the height of its power, the iconic company was so dominant and so profitable that everyone in America imagined GM to be an unstoppable juggernaut.

    But the bigger and bulkier GM got, the more the company was viewed as a cash cow… no longer so much a lean, mean free market enterprise as a sprawling American institution, rich enough to hand out freebies to everyone – or at least anyone smart enough to get their hand in the till.

    It was this vision of never-ending profits and unchallenged dominance that cost General Motors dearly. The GM executives who made disastrous long-term deals with the unions in the ‘50s and ‘60s no doubt imagined the company would be just fine. Near the peak of its power, it was all but impossible to imagine a time when times would not be so flush.

    Is the story starting to sound familiar yet?

    The more profitable and dominant GM became, the more pressure the company faced (from union members and politicians alike) to “share the wealth.” The union members ultimately made it all but impossible to shut down production or close factories (other than at enormous cost). Politicians did the same thing at the state and local level, making it all but impossible to close down dealerships.

    The trouble with all this wealth-sharing is that the whole thing was a one-way street.

    In a more functional, two-way relationship, there is a recognition of the difference between good times and bad times. Like in a business partnership, for example. When times are good, the partners in the business do well. But when times are hard, the partners in the business do poorly. They share the pain of hardship.

    General Motors had no ability to share the pain of hardship with its “partners” – the unions, dealers, politicians and the like who all lined up for a piece of the juggernaut. In this GM was like a car that had no reverse gear. The political costs of doing business could be ratcheted up, but they could not be ratcheted down again.

    And so “General Motors” really started becoming “Government Motors” long before the handouts came, because this is exactly how governments work too. When times are prosperous, people want their government to be generous. When times are hard, people want their governments to be even more generous. There is no reverse gear.

    Of course, someone has to pay for all that largesse. But as long as the check writers are in the minority, the majority can have its merry way. (Perhaps this is why Thomas Jefferson is reputed to have said, “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”)

    …And a Long-Time Transformation

    So the first step in the transformation of GM was the cultural entrenchment of largesse – treating the company as if it were an ever-expanding arm of government, rather than a free market enterprise that needed to retain the ability to bend and flex with the times.

    The second step came when GM lost its way, and the official government (Uncle Sam) found increasing need to step in and help.

    Longtime car buffs argue that GM’s precipitous decline really began in the 1980s, with CEO Roger Smith. A reorganization gone badly wrong, combined with tough new competition from the Japanese, led to utter disaster. Quality went into freefall even as car plants began to idle. “By 1989,” BusinessWeek reports, “GM was losing more than $2,000 on every car it built…”

    Internally, GM’s bureaucratic corporate culture was another disaster. In an internal 1988 memo, one insider complained that “our culture discourages open, frank debate… there exists a clear perception among the rank and file of GM personnel that management does not receive bad news well… our most serious problem pertains to organization and culture.”

    As BusinessWeek further reports, former GM board member Ross Perot complained that same year that “At GM the stress is not on getting results – on winning – but on bureaucracy, on conforming to the GM System. You get to the top of General Motors not by doing something but by not making a mistake.”

    More than 20 years ago, General Motors already looked, felt and acted like a de facto Detroit wing of the U.S. government in all the ways that mattered – the shoddy quality of its products, the epic scale of its largesse, and the ham-fisted way it was run.

    Maybe it was inevitable, then, that “Government Motors” would finally be made official… and thus sadly fitting for Uncle Sam to take an outright 60% stake (with the unions getting a fair chunk of the rest).

    If so, perhaps we should think of this event not as a death, but a birth. Maybe GM is like some horrible moth, breaking out of its multi-decade chrysalis stage at long last. Government Motors is dead… long live Government Motors.

    More of the Same

    Back in December 2008, the not-yet-defenestrated Rick Wagoner predicted a GM bankruptcy could cost taxpayers as much as $100 billion. As it turns out, Wagoner is on track to be right. Unless, of course, that number turns out to be conservative – which it most likely will, when all the hidden costs are factored in.

