Monday, March 15, 2010

Obama's personal stimulus package fails to keep Florida Deli afloat

From NBC Miami:
Usually, a lunch visit by the President of the United States is enough to send a sandwich shops business through the roof.

But for the Deli Den, the presidential candidate Barack Obama's 2008 lunch was just the final highlight before it closed its doors.

The Hollywood deli and mainstay of the South Florida sandwich scene has served its last bowl of matzah ball soup and shuttered its doors Sunday, said its owner Bernie Emano. The shop has to be out of the store front by Tuesday.

Owners claim Obama's stimulus cash - his $53.77 lunch tab for potato latkes, Nova, cream cheese and bagels, black and white cookies and oatmeal-raisin cookies - wasn't enough to stymie the effects of the bad economy or a hike in rent..

The popular lunch spot's unexpected and sudden closure stunned customers who showed up for a sandwich on Monday. They found a "closed for business" sign.

Looks like Obama, who will be in Miami on April 15, and the rest of South Florida will have to find a new place to answer that lunch time hunger.
Question: Since Obama's political philosophy is: "The more spending, the merrier", why didn't he stop by the Deli for a second round of lunch and provide the business with a second stimulus package? An additional supply of cash from Obama's personal stimulus funds might have saved the day! Clearly, now is not the right time for Obama to be tightening his belt - both fiscally-wise and calorie-wise....

Thursday, March 11, 2010


From Roll Call:
House lawmakers on Thursday referred a resolution to the ethics committee that calls for a new investigation related to allegations that ex-Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) sexually harassed his aides, including a review of when Democratic leaders and their staffs learned of the accusations and their responses. ..

[House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi has said she was unaware of the ethics investigation into Massa’s actions until he announced his retirement last week, but media reports Wednesday indicated members of Pelosi’s staff may have been alerted to other concerns about Massa’s behavior, including his decision to live in a Capitol Hill townhouse with several aides, as early as October.

A Pelosi spokesman did not immediately return a telephone call for comment Thursday.

The resolution, which the House voted to refer to the ethics panel in a 402-1 vote, was sponsored by Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and echoes one introduced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who was then Minority Leader, in 2006 after allegations surfaced that then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) sent sexually explicit e-mail messages to a House page.
Pelosi, at the time, called on the House Ethics Committee to investigate Mr. Foley and the Republican leadership, including, Rep. John Boehner.

Flashback, October 2006:

The resolution introduced by Rep. Boehner on Thursday, would direct the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, known as the ethics committee, to form an investigation subcommittee within 10 days...

But the ethics committee does not have to establish an investigative subcommittee, or even respond to the resolution. To order an investigation, the House would be required to approve the resolution itself, rather than refer the resolution to the ethics panel.
Whether the ethics committee will actually investigate Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues remains to be seen. But at least for the time being, Pelosi is getting a taste of her own medicine.

Rep. Boehner was well within his rights to demand that Pelosi be given the same treatment that he and Republican leaders were given in 2006.

A little bit of retribution, I suppose.


Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Endless Deceit: Democratic lawmakers urged congressional budget leader to use outdated estimates of health care bill

From the Washington Post:
The projected cost of President Obama's plan to overhaul the federal student loan program has exploded over the past year, making it almost impossible to include the popular measure in the same deficit-reduction package that would be the vehicle for the final pieces of Obama's health care initiative, Democratic sources said on Wednesday.

In the weak economy, demand for student loans has risen dramatically, driving up the cost of Obama's proposal to expand Pell Grants and provide them to all who qualify. Congressional budget analysts, meanwhile, have told Democratic lawmakers that they are likely to see far less savings from Obama's proposal to diminish the role of private lenders in the guaranteed student loan program because one in five colleges has already abandoned the program in anticipation of the changes.

As a result, rather than saving $50 billion over the next decade, Obama's student loan initiative is now projected to increase deficits by about $5 billion over that period, Democratic sources said, adding that including it in the same package with fixes to the health care bill [which is what Obama is proposing] would wreck efforts to meet the deficit-reduction goals that are required under reconciliation rules.

