Archive for April 3rd, 2009

“Obama’s Ultimate Agenda” by Charles Krauthammer

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

WASHINGTON — Five minutes of explanation to James Madison, and he’ll have a pretty good idea what a motorcar is (basically a steamboat on wheels; the internal combustion engine might take a few minutes more). Then try to explain to Madison how the Constitution he fathered allows the president to unilaterally guarantee the repair or replacement of every component of millions of such contraptions sold in the several states, and you will leave him slack-jawed.

In fact, we are now so deep into government intervention that constitutional objections are summarily swept aside. The last Treasury secretary brought the nine largest banks into his office and informed them that henceforth he was their partner. His successor is seeking the power to seize any financial institution at his own discretion.

Despite these astonishments, I remain more amused than alarmed. First, the notion of presidential car warranties strikes me as simply too bizarre, too comical, to mark the beginning of Yankee Peronism.

Second, there is every political incentive to make these interventions in the banks and autos temporary and circumscribed. For President Obama, autos and banks are sideshows. Enormous sideshows, to be sure, but had the financial meltdown and the looming auto bankruptcies not been handed to him, he would hardly have gone seeking to be the nation’s car and credit czar.

Obama has far different ambitions. His goal is to rewrite the American social compact, to recast the relationship between government and citizen. He wants government to narrow the nation’s income and anxiety gaps. Soak the rich for reasons of revenue and justice. Nationalize health care and federalize education to grant all citizens of all classes the freedom from anxiety about health care and college that the rich enjoy. And fund this vast new social safety net through the cash cow of a disguised carbon tax.

Obama is a leveler. He has come to narrow the divide between rich and poor. For him the ultimate social value is fairness. Imposing it upon the American social order is his mission.

Fairness through leveling is the essence of Obamaism. (Asked by Charlie Gibson during a campaign debate about his support for raising capital gains taxes — even if they caused a net revenue (BEG ITAL)loss(END ITAL) to the government — Obama stuck to the tax hike “for purposes of fairness.”) The elements are highly progressive taxation, federalized health care and higher education, and revenue-producing energy controls. But first he must deal with the sideshows. They could sink the economy and poison his public support before he gets to enact his real agenda.

The big sideshows, of course, are the credit crisis, which Obama has contracted out to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, and the collapse of the U.S. automakers, which Obama seems to have taken on for himself.

Read the rest of the article here.

“Counting People Without Counting People” by Jeff Schreiber

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

According to The Washington Post, President Barack Obama has chosen University of Michigan professor Robert Groves as director for the 2010 United States Census. While the jury is still out as to whether Groves is paid-up as far as his taxes are concerned, one thing we do know is that the professor is an outspoken advocate for statistical sampling, the act of counting people by making geographical, demographical and mathematical estimates.

Twelve days ago, in a piece entitled A Crucial Count, I wrote briefly about the importance of the census, the different approaches to taking the census and the constitutionality of each, as well as the role of voter fraud specialists ACORN in the upcoming census. I also wrote that, despite studies showing the pitfalls of statistical sampling, we should not expect the fight for statistical sampling to be over.

Seems I was right.

Original Link.

“Obama Census Plan: No Illegal Alien Left Behind” by Michelle Malkin

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

I have seen the electoral future, and it is rigged. With fraud-prone, ideologically driven interest groups swarming the census-gathering process, the left is solidifying its chances of a permanent ruling majority. Lax immigration enforcement is the not-so-secret key to the Democrats’ power grab. And the Obama administration is all too happy to aid and abet.

At a meeting to mobilize volunteer trainees assisting with the decennial national headcount, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke encouraged the government’s partners to spread the word that privacy rights of census-takers would not be violated, and that accuracy and fairness would be ensured. Locke assured the activists: “We all recognize what is at stake.”

But do you?

The volunteer groups Locke is entrusting to protect accuracy and fairness include the voter registration con artists of tax-subsidized ACORN, the amnesty activists of Voto Latino and the labor bosses of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The fate of $300 billion in federal funding — and, most importantly, the apportionment of congressional seats — rest in their hands.

As for “privacy rights,” it’s not your privacy rights they care about. It’s the privacy rights of millions of illegal aliens, whose advocates have enshrined for them a sacred right never to be questioned about their immigration status. Obama’s census partners are using the process to pressure homeland security agents to halt interior enforcement efforts and workplace raids so that illegal alien cooperation with the national survey is maximized. Inclusion of the massive illegal alien population has resulted in a radical redrawing of the electoral map.

