Monday, March 31, 2014

Oh, the irony.

There it was just above Democrat Illinois Gov. Quinn’s editorial pleading to make the state’s temporary income tax hike a permanent income tax hike, as if we could see that one coming.

You might remember that Illinois kind of went the “other” way a few years ago, hiking taxes on personal income 66 percent as a way of trying to get out of the de facto bankruptcy that politicians like Illinois Senator Barack Obama (Present!) had given the state.

Politicians and unions had combined in plan to grift taxpayers in a union pension scheme that was always going to blow up, whatever the economy did.

And so instead of cutting taxes to stimulate the economy, and get increased revenue for the state the honest way, the politicians-- the machine from which Obama was born—said “Screw ‘em: Let’s just make the taxpayers pay it and finally put the shovel to the economy.”

The tax hike was only going to be temporary they said.

It’s regrettable: “But what about the children, sniff, sniff?” They would starve if the state didn’t get more revenue.

I was a resident of Illinois for more than 15 years.

The tax hike dodge is an old one practiced by both Downstate Republicans and Cook County Democrats since well before I was born.

But this time it’s finally catching up with both parties.

Because above the fold, just above Gov. Quinn’s taxatorial pleading to make the income tax hikes permanent, was a compendium of statistics complied by the Chicago Tribune that stands as an indictment not just to tax hikes, but to Illinois, Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, Jesse Jacksons-- senior and junior-- anyone named Daley, practically any Illinois governor not indicted in my life time—we’ll call them unindicted co-conspirators-- and our current president of the United States (Present!) Barack “The-H-stands-for-Tax-Hike” Obama.

The list of statistics is a long recitation of how poorly Illinois has fared even in the worst economic recovery of the modern era.

Officially, therefore Illinois has become King of the Crap, Lord of the Flies, whatever.

In categories like business climate, unemployment, overall economic performance, and household income, the Tribune tells a doleful tale that is the logical extreme of Keynesian economics at it’s worst.

To keep the government running the state has had to completely gut the private sector.

In unemployment Illinois has gone from 9th in the nation to 49th-ish (or 56th-ish depending on how many states you recognize): “The latest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data — for January, seasonally adjusted — rank unemployment rates from a high of 9.2 percent in Rhode Island to a low of 2.6 percent in North Dakota,” says the Tribune. “At 8.7 percent, Illinois ties with Nevada for second-worst. Illinois now has 376,099 fewer nonfarm jobs than in January 2008 — a drop of 5.9 percent.”

And here’s a question for Illinoisans: How do you spend $14,000 per year, per student on K-12 education and not graduate the most prepared, highest scoring students in the history of the planet?

And it’s not fair saying that other states spend more.

For a class of 25 students, that’s $350,000 per year.

There are private prep schools that can graduate college ready students yearly for less.

Not surprisingly Illinois leads the nation in local governmental units with 6,963.

That’s a lot of union contracts.

Which of course is the real issue, isn’t it?

Illinois is run like an ATM for politicians and their pals while the taxpayers and citizens gets screwed.

But what once was just Illinois’ problem is now a problem for the whole country.

Because as a county under Barack “The-H-stands-for-Tax-Hike” Obama (Present!) we’re taking on the tone and coloration of the Land of Lincoln—and not the good parts.

Oh, the irony.

We voted for Hope and Change.

And we got Illinois.

It happens every time.
When Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif, went off on Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis, for his remarks that “We have got a tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work,” the wrong part what she had to say got all the attention.

The big buzz that Congressional Black Caucus member Lee generated was her accusation that Ryan’s remarks were a “thinly veiled racial attack.”

But the part of her remarks I found most interesting was “…Mr. Ryan should step up and produce some legitimate proposals on how to tackle poverty and racial discrimination in America.”

Paul Ryan has been one of the most creative and courageous policy thinkers in Washington in recent years.

Ryan sat down with me for an interview shortly before he ran for Vice President in 2012 (the interview is on my organization’s website His thoughtfulness and compassion came through loud and clear and he zeroed in on the core of a problem I have been talking and writing about for more than 20 years – government programs that not only do not solve problems but make problems worse.

I stepped into this whole business of public policy from my own experience with welfare. I saw that the welfare program, which operated in this country from the 1960’s until it was reformed in 1996, that required women to not work, not save, and not get married in order to qualify for their welfare checks was a most efficient mechanism to destroy family and perpetuate poverty.

So it should come as no surprise that single parent black households tripled as a percentage of all black households from the 1960’s to today.

Where Barbara Lee is right is that this is not about race. What it is about is liberalism.

The racial aspect comes into play in that black political leaders, like Congresswoman Lee, overwhelmingly embrace liberalism, progressivism, welfare statism – whatever you want to call it – that has failed and caused untold damage in the very communities they claim to want to help. And they refuse to ever learn. Their answer to every problem, despite prior experience, is more government, more taxpayer’s dollars.

When real reformers like Paul Ryan come along, they get branded racist.

In a column I wrote a couple years ago, I pointed out that the 41 member Congressional Black Caucus were uniformly Democrats, had a 100% reelection rates, and the average poverty rate in these Congressional Black Caucus districts was 20.3% and the average child poverty rate 28.8% - both well above national averages.

Economist Walter Williams has pointed out that, in America’s top 10 poorest cities with populations more than 250,000, “…for decades, all of them have been run by Democratic and presumably liberal administrations. Some of them – such as Detroit (now the largest municipal bankruptcy in the nation’s history), Buffalo, Newark, and Philadelphia, haven’t elected a Republican mayor for more than half a century. What’s more is that, in some cases for decades, the mayors of six of these high-poverty cities have been black Americans.”

Again, the point is not that the mayors of these cities are black. It is that they are liberals. And black politicians, like Congresswoman Barbara Lee, overwhelmingly are liberals, and they remain liberals, despite a long and consistent track record of failure.

When welfare was reformed, liberals like Barbara Lee fought it.

It is pure self-absorption for any interest group to think it is all about them. America is in real trouble today and we’re all in this together.

Ms. Lee talks about “code words.” Her code word is “racist”, which means someone, like Paul Ryan, who wants to make Americans of all backgrounds better off by giving them more freedom, more choice, more responsibility, and less government.

Kerry suggests defining Israel as “national homeland for Jews”

  / Jihad Watch
KerryJan2014Why exactly a “national homeland for Jews” would be acceptable to “Palestinian” Islamic supremacists in a way that “Jewish state” isn’t remains unclear, but the “Palestinians,” as maximalist and unilateral as ever, have already rejected the proposal, so we will probably never glimpse the arcane reasoning processes of the formidable Kerry.

