Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Patent reform and intellectual copyright reform more generally have been gaining steam on Capitol Hill and in the conservative movement recently. Reform advocates thought they had a slam-dunk with a bipartisan bill that would have attempted to curb the practice of "patent trolls" - frivolous lawsuits based on claims of patent infringement - until Sen. Pat Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, put the brakes on the proposal.


Brian Fung of the Washington Post has the details:
The bipartisan compromise on patents was headed for a markup on Thursday. But Leahy suddenly took it off the table after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) intervened at the last minute, according to multiple people close to the negotiations. 
As late as Wednesday morning, Leahy and the bill's two top shepherds — Sens. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) -- were said to have settled on the bill's language, saying, as one reform advocate put it, "pencils down."
"This is the third time in three weeks the majority leader has blocked legislation with bipartisan support in the Senate," Cornyn said. "It’s disappointing the majority leader has allowed the demands of one special interest group to trump a bipartisan will in Congress and the overwhelming support of innovators and job creators."
Fung reports that reform advocates blame trial lawyers and universities (among others), two large Democratic constituencies, for the hold-up, and Democrats didn't want to upset key constituencies.

Harry Reid's fingerprints are all over this, and it's an example of Mitch McConnell's criticisms of how Reid has put the Senate completely under his thumb.

"I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today." -- Wimpy from Popeye
"I won't pull the football away this time, Charlie Brown!" -- Lucy, Charlie Brown
Those are long running laugh lines in the comics and readers are supposed to roll their eyes as they hear those words. Maybe Americans just aren't as smart as they used to be because the Obama Administration continually offers up excuses that are just as lame while even professional journalists take it seriously. Granted, politicians lying and making excuses is as old as mankind, but Obama's every bit as artless about it as Lucy and Wimpy and yet so many people don't seem to be able to figure it out. Sure, Bill Clinton is a hopeless liar, but at least he is slick about it. Obama's about as artful as Kim Jong-un when it comes to deception, which makes it doubly irritating. Not only is he giving a hopelessly dishonest excuse, but he's insulting your intelligence by expecting you to believe something so stupid at the same time.

1) Obama claims he was completely unaware that healthcare.gov was going to fail: Barack Obama's signature issue was the Affordable Care Act. It was the hottest political issue in America. It was constantly in the news. Barack Obama viciously fought off Republican attempts to keep the law from starting up and yet, the website is the biggest disaster since the Titanic. So, how did the Obama Administration explain the disastrous failure of the Obamacare rollout?
In an exclusive interview with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta asked when the President first learned about the considerable issues with the Obamacare website. Sebelius responded that it was in “the first couple of days” after the site went live October 1. 
“But not before that?” Gupta followed up.
To which Sebelius replied, “No, sir.”
2) The economy is bad because it got cold during the winter: The economy was bad when Barack Obama took office and it has stayed bad for 5 1/2 years because of his policies. Rather than admit that the stimulus, the bailouts, cash for clunkers, the Affordable Care Act, and the rest of Obama's agenda have been choking the economy, the administration has been reduced to blaming cold weather for its failure.
The White House announced today that real GDP grew at a meager 0.1% annual rate in the first quarter: 
"Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose 0.1 percent at an annual rate in the first quarter of 2014, following the 3.4 percent annual pace in the second half of 2013." Severe winter weather is one reason for the slower growth, the White House says:
"Today's GDP estimate is subject to a number of notable influences, including historically severe winter weather, which temporarily lowered growth in the first quarter."
3) Barack Obama wouldn't wear a flag pin because it is a substitute for patriotism: Like many liberals, Barack Obama doesn't like America very much and overt displays of patriotism repel him. Because Obama was foolish enough to want to tell the world that he wouldn't wear a flag pin, but couldn't admit the truth because it disgusts the average American, the most unpatriotic President in history said this.
“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a (flag) pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest…” — Barack Obama
Of course, no one bought that and since then, Obama has gone back to wearing a flag pin.