At a meeting late Tuesday in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), advocates of the student loan program -- one of Obama's top domestic priorities -- urged Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) to simply use the old cost estimate when putting together the reconciliation package. Conrad resisted, according to people familiar with the meeting...
In similar vain, the New York Times reported:
The House bill was projected to save $87 billion over 10 years and would have spent $87 billion on Pell grants and other education initatives. [But Sen.] Reid’s office said a more recent estimate showed the bill would [actually] increase future deficits by about $36 billion...

In a meeting on Tuesday, [Representative George Miller, Democrat of California and chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, who is the leading proponent of the student loan overhaul] and other House Democrats pressed Mr. Conrad to rely on an earlier cost analysis of the House bill that had been prepared by the budget office.
Pray tell, how much more deceit can the American people tolerate?!!!

Louise Slaughter is Stupak's Lifesaver

From the GOP Leader blog:
The twisted scheme by which Democratic leaders plan to bend the rules to ram President Obama’s massive health care legislation through Congress now has a name: the Slaughter Solution.

The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill.

You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House – without an actual vote by members of the House.
Okay, perhaps you're looking up at the title of this post, still scratching your heads and wondering: How on Earth is Louise Slaughter, Bart Stupak's lifesaver?

Well, Slate Magazine expounds a little bit more on Louise Slaughter's proposal, and in doing so, provides the solution to the above conundrum:
Bill A, the Senate health care bill, has already passed with 60 votes. House Democrats don't like it. It has the "cornhusker kickback"... and other flaws. So they plan to fix Bill A with [the House bill] Bill B, a reconciliation bill. Bill B is the one House Democrats like.

The rub is that House Democrats don't want to vote on Bill A without assurances that Bill B will make it through the Senate and become law. If it doesn't, they get stuck having voted for the politically unpleasant Bill A without being able to say they tried to fix Bill A with Bill B...

One method for accommodating the situation [Louise Slaughter's proposal] (
first reported in CongressDaily) would allow the House to vote on the Bill B and, after doing so, simply consider the Senate health care bill (Bill A) as passed. There would be no actual up-or-down vote on the underlying bill. This would be the legislative equivalent of the economist's old trick of assuming a can opener.

This approach would serve two purposes. First, Democrats [like Rep. Bart Stupak] who think the Senate bill doesn't sufficiently limit abortion rights would never have to be on record as having voted for it... Second, if the Senate didn't fulfill its end of the bargain by voting on Bill B—remember, it's already passed Bill A—then House Democrats would be able to say: I never voted for that crummy Bill A. In fact, I only voted for that nifty Bill B to fix it...

Republicans will try to say that the vote on Bill B is the equivalent of a vote on Bill A while arguing that this sleight of hand represents just another contortion in the Democrats' headlong effort to pass health care. (They'll also make a similar argument about a vote on the "rule" that allows all of this to take place, but if I spend too much time explaining that, you'll never come back here again.) Democrats will hope this maneuver will allow them to pass health care...
Mr. Stupak can still support the senate's health care/abortion-funding bill without being on record as having voted for the bill. And thus, Louise Slaughter is not only Stupak's lifesaver, she is also a lifesaver for government-funded abortion. All puns intended.

And speaking of "sleight of hand", did you see Nancy Pelosi's latest health care/sleight of hand technique? If you haven't seen it already, click here to watch the House Speaker demonstrate this amazing feat!

Pelosi's sleight of hand - health care reform

Did the Obama administration violate the law when it interfered with the BBG's statement on Iran?

Several weeks ago, I reported via the Washington Post and The Cable that the Obama administration had tried to prevent the Broadcasting Board of Governors from protesting Iran's censorship policies, specifically the jamming of radio broadcast signals from abroad.

According to e-mails from Jeff Trimble - executive director of the Broadcasting Board of Governors - to several of his staffers, the National Security Council at first didn't want Voice of America to attach its name to a statement protesting Iran's censorship of the radio airwaves if it used the word "jamming." Later, the NSC modified its position to object to the use of the term "intensified jamming."
Dan Austin, director of VOA, acknowledged that changes had been made to the statement but declined to discuss the NSC's role. He said that the U.S. government should not be interfering with the BBG's editorial content, but acknowledged that on the communications and policy side, the lines were less clear.