“Report: Kerry suggests defining Israel as ‘national homeland for Jews,’” by Roi Kais for Ynet News, March 29 (thanks to Jerk Chicken):
US Secretary of State John Kerry is trying to overcome the controversy surrounding the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state by changing the definition to “the national homeland of the Jews”, the London-based Arabic Al-Hayat newspaper reported Saturday morning.
The report, that quoted western diplomatic sources, noted that in exchange for Kerry’s initiative, the Palestinians would have to agree that the Palestinian capital would be established only in parts of East Jerusalem; it was further reported that the Palestinians have rejected the proposal.
A Palestinian source told the newspaper that the American side has expressed willingness to change the principle related to the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and make it a requisite in a permanent agreement, however the Palestinians declined.
According to the report, the Palestinian side tends to pull the framework agreement out of the deliberations of fear it will be the new basis for negotiations that weaken the rights of the Palestinians. On the other hand, the newspaper claimed, the Israeli side has non-publicly expressed great enthusiasm to keep the agreement in place.
Meanwhile, western diplomatic sources said that if the formulating of the agreement will flounder, Kerry’s plan is to extend negotiations until the end of the year.
It was further added that Kerry and his aide Martin Indyk updated Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu informed them that his government will collapse if the fourth round of Palestinian security prisoners release will be executed, since it includes 14 Arab-Israeli prisoners.
The two, according to the report, demanded that Abbas agrees to extend talks in order to convince Israel to free the prisoners, yet Abbas rejected the effort claiming he is unwilling to discuss any matter related to the negotiations before the prisoners are released.
“While Kerry works to achieve a framework agreement, Martin Indyk examines the grounds to continue negotiations in case the framework agreement fails,” Al-Hayat reported.

68,000 illegal aliens with criminal records caught and released

Obama policy weak on enforcement

By Stephen Dinan / The Washington Times

**FILE** Men recently deported from Arizona wait in line to be registered with Mexican authorities at the border in Nogales, Mexico, on April 28, 2010. (Associated Press)Bottom ofImmigration agents tried to deport only about a fourth of the cases they encountered in 2013, said a report being released Monday from the Center for Immigration Studies that shows just how much President Obama’s policies have cut down on potential enforcement.
Jessica Vaughan, the report’s author, called it a form of “catch and release.” She said agents at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement received more than 720,000 hits on immigrants who could be eligible for deportation but filed charges against fewer than 195,000 of them.

Of those let go, 68,000 had criminal convictions on their records. All told, more than 870,000 immigrants have been ordered removed from the U.S. but are defying the government and refusing to leave.

“These numbers confirm that interior enforcement has been anything but tough — that in fact, ICE is releasing more illegal aliens and more criminal aliens than they’re trying to remove,” said Ms. Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates a crackdown on immigration.

The numbers are being released as Mr. Obama comes under pressure to cut deportations even more.

In meetings with immigrant rights activists this month, Mr. Obama promised to devise more “humane” policies that would carve even more illegal immigrants out of deportation rules.

Democrats, looking to shift the pressure, announced a petition drive last week to try to force House Republicans to bring a broad bill legalizing most illegal immigrants to the chamber floor for a vote.

“The only opposition seems to be among House Republicans,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat.

Still, immigrant rights groups are targeting Democrats. One group has announced plans to demonstrate outside of Democratic Party offices across the country to demand that Mr. Obama halt deportations on a broader scale.

Two years ago, the president announced a policy granting tentative legal status to more than 500,000 young adult illegal immigrants. The Homeland Security Department also has issued several policy memos pushing most other illegal immigrants down the list of deportation priorities.

All of that has led to an overall drop in deportations by about 10 percent in 2013 to just under 370,000. Deportations are on pace for another 10 percent drop this year, to about 325,000.

Homeland Security officials say they are budgeted to deport about 400,000 immigrants a year.

Immigrant rights activists call that the deportation quota and say Mr. Obama has had to go beyond serious criminals and rank-and-file immigrants to boost his numbers.

However, Ms. Vaughan’s study suggests that ICE doesn’t even go after all of the criminals it encounters. In 2013, ICE agents reported coming across 193,000 immigrants with criminal records — more serious than traffic offenses — yet they tried to deport only 125,000.

She said that in Arizona, ICE agents are even releasing illegal immigrants convicted of identity theft.

“The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that immigration enforcement in America has collapsed,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, an Alabama Republican who has fought legalization efforts in Congress. “Even those with criminal convictions are being released. DHS is a department in crisis.”

An illegal immigrant’s chances of facing arrest and deportation proceedings often seem to depend on where they are caught.

Agents in the Los Angeles office released 81 percent of the immigrants they encountered. Down the road in San Diego, agents released only 5 percent, according to the report.

Ms. Vaughan said the ICE encounters weren’t random. In each case, there had been either a database hit or a specific lead that showed the immigrant may qualify for deportation — though in many cases, the investigation may have found they were not eligible for removal.

Vice President Joseph R. Biden may have tipped the administration’s hand on expanding the categories of those exempt from deportation. Speaking to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce last week, he praised illegal immigrants as exemplary.

“I believe they’re already American citizens,” Mr. Biden said.

Some activists argue that breaking immigration laws and ignoring previous deportations shouldn’t be enough to get kicked out. They received backing last week when John Sandweg, former acting director of ICE, penned an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times arguing that those folks aren’t public safety threats and should be allowed to stay.

“To be sure, those who repeatedly cross our borders illegally or abscond from the immigration court bear culpability. However, making this population a priority detracts from ICE’s ability to track down and arrest the increasing number of much more serious public safety threats the agency identifies,” he wrote.

Selling out the Constitution...selling out America
By: Diane Sori

After a visit to Amsterdam to attend a G7 meeting to discuss how to punish Vladimir Putin for his 'supposed' nationalistic annexing of Crimea, and after attending a two-day Nuclear Security Summit in the Hague, Barack HUSSEIN Obama then visited Brussels (a city whose population is a shocking 40% muslim...guess he felt right at home there) where he cost the city $10.4 million for the additional 350 security people needed to keep him safe. And he brought with him an entourage of 900 people and three cargo planes carrying 45 vehicles...and God only knows how much that cost we taxpayers...all to stand before the EU and NATO summits to say that "Our Constitution is outdated and international law is supreme."

And knowing how much Obama loves his pen and phone, if he had his way he would render null and void the entire Constitution by Executive Order and do so in the blink of an eye.

You know it, I know it, and Obama knows we know it, yet he simply doesn't care that we do.

Now just imagine the press coverage if a Republican president had dared to utter those words...for as little media coverage as Obama's words have gotten from the liberal press since said almost one week ago, those words said by a Republican... any Republican...would be covered non-stop 24/7 ad-nauseum.