4) Obama wasn’t responsible for the IRS targeting the Tea Party because he heard about it on the news: Barack Obama apparently knows less about what’s going in his administration than Colonel Wilhelm Klink knew about what was going in his prison camp in Hogan’s Heroes. If Barack Obama consistently claims he doesn’t know more about what’s going on in his administration than the general public then he’s a liar, an idiot or both.
During a press conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday, President Obama was asked about the IRS scandal. He responded, ”I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday.”
5) Obama blamed ATM machines and airport kiosks for his inability to create jobs: Barack Obama's far left-wing economic policies have created a semi-permanent, Jimmy-Carter-style malaise that appears to be on track to last throughout his entire presidency. Of course, Obama isn't going to admit that his policies are putting millions of Americans out of work; so he blamed ATM machines and other technical advances, as if that hasn't been going on since the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century.
“There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate.”
6) Obama's excuse for Benghazi is that it happened a long time ago: Our embassy in Libya was woefully under-protected despite the fact that Ambassador Chris Stevens had requested more security on multiple occasions and had been turned down. After Al-Qaeda attacked the embassy, no rescue attempt was made. Afterwards, during a presidential election year when Obama was under pressure to show that Al-Qaeda was behind the attack, members of the administration including the President deliberately misled Americans to make them think that a video was responsible for the attack when they knew from day one that terrorists were responsible. Since then, the Obama Administration has delayed and stonewalled the congressional investigation at every opportunity and its excuse for the scandal is...
“Dude, this was, like, two years ago.” Thus spake former National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor on Thursday after Fox News Channel anchorman Bret Baier asked him whether he had been involved in changing talking points to prepare then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice for Sunday talk shows in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi, Libya, attacks that left four Ame

Obamacare Rule: Dump Employees Onto Exchanges, Face Big Taxes

By Sandy Fitzgerald and Elliott Jager
 / Newsmax

Employers who give money to their workers to help pay for insurance through Obamacare exchanges may be in for sticker shock when the taxman comes calling: the IRS considers such arrangements employer payment plans that don't satisfy federal rules.

That could cost employers an excise tax of $100 a day, up to a grand sum of $36,500 per year per employee affected, the IRS confirmed in a "Q&A" on its website earlier this month, which in the case of larger businesses could ring up taxes of millions of dollars.

This means employers cannot hand tax-free contributions to their workers and tell them to purchase health insurance, The New York Times reports, as it is considered a violation of the Affordable Care Act's mandate that large employers provide health insurance coverage to their full-time workers.

"Under IRS Notice 2013-54, such arrangements are described as employer payment plans," the IRS Q&A entry said. "An employer payment plan, as the term is used in this notice, generally does not include an arrangement under which an employee may have an after-tax amount applied toward health coverage or take that amount in cash compensation."

Notice 2013-54, dated last Sept. 13, says the plans are considered group health plans that are subject to market reforms, "including the prohibition on annual limits for essential health benefits and the requirement to provide certain preventive care without cost sharing."

Because such arrangements can't be integrated with individual policies, the IRS notice says, employers "may be subject to a $100/day excise tax per applicable employee (which is $36,500 per year, per employee)," the Q&A says.

"The targets of this particular Q&A are employers who maintain "non-integrated" "employer payment plans," Porter Wright Financial Consultant Ann Caresani says of the IRS entry.

"These are new terms, which include reimbursement plans such as health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs, excluding retiree-only and excepted benefits HRAs). Those should generally have been eliminated by Jan. 1, 2014, or amended to be integrated with group health coverage," she said.

Caresani noted that federal agencies "dropped this bomb" on employers in the weeks before open enrollment began.

"You could have done the math on the $100-per-day excise tax. But the IRS puts this $36,500 figure into a Q&A for a reason: it wants to scare you," Caresani said. "And employers need to know that a non-integrated employer payment plan is just one of many potential triggers of these potentially devastating excise taxes."

The ruling comes as a blow to many employers who gave their workers tax-free cash contributions to purchase coverage. Andrew Biebl, a tax partner at CliftonLarsonAllen in Minneapolis, said the idea of giving workers money to buy their own insurance preceded Obamacare.

"For decades, employers have been assisting employees by reimbursing them for health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs," Biebl told the Times. "The new federal ruling eliminates many of those arrangements by imposing an unusually punitive penalty."