    In total, Washington will be lending a cool $49.5 billion to the reorganized GM – a fresh $30.1B on top of the $19.4B already doled out. Those sums will then convert into the fore mentioned 60% stake. The governments of Canada and Ontario are also pitching in another $9.5 billion or so.

    In its bankruptcy filing, GM listed $172.8 billion worth of debts (makes you whistle through your teeth, don’t it?) and more than 100,000 creditors. The fallen icon will be kicked out of the Dow next week.

    So will the new Government Motors be a success – a leaner, meaner, more responsive car company as Washington hopes? Will the new GM be able to move with “pure, unadulterated speed” as interim CEO Fritz Henderson suggests?

    Don’t hold your breath.

    As Einstein more or less opined, one cannot solve a problem with the same consciousness that created it. Unfortunately, since GM has been sprawled face down in the bureaucratic ditch for decades now, changing the company’s political ownership status from “unofficial” to “official” is not likely to have much effect.

    Real, honest-to-God businesses are beholden to profit-seeking ownership interests, not largesse-seeking ownership interests. That’s why it is such a bad deal letting the government own much of anything. As soon as an asset or a resource becomes public property, it instantly becomes fair game for all manner of special interests and beady-eyed schemers to exploit.

    In that light, the “new” GM is going to be “owned” by a bewildering array of special interests – from union members, to environmentalists, to protectionists, to countless local interests at the state and federal level in multiple jurisdictions (and not just in the U.S., but Canada to boot). How many of those new owners can we expect to be worried about actual profits, versus carving out the biggest slice of the pie they can get? Hmm…

    Oh, and About That Marxism Charge…

    So, are the Pravda cynics right? Is America descending into Marxism at breathtaking speed, with General Motors serving as “Exhibit A” for the prosecution’s case?

    As with all our most entertaining discussions, I’ll let you be the jury on this one. But before you answer, quick – what’s the most famous thing Karl Marx ever said?

    For most of us, one of two phrases immediately comes to mind. First: “Workers of the world, unite!” And second: “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”

    The first of those statements – on workers uniting – is noble in its own way. Despite appearances to the contrary, your humble editor is not 100% anti-union. The drive for union representation certainly made sense in the early days of the industrial revolution, when children were put to work as labor slaves and workers were generally exploited within an inch of their lives.

    The real trouble came later, when the tables turned so thoroughly that the exploited became the exploiters. Union power overstepping its bounds, i.e. “Workers Unite!” taken too far, is one of the main threads of the GM story for the second half of the 20th century. Do some unions exist for good reason and advance their causes justly, even today? Of course. At the same time, have the unions – particularly the auto unions – covered themselves in glory these past fifty years? I don’t think so.

    The second statement – “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” – is far more frightening than noble. You can’t have a system that allocates the “from” and the “to” without putting a small circle of men (or women) in power… and to really do it right they need absolute power. Via Washington’s Byzantine labyrinth of smoke and mirrors, where much of the real power is wielded out of sight and behind closed doors, some would argue we are headed in that direction already.

    Others would argue that Marxism is the “harder” form of socialism, in which participation goes from small-scale and voluntary to large-scale and coerced – and further protest that we are nowhere near that, as both the media and the public at large are in favor of Washington’s latest moves. While distasteful in the extreme, these devil’s advocates might say, the GM saga is necessary for America’s healing.

    What say ye? Is such talk overblown, or is there real reason to fear the direction in which General Motors (and America) is headed? Speak now or forever hold your peace (or at least until next time): justice@taipandaily.com

    Warm Regards,
    JL

  119. hello hillfriends…touching base so I am not sure if anyone has already posted this…but get ready to have your blood start boiling…not that we didn’t know…but still…

    politico.com/news/stories/0609/23252.html A sheep in Wolffe’s clothing or

    the biggest suck up “journalist” at the moment…UNBELIEVABLE!

    sorry for duplication from moderation

  120. Israel Won’t Bomb Iran: Foreign Minister

    Wednesday, June 3, 2009 8:09 AM

    MOSCOW — Israel does not intend to bomb Iran, Israel’s foreign minister said Wednesday in the most explicit comments on the matter to date by a top minister of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.