And while we all know that this most miserable of presidents has NO love for the Constitution... America's very foundation and law of our land...just know that if this man ever dared to try to negate the greatest document of freedom and human rights ever written, I truly hope he's prepared for what would happen, for as history has proven time and again NO country has ever changed its core law or governing system without civil war.

But then again civil war might just be Barack HUSSEIN Obama's ultimate goal.

"Our Constitution is outdated and international law is supreme." Words of a traitor said in Brussels that bears repeating once again for it must be known that the man who took an oath to "...preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” wants to sellout our Constitution...wants to sellout UN globalists as he strives for 'We the People' to be governed by international law. But if Obama had bothered to pay attention to his lessons when he was in law school he would have learned that law is NOT law...whether domestic or international...unless the populace agrees to be governed by it. And Obama knows that 'We the People' can only be pushed so far when it comes to his trampling on our he can use the race card against us for only so long.

So as Obama bloviates about international law it must be remembered that international law is NOT binding U.S. law NO matter how he wants it to be. Obama forgets that international agreements or what he calls 'international laws' are made under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution ("He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..."), and if they have treaty status are subject to ratification under Article I (legislative powers), and will only be declared law of the land under the Supremacy Clause (the provision in Article Six, Clause 2 that establishes the Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land").

In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that treaties are NOT law without an implementing act of Congress...that treaties do NOT override the Constitution...that treaties cannot amend the Constitution...and that any treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by Congress ("...or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so..."), when the State deems performance of a treaty is self-destructive. And we all know that any and everything Obama does is indeed self-destructive to our country as he is the enemy within who wants to sell out America to our enemies both foreign and domestic.

And even the currently held Democratic controlled Senate knows better than to sell us out to international UN the expense of our Constitution.

How smart were our Founders to have vision to foresee this becoming an issue at sometime in the smart were they to protect us from a man like Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Also in Brussels, Obama spouted off about what he called the universal “ideals that unite us all..." Obviously NOT understanding or just choosing to ignore the fact that one country's ideals might in NO way be another county's ideals, the concept of individual rights as related to each county's sovereignty is lost on this man who believes in and pushes for the New World Order of a one world government...a one world government controlled by his progressive elitist cohorts sprinkled in with a smattering of his muslim brethren.

And in an effort to extol the virtues of European-style big government as he pandered to those he needs to come to his aid against Vladimir Putin, Obama had the audacity to claim that our Founding Fathers small-government based Constitution got their ideas from European monarchies...which we know is pure unadulterated nonsense as colonial-era European-style big government was the very thing our Founders wanted NO part of for the newly emerging American nation.

And so Barack HUSSEIN Obama once again tried to sellout America as he flashed his infamous smirk of a smile as he played for the cameras in Brussels. So the man who in fear of the 'Russian Bear' took all military deterrents off the table by claiming military deterrence doesn't work, spoke from the other side of his mouth by urging 'We the People' to sheepishly surrender to international law at the expense of our Constitution.

The gall of this man knows NO bounds as the world looks on and laughs at the weakling who would be king.

Sunday, March 30, 2014

The Obama Environmental Protection Agency recently slashed the maximum allowable sulfur content in gasoline from 30 parts per million to 10 ppm. The agency claims its new “Tier 3” rule will bring $7 billion to $19 billion in annual health benefits by 2030.

“These standards are a win for public health, a win for our environment and a win for our pocketbooks,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy insists.

It’s all hokum. Like almost everything else emanating from EPA these days, the gasoline regulations are a case study in how America’s economy, jobs, living standards, health and welfare are being pummeled by secretive, deceptive, and indeed fraudulent and corrupt government practices.

Since the Clean Air Act was passed in 1970, America’s cars have eliminated some 99% of pollutants that once came out of tailpipes, notes air quality expert Joel Schwartz. Since 2004, under Tier 2 rules, refiners have reduced sulfur in gasoline from an average of 300 ppm to 30 ppm – a 90% drop, on top of pre-2004 reductions. In addition, because newer cars start out cleaner and stay cleaner throughout their lives, fleet turnover is reducing emissions by 8 to10 percent per year, steadily improving air quality.

The net result, says a 2012 Environ International study, is that ground-level ozone concentrations will fall even more dramatically by 2022. Volatile organic pollutants will plummet by 62%, carbon monoxide by 51% and nitrous oxides by 80% – beyond reductions already achieved between 1970 and 2004.

EPA (which once promised to be ultra-transparent) claims its rules will add less than a penny per gallon to gasoline prices; but it won’t say how it arrived at that estimate. Industry sources say the Tier 3 rules will require $10 billion in upfront capital expenditures, an additional $2.4 billion in annual compliance expenses, significant increases in refinery energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, an extra 5-9 cents per gallon in manufacturing costs, which will certainly hit consumers at the pump.

But regardless of their ultimate cost, the rules will reduce monthly ozone levels by just 1.2 parts per billion during rush hour, says Environ. That’s equivalent to 12 cents out of $100 million or 1.2 seconds out of 32,000 years. These minuscule improvements could not even have been measured by equipment existing a couple decades ago. Their contribution to improved human health will be essentially zero.

Not so, say the EPA, Sierra Club and American Lung Association (ALA). The rules will reduce asthma in “the children,” they insist. However, asthma incidences have been increasing, while air pollution has declined – demonstrating that the pollution-asthma connection is a red herring. The disease is caused by allergies, a failure to expose young children to sufficient allergens to cause their immune systems to build resistance to airborne allergens, and lack of sufficient exercise to keep lungs robust. Not surprisingly, a Southern California study found no association between asthma hospitalizations and air pollution levels.

Moreover, EPA paid the ALA $20 million between 2001 and 2010. No wonder it echoes agency claims about air quality and lung problems. The payments continue today, while EPA also funnels millions to various environmentalist pressure groups – and even to “independent” EPA scientific review panels – that likewise rubber stamp too many EPA pollution claims, studies and regulatory actions.

As Ron Arnold recently reported in The Washington Examiner, 15 of EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee members have received $180.8 million in EPA grants since 2000. One CASAC panelist (Ed Avol of USC) received $51.7 million! The seven CASAC executive committee members pocketed $80.2 million. Imagine Big Oil paying that kind of cash to an advisory group, and calling it “independent.” The news media, government and environmentalists would have a field day with that one.

The Clean Air Act, Information Quality Act, Executive Order 12866 and other laws require that agencies assess both the costs and benefits of proposed regulations, adopt them only if their benefits justify their costs, and even determine whether a regulation is worth implementing at all. However, EPA and other agencies systematically violate these rules, routinely inflate the alleged benefits of their rules, and habitually minimize or even ignore their energy, economic, health and social costs.