Theoretically, an employer can still hike the salary of a worker and tell him to buy insurance with the additional money. However, the added compensation is taxable on both ends and may be challenged by the workers as a reduction in their benefits, said Christopher Condeluci, who previously served as a tax and benefits counsel to the Senate Finance Committee.

The federal government has already postponed the enforcement of its mandate that employers with 50 or more full-time employees provide insurance for full-time employees until 2015,and the individual mandate until October 2016. Failure to comply with the coverage mandate carries a penalty of up to $3,000 per employee.

But the recently emphasized $100-a-day excise tax is separate from that fee, and will be assessed on employers who fail to provide plans that meet Obamacare reform standards.

Meanwhile, the Department of Health and Human Services announced it would offer financial assistance to certain insurers who've suffered losses because of Obamacare. The goal is to keep premiums from rising in an election year, the Times reported.

Republicans say the policy amounts to a bailout in return for the industry's support of Obamacare.

Separately, the department restricted states from establishing burdensome qualifications on insurance counselors or "navigators" whose job is to assist enrollees registering for Obamacare if the requirements interfered with implementing the federal law, the Times reported.

Obama plots deployment of U.S. military advisers to Syria
By Dave Boyer / The Washington Times

In a move that would expand America’s involvement in Syria’s civil war, President Obama is close to authorizing the U.S. military to train moderate Syrian rebels to fight the regime of Bashar al-Assad and al Qaeda-linked groups, according to reports.

U.S. officials told the Wall Street Journal Tuesday that the new military program would supplement a small training effort led by the CIA, which Mr. Obama authorized a year ago.

In a commencement address at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point on Wednesday, Mr. Obama is expected to give his backing for the new training effort by saying he intends to increase support to the armed Syrian opposition, including by providing them with training, the Journal reported.

A Frontline documentary to air Tuesday night will air interviews with moderate Syrian rebels who say the U.S. is arranging for their training in Qatar, with sophisticated weapons and techniques.

The administration has been debating for a year how to put more pressure on the Assad regime without entangling the U.S. in another protracted Middle East war.

Obama backs off drone strikes

/ Jihad Watch
ObamaFBIThere go the last vestiges of any serious counterterror effort from the Obama Administration. Islamic supremacists and Leftist jihad enablers have been pressuring him for years to do this, and have heaped all kinds of outlandish abuse upon him for not jumping immediately to do their bidding. Most outlandishly of all, this most Islamophilic of Presidents won an “Islamophobia” award in the UK a few months ago. It was only a matter of time before he would cave.

“Obama backs off drone strikes,” by Kristina Wong, The Hill, May 19, 2014:
President Obama is relying less on drones and more on foreign governments in the global fight against terrorists.
The shift, which also includes fewer unilateral special operations raids of the type that killed Osama bin Laden, is prompting criticism that Washington depends on unstable governments such as in Nigeria, where Boko Haram, an extremist group, has emerged as a new threat.
The Pentagon has hiked its budget for “Section 1206” counterterrorism programs to train and equip foreign militaries from $218.6 million in 2012 to a requested $290.2 million in 2014, according to a recent Congressional Research Service report.
Its budget for “Section 1208” counterterrorism programs, which train and equip foreign militaries and also include more specific operational activities, is classified, but defense officials say that while the amount has stayed stable, money has shifted from Afghanistan to North Africa and the Middle East.
The administration zealously used drones at the beginning of Obama’s term, a strategy that angered partner governments and drew criticism from both the left and the right.
The scrutiny led the president to announce last spring that the U.S. would be more tempered in its use of unmanned airstrikes against terrorists.
The administration provides no statistics on these attacks, but the nonprofit organization The Long War Journal found the number in Yemen fell from 41 in 2012 to 26 in 2013. In Pakistan, the number dropped from an estimated 117 in 2010 to 28 in 2013.
The White House formally rejects the idea that the government is relying more on foreign governments in the war on terrorism.
But in a speech at the National Defense University in Washington last May where Obama laid out his plans on fighting terrorism, the president spoke of the need to work with other nations.
“Beyond Afghanistan, we must define our effort not as a boundless ‘global war on terror’ but rather as a series of persistent, targeted efforts to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America,” Obama said. “In many cases, this will involve partnerships with other countries. Much of our best counter-terrorism cooperation results in the gathering and sharing of intelligence and the arrest and prosecution of terrorists.”
Critics say the limits of the strategy can be seen around the world.
“That makes sense where there’s capability, but there’s no substitute for American counterterrorism expertise,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told The Hill….
Well, that expertise is vastly overrated, Senator, especially now that counterterror officials are forbidden to study the motives and goals of the terrorists.