"If it doesn't violate the letter of the firewall, common sense dictates it violates the spirit," a BBG official told The Cable on background basis.

VOA eventually joined the statement, and Trimble declined to confirm or deny that the White House pressured him...
Apparently, the Obama administration's actions aren't sitting too well with three Republican lawmakers who question whether the NSC might have broken the law by interfering in the BBG's policy making decisions:
Sens. Jon Kyl, R-AZ, Sam Brownback, R-KS, and Tom Coburn, R-OK sent a letter (pdf) Tuesday to BBG President Jeff Trimble demanding a full accounting of the actions of the NSC and the State Department in dealing with the BBG before it eventually issued the statement, which criticized Iran for its jamming of international satellites.

"If true, these actions constitute serious violations of U.S law, policy, and tradition related to the editorial independence of the taxpayer-funded Broadcasting Board of Governors. We believe it is important for you to address the claims made in the article," the letter stated.

"We also believe it's important for you to publicly indicate whether representatives of the administration, including officials of the National Security Council, the Executive Office of the President, or the State Department, were involved in any way in the drafting, preparation, or clearance" of the statement.

The senators demanded that Trimble identify the specific individuals who were involved in the statement, state whether anyone at State raised concerns about possible violation of the editorial "firewall" between the administration and the BBG, and detail all of the BBG's activities related to Iran since last June's election.

Several BBG nominees are pending confirmation in the Senate, the letter noted.

An NSC official..., admitted that the NSC held a series of inter-agency meetings on the issue after the BBG asked the council for advice and defended the interaction as "appropriate."
"After the BBG asked the council for advice" - yeah, right!
"The BBG approached the NSC for guidance regarding a specific request from BBC and Deutsche Welle to issue a joint statement with VOA," the official said. "The NSC then worked with State and BBG to review the content of such a statement to ensure it was both factually accurate and legally sound; the NSC endorsed the issuance of a joint statement, and a strong statement was indeed issued."
Apparently, the NSC believes that the term "intensified jamming" is neither "factually accurate" nor "legally sound" since Iran would never dream of "intensifying" it's signal-jamming policies, which is why the NSC finally acquiesced and permitted the BBG to use just the word "jamming" without the factually inaccurate, legally unsound and superfluous adjective: "intensified". Heh...

Personally, I don't believe the NSC is telling the truth, and I hope Senators Kyle, Brownback and Coburn get down to the bottom of this - but unfortunately, I don't think that will happen anytime soon.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Climate Change: Obama should heed his own words

In light of the recent Climategate scandal - in which climate change scientists suppressed peer-reviewed papers skeptical of global warming - it would behoove the President to heed his own words, specifically something he had said on March 9, 2009, when he signed the Stem Cell Executive Order and Scientific Integrity Presidential Memorandum:
Promoting science isn’t just about providing resources – it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists... do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda – and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology...

That is why today, I am signing a Presidential Memorandum directing the head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a strategy for restoring scientific integrity to government decision making. To ensure that in this new Administration, we base our public policies on the soundest science; that we appoint scientific advisers based on their credentials and experience, not their politics or ideology; and that we are open and honest with the American people about the science behind our decisions.
Sage advice! - If only Obama would abide by these principles.

H/T - a certain Liberal publication

CBS poll: Obama flunks 1st year - 63% give him an 'F'; 25%, a 'D'

In an interview with Oprah Winfrey in December of last year, President Obama was asked what grade he would give himself for his first year in office. The President replied: "A good, solid B+."

However, while Obama may think highly of his own job performance, the American people strongly disagree with his assessment. 6 in 10 give him an 'F' and another 25% grade him with a 'D', according to a CBS online poll:
An unscientific poll evaluating President Obama's first year in office that is being run by CBS News gives him – by an overwhelming margin – a failing grade.