Editor's note: This column was coauthored by Bob Morrison.
Henry Kissinger made Mideast “shuttle diplomacy” famous in the 1970s. The peripatetic Sec. of State then jetted back and forth between Israel and Egypt and fashioned an uneasy cease-fire in the Yom Kippur War of 1973.

President Obama has added a new twist to shuttle diplomacy. It seems whenever Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in the air en route to Washington, the Commander-in-Chief chooses that time to apply the screws to Israel’s democratic government.

Three years ago, Mr. Obama made a major pronouncement: Israel should return to the pre-1967 borders as a basis for negotiating with the Arabs. He delivered these prepared remarks while Netanyahu was still in the air. Once Netanyahu came down to earth, he politely but firmly took the President to school on Mid Eastern affairs. Sitting in the Oval Office, and before live TV cameras, the Prime Minister noted that Israel could never return to those indefensible borders and remain a viable country.

Netanyahu was too diplomatic to use the phrase made famous by the late Abba Eban. The lines that existed prior to the Six Day War in 1967 were “Auschwitz borders.” But he made his point.

The White House quickly backpedaled. The President meant, of course, those pre-1967 borders “with appropriate territorial swaps” with the Arabs of Palestine. It would all be agreed upon. No pressure, Israel. Don’t feel pushed.

This time, President Obama sat for an interview with Bloomberg View correspondent Jeffrey Goldberg while Netanyahu was jetting westward. Previewing their forthcoming talks in the White House, the President said he would warn the Prime Minister that “time is running out.” He saw fit to quote the Jewish sage, Hillel: “If not now, when? And if not you, Mr. Prime Minister, who?”

The time is running out for Israel to give over to the PLO major portions of the West Bank of the Jordan River, an area known for millennia as Judea and Samaria. The President will not suggest surrendering Judea and Samaria to the PLO, of course.

Too many Americans remember that the Palestinian Liberation Organization led for decades on the U.S. State Department’s list of international terrorist organizations. The late Yassir Arafat, the PLO Chairman, was the inventor of airline hijacking for terror purposes. Britain’s leftwing Guardian has noted that Arafat’s loyal lieutenant, Abu Daoud, organized the massacre of the Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics.

Arafat’s Nobel Peace Prize was awarded him in 1994 despite his orders to his gunmen in Khartoum in the Sudan in 1973. “Execute the diplomats,” Arafat said then. U.S. Ambassador Cleo Noel was among those brutally murdered.

No, the President will refer to Israel’s negotiating partners as the Palestinian Authority. The PLO morphed into the PA twenty years ago in order to qualify for U.S. and EU recognition. And with that recognition came billions of dollars and Euros in foreign aid.

Much of that aid wound up in the Swiss bank accounts of Arafat and his PLO cronies.

Since the death of Arafat in 2004, the PA has been headed by Mahmoud Abbas. He holds a Ph.D. from Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, during the Soviet era, where his dissertation expressed the view that Zionist leaders collaborated with the Nazis. Thus, Abbas is effectively one of the leading Holocaust deniers in the world.

Abbas is routinely referred to in Western media as “leader” of the Palestinian Authority. But since 2006, when the overtly terrorist group, Hamas, won an election in the Gaza Strip, Abbas has indefinitely postponed scheduled elections in PA-controlled areas. He is, therefore, the leader of an Authority without authority.

President Obama wants Benjamin Netanyahu to yield strategic territory to Abbas, who could not guarantee compliance with any signed agreement. Start with the PLO pledge to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and cease “incitement” of the Arab masses to murder of the Jews. The PA actually names public squares for suicide bombers and teaches school children to model suicide vests. PA maps of Palestine show no territory for Israel.

In those areas that would be ceded to the PA, Abbas assures the world, no Jews would be permitted to live. We’ve seen this movie before. The Nazis sought to rid Poland and Ukraine of Jews, calling for those regions to be Judenrein—lands free of Jews.

Abbas’ friends in the PA-administered territories greeted the collapse of the flaming Twin Towers on September 11th with dancing in the streets. They fired their Soviet-supplied rifles into the air in celebration. They gave candy to their children.

It is by no means clear why any American should want to deal with the PLO, much less the American President. Or try to put pressure on Israel’s democratically legitimated government to yield to this gang of not-quite-reformed terrorists. They are inveterate enemies of the United States.

The President is obviously feeling second term pressures. He wants to be that “transformational President” that he promised his voters he would be. When he says “time is running out,” he’s right.

President has just 1029 days left in office. The Jews have been in Judea and Samaria for six thousand years.
US Now World's Top Energy Producer

Thanks to fracking technology and horizontal drilling techniques, the United States has gone from a large-scale energy importer to the world's top producer — a development with far-reaching consequences.

America produced an average of about 12.1 million barrels of crude oil, natural gas liquids, and biofuels a day in 2013 — that’s 300,000 barrels a day more than Saudi Arabia and 1.6 million more than Russia, the two previous leaders.

U.S. production of crude oil alone rose by a record 991,000 barrels a day last year, according to the International Energy Agency. And oil imports declined by 16 percent, from $310 billion to $268 billion.

Fracking has enabled shale-gas production in North Dakota, Texas, and the formation that crosses parts of West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York to account for 44 percent of total U.S. natural gas output.

"The hydrocarbon boom in the United States is driven by fracking," according to a report from the Hoover Institution headlined "Three Cheers for Fracking."

In the 1970s, some experts predicted that America would run out of natural gas, and between the early 1990s and 2008, U.S. oil production fell steadily. World oil prices rose and American imports increased, especially from unstable, often unfriendly nations.

"Fracking has upended all of this," declared Gary D. Libecap, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and an economics professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Fracking and horizontal drilling enable drillers to extract hydrocarbon deposits that would otherwise be inaccessible or too expensive to extract.

As a consequence, fracking has:

  • Lowered overall energy prices
  • Increased U.S. exports of natural gas
  • Eliminated imports of liquid natural gas by the United States, saving $100 billion a year
  • Benefited most world economies by tempering oil and gas price increases
  • Lowered U.S. demand for oil from Venezuela, where rulers have been increasingly autocratic
  • Shown the way for new oil and gas production in Europe, reducing dependence on supplies from Russia
  • Expanded American manufacturing due to lower and more certain energy costs compared to other nations
  • Contributed to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as the country shifts from coal-fired energy plants to natural gas-fired facilities
  • Directly increased U.S. employment in oil and gas extraction by 28,000 jobs between 2007 and 2011 alone, and indirectly by 45,000 in new employment in support industries

     Fracking and natural gas production, Libecap concludes, have been "good for the economy, good for democracies worldwide, and good for the environment."