    Speaking at the end of a three-day visit to Russia, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tehran’s nuclear program is the world’s problem, not just Israel’s, and that its Arab neighbors should be even more concerned about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel is.

    But he said those countries should not expect Israel to solve this problem for them.

    The comments marked a softening of signals from Netanyahu’s hardline government – particularly coming from Lieberman, one its leading hawks.

    “We do not intend to bomb Iran, and nobody will solve their problems with our hands,” Lieberman told reporters. “We don’t need that. Israel is a strong country, we can protect ourselves.

    “But the world should understand that the Iran’s entrance into the nuclear club would prompt a whole arms race, a crazy race of unconventional weaponry across the Mideast that is a threat to the entire world order, a challenge to the whole international community,” he said, in Russian. “So we do not want a global problem to be solved with our hands.”

    Netanyahu has repeatedly said Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, and has refused to rule out the use of force.

    After his recent meeting in Washington with President Barack Obama, Netanyahu said he and Obama agreed Iran must not obtain nuclear weapons, and attempts to solve the problem through negotiations could not be unlimited in time.

    Iran, whose president has expressed hatred of Israel, maintains its nuclear programs are only designed to provide electricity. But Israel, the United States and other nations fear the effort is aimed at acquiring nuclear weapons.

    Lieberman suggested Iran’s closer neighbors should be more concerned about a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel.

    “It’s clearly not an Israeli problem – it’s the problem of the whole Middle East, and those who are most concerned about the Iranian nuclear problem are the Arab countries,” Lieberman said.

    “I think that those Iran’s nuclear program frightens most of all are the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and all the others,” he said. “Iran is a factor of instability in the Middle East, without any connection with Israel.”

    Lieberman also said that issues such as the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs and instability in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Somalia pose greater global threats than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does – suggesting the United States should focus more on resolving other problems.

    He spoke as Obama began his first Mideast trip as president.

    Lieberman met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov during his Russian visit, the first since he – a Soviet native – became Israel’s foreign minister two months ago.

    Israel wants Russia, which has close ties with Iran, to increase pressure on Tehran over its nuclear program. But his visit brought no sign of a shift in Russian policy on Iran or Moscow’s engagement with the violent Hamas group, which angers Israel.

    “I won’t pretend that full mutual understanding can be reached in a single visit. Doubtless, there are disagreements.” Lieberman said. “But these disagreements were very clearly laid out and we will continue our dialogue with Russia.”

    © 2009 Associated Press.

  121. O’Reilly says he may have a connection between GE and the roadside bombs being used to kill our soldiers in the middle east. Let us hope no one is killed, but if they are and it is with a GE device that the public knows that people like Immelt put profits ahead of the lives of the American People. The man is evil incarnate. The same can be said for Zucker and Capus. Three of the worst people you will ever find.

  122. huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/03/obama-girls-heading-to-pa_n_211124.html

    we knew this was coming…suppose we pay and we can expect big flashy headlines…

    these people are shameless…

  123. From the jerk’s book
    **********************************

    Wolffe also describes a tense tete-a-tete with Hillary Clinton, in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses. The anecdote is illuminating in several ways:
    He was traveling to Des Moines for yet another debate and was getting ready to board his plane at the same time as Clinton was boarding hers, at Reagan National Airport. Clinton asked to talk to Obama and she apologized to him for comments by her New Hampshire co-chairman. Billy Shaheen had suggested that Republicans would exploit Obama’s self-confessed drug use if he won the nomination. Such comments had no place in her campaign, Clinton assured Obama, and Shaheen would resign. But Obama was not satisfied: he felt it was part of a pattern, which included an email forwarded by a Clinton volunteer in Iowa, suggesting that he was Muslim. Clinton grew agitated, waving her arms and poking her finger at him, as she hurled his own negativity back at him. Wasn’t he the one who just called her disingenuous for saying she couldn’t release her own White House papers? Wasn’t it his donor, David Geffen, who accused her and her husband of lying with ease? Instead of responding with anger, Obama tried to chill his rival, placing a hand on her arm. Clinton recoiled from the gesture, which seemed either patronizing or restraining, or both.
    The tale of this tarmac showdown is chock full of intrigue, and it seems to deflate the Obama mythos somewhat. His Jedi mind trick didn’t work on Hillary, for one thing. For another, having been offered an apology by Hillary, Barack committed a rare overreach, and it didn’t work out. Perhaps this was a calibrating moment for his famous temperament.