The poll, which has been online for several weeks and has attracted thousands of comments, reveals that not even 3 percent of the respondents grade Obama with an "A," barely another 3 percent give him a "B" and about 4 percent give him a "C."

Almost 26 percent give him a "D" and more than 63 percent him an "F."

Said one person on the poll's comments section: "Obama may be a Harvard Law School graduate, but when it comes to common sense, he must of skipped that class, or failed it miserably..."


Fewer than 6 in 10 gave him an "A" or a "B" on the economy. Seventy percent gave him an "F" and other 18 percent a "D." On foreign policy, more than 84 percent gave him a "D" or "F" and only 3.9 percent gave him an "A."

On Obama's proclaimed No. 1 priority, health care, nearly 82 percent graded him with an "F" and nearly another 10 percent handed out a "D." Only 2.6 percent gave him an "A."...
Read the entire article here.

[Ed. Note: You will not see the CBS poll results until you actually grade the President's job performance and submit your response.]

Sen. Obama Denounces 2005 ‘Nuclear Option’

H/T - Breitbart

Related Post: Obama American Agenda Flashback: Dems Should Not Pass Healthcare With a 50-Plus-1 Strategy

Other News: Chief Justice Roberts: Obama's State of the Union criticism 'very troubling'

Pelosi: We must pass the health care bill so you can find out what's in it - Video

"We have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaking at the 2010 Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties - March 9, 2010

Pathetic: Democrats to waive PAYGO

At least that's what Erick Erickson of Redstate is alleging:
I almost missed this. It happens around 11am.

The Senate is going to vote on an amendment from Senator Tom Coburn. From an email friend:
The amendment would require the Senate to be honest about its ridiculous spending and post the full cost of all PAYGO violations online for taxpayers to see.

The Democrats have drafted a side-by-side amendment, to be voted on tomorrow as well. This vote is meant to give cover for members to vote against the Coburn amendment, and still be for “transparency.”

Their amendment would simply require the Secretary of the Senate to post links on its website to the CBO cost estimates and other budgetary documents for legislation passed by the Senate. This amendment does not require a tally of total spending passed by the Senate exempted from PAYGO, and provides taxpayers with no new information not already available online. The only reason to oppose the Coburn amendment is to hide the truth about Congress’ inability to stop its out of control spending and keep its word to live under PAYGO.
UPDATE: It gets better. The Democrats are going to put up a vote after the Coburn amendment to waive PAYGO — a law they passed only four weeks ago.
Of course, I have no way of confirming any of this. I'm simply relying on Mr. Erickson and on the email he received from a friend. Let's hope he releases some additional information.


From NRO:
Coburn's PAYGO Amendment Passes 100-0.


UPDATE: Sen. Coburn is not optimistic about the amendment's ultimate fate. From an e-mailed statement:

“Since the Senate passed PAYGO legislation three weeks ago, the Senate has passed nearly $120 billion in new spending that violates PAYGO. Today, minutes after the Senate accepted my amendment to post its violations of PAYGO online, Senators signaled their intent to remove this amendment from the bill before it goes to the President. Taxpayers are tired of this cat and mouse game on spending and will hold Senators accountable if they want to be for transparency in words but not action,” Dr. Coburn said.
Looks like Mr. Erickson knows what he's talking about. They are indeed going to waive PAYGO.

Slimy Democrats....

Monday, March 8, 2010

Health bill to affect part-time workers

From the AP:
A Democratic aide says a new provision in the health care bill will require businesses to count part-time workers when calculating penalties for failing to provide coverage.

The bill originally passed by the Senate only penalized businesses for full-time workers who weren't covered...

The inclusion of part-time workers is part of a package of final changes that is nearing completion, according to the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because it's not been made public.

Democrats feared that businesses would avoid penalties by hiring more part-time workers. But business groups oppose the change as overly burdensome.
It goes without saying that this provision will completely decimate the part-time job market. The Dems are clearly putting themselves into an even deeper hole.

Good luck with that one, Mr. President. You're gonna need it.

U.S. Muslim leaders forbid aid to troops

From World Net Daily:
American Muslims are banned from helping U.S. soldiers deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq and other "Muslim lands," according to a shocking fatwa, or religious decree, recently issued by American-based Islamic jurists.