The census is used to divvy up seats in the House as a proportion of their population based on the headcount. More people equals more seats. More illegal immigrants counted equals more power.

This is not hypothetical. The Center for Immigration Studies determined that in the 2000 election cycle, the presence of non-citizens, including illegal immigrants, temporary visitors and green-card holders, caused nine seats in the House to switch hands. As the think tank’s analysis reported: California added six seats it would not have had otherwise. Texas, New York and Florida each gained a seat. Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin each lost a seat. Montana, Kentucky and Utah each failed to secure a seat they would otherwise have gained.

Translation in plain English: Open borders have profound consequences. And they don’t end with congressional apportionment. The redistribution of power extends to presidential elections because the Electoral College is pegged to the size of congressional delegations.

Read the rest of the article here.

Obama Bows to Saudi King – Called ‘Most Unbecoming for President of the United States’

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

President Obama greeted the king of Saudi Arabia with a full bow from the waist yesterday, a move one commentator described as a violation of protocol and not worthy of the office he holds.

“I am quite certain that this is not the protocol, and is most unbecoming a president of the United States,” writes Clarice Feldman in an American Thinker commentary.

The situation developed as leaders of the world attending the G20 summit in London assembled for a photograph to mark the event.

In this first image, after the king extended his hand while Obama approached, Obama bends from the waist until his head is nearly at the monarch’s waist:

President Obama’s bow to Saudi king

In a second image, Obama has straightened up and is exchanging remarks with the Saudi leader:

Obama speaks briefly with Saudi king after bowing

Video by a television crew was posted on YouTube. The bow comes at about 50 seconds into the video:

The action appeared especially awkward since among the dozens of world leaders and their spouses, handshakes abounded, but there appeared to be no other bowing in the room.

The U.S. State Department’s office of protocol did not respond to a WND request for the proper etiquette for two heads of state meeting, but the online Travel Etiquette website for Saudi Arabia said handshakes are common greetings between members of the same sex.

“You should expect to undertake a considerable amount of small talk, and learning a few Arabic greetings would be well received. Saudis will stand closer to each other than many westerners are used to, and members of the same sex will often touch arms when postulating or emphasizing a point. You should not draw away from this as it would be considered rude and rejecting. Be aware that due to the conservative nature of Saudi Arabian society, it is not considered proper etiquette for men and women to greet each other in public,” the site advises.

“It is proper etiquette to refer to a royal as Your Highness, and any members of the government ministries as Your Excellency,” it said.

Many of the proper procedures for meeting royalty are set by the British monarchy, since its members carry probably the highest royal profile around the world today.

The website for the British queen advises men who are from the United Kingdom to provide a neck bow (from the head only) “whilst women do a small curtsy. Other people prefer simply to shake hands in the usual way.”

“On presentation to The Queen, the correct formal address is ‘Your Majesty’ and subsequently ‘Ma’am’,” the site advises.

ABC reported Obama and his wife, Michelle, were less formal meeting Queen Elizabeth II earlier this week, when they exchanged handshakes. The queen briefly touched Michelle Obama on the back, and she returned the contact.

Pundits were surprised, since in 1992 Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating was criticized when he put his arm around the queen in violation of a general “no-touch” rule regarding royalty.

But the traditional Miss Manners book of etiquette advises: “One does not bow or curtsy to a foreign monarch because the gesture symbolizes recognition of her power over her subjects.”

Original Link.

Energy Costs Being Bumped $2,000 Per Household

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

The vice president for an energy research center says the administration of President Barack Obama is working now on what could end up being the biggest levy ever in the history of the United States, a tax that is expected to cost $2,000 per household.

“The cost of all energy will go up, consumers and businesses and everyone who drives a car, heats their home, goes to a job that uses energy, will pay more, either through the loss of their job or the actual cost of electricity by almost $2,000 a year,” said Dan Kish, the senior vice president for policy at the Institute for Energy Research.

Kish, who has more than 25 years experience on congressional committees, was interviewed by Greg Corombos of Radio America/WND and the audio of the exchange is embedded here:

He discusses how much revenue Obama wants from his proposal to tax carbon emissions and what that means to ordinary Americans.