  124. But he said those countries should not expect Israel to solve this problem for them.
    ———————————————-
    That is the right statement for Israel to be making now. Enough of these bastards like the King of Saudi Arabia who tells you privately he would not be disappointed personally if Israel or the United States took action to eliminate the nuclear threat emanating from Iran, but of course if you do it we will be compelled to condemn your actions in order to appease the Arab Street as I am sure you understand. Thanks for nothing. With friends like that who needs enemies.

  125. The other thing this does is put the entire onus of defending Israel against an Arab attack on Obama. He may not realize that but it is true. The burden is now on him to get Iran to stop building a nuclear weapon. And the so called Arab allies can ponder the implications of a nuclear Iran to their own future. Clarity here is useful.

  126. gonzotx Says:

    June 3rd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
    Israel Won’t Bomb Iran: Foreign Minister

    —————————

    Another checkmate moment for Israel!

  127. “Obama tried to chill his rival, placing a hand on her arm. Clinton recoiled from the gesture, which seemed either patronizing or restraining, or both.”

    ————————

    What a sickening idiot he is.

  128. Order of Merit

    Is ONLY given to Muslims. there is a video there that needs to be embedded, he bowed again, of course to put the gansta necklace on. Fitting one might say!
    ************************************

    Obama’s Bling: U.S. Deficit Reduction Plan?
    Posted: 05:00 PM ET

    From CNN Senior White House Correspondent Ed Henry

    RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (CNN) — President Obama’s royal welcome here from King Abdallah included a gigantic gold necklace so ostentatious that White House aides are privately joking it could help solve America’s debt problem if it was turned in to a pawn shop.

    The necklace is officially called the King Abdul Aziz Order of Merit, the kingdom’s highest honor. It’s so massive that when Obama draped the necklace over his neck, it seemed to hang down near the commander-in-chief’s waist.

    Perhaps mindful that such a showy bit of bling might not exactly go over well in the middle of a U.S. recession, the president quickly removed the necklace by politely saying it would be good to take it away for “safe keeping.”

    One senior White House official later joked to CNN that the necklace is the administration’s new “deficit reduction plan.” Would the White House really sell it off?

    No way, the official quickly added with a smile, because the move “might not be received well” by his Saudi hosts.

  129. If you want to see the bling bow

    politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/03/obamas-bling-u-s-deficit-reduction-plan/

  130. Found @ BP
    ***************************

    Poll of the Day

    Did Brian Williams bow to Obama?
    Yes 49.2% 61

    I’m just glad he didn’t blow him 41.9% 52

    Who cares? 8.1% 10
    No 0.8% 1
    total votes: 124

    .blogpoll.com/poll/act_Vote.php

  131. Order of Merit

    Is ONLY given to Muslims.

    ————————

    The have him now. The Saudis et al are dragging an unreluctant president Judas into their family of vultures one piece of silver at a time.

  132. For those who worry about Hillary, I think she is doing fine. She will not be marginalized. No sense worrying about that.

    I agree completely, wbboei.

  133. Yes, the saudis were behind this all the way–not the manchurian candidate–the saudi candidate. One of the most corrupt and oppressive regimes in the world, and obama is joined to them at the hip.

  134. JanH Says:

    June 3rd, 2009 at 8:58 pm
    ***********************************

    If you take a lot @ that necklace, you will change your tune to a HUNK of GOLD @ a time…

  135. I found this comment on another blog and i am sooo believing this!
    **********************************************

    Why do I have the feeling this whole Muslim thing is slowly coming out that he really is a Muslim and we all are being fed this crud slowly to keep from choking on the truth all at once. And then when it finally is revealed that he is a Muslim the spin will be, “EH, who cares”. Of course we all thought it a long time ago, but things are just kinda falling into place a little at a time. Someone on here had said earlier today, I think, that this may be the reason he hasn’t picked out a church yet. Maybe he’ll just cut out the middle man and find a good radical mosque.

