Archive for June, 2009

North Korea getting “ballsy”!

June 25, 2009

By JAE-SOON CHANG, Associated Press Writer

SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea vowed Thursday to enlarge its atomic arsenal and warned of a “fire shower of nuclear retaliation” in the event of any U.S. attack, as the regime marked the 1950 outbreak of the Korean War amid heightened tensions.

The anniversary came as the U.S. Navy trailed a North Korean ship suspected of carrying weapons in violation of a U.N. resolution punishing Pyongyang’s May 25 nuclear test, and as anticipation mounted that the North might test-fire short- or mid-range missiles in the coming days.

State-run newspapers in Pyongyang ran lengthy editorials accusing the U.S. of invading the country in 1950 and of looking for an opportunity to attack again. The editorials said that justified North Korea’s development of atomic bombs to defend itself.

The North “will never give up its nuclear deterrent … and will further strengthen it” as long as Washington remains hostile, Pyongyang’s main Rodong Sinmun newspaper said.

In a separate commentary, the Rodong blasted a recent U.S. pledge to defend South Korea with its nuclear weapons, saying that amounted to “asking for the calamitous situation of having a fire shower of nuclear retaliation all over South Korea.”

The Minju Joson, another state-run newspaper, said the U.S. should withdraw its troops from South Korea and drop its “hostile” policy toward the North, saying those were “key to resolving the Korean peninsula issue.”

Historical evidence shows it was North Korea that started the Korean War by invading the South, but Pyongyang claims the U.S. was to blame. The totalitarian government apparently hopes to infuse North Koreans with fear of a fresh American attack to better control the hunger-stricken population.

The U.S. fought alongside the South, leading U.N. forces, during the war. The conflict ended in 1953 with a truce, not a peace treaty, leaving the peninsula divided and in a state of war. The U.S. has 28,500 troops in South Korea to protect against hostilities.

The U.S. has repeatedly said it has no intention of attacking the North.

The new U.N. resolution seeks to clamp down on North Korea’s trading of banned arms and weapons-related material by requiring U.N. member states to request inspections of ships carrying suspected cargo.

North Korea has said it would consider interception of its ships a declaration of war.

The U.S. has been seeking to get key nations to enforce the sanctions aggressively. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called the foreign ministers of Russia and China on Wednesday to discuss efforts to enforce the U.N. punishments, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said.

The Kang Nam is the first North Korean ship to be tracked under the resolution. It left the North Korean port of Nampo a week ago and is believed bound for Myanmar, South Korean and U.S. officials said.

Myanmar state television on Wednesday evening said another North Korean vessel was expected to pick up a load of rice and that the government had no information about the Kang Nam.

A senior U.S. defense official said Wednesday that the ship had already cleared the Taiwan Strait.

He said he didn’t know how much range the Kang Nam has — whether or when it may need to stop at a port to refuel — but that the ship has in the past stopped in Hong Kong.

Another U.S. defense official said he tended to doubt reports that the Kang Nam was carrying nuclear-related equipment, saying the information officials had received seemed to indicate the cargo was conventional munitions.

The U.S. officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing intelligence.

The U.S. and its allies have not decided whether to contact and request an inspection of the ship, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Wednesday. He said he did not believe a decision would come soon.

Reports about possible missile launches from the North highlighted the tension on the Korean peninsula.

The North has designated a no-sail zone off its east coast from June 25 to July 10 for military drills.

A senior South Korean government official said the ban is believed connected to North Korean plans to fire short- or mid-range missiles. He spoke on condition of anonymity, citing department policy.

South Korea’s Yonhap news agency reported that the North may fire a Scud missile with a range of up to 310 miles (500 kilometers) or a short-range ground-to-ship missile with a range of 100 miles (160 kilometers) during the no-sail period.

U.S. defense and counterproliferation officials in Washington said they also expected the North to launch short- to medium-range missiles. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.

North Korea had warned previously it would fire a long-range missile as a response to U.N. Security Council condemnation of an April rocket launch seen as a cover for its ballistic missile technology.