    It could be even better. According to the Institute for Policy Innovation, the federal government owns 28 percent of U.S. land, including 62 percent of Alaska and 47 percent of 11 Western states. Companies would be willing to drill there, but the Obama administration has delayed and denied drilling permits, and production on federal lands has fallen 23 percent since 2007.

  • Netanyahu to Kerry: Terrorist release would topple government

    Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

    “Binyamin Netanyahu told US Secretary of State John Kerry that his governing coalition may fall apart if Israel goes ahead with the fourth planned tranche in the terrorist release that it agreed to as a ‘goodwill gesture’ toward the Palestinian Authority.” Gd bless Netanyahu for having the courage to speak common sense and truth to Secretary of State Thurston Howell III and the O-bumbler in the White House. Obama is desperate to weaken Israel drastically before he leaves office; we can be grateful that Netanyahu is having none of it.
    Prime Minister Netanyahu allegedly told US Secretary of State John FN Kerry that releasing another 26 terrorists would topple his government.
    The pan-Arab London-based newspaper Al-Hayat has reported that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told US Secretary of State John Kerry that his governing coalition may fall apart if Israel goes ahead with the fourth planned tranche in the terrorist release that it agreed to as a “goodwill gesture” toward the Palestinian Authority.
    Al-Hayat said that Kerry has asked PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas to extend negotiations even if Israel fails to release additional terrorists. Abbas, for his part, told Kerry he would not discuss continuing negotiations until the terrorists are freed, including 14 Israeli Arabs.
    According to another report, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu refuses to release any more terrorists until the PA recognizes Israel as a Jewish state.
    The leadership of Hamas said that Israel’s refusal to carry out the fourth tranche is “a ringing slap in the cheek” to the PA. Hamas said that the way to free terrorist prisoners is by abducting Israeli soldiers – and not in a deal that involves a PA commitment not to take action against Israel in the UN.
    If it was a ringing slap in the cheek (I hope it was), it was long overdue.
    Jihad Watch

    New moderate Iran names 1979 U.S. Embassy hostage-taker its UN envoy

    / Jihad Watch
    Hamid Aboutalebi
    Here is yet another indication that the Iranians aren’t “moderate” at all, but are reveling in their victory over Barack Obama and John Kerry, and are well aware that there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that they can do or say that will bring Obama and Kerry and Co. to reconsider their abject capitulation to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

    “Iran Names 1979 U.S. Embassy Hostage-Taker Its UN Envoy,” by Kambiz Foroohar for Bloomberg, March 29 (thanks to Kenneth):
    Iran has named a member of the militant group that held 52 Americans hostage in Tehran for 444 days to be its next ambassador to the United Nations.
    The Iranian government has applied for a U.S. visa for Hamid Aboutalebi, Iran’s former ambassador to Belgium and Italy, who was a member of the Muslim Students Following the Imam’s Line, a group of radical students that seized the U.S. embassy on Nov. 4, 1979. Imam was an honorific used for Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution.
    Relations between the Islamic Republic and the U.S. and its allies are beginning to emerge from the deep freeze that began when the self-proclaimed Iranian students overrun the embassy and took the hostages. The State Department hasn’t responded to the visa application, according to an Iranian diplomat.
    A controversy over Aboutalebi’s appointment could spark demands on Capitol Hill and beyond during this congressional election year for the Obama administration to take the unusual step of denying a visa to an official posted to the UN. It also could hamper progress toward a comprehensive agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program, which the U.S. and five other world powers are seeking to negotiate with Iran by July 20.
    Iranian President Hassan Rouhani chose Aboutalebi to serve at the UN, which is headquartered in New York City on international, soil after the interim nuclear deal was forged last Nov. 24.

    Compensation Issue

    “There’ll not be any rapprochement with Iran until hostages are compensated for their torture,” said Tom Lankford, an Alexandria, Virginia-based lawyer who’s been trying to win compensation for the hostages since 2000. “It’s important that no state sponsor of terror can avoid paying for acts of terror.”
    Anyone connected with the hostage-takers shouldn’t get a U.S. visa, said a former hostage and U.S. diplomat. He requested anonymity to avoid renewed attention.
    Aboutalebi has said he didn’t take part in the initial occupation of the embassy, and acted as translator and negotiator, according to an interview he gave to the Khabaronline news website in Iran.
    “On a few other occasions, when they needed to translate something in relation with their contacts with other countries, I translated their material into English or French,”
    Aboutalebi said, according to Khabaronline. “I did the translation during a press conference when the female and black staffers of the embassy were released, and it was purely based on humanitarian motivations.”
    He referred to the release of some embassy staff members during the first few weeks of the crisis in November 1979.

    Saturday, March 29, 2014

    BREAKING NEWS! Two objects bearing colors of missing Malaysia Airlines flight found floating in the sea by Chinese military plane

    Bare Naked Islam


    A Chinese military plane scanning part of a search zone for signs of debris from Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 spotted several objects floating in the sea on Saturday, including two bearing colors of the missing jet. The three objects spotted by the Chinese plane were white, red and orange in color. The missing Boeing 777′s exterior was red, white, blue and gray.

    Excuse me? Anyone see any orange on this plane?



    WASHINGTON - The news media was ecstatic when the government said in January that the economy grew by 3.2 percent in the last three months of 2013. It was convincing proof, they said on the nightly news, that the economy had finally recovered from its chronic lethargy.

    But according to a revised estimate released Thursday by the U.S. Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis, that 3.2 percent figure was a wild exaggeration.

    The U.S. gross domestic product (GDP), the broadest measure of our country's entire economic output, grew no more than 2.6 percent in the fourth quarter -- a pitifully low growth rate for the largest economy in the world.

    "Averaged across the four quarters of last year, real GDP added 1.9 percent in 2013 from 2012," said Forbes web site reported.

    You didn't hear about this on the nightly network news on Thursday? I'm not surprised. More often than not, the network news tends to ignore poor economic data, while exaggerating the significance of occasional numbers that they say proves the Obama economy is turning around.

    But 1.9 percent growth for all of last year is dreadful by any comparison, and economists aren't expecting anything much better than somewhere around 2 percent in the first quarter and maybe beyond.

    By any relevant comparison, this is another sign that the U.S. economy continues to stumble along at a weak, sub-par pace in the sixth year of Barack Obama's economically unfulfilled presidency.

    It's "hardly the 4 to 5 percent [growth rate] needed to provide enough jobs and restore housing prices to pre-recession levels," says Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland's School of Business.

    That's the kind of robust economic growth rate we need to produce 350,000 jobs a month to boost employment to pre-recession levels.

    Instead, the economy is producing up to, and often far less than, 200,000 jobs a month -- nowhere near what is needed to put Americans back to work.