One of the most respected Islamic law authorities in America has decreed it is "not permissible" for even Muslims who are citizens of America to send food or other aid to American troops serving in those Muslim countries.

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, or AMJA, ruled it is a "sin" to help the U.S. military in its multi-front war on terror. AMJA delivered the ruling through its online "fatwa bank":
"Q: Is it permissible to participate in taking food to the American and foreign soldiers working in Muslim lands?" "

A: That would not be permissible, for that would be helping others in sin and transgression."
Critics warn that such anti-military views by Muslim scholars have translated into homegrown violence against American soldiers.

Another American cleric, Anwar Awlaki, has decreed that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are crimes against Muslims and has warned fellow Muslim Americans not to serve in the U.S. military or support U.S. military efforts in any way. Recently, he has issued fatwas declaring U.S. troops and military bases open target for jihad.

The Fort Dix Six terrorists cited Awlaki's sermons as a prime motivating factor in their plot to attack Army personnel based at the New Jersey post...

In a series of e-mail exchanges, Awlaki personally counseled Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the accused Fort Hood terrorist... Hasan in late 2008 and early 2009 had asked Awlaki "about killing American soldiers and officers and whether that was legitimate or not."

In response, Awlaki gave his blessing to such attacks...
Read the rest

Dutch reporter exposes security loopholes on U.S.-bound jet

Earlier today, I reported via CNS News that the TSA will continue to use only a small portion of its terror watch list to screen airline passengers. It's comforting to know that Obama is still using Policial Correctness as his primary counterterrorism tool. But here's some more comforting news that is certain to assuage your fear of flying in the post 9/11/Abdulmutallab era:
A Dutch reporter said he sneaked liquid onto flights to the United States from the Netherlands, demonstrating gaps in security on international flights.

In a Dutch television program aired Sunday, reporter Alberto Stegeman said he and two others smuggled bottled water on flights from Amsterdam's Schiphol International Airport to London's Heathrow International Airport and onto Dulles International Airport in Washington...

The bottles could have held liquid explosives, yet he managed to get them aboard easily, Stegeman said.

"It is still possible to bring a bomb on the airplane into the United States from Schiphol," he said.

On Christmas Day, accused Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to detonate a liquid explosive attached to his underwear while on board Delta Flight 253 as it was landing in Detroit. Within days, new security measures were implemented at international airports, including pat-downs of passengers and manual checks of carry-on items. The plane carrying Abdulmutallab originated in Amsterdam.
Feel better now?

Obama administration seeking 'political cover' before it releases accused terrorist from U.S. justice system

From the National Post:
Obama administration officials are quietly seeking a way to repatriate Canadian-born terror suspect Omar Khadr, an authority in a position to know has confided...

Mr. Khadr's age of 15 at the time of the alleged offences is playing on the minds of certain administration officials – especially those with backgrounds in the type of activism that has clashed with some of the more controversial U.S. anti-terror efforts, the source signalled...

But even those seeking to return Mr. Khadr to Canada don't feel the United States can make the first move. They want Ottawa to ask for Mr. Khadr back so that the Obama administration has "political cover" to dodge any domestic backlash resulting from the release of an accused terrorist from the U.S. justice system."There are political repercussions," the source said. So administration officials are "looking for a Canadian [out]reach." Their determination to explore what "we can do" is nevertheless there, the source added. The U.S. "would like to send him back."

The U.S. Department of Justice declined comment on the issue.

The government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper has long publicly maintained it will not seek Mr. Khadr's return, saying he faces serious charges in the United States that need to be addressed...

Mr. Khadr faces five war crimes charges before the military commission system created under the presidency of George W. Bush. Among them is murder in the death of Delta Force Sgt. Chris Speer, who was fatally wounded by a hand grenade that Khadr allegedly tossed during a 2002 firefight in Afghanistan...