___

Associated Press writers Hyung-jin Kim in Seoul and Pauline Jelinek, Pamela Hess and Lolita Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.

I get the impression that North Korea is getting brave because they sense a very big weakness in the White House. It seems to me, they see President Obama as being too afraid to do anything confrontational in a military sense. They may think, this is there “golden opportunity” to be the “bully” of the Pacific Rim. A “player”, a force to be reckoned with. I think we can get the North Koreans to back down if we quietly, at first, let it be known if North Korea does this, we will allow the complete rearmament of Japan. To this day, Asia is still afraid of a fully armed Japan. I believe this is our “ace in the hole”. Will Obama play it? Stay tuned.

What Is Obama Thinking?

June 24, 2009

S.E. Cupp ,Conservative Commentaror

– FOXNews.com

In the past two months, the House Speaker has criticized the integrity of the CIA, a popular television host called a governor a “slutty flight attendant,” and a California Senator publicly humiliated a U.S. Army general.
And what has our president had to say about any of it? Zilch. Nada. Crickets.
While it’s true the president’s job is not to mediate childish playground disputes, he is supposed to show some calculated leadership on all kinds of issues, small and large, especially when they become so publicly divisive. Americans are desperate to know what he thinks, and his lack of leadership on these issues has been conspicuous and chilling.
When Nancy Pelosi accused the CIA of lying to her and Congress about the use of certain interrogation methods, President Obama allowed the accusations to go totally unanswered, even after she repeated and strengthened them. By maintaining his silence on the matter, Republicans were forced to take leadership themselves, pressing the Speaker on her charges, and defending the CIA.
This wasn’t just a little pigtail-pulling tiff by the see-saw — this concerned the credibility of the CIA, the legitimacy of the agency’s intelligence, and our national security itself. And the only response it elicited from Obama was a bizarre and anachronistic interjection into a briefing on auto emissions, when he suddenly offered that Pelosi has “just been cracking the whip and, you know, making Congress so productive over these last several days. We are grateful for her.”
The only right action here for any president was to defend the CIA, his CIA director and the country’s intelligence-gathering operatives. Where did he stand on it? We don’t know.
Then, a month later, when David Letterman called Alaska Governor Sarah Palin a “slutty flight attendant” and hurled despicable insults at her daughter, the silence, again, was deafening. Even though the incident may not carry global policy implications, as a father of two daughters and the leader of a country that has more women than men, didn’t he feel compelled to defend an accomplished governor and mother of five? Apparently not.
Had the president issued a brief statement criticizing Letterman’s deplorable jokes, he would have set the tone for an industry that already worships him, while appeasing women on both sides of the aisle who are deeply offended by the way Palin — and Hillary Clinton, for that matter — have been treated. Is he a uniter or isn’t he?
And most recently, when Senator Barbara Boxer demanded that a decorated U.S. Army general call her “senator” instead of “ma’am” — setting off a wave of outrage in the Armed Services — the president and his administration were again silent. There was no defense issued  for a U.S. senator or for the military personnel he commands. Content to let Boxer and her supporters duke it out with the military, President Obama didn’t wade into this one either.
Arguments that the president is too busy to waste time on petty, partisan squabbles like these just doesn’t fly. First, they aren’t petty. They are important commentaries on the social and cultural divisions of the country, and the very stuff Americans care about. They want to know what the president thinks about them.
Second, he apparently has plenty of time. If there’s time to make a Leno appearance, and time to fill out (and post on the White House official Web site) his NCAA brackets, and time to comment on Rush Limbaugh and FOX News, then isn’t there time to throw an opinion or two out on these issues?
His silence on these matters would be more compelling if President Obama were loudly and decisively dealing with the really important stuff, like Iran and North Korea. But he’s been relatively silent there as well. When Britain comes down heavier on Iran than the United States does, you know something’s out of whack. And as for North Korea, that was handed over to the U.N., where it was summarily scolded.
The presidentS.E. Cupp ,Conservative Commentaror

In the past two months, the House Speaker has criticized the integrity of the CIA, a popular television host called a governor a “slutty flight attendant,” and a California Senator publicly humiliated a U.S. Army general.