  136. Gonzo–I will buy that. Since Bambi is now part of the family, I trust he will speak to the King about the state sponsored torture of women. Since the King is anxious to achieve justice in the middle east re. the palestinian question, he may want to look first in his own backyard. Otherwise thinking people might be inclined to dismiss him as a rich, arrogant, oppressive, hypocrite–and torturer. Think how many school children could be educated, how many sick people in his kingdom could be cured if the would just donate the gold in the bathroom of his 747 to a worthy cause rather than himself. Obamas patron–mystery solved.

    Saudi torture of women rampant, says Amnesty

    By Robert Fisk, Middle East Correspondent (2000)

    The statistics say it all. In just 10 years, 28 women have been executed in Saudi Arabia, six of them in the past 14 months, without fair trials, beheaded or shot through the head – the Saudis will not say which – often on the basis of uncorroborated confessions. The most recent was Mukhtiara Khadem Hussein, a Pakistani woman judicially executed on 18 July because of a conviction for drug trafficking.

    The statistics say it all. In just 10 years, 28 women have been executed in Saudi Arabia, six of them in the past 14 months, without fair trials, beheaded or shot through the head – the Saudis will not say which – often on the basis of uncorroborated confessions. The most recent was Mukhtiara Khadem Hussein, a Pakistani woman judicially executed on 18 July because of a conviction for drug trafficking.

    Of these, 17 were foreign nationals, a “disproportionate percentage” since foreign nationals are only 25 per cent of the population. A Saudi woman was beheaded in public, according to independent sources only seconds before her daughter was executed for the same crime: murdering her husband, the daughter’s father. Noura bint Ubeid bin Aqla Zuebi and Aisha bint Muhammed bin Daydan bin Aqlaa Al-Zuebi were executed on 11 December 1992 in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province, scarcely 18 months after the West “saved” Saudi Arabia from Iraqi aggression.

    For the second time in six months, Amnesty International has turned its humanitarian searchlight on Saudi Arabia’s justice “system” – the quotation marks are essential – demanding to know why the kingdom’s judiciary and regal authorities should subject women to arbitrary detention, arrest, flogging and execution. An Amnesty report last March on human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia provoked the fury of the regime – but, at the least, a limited discussion within the ruling élite. The condemnation of the pro-Saudi press was predictable.

    Today’s Amnesty document, a painful account of the torture, imprisonment and punishment of women in the Kingdom, will undoubtedly produce similar results. Tales of the rape of Third World domestic servants by Saudi nationals and the brutal lashing of unnumbered Filipino women by so-called “judicial” courts will enrage the Saudi authorities. So they should.

    Here, for example, is the account of a 53-year-old Filipino woman, Violetta Calminero, who endured 150 lashes. “The three sessions of 50 lashes were administered in the space of five days … the lashes were administered in a room with three mutawaeen [religious police] sitting at a table. I was made to lean over a chair fully clothed with my abaya [a gown]… I noticed that if women squirmed or moved, the lashes became more intense.” Other women talked of being beaten by “religious” police after their arrests, or of being assaulted by husbands who demanded divorce. “Sometimes my husband would drag me around the floor by my hair,” a Saudi woman told Amnesty. “There were constant beatings with the head-rope. Towards the end, my husband would lock the bedroom door at night, to stop me [supposedly] going to have sex with a neighbour.”

    Saudi Arabia, Amnesty says in its latest report, is required to act in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognises “the inherent dignity and … inalienable rights of all members of the human family”, yet the Saudi authorities have “consistently failed to investigate allegations of abuses against women.”

    It quotes religious authorities as justifying a ban on women driving, moving freely outside the Kingdom or receiving a full education. A woman can, for instance, be a major shareholder in a company but is not allowed to attend a board of directors meeting.

    What Amnesty does not say – given Saudi Arabia’s oil-unique relationship with the United States, its political dependence on American arms in the Gulf and its fear of America’s “terrorist” enemies – is that not the slightest pressure will be exerted upon its authorities to abide by human rights laws. Even when tens of thousands of American troops were based in the Kingdom after Iraq’s invasion and occupation of Kuwait, discrimination against women continued unabated.