Critics: White House Blunder Puts Whole CIA Unit in Peril

By Todd Beamon
 / Newsmax

The accidental disclosure of the identity of the top CIA agent in Afghanistan by the Obama administration could affect operations in that country — even target the entire unit for assassination by the Taliban, political operatives said Monday.

"It looks like a rookie mistake, but it's in year six of the administration," retired Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, who directed both the CIA and the National Security Agency, told Newsmax. "It's a bit stunning. You would never expect to see that in material that's been made public."

Former House Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra told Newsmax that the CIA agent "is now compromised. I just classify this as a major blunder by the Obama White House national security staff."

"I do not know how long this person has been in Kabul, but they're not going to be there for long," Hoekstra added. "They'll probably be moved within a couple of days."

Bob Baer, a retired CIA agent, told CNN that administration officials are "going to have to pull him out now that he's been identified publicly."

"The Taliban probably didn't know his name before, but they will now," he said. "They will focus on attempting to assassinate him — and I think it is just a matter of fact that they will pull him out of Afghanistan."

In an embarrassing flub for the White House, the CIA official's name was included in an email sent to thousands of journalists during President Barack Obama's surprise Memorial Day trip to Bagram Air Field in Afghanistan.

The officer's name — identified as "chief of station" in Kabul — was included by U.S. embassy staff on a list of 15 senior U.S. officials who met with Obama during the Saturday visit.

The list was sent to a reporter for The Washington Post who was representing the news media, who then sent it out to the White House "press pool" list, which contains as many as 6,000 recipients.

The officer's name was being withheld by many news organizations at the request of the Obama administration, who said its publication could put his life and those of his family members in danger.

A Google search, however, appeared to reveal the name of the officer's wife and other personal details.

White House officials realized the error when Washington Post White House bureau chief Scott Wilson notified them, and sent out a new list without the station chief's name.

The reporter who distributes the pool report generally sends it to the White House to be checked for factual accuracy and then forwards it to the thousands of journalists on the email distribution list.

In this case, the White House failed on at least two occasions to recognize that the CIA official's name was being revealed and circulated so broadly.

The disclosure smacked of the 2003 disclosure that Valerie Plame was a CIA operative by officials of the George W. Bush administration, Hayden and Hoekstra told Newsmax on Monday. It was done to discredit Plame's husband, a former ambassador who had criticized the decision to invade Iraq.

Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a lawyer who was chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in the case, and sentenced to 30 months in prison, though Bush later commuted the prison sentence.

For her part, Plame said on Monday on Twitter:

"The issue is the same," Hayden told Newsmax. "The issue is revealing the name of someone whose relationship to the CIA is a classified matter. It's exactly the same thing."

While neither Hoekstra nor Hayden suspects the disclosure was intentional, what is most troubling about it, they said, is that Obama's national security staff should know how to handle such matters by now — after almost six years in the White House.

"This is not the president's first trip overseas," Hoekstra said. "He's now nearly six years into his presidency, and for an 'experienced' staff to be making these kinds of mistakes is pretty inexcusable."

Members of the CIA's operations arm, called the National Clandestine Service, are typically given cover identities to protect them, their families, and the sources they have recruited abroad.

The station chief, who manages all CIA operations in the country, is often a senior officer whose true name is known to the host nation and other intelligence agencies.

The term "station chief" is sensitive enough, however, that former officers usually are not allowed to use it in their resumes in connection with specific countries, even after their covers have been lifted.

Because Afghanistan's station chief is known to Afghan officials and lives in a heavily guarded compound, he may be able to continue in his job, both Hayden and Hoekstra told Newsmax.

"Most likely, the CIA chief in Kabul was cooperating with key people in the Afghan military," Hoekstra said. "We know that there's probably leaks in the Afghan hierarchy, but that's no excuse for us being sloppy. That's absolutely no excuse."