    Obama's underperforming economy created a little over 100,000 jobs in January, and a disappointing 175,000 in February, with little expectations of significantly larger job numbers in the months to come. Indeed, the jobless rate inched up last month to 6.7 percent because of the weak jobs numbers and a growing number of discouraged long term job seekers who have quit looking for work.

    If all of these uncounted discouraged workers began looking for a job again, the real unemployment rate would be 9.6 percent, Morici says.

    With the fourth quarter economic growth rate running in the anemic 2 percent range, economists aren't expecting GDP to improve much in the first half of this year, either.

    "We've had a significant fall off," global economist Euler Hermes told Forbes.

    A chief reason economic growth has slowed, he says, can be found in a separate Bureau of Economic Analysis report which shows that personal income "hasn't grown in several months, making it unlikely consumer demand will pick up in the months ahead."

    While some economists are forecasting GDP growth may reach 3 percent later this year, even that would be sub-par for our economy. "The U.S. is not on the verge of a boom. GDP growth of 3 percent would be the fastest rate since 2005, [but] it is still well below the average of 4 percent in the 1990s," Hermes said.

    That was in President Clinton's second term after he had cut the capital gains tax rate, triggering a wave of new venture capital investment that led to stronger economic growth and a job boom, especially in the high tech sector.

    Under Obama, on the other hand, the capital gains tax has risen for high income investors, reducing risk taking and shrinking job growth. That's why investors have grown more pessimistic about the direction of our economy and why the stock market has been in decline.

    "As it stands right now, the first quarter 2014 growth rate is likely to be slower than" the fourth quarter in 2013, says Steve Blitz, the chief economist at ITG Investment Research.

    Why was 2013 such a lackluster year for the economy? Business economist Peter Morici, in an analysis last week, spelled out what happened during the course of the year. And in a nutshell, he says, government tax increases were largely to blame.

    "Throughout 2013, higher taxes on all income classes -- President Obama's levies on the wealthy, higher local taxes on the middle class, and reinstatement of Social Security taxes on lower income workers -- depressed consumer spending."

    The remaining three years in Obama's economy are unlikely to get much better, if the latest economic figures and studies are any forecast of the future.

    In a Washington Post article headlined "Future bleak for long-term jobless," a study presented last week to the liberal Brookings Institution told why millions of jobless Americans can't expect to find work anytime soon.

    Former White House economic adviser Alan Krueger, the author of the study, calls "people who have been out of a job for six months or more an 'unlucky subset of the unemployed' who exist on the margins of the economy -- with faint hope of returning to productivity," the Post said.

    Interest rates are headed up, driven higher by the Fed's grossly mistaken belief that the economy is improving, and thus it can take its foot off its stimulus pedal. That will likely wreak havoc with the housing industry, shrinking home sales and the availability of construction jobs.

    The average rate for the 30-year mortgage rose to 4.40 percent recently, according to government mortgage buyer Freddie Mac. And it's likely to go higher.

    The number of Americans who signed contracts to buy existing homes fell for the eighth month in February. That's the lowest level since 2012, says the National Association of Realtors.

    This economy stinks. And even though it's not getting reported on the evening news, the American know that our country has been moving in the wrong direction ever since 2009.
    Racism used to mean hating someone because of his race.

    No more.

    Today, 99 times out of 100 in politics, the word “racist” is used purely for political reasons without any regard to whether something bigoted was actually said.

    That doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist. It CERTAINLY DOES and sometimes it's right out in the open, like the Left's "Black Americans are way too stupid and incompetent to get voter ID like all the other races" canard. But, if we were to define "racism" as offensive statements about someone of another race that wouldn't be automatically excused if Joe Biden, Harry Reid, or Bill Clinton said them, then there's so little "racism" in politics that it's barely worth mentioning.

    Yet, the accusations of "racism" never seem to stop. Why? Because when liberals cry "racism," they don't really mean racism. They mean....

    1) You disagree with me: "The Republican Party is racist." "Sarah Palin is racist." There's a famous Tea Party sign that reads, "It doesn't matter what this sign says. You'll call it racism anyway!" Why are these people and groups racist? They JUST ARE. "Everybody" knows it. In other words, liberals believe they can't be racist by virtue of being liberal; so people or groups that oppose them must be "racist" by default. It's about as intellectual as a five year old calling someone a "poopy head," but it's how they think.

    2) I need more attention and/or money: There are an awful lot of people in the Democrat Party who make a living calling people "racist." Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Melissa Harris-Perry, Toure, Joy Reid, Eric Dyson, the NAACP, Tavis Smiley, Cornell West and Ben Jealous rely on finding new and intriguing ways to accuse people of bigotry to fill their pockets and get in front of cameras. If they couldn't find enough things to call "racist," they'd be nobodies and worse yet, some of them might have to get real jobs instead of pretending to be offended for a living.

    3) Let’s take a choice away from black Americans: No group in Congress does less to make the lives of its constituents better than the Congressional Black Caucus. Furthermore, no ethnic group in America has been more loyal to a political party with less to show for it than black Americans. So how can it be that the Democrat Party has been an absolute disaster for black Americans, yet it can count on 90% of the black vote every election? Simple; liberals have falsely convinced black Americans that Republicans hate them. That means no matter how bad it gets, Republicans can't even be considered as an option. This is how Democrats have managed to utterly destroy cities like Detroit without the populace even considering the Republican Party as an option.

    4) You are disagreeing with a minority: The last thing any liberal wants is to argue an issue on its merits. Is it logical? Does it work? Is the benefit worth the cost? These things have NOTHING to do with why liberals support a position. So, one of the many ways they try to get people off track is to accuse any white person arguing with a minority of being racist. This is a neat trick, given that roughly 70% of Hispanic Americans and 90% of black Americans vote Democrat. Maybe Republicans should adopt this one and start accusing liberals who disagree with Allen West, Ben Carson and Ted Cruz of being racists.

    5) Your attack is damaging us: When Republicans hit Democrats with any kind of damaging attack, it is inevitably called "racist." For example, this is how former MSNBC host Martin Bashir could say something as crazy as, "Republicans are using [the IRS scandal] as their latest weapon in the war against the black man in the White House. ‘IRS’ is the new ‘N****r.’” It's an attempt to shut Republicans up.

    6) You won't do what I want!: When you reward and encourage people who claim to be offended by trivia instead of laughing at them for being such pansies, it only encourages them to lash out more at people who hurt their precious feelings. Liberals who get their feelings hurt tend to respond by classifying the people who've egregiously offended them – by say, wearing a Redskins jersey, supporting lower taxes, or not voting for Obama -- as horrible human beings. Maybe they're part of the "patriarchy," "sexists," "homophobes" or "racists." In all fairness, if Hillary Clinton were running for President, liberals would be screaming about sexism all the time. However, since Obama is ruining the country at the moment, calling someone a "racist" is their preferred way of whining that people won't do what they want.