Kish, who has worked as chief of staff for Republicans on the House Resources Committee, said the budget plan in Congress has “room” for the president’s request for about $650 billion over the next 10 years in energy taxes, although he said the administration has been flexible on that figure, estimating that it could go as high as $1.9 trillion.

“We might as well call it a tax,” he said.

Original Link.

North Korea Almost Certain to Launch Long-Range Missile

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

North Korea is almost certain to launch its long-range rocket, possibly as early as Saturday if weather allows, Reuters reported South Korean President Lee Myung-bak as saying on Friday, promising a “strong and stern response.”

“I think it’s almost certain North Korea will fire the missile,” he told reporters in London where he had attended the G20 summit.

President Obama gave North Korea a firm warning Friday, saying the provocative threat has put “enormous strains” on the international community.

“Should North Korea decide to take this action, we will work with all interested partners in the international community to take appropriate steps to let North Korea know that they cannot threaten the safety and stability of other countries with impunity, Reuters quotes Obama from a joint news conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Saturday is the start of a five-day window during which the North says it will send a communications satellite into orbit, and officials have said they think the North won’t wait. The U.S., South Korea and Japan think the communist country is really testing long-range missile technology — a move they have warned would violate a U.N. Security Council resolution banning the North from ballistic activity.

The launch has sparked international alarm because the North has admitted it has nuclear weapons and has repeatedly broken promises to shelve its nuclear program or halt rocket tests.

North Korea’s planned missile launch would be a “provocative act in violation” of a United Nations Security Council resolution, the White House said on Friday.

Original Link.

NYTimes: Good Thing Obama is Like Hitler

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

Do what? That’s right folks, Mr. David Leonhardt, of the New York Times, compares Emperor Obama’s economic policies to none other than Adolf Hitler.
Wow. That is a stretch in every direction.
I came under fire for comparing the Emperor’s mandatory “Volunteer Youth Brigade” to Hitler’s Sturmabteilung, or “Brown Shirts”, which is a closer comparison than comparing their economic policies.
NewsBusters has this to say:

“Here Leonhardt is taking the trains-on-time track with his Hitler angle by saying that, despite that whole Holocaust and World War II business, Hitler’s policies were good for Germany. So good, in fact, that he celebrates the ways he sees that Obama is emulating the mustachioed mad-man’s economic prescriptions with the massive takeover of the economy and bloated government spending on “stimulus.”

You know the left has lost it when they are invoking the “success” of Hitler to prop up The One!”

Every so often, history serves up an analogy that’s uncomfortable, a little distracting and yet still very relevant.

In the summer of 1933, just as they will do on Thursday, heads of government and their finance ministers met in London to talk about a global economic crisis. They accomplished little and went home to battle the crisis in their own ways.

More than any other country, Germany — Nazi Germany — then set out on a serious stimulus program. The government built up the military, expanded the autobahn, put up stadiums for the 1936 Berlin Olympics and built monuments to the Nazi Party across Munich and Berlin.

The economic benefits of this vast works program never flowed to most workers, because fascism doesn’t look kindly on collective bargaining. But Germany did escape the Great Depression faster than other countries. Corporate profits boomed, and unemployment sank (and not because of slave labor, which didn’t become widespread until later). Harold James, an economic historian, says that the young liberal economists studying under John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s began to debate whether Hitler had solved unemployment.

No sane person enjoys mixing nuance and Nazis, but this bit of economic history has a particular importance this week. In the run-up to the G-20 meeting, European leaders have resisted calls for more government spending. Last week, the European Union president, Mirek Topolanek, echoed a line from AC/DC — whom he had just heard in concert — and described the Obama administration’s stimulus plan as “a road to hell.”

Here in the United States, many people are understandably wondering whether the $800 billion stimulus program will make much of a difference. They want to know: Does stimulus work? Fortunately, this is one economic question that’s been answered pretty clearly in the last century.

Yes, stimulus works.

Further from NewBusters:

“Oh, sure Germany became a powerhouse previous to the outbreak of WWII. But, what Leonhardt criminally ignores is that Hitler made Germany a powerhouse by stealing the personal property and wealth of minorities and business owners alike and remanding them to the state. And then, to sustain this wild growth, he launched a war of greed and acquisition on his neighbors that added to that power but cost the lives of millions. Germany built this empire on the destruction of God-given rights, oppression of religious and ethnic minorities, and widespread death and war.”