Sgt. Speer’s widow, Tabitha, is also expected to testify at any sentencing hearing. His death left her alone to raise their two young children.
h/t - Creeping Sharia

Related news:

Charming and chilling: Osma Bin Laden's bodyguard:
Osama bin Laden's [allegedly rehabilitated] former bodyguard, Nasir al-Bahri, says [in an interview] that he would like President Obama to commission him to establish a secure rehabilitation and re-education centre for terrorist detainees.

But then he goes on to say: “I do wish now that I had never left Afghanistan, that I was still with my sheikh [Osama Bin Laden].”


Acting TSA Head: Agency to Continue Using only Small Portion of Terror Watch List to Screen Passengers

Shortly after the failed Christmas Day bombing, President Obama ordered his homeland security adviser, John Brennan, to lead a review of the terrorist watch-listing system. Obama also directed Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to review aviation screening procedures. But apparently, political correctness still rules the day in the Obama White House:

From CNS News:
Acting Transportation Security Administration (TSA) administrator Gale Rossides said last week that her agency will continue its policy of screening airline passengers against only a fraction of the 400,000 name Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) and will continue to allow some terrorists on that list to board planes...

“TSA uses the No-Fly List and the Selectee List, two important subsets within the Terrorist Screening Database managed by the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center...," Rossides [told the House Appropriations Committee’s Homeland Security Subcommittee].

Rossides explained that terrorists on the No-Fly list are not allowed to board while terrorists on the Selectee list are subjected to “additional security measures” before being allowed to board their flights and continue their travels.

“Individuals on the No-Fly list should not receive a boarding pass for a flight to, from, or within the United States. Individuals (terrorists) on the Selectee list must go through additional security measures, including a full-body pat-down and a full physical examination of personal effects (before being allowed to board.)”

As previously reported by, the TSDB is, according to the presidential directive that created it, was intended “to detect and interdict individuals known or reasonably suspected to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism (‘terrorism suspects’) and terrorist activities.”

As subsets of the TSDB, the No-Fly and Selectee lists contain the names of “known or reasonably suspected” terrorists. However – as Acting Administrator Rossides revealed – the government does not use the entire TSDB to screen airline passengers, only the “subsets” that make up the No-Fly and Selectee lists, meaning that – as a matter of official policy -- the government allows some “known or reasonably suspected” terrorists to board airplanes full of American citizens...

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Will Obama and Ahmadinejad issue a joint statement about the 9/11 attacks?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Saturday dismissed the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States as a "big lie:
"September 11 was a big lie and a pretext for the war on terror and a prelude to invading Afghanistan," Ahmadinejad said...

In 2007..., Ahmadinejad... questioned the Sept. 11 death toll of around 3,000, claiming the Americans never published the victims' names.

[However], on the 2007 anniversary of the attacks, the names of 2,750 victims killed in New York were [indeed] read aloud at a memorial ceremony.
In 2007, Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth founder, Justin Martell, approached Barack Obama and asked him if he supported reopening an investigation into the 9/11 attacks.

Obama replied: "I think that we need to investigate a whole range of options, although I have to admit that, some of the issues that I understand you guys have raised I'm not as 'entirely confident' are the case."

Question: Since Obama has indicated in the past that he'd be willing to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, would he also be willing to issue a joint statement with the Iranian President about the 9/11 attacks?

Although Obama and Ahmadinejad have slightly different views on the matter - the Iranian President is 100% certain that 9/11 was an inside job and Obama is not 'entirely confident' about that - I'm sure they can come up with some kind of joint statement, questioning the facts surrounding 9/11, that would be agreeable to both of them.

Ironically, in 2008 [or 2007], when former President Bill Clinton was confronted by a couple of hecklers who accused the US government of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks, he replied: "Inside job? How dare you!"

Obviously, Bill Clinton does not share the same views as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with regards to the 9/11 attacks - which is why, unlike Mr. Obama, Clinton felt compelled to berate the 9/11 truthers for their outlandish and crude remarks.

But that is beside the point. What is significant, however, is that President Obama and his Iranian counterpart are both skeptical about the so-called facts surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Hence, the aforementioned subject would be a good starting point in any future discussions to be held between the two like-minded leaders.

Let's hope these two great leaders meet soon, so that they can reveal the truth to us once and for all.