Baer, who worked primarily in the Middle East for the CIA from 1976 to 1997, echoed similar concerns to CNN.

"They're going to be able to look at him, his cover," he said, referring to the Taliban. "The people around him are going to look like CIA, too, and they may have to take a whole unit out.

"It depends on the situation out there," Baer added. "But this is a serious breach of security. The problem is White House staffers, and some of the military, don't understand the significance of cover and what it means for the CIA."

The intentional disclosure of the name of a "covered" operative is a crime under the U.S. Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

In January, a former CIA officer, John Kiriakou, was sentenced to 30 months in prison after pleading guilty to disclosing to a reporter the name of an undercover agency officer.

"I doubt anyone from the White House is going to be prosecuted over this," said Jesselyn Radack, who represented Kiriakou. "It shows the continuing double standard over leaks."

Referencing the Plame case, Hoekstra also cited a double standard — but this one is with the mainstream media and its continued weak coverage of the Obama administration.

"What you're going to see again is a double standard," he told Newsmax. "Obviously, in terms of scale, this is a much more significant blunder than the mistake that was made by Scooter Libby.

"You're going to see the media just skate on this one and say: 'That's too bad. That's really too bad that someone made a mistake like this.'

"But the person in Kabul is absolutely furious that his or her cover has been blown," Hoekstra said. "When you compare that to where Valerie Plame was to the station chief in Kabul, there is no comparison — in terms of scale and in terms of importance."

Santa Barbara –Virtually Gun Free and Target Rich

By Craig Andresen 

sb 1If someone is hell bent on killing others, they will always find a way to do it.

Richard Martinez, the father of 20-year-old Christopher Ross Michaels-Martinez who was killed in a madman’s rampage last week in Santa Barbara spewed this nonsense a few nights ago: 

“Why did Chris die? Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA… When will enough people say, ‘Stop this madness.’ We do not have to live like this. Too many people have died. We should say to ourselves, ‘not one more.’”

According to this liberal, gun free zone, anti 2nd Amendment father, his son was killed, because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA…”

Really Mr. Martinez? THAT’S how you see it???

You sir are a fool.

Your son was not killed by the NRA nor by politicians who, as you assert, are so craven as to stand with the 2nd Amendment. YOUR son was killed by a liberal entitlement demanding madman…one Elliot Rodger…but you just can’t bring yourself to admit that the fault…the ultimate fault lies with someone, a shooter who shared your basic political philosophy, can you?

Martinez, like so many other liberals, foolishly believes that more gun laws would have kept his son alive. Martinez is but further proof that Reagan was spot on when he said…

“The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

The 'People's Pope' tries to appease the unappeasable
By: Diane Sori

“I am with you.”  
- Pope Francis' words to Palestinian children while in Bethlehem

Let me start by saying that some articles are harder to write than others and this is one of them for NEVER in my wildest dreams did I ever think I'd say anything against the Pope of the Holy Roman Catholic Church for NOT only do I respect the man but I respect and honor the position he holds. But when the Pope appears to side against Israel I cannot remain silent.

Just a few days ago, Pope Francis publicly said words he should NEVER have said as he, the titular head of the Roman Catholic Church and speaking on their behalf, expressed sympathy and solidarity with the Palestinians, and gave his and the Church's support to the so-called (non-existent) Palestinians. And he did this during his first pilgrimage to the Holy Land as Pope.

Repeatedly saying he backed the Palestinians statehood goal, Pope Frances, who could have prayed anywhere during his visit to the West Bank, calculatingly chose to pray at Israel’s rightfully placed and so needed separation wall...the one that keeps the barbarians from blowing up innocent people in Israel...chose to pray at a section where “Free Palestine” was scribbled on the wall...and also chose to call the recent halt in the peace talks “unacceptable.”
He even went so far as to arrange a June 6th meeting between the Israeli and Palestinian presidents...a meeting to be held at the Vatican where Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres can pray for peace together. “I offer my home in the Vatican as a place for this encounter of prayer,” Pope Frances said, but I doubt this will in the end come to fruition for the Palestinians do NOT want peace nor do they want just a sliver of Israel...they want ALL of Israel...and the Pope should well know this...or does but just does NOT care or is just too fearful of addressing the truth.