  137. Why do I have the feeling this whole Muslim thing is slowly coming out that he really is a Muslim and we all are being fed this crud slowly to keep from choking on the truth all at once. And then when it finally is revealed that he is a Muslim the spin will be, “EH
    ————————————————
    That is what I am saying. It is a case of boil the frog. If you plunge the frog into water that is already boiling then he will jump out. But if you put him in tepid water and slowly turn up the heat, he will not notice, will stay in the pot and will eventually die.

  138. OK , I do not like Jake, but,…these are Some Excerpt’s from Ani’s post @ NQ…..

    Pay attention to the part where, gee Obama HUSSEIN LIED about being first again..Gee wiz, it was that, I’m sorry, what was it that the fraud called Bill Clinton? A lying what?….
    ***********************************

    According to Jake Tapper of ABC News:

    Cheney was asked at the National Press Club, “given recent events in Iowa and elsewhere, is some form of legalized gay marriage inevitable for the United States?”

    “I think that freedom means freedom for everyone,” Cheney said.

    “People ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish,” said the laconic former veep, whose daughter Mary is lesbian, and has a son, Sam, with her partner Heather Poe.

    Cheney said “…The question of whether or not there ought to be a federal statute to protect this, I don’t support. I do believe that historically the way marriage has been regulated is at the state level. It has always been a state issue and I think that is the way it ought to be handled, on a state-by-state basis. … But I don’t have any problem with that. People ought to get a shot at that.”

    I know that VP Cheney has a lesbian daughter and all, but let me put it to you this way, if the world’s most reactionary VP, a/k/a my name is Dick “just call me Mr. Neo Con” Cheney can make a statement as progressive as that – for him – what the hell excuse does our most progressive President evah have for not coming out in favor of gay marriage, or at the very least, at long last repealing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” – since he has an overwhelmingly Democratic congress and with his popularity, he clearly has the political capital to do it.

    And what is the President doing? Tapper of ABC News reports POTUS Honors LGBT Pride Month by Not Supporting Same Sex Marriage, While Cheney Disagrees. Ouch!

    Saying he’s “proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration,” President Obama issued a presidential proclamation Monday in honor of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.

    To LGBT activists, however, some of the omissions on his proclamation likely spoke louder than the words included.

    Then, Tapper offers an UPDATE at the bottom of his post:

    It turns out that Mr. Obama’s claim “to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration” isn’t accurate, since by April 1993 President Bill Clinton had nominated two openly gay Assistant Secretaries.

    Double ouch! Always trying

  139. wbboei Says:

    June 3rd, 2009 at 10:04 pm

    ***************************************************

    Every time I read something on the treatment of Women in the Middle East I actually lose my breath. I am so overwhelmed with the lack of outcry by the Women of the World

    I want to see Hillary walk down a Saudi street with American clothes on, then get in a car, pull out a cigarette and give the Prince the finger.

    I really think if i lived in a city where there was a Saudi interest, Embassy or what not I would protest EVERYDAY….

  140. WBB

    I AM NOT AS ARTICULATE AS YOU AND HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN BOILING AMPHIBIANS!

    I AM SOOO CONCRETE I WAS HAVING A HARD TIME WRAPPING MY HEAD AROUND IT…

  141. You know the “one ” announced America had one of the BIGGEST POPULATION’S outside of the ME today… some fact checking @ NQ
    *************************************

    O boy, got to ask Wolfram Alpha something: religions percentages USA:

    Protestant 51.3

    Here is a What-Is-Obama-Smoking? Alert:

    Indonesia: 200 million Muslims. India: 156 million Muslims. Pakistan: 150 million Muslims.

    United States: 2.3 million Muslims (according to the Pew Research Center).

    Protestant 51.3
    Catholic 23.9
    Latter Day Saints (Mormon) 1.7
    Jewish 1.7
    Buddhist .7
    Muslim .6
    other 18.6

    The stunner for me in these results is that “Buddhist” edges out “Muslim.”

Comments are closed.