    7) Stop trying to do outreach to black Americans: Democrats believe they own black Americans. That’s why they hate black Americans who don't buy into that or white Republicans who want to do outreach. So, if a black Republican challenges the idea that black Americans are all helpless victims of racism who need crumbs from Democrats to survive, he'll be racially insulted. If a white Republican like Paul Ryan starts doing some outreach that could conceivably appeal to black Americans, he will immediately be attacked as a racist. The Democrats are absolutely committed to keeping black Americans under their thumbs and anyone who challenges that will be treated as a threat.

    Obama to Saudis: We will not accept a bad Iran deal

    / Jihad Watch
    Obama-US-Saudi-Arabia_Horo-1-e1396027024834-635x357While they chant “Death to America!” in Tehran, the mullahs must laugh at Obama’s audacity in trying to get howlers like this past Abdullah, who wasn’t born yesterday. As Iran’s President Rouhani put it: “In Geneva agreement world powers surrendered to Iranian nation’s will.” And the whole world knows it.

    “Obama to Saudis: We will not accept a bad Iran deal,” from the Times of Israel, March 28 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
    US President Barack Obama reportedly reassured his wary ally King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia on Friday that the US would not accept a bad nuclear deal with Iran.
    During a visit to the king’s desert oasis, the two leaders discussed “tactical differences” in their respective approach to certain issues, but agreed that their countries remained strategically aligned, Reuters quoted a senior US official as saying.
    Obama’s Marine One helicopter kicked up clouds of sand in his arrival at the king’s desert camp outside the capital of Riyadh for a meeting and dinner with Abdullah. The president walked through a row of military guards to an ornate room featuring a massive crystal chandelier and took a seat next to the 89-year-old king, who was breathing with the help of an oxygen tank. 
    Secretary of State John Kerry sat at Obama’s side for the visit that is the president’s third official meeting with the king in six years.
    Despite its decades-long alliance with the United States, Saudi’s royal family has become increasingly anxious in recent years over Obama’s nuclear talks with Iran and his tepid involvement in the Syrian civil war. During his evening meetings with the king, Obama’s task was to reassure Saudi Arabia that the US is not abandoning Arab interests despite troop withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan, greater energy independence back home and nuclear talks with predominantly Persian Iran.
    White House officials and Mideast experts say the Saudi royal family’s main concern is Iran. They fear Iran’s nuclear program, object to Iran’s backing of the Bashar Assad regime in Syria and see the government of Tehran as having designs on oil fields in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.
    Deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters aboard Air Force One on the flight to Saudi Arabia that the issues at the heart of Obama’s meetings with Abdullah include Gulf security, Middle East peace, Syria, Iran and Egypt.
    On Syria, Rhodes said Obama did not plan to make any specific announcements about additional assistance to opposition forces. He said the US and Saudi Arabia have been working together closely to coordinate their assistance to the rebels.
    Rhodes said that coordination has helped put the US relationship with Saudi Arabia “in a stronger place today than it was in the fall when we had some tactical differences about our Syria policy.”
    “We are in a better place today than we were seven months ago,” Rhodes said.
    Obama angered Saudi officials by scrapping plans to launch a military strike against Syria, choosing instead to back a plan to strip Syrian President Bashar Assad of his chemical weapons.
    Rhodes said Obama would update the king on the nuclear talks with Iran. He said Obama would also make the point that those negotiations do not mean US concerns about other Iranian activities have lessened, including its support for Assad and Hezbollah, as well as its destabilizing activity in Yemen and the Gulf.
    “Those concerns remain constant and we’re not in any way negotiating those issues in the nuclear talks,” he said.
    Rhodes said human rights, including women’s rights, would be on the agenda for Obama’s meetings. But he said the US has a broad range of security interests with Saudi Arabia that would be most prominent on the agenda.
    “We’ve raised concerns around human rights issues, issues related to women’s rights,” Rhodes said, adding that the U.S. has to maintain “the ability to cooperate” with the Saudis on other issues.
    The Saudi anxieties have been building over time, according to Simon Henderson, a fellow at The Washington Institute, a think tank focused on Middle East policy.
    “Ever since Washington withdrew support for President (Hosni) Mubarak of Egypt in 2011, Abdullah and other Gulf leaders have worried about the reliability of Washington’s posture toward even longstanding allies,” Henderson wrote this week. “President Obama’s U-turn on military action against Syria over its use of chemical weapons last summer only added to the concern, which has likely morphed into exasperation after recent events in Crimea, where the Saudis judge that President Obama was outmaneuvered by Vladimir Putin.”
    America lost amongst a dream NOT remembered
    By: Diane Sori 

    "Diplomacy over action could cost America dearly."  
    - Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post reporter and FOX News commentator

    Our fearless leader in action...Muslim Brotherhood supporting and probably card carrying member Barack HUSSEIN Obama has now threatened “serious consequences” if Egypt dares...dares mind carry out the death penalty verdict handed down to 529 convicted Muslim Brotherhood terrorists and thugs. And John 'Swiftboat' Kerry has now stuck his nose in and added that he has also ordered Egyptian officials to cancel the death penalty verdict for those 529 Muslim Brotherhood members...or else.

    Or else what...useless sanctions will be slapped on them...General Sisi must be laughing his head off as much as Vladimir Putin is laughing his.

    Obama and Kerry oh so conveniently forget...or better yet choose to ignore...that Egypt is an independent and sovereign country ruled by the Egyptian constitution and by the power of an 'independent judiciary authority of law' and are NOT ruled by Obama. Therefore, they do NOT have to abide by Obama's or Kerry's wants or demands regarding their internal affairs, especially after Obama actually had the nerve to condemned Egypt for even bringing terrorists, thugs, and criminals to justice.

    But hey...the man who professes to be a Christian could NOT care less about his supposed 'fellow' Christians being slaughtered in Egypt while he works to protect his Muslim Brotherhood brethren at all costs...good little muslim that he really is...after all he welcomed them into our government fold with open arms. And he knows allah might start rumbling if he didn't protect and stand behind the brethren every time they are brought to justice anywhere in the world.

    So as Egypt is now joining other nations in laughing at Obama's diplomatic failures, Vladimir Putin continues to move his chess pieces into position to checkmate Obama on all fronts. And with Putin making NO secret that next in his scope will be Kharkiv, Donetsk, and the rest of southeastern Ukraine, Obama still continues on with his diplomatic kumbaya nonsense as Putin works to rebuild an empire.