Obama's Iran policy, one big joke

From the Washington Post:
The Obama administration is pushing to carve out an exemption for China and other permanent members of the U.N. Security Council from legislation pending in the Senate and the House that would tighten sanctions on companies doing business in Iran, administration and congressional sources said.

The administration's plan in effect would label China as a country cooperating in the U.S.-led drive to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and appears to be part of a broader strategy to prod Beijing to vote for a new sanctions resolution...

Among other things, the legislation tightens existing U.S. sanctions on Iran by targeting sales of refined petroleum products to the country and the administration would want it to include an exemption for the six countries seeking to negotiate with Iran on its nuclear program. The six are the five permanent members of the Security Council -- the United States, France, Russia, China and Britain -- and Germany...
From The Cable:
Several congressional aides told The Cable Friday that their bosses were getting impatient with the ever-slipping deadline for U.N. action and that a large exemption that includes Russia and China would not fly on Capitol Hill.

"When we had the discussions in December about cooperating countries, it boiled down to the fact that the administration was demanding an exemption that was large enough to drive a truck through and that was not well received in the Congress," said one senior congressional aide close to the discussions.
Investors Business Daily notes:
If China does not sanction Iran..., then sanctions are meaningless. China is a leading trading partner of Iran's and depends on Iran for 11% of its oil.
And here's the biggest joke of 'em all.

From the New York Times:
The federal government has awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments, grants and other benefits over the past decade to foreign and multinational American companies while they were doing business in Iran...

That includes nearly $15 billion paid to companies that defied American sanctions law by making large investments that helped Iran develop its vast oil and gas reserves...

Many of those companies are enmeshed in the most vital elements of Iran’s economy. More than two-thirds of the government money went to companies doing business in Iran’s energy industry — a huge source of revenue for the Iranian government and a stronghold of the increasingly powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps...

One of the government’s most powerful tools, at least on paper, to influence the behavior of companies beyond the jurisdiction of the embargo is the Iran Sanctions Act, devised to punish foreign companies that invest more than $20 million in a given year to develop Iran’s oil and gas fields. But... the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies...

Friday, March 5, 2010

Obama Budget Underestimates Deficit by $1.2 trillion, CBO Says

From Business Week:
President Barack Obama’s budget proposal would generate bigger deficits than advertised each year for the next decade, with the 10-year shortfall totaling $1.2 trillion more than the administration estimated, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Read the full article

Obligatory Harry Reid Gaffe Post: "Only 36,000 people lost their jobs today, which is really good!"

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Bachmann calls for "independent investigation" of Obama's judgeship nomintion

Cavuto Blasts Obama's Transparency Claims: "People Have Had It With Phonies!"

Stupak says Pelosi is lying

Obama American Agenda Flashback: Dems Should Not Pass Healthcare With a 50-Plus-1 Strategy

I already posted a link to this video on Wednesday, but since it reveals the very essence of Obama, it would be remiss of me not to embed it in a post of its own. And so, I am hereby fulfilling my duty. Heh:

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

News for your perusal

Obama caught lip-syncing speech - Video, Parody

Obama's 'Cyber Shield' will be reading your email contents

Afghan officials say freed Gitmo detainee now a Taliban commander

JFK air traffic controller let, not one, but two kids direct planes

Iranian dissidents in America report steady stream of death threats

Obama Flashback: Dems Should Not Pass Healthcare With a 50-Plus-1 Strategy - Video

Obama now selling judgeships for health care votes?

U.S. Underemployment 19.8% in February

AP Interviews Hamas spy

Obama pursuing Military ties with Libya

President Obama's foreign policy has essentially become a boon for despots all across the globe. During his short tenure in office, the President has managed to embolden the world's tyrants into taking steps they would have never taken while George W. Bush was President.

Last month, approximately five years after the US withdrew its ambassador to Syria, President Obama nominated Robert Ford as the new U.S. Ambassador to Syria. The President also lifted the long-standing U.S. travel ban on Syria. Meanwhile, Syrian President, Bashar Assad, has been seizing on his new-found relationship with Obama to further his own tyrannical agenda.