The world gets crazier by the moment.

Original Link.

“Middle East Caricature” by Cliff May

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

Let’s not call the political cartoonist Pat Oliphant an anti-Semite or even an Israel-basher. Let’s just be clear about what he is doing: encouraging those whose intentions are genocidal.

Hamas unambiguously falls into that category. The Hamas Charter calls for Israel to be “obliterated.” Hamas’ founder, Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, said Israel must “disappear from the map.” Hamas spokesman and legislator Sheikh Ahmad Bahr has said that both Israel and America “will be annihilated,” adding: “Kill them all, down to the very last one.” Hamas-owned Al-Aqsa TV has promised: “We will wipe out the people of Zion, and will not leave a single one of them.”

Oliphant is not just any opinion monger. He is the most widely syndicated political cartoonist in the world, winner of the Pulitzer Prize and other prestigious awards. The drawing he distributed in late March shows a headless (therefore inhuman) figure representing Israel. The creature wears jackboots and is goose-stepping (because Nazis wore jackboots and goose-stepped). It has a brawny, hairy arm wielding a sword (to suggest it is primitive and bellicose). It is pushing a Star of David (the symbol of both Israel and Judaism) that has a shark’s face with an open mouth and long, sharp teeth (no explanation needed). It pursues its victim: a tiny, defenseless mother and child labeled “Gaza.”

The symbolism here is unoriginal. Dehumanizing Jews in cartoons is a tradition that dates back at least to Germany in the 1930s and has been maintained in the Arab press ever since. Nor is it novel to equate 21st century Jews with their 20th century executioners. But until now, such images have rarely, if ever, been so legitimized in the mainstream media. A corner has been turned.

Oliphant may not be interested in the context for the conflict between Israel and Hamas, but others should be. There is, for example, the fact that Israel occupied Gaza as a consequence of the 1967 war waged against Israel by Egypt, Syria, Jordan and other Arab states. Prior to that, Gaza was an Egyptian territory. There also is the fact that in 2005 Israel ended its occupation of Gaza. This fact is pertinent too: Many Gazans have supported Hamas knowing full well that the organization’s top priority is to wage jihad against Israel.

In recent years, that has meant raining missiles on Israelis, not least on Israeli mothers and children. A few months ago, Israel launched a three-week air and ground offensive in an effort to make Hamas stop.

It is not only Israel’s supporters who blame Hamas for the death and destruction that resulted. “The one responsible,” said Nimr Hammad, an advisor to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, is “Hamas, and not the Zionist entity, which in its own view reacted to the firing of Palestinian missiles.”

Wars can never be garden parties but during the recent conflict, far from acting like a headless monster, the Israel Defense Force took extraordinary efforts to limit civilian casualties, including, for example, making phone calls to Palestinian civilians to urge them to leave areas that would be targeted.

By contrast, Hamas took steps to increase non-combatant deaths. For instance, an Israeli armored brigade commander told The New York Times that his troops encountered “a woman, about 60 years old, walking with a white flag and six to eight children behind her, and behind them was a Hamas fighter with his gun. “We did not shoot him,” the commander said.

Read the rest of the article here.

White House Corrects Conference Call Number After Directing Reporters to Sex Line

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

I want you to notice two aspects of this article; 1) yet another Emperor Obama administration mistake, and 2) the condescending tone of the administration when asked for comment on the mix-up.
All are expected to toe the line in regards to Emperor Obama and his cronies. “Know your place, peasants!!”

Journalists seeking to talk a little foreign policy with high-profile Obama administration officials live from the G20 meetings in London this week were solicited for phone sex instead after ringing up the toll-free number given by the White House.

In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a sex line number for journalists seeking an “on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit.”

But after dialing, a soft-voiced female recording that was clearly not Clinton asked for a credit card number if you “feel like getting nasty.”

After several efforts to make sure that the phone number was correctly dialed, a call to the White House resulted in a corrected press release. “If you are having trouble dialing into the call, please try this number as an alternative,” and listed the international line included for reporters abroad to dial.

By this time, the conference call was already under way.

Asked for comment about this mishap, Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton responded: “A corrected phone number on a press release is probably one of the stupider things FOX News has covered lately.”

Original Link.