    And in the process of empire building Putin is NOT only making a mockery of the U.S., but he has actually negated America’s superpower status to almost nil. Making our great country a bit player on the world's stage, Putin has caused our allies in Japan and South Korea to wonder what will happen to them as both Russia and China flex their muscle. And those in the Middle East...especially in Israel... see our country under Obama's watch as playing games with selling them out in regards to Iran moving forward with their nuclear ambitions. 

    And as Obama continues to draw 'red lines' in the sand in regards to our enemies, once crossed his retort is NOT military it should be...but economic sanctions that just mean our enemies will pull out their credit cards and charge whatever they need as those in Europe will allow this out of fear of going up against the suppliers of their much needed gas and oil.

    Oh what a NOT so happy web Barack HUSSEIN Obama has weaved.

    And with Vladimir Putin now amassing over 80,000 troops along Ukraine's southeastern border what does Obama do...he again bloviates in his best 'leading from behind' nails on a blackboard voice that Russia needs “to move back those troops and to begin negotiations directly with the Ukrainian government, as well as the international community.”

    Even I'm laughing at that one for Obama has to realize that his being a Community Organizer is NO match for Putin's 'Russian Bear' persona. Even Obama has to realize that as Putin rebuilds an empire he is doing so while he...Barack HUSSEIN Obama...dismantles our great nation one Constitutional amendment at a time.

    And Vladimir Putin knows Obama is weak...General Sisi of Egypt knows Obama is weak...Hassan Rouhani of Iran knows Obama is weak...Benjamin Netanyahu knows Obama is weak...and most importantly 'We the People' know Obama is weak and yet we allow him to remain in power as he destroys our he destroys our he destroys our health care he placates our enemies...all equating to one traitorous action after another being the hallmarks of his presidency and the harbinger of America's demise.

    Dealing from a position of appeasement, weakness, and total dysfunction regarding foreign policy and NOT from a much needed position of strength...of military strength...when you think about... really think it makes you realize that Barack HUSSEIN Obama has actually already surrendered the Middle East to Iran, and now by his lack of actual action has surrendered Ukraine to Russia in addition to dictating to the sovereign nation of Egypt how they are to punish his terrorist and thug buddies. And within that realm of the new reality of Obama's social engineering, the man who would be King has been made into a court jester by the bully Putin, by the crazed Iranian regime as he does a diplomatic dance with Tehran, and by a general out to restore order, sanity, and freedom to his country...a country set ablaze by the very man who thinks his words and wants trump all.

    And all this, as Charles Krauthammer said, "...could cost America dearly" for while nation building is NOT our prime objective, nation saving must always be for if we lose 'face' within the world community our enemies will have easy pickings of those wanting freedom...of those whose very freedom is now but a dream NOT remembered.

    And Barack HUSSEIN Obama in five short years has built it, owns it, and now must pay dearly for it with our beloved America the very thing that has been lost in the process...and that my friends is the saddest thing of all.

    Friday, March 28, 2014

    "This is my last election," President Obama said in words caught on an open mic. "After my election, I have more flexibility."

    He was speaking in Seoul, South Korea, in March 2012, almost exactly two years ago, to Dmitry Medvedev, then in his last year as Vladimir Putin's stand-in president of Russia.

    The subject was missile defense, and Obama was apparently seeking time to assuage Russia's objections that a proposed U.S. missile defense system, sited in Romania, Poland, Turkey and Spain, would not be aimed at Russian missiles.

    Earlier, in September 2009, Obama canceled missile defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic, to which Russia objected. The decision was relayed by telephone, at midnight European time, on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet Union's attack on Poland pursuant to the Hitler-Stalin pact in 1939. The Polish prime minister refused to take the call.

    "I understand your message," Medvedev told Obama in Seoul. "I will transmit this information to" -- no question of who was in control -- "Vladimir."

    It is becoming apparent now what "more flexibility" looks like. And that Mitt Romney was not entirely off the mark when, after Obama's words to Medvedev, he called Putin's Russia "our No. 1 geopolitical foe."

    Romney did not predict Putin's seizure of Crimea last month any more than Obama did. Very few people foresaw it during the cascade of events -- the firing on demonstrators in Kiev, the ouster and flight of Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich -- that led to it late last month.

    And Obama probably did not anticipate that Syria's Bashar Assad regime would use chemical weapons after he warned in August 2012, during his reelection campaign, that doing so would be "a red line for us ... that would change our calculus." With the flexibility provided "after my election" and with Putin's help, Obama quietly erased the red line.

    The takeover of Crimea rubbed out the red boundary line guaranteed by the U.S., Britain, Russia and Ukraine in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. In response, Obama imposed weak sanctions on some Russians on March 17 and somewhat stronger sanctions three days later.

    Additional F-15s were sent to Lithuania and a dozen F-16 jets were sent to Poland. Vice President Joe Biden journeyed to Poland and assured NATO members of what, absent Obama's flexibility, would not have had to be said: that the United States would maintain its obligations to respond to attack on NATO allies -- Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia.

    These responses are, as former Defense Secretary Robert Gates wrote in the Wall Street Journal on March 25, "anemic." Unsettling possibilities loom. Putin is massing troops near eastern Ukraine and might attack in the name of protecting ethnic Russians there. And there are large Russian minorities in Latvia and Estonia.

    In the Netherlands, Obama suggested he'd impose tougher sanctions on Russian businesses if Putin moved further into Ukraine. But he conceded there would be no military response to the seizure of Crimea.

    The contagion may spread further. China, long opposed to outside interference in nations' internal affairs, has made it clear it does not oppose Russia's move across a recognized international border.

    Since Richard Nixon's opening to China, American administrations have tried to capitalize on tensions between China and Russia. Now these two once-Communist powers seem to be coming together.

    And China has been asserting sovereignty over disputed islands in the East and South China Seas long claimed by Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines and Vietnam. That follows its earlier declaration of an air defense identification zone jutting out far from its recognized territorial waters.

    All this follows from what Gates calls "the fecklessness of the West in Syria" -- flexibility in action. Gates argues that Putin's actions "require from Western leaders strategic thinking, bold leadership and steely resolve -- now."

    Gates suggests that Obama reinstate the defense budget he proposed last year, without the sequester-required cuts in this year's budget that would shrink the Army's manpower to 1940 levels and the Navy to 1917 levels.

    But that would require difficult negotiations with Republicans on a range of budget issues. Obama has made no serious attempts to negotiate such issues, as President Bill Clinton did with Newt Gingrich, since he raised the ante and broke up the "grand bargain" negotiations in August 2011.

    The problem with flexibility and erasing red lines is that it leaves you with little flexibility and tempts others to cross red lines you don't dare erase. "After my election" turns out to be a dangerous time.