Last week, the Syrian leader met with Iranian President President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. The head of Israel's Military Intelligence's Research Division said Tuesday that Syria is crossing previous red lines in supplying Hezbollah with weapons and handing over arms that it never before dared transfer.

"Syria is handing over to Hezbollah components that it would not dare hand over before," he said.

Praise the Messiah!

Last week, Libyan leader, Muammar Qaddafi, called for a jihad [holy war] against Switzerland, which elicited an off-handed quip from State Department spokesman Philip Crowley. The Libyan foreign ministry later called in the US charge d'affaires demanding "explanations and apologies" over Crowley's quip, adding that there would be "negative repercussions on economic and political relations between the two countries if no measures" were adopted. [Crowley on Wednesday offered an apology. "I made an offhand comment last Friday regarding statements from Libya," he said, "it was not intended to be a personal attack."]

Of course, it goes without saying that Obama would do anything in the world to appease his Libyan counterpart. Souring relations with a despot the likes of Muammar Qaddafi is simply not an option:
Gene Cretz, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, said Tuesday that the United States is hoping to "put some flesh" on the bones of American efforts to deepen ties between these two former foes.

He outlined a number of steps the two countries might take in the coming year, including closer military-to-military relations, U.S. training of Libyan forces, a new trade agreement, and a human rights dialogue. The goal, he said, was to build a working relationship that can survive the "vicissitudes of politics"...

Cretz made the remarks at an invite-only luncheon organized by the Middle East Institute and underwritten by Bechtel and Coca-Cola. Libya's man in Washington, Ali Aujali, also spoke at the event, and the two men had kind words for one another...

Sarah Whitson, the Middle East director at Human Rights Watch... expects the United States to find more cooperation on military matters, as the Libyans are desperate to upgrade their training and equipment.
Last month, the Obama administration agreed to provide Lebanon with Hawker-Beechcraft AT-6 or Embraer Super Tucano planes to improve its capabilities in "reconnaissance missions" and "counter- insurgency operations." [Russia also agreed to provide Lebanon with state of the art Mi-24 military choppers.]

And so, it seems as if Obama's utopian vision for the Middle East is finally taking shape. I can't wait to see the final product!

Ah, "hope" and "change", how exhilarating!

Monday, March 1, 2010

Medvedev Takes a Page From Obama's Socialist Playbook

Taking his cue from President Obama, who - last year - had asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to resign, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Monday called for officials in charge of preparing Russian athletes for the Winter Olympics to resign after the country suffered its worst-ever performance in Vancouver.

"Those in charge of preparation for the Olympics must take responsibility right now. The responsible persons should take the courageous decision and submit their resignation," Medvedev said in televised remarks.

"If they cannot do it we will help them," he added, speaking at a meeting with leaders of the ruling United Russia party.

Vyacheslav Bykov, coach of the Russian Hockey team, directed his ire toward the players [last week], saying:

"Let’s put up a bunch of guillotines and gallows. We have 35 people on the hockey team. Let’s go to Red Square and dispatch with them all.”

Medvedev, in his critique of the Russian Olympic Federations, borrowed a term commonly used by President Obama: "Fat Cats".

"We need to think about how to change the system of preparing athletes. Its main focus needs to be the athlete himself, not the federations, which seem sometimes like fat cats," Medvedev said.

The Russian President also lamented the loss of the 'old Soviet school'.

“For a long time we were riding on Soviet-era potential [in the Olympics]," he said. "At some point it ran out. We’ve already lost the old Soviet school; it shouldn’t be idealized, but it’s gone, and we haven’t created our own school.”

Russia is hosting the 2014 Winter Olympics at Sochi, a resort on the Black Sea coast, and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party is taking “special control” of preparations for the Sochi games, according to Boris Gryzlov, chairman of the party and speaker of Russia’s lower house of parliament.

Clearly, President Obama, in his takeover of GM and the banking industry, has struck a chord with both Putin and Medvedev - who are now following in the footsteps of their beloved Comrade and Socialist mentor.