But wait, to insure this meeting take place, watch this most liberal of Popes invite Barack HUSSEIN Obama to join in the prayers...oh what a photo-op from hell that would be.

And there's more...Pope Francis, now sadly showing himself to be a liberal muslim supporting Pope, also gave a private luncheon for five Palestinian families who claim they were directly harmed by Israel's policies, but he did NOT host the same for let's say five Israeli families of those the Palestinians have killed with their almost daily rocket launches into Israel or with their much ballyhooed suicide bombings.

And all this obvious anti-Israel and shadowy anti-Jewish sentiments by this Pope has the Palestinians dancing in the streets, so to speak, as Palestinian officials applauded this most revered man's decision to refer to the “state of Palestine." But even more appalling than that...and almost on par with Barack HUSSEIN Obama's demand that Israel pull back to its pre-'67 borders...was this Pope calling Mahmoud Abbas a "man of peace," referring to him as the president of the “state of Palestine,” and referring to his Bethlehem office as the “presidential palace.” 
And with those words Pope Frances knowingly or unknowingly dug the knife deep into Israel's back and did so before the cameras.

And just like after 9/11, the muslims here in America...those of so-called Palestinian descent...had to stick their two-cents in helping to flame the fire this Pope ignited.

“Coming to Bethlehem and flying to Bethlehem from Jordan shows solidarity with the Palestinian people, which is wonderful. We need that,” were the words spoken by Samar Sakkakin from Canton, Michigan NOT far from the muslim enclave of Dearborne...words once again proving there is NO such thing as a moderate muslim.

But what's even worse than the words Pope Frances spoke or the invite to pray he made is that this man had NO business butting into affairs he knows NOTHING about. Let him live under the threat of daily rocket attacks...let him wander the streets of Tel-Aviv or other areas of Israel and wonder if the next bus he takes or the next restaurant he stops at to eat will be his last...let him experience what it's like to have less than a minutes warning to get into a bomb shelter...let him live under the threat of a nuclear bomb aimed at his country with madmen at the trigger...let him have all that and then and only then can he butt into the affairs of a sovereign nation...of Israel...who lives daily with hungry wolves at her door.

And dare I say this Pope misled his followers because for weeks leading up to his visit, Pope Frances had been insisting that this three-day trip to the Holy Land was to be a “strictly religious” pilgrimage to commemorate the 50th anniversary of a previous meeting between the Catholic and Orthodox hierarchy, and to pray with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the head of the world's Orthodox Christians. Changing his mind at the very last minute as his advisers claim, and then doing and saying what this Pope has done and said, now removes this visit in its entirety from the religious and places it into the realm of the political. And when one is the head of the Holy Roman Catholic Church with its roughly 1.2 billion followers, the political fallout can have huge ramifications...and in this case those ramifications bode very poorly for Israel.

And smack of the 'old hatreds' resurfacing.

Claiming he is a friend of Israel...but with his actions and words sadly proving otherwise...Pope Frances, on the final stop of this trip, arrived in Israel where he pulled out the best of the accepted politically correct words and called for a “just and lasting solution” so that Israelis and Palestinians may live in peace. Saying Israel deserves peace and security “within internationally recognized borders,” while the Palestinians have a “right to live with dignity and with freedom of movement” in their own homeland, this Pope cannot accept the simple fact that there is NO such thing as Palestinians...they're just run-of-the-mill Arabs most with Jordanian ancestry... and that their homeland is NOT Israel but is Jordan and the other massive Arab nations that surround the tiny sliver of land that is Israel...a nation that cannot ill-afford to give up even one handful of dirt to those who wish to wipe her off the face of the Earth.

And Pope Francis for whatever reason cannot accept the fact that their own brethren do NOT want them as the so-called Palestinians are the bottom of the Arab barrel in every respect.

So while Pope Francis' intentions might be good...and as the Holy See I pray they are...and his hope for peace between the two factions heartfelt...the sad reality is that he has overstepped his bounds on this one as most Westerners know that there can NEVER be peace with those out to kill us all.