And what has our president had to say about any of it? Zilch. Nada. Crickets.

While it’s true the president’s job is not to mediate childish playground disputes, he is supposed to show some calculated leadership on all kinds of issues, small and large, especially when they become so publicly divisive. Americans are desperate to know what he thinks, and his lack of leadership on these issues has been conspicuous and chilling.

When Nancy Pelosi accused the CIA of lying to her and Congress about the use of certain interrogation methods, President Obama allowed the accusations to go totally unanswered, even after she repeated and strengthened them. By maintaining his silence on the matter, Republicans were forced to take leadership themselves, pressing the Speaker on her charges, and defending the CIA.

This wasn’t just a little pigtail-pulling tiff by the see-saw — this concerned the credibility of the CIA, the legitimacy of the agency’s intelligence, and our national security itself. And the only response it elicited from Obama was a bizarre and anachronistic interjection into a briefing on auto emissions, when he suddenly offered that Pelosi has “just been cracking the whip and, you know, making Congress so productive over these last several days. We are grateful for her.”

The only right action here for any president was to defend the CIA, his CIA director and the country’s intelligence-gathering operatives. Where did he stand on it? We don’t know.

Then, a month later, when David Letterman called Alaska Governor Sarah Palin a “slutty flight attendant” and hurled despicable insults at her daughter, the silence, again, was deafening. Even though the incident may not carry global policy implications, as a father of two daughters and the leader of a country that has more women than men, didn’t he feel compelled to defend an accomplished governor and mother of five? Apparently not.

Had the president issued a brief statement criticizing Letterman’s deplorable jokes, he would have set the tone for an industry that already worships him, while appeasing women on both sides of the aisle who are deeply offended by the way Palin — and Hillary Clinton, for that matter — have been treated. Is he a uniter or isn’t he?

And most recently, when Senator Barbara Boxer demanded that a decorated U.S. Army general call her “senator” instead of “ma’am” — setting off a wave of outrage in the Armed Services — the president and his administration were again silent. There was no defense issued  for a U.S. senator or for the military personnel he commands. Content to let Boxer and her supporters duke it out with the military, President Obama didn’t wade into this one either.

Arguments that the president is too busy to waste time on petty, partisan squabbles like these just doesn’t fly. First, they aren’t petty. They are important commentaries on the social and cultural divisions of the country, and the very stuff Americans care about. They want to know what the president thinks about them.

Second, he apparently has plenty of time. If there’s time to make a Leno appearance, and time to fill out (and post on the White House official Web site) his NCAA brackets, and time to comment on Rush Limbaugh and FOX News, then isn’t there time to throw an opinion or two out on these issues?

His silence on these matters would be more compelling if President Obama were loudly and decisively dealing with the really important stuff, like Iran and North Korea. But he’s been relatively silent there as well. When Britain comes down heavier on Iran than the United States does, you know something’s out of whack. And as for North Korea, that was handed over to the U.N., where it was summarily scolded.

The president will spend this week selling health care on ABC. But the more he remains silent on issues large and small, domestic and international, cultural and political, the less presidential he looks. Just because he lives in the White House, flies on Air Force One, makes commercials for his various policy initiatives, and appoints czars to oversee the big problems, doesn’t mean he’s leading the country. Real leaders have opinions. What are his?

Just another day in the life of  “Barack the Benevolent”. Our “testicularly challenged” President spends most of his days hiding under his desk. It almost seems he waits for his staffers to tell him what he believes and when to start believing it! Why do you think North Korean dictator Kim Jeong (mentally) Il is doing what he is doing? Because he knows our “testosterone lacking” leader is all fluff and no substance. At this rate, by the time January 2013 rolls around, China will be in control of Taiwan and will own the Spratly Islands of the Philippines. North Korea will be a nuclear power and Japan will be DEMANDING we allow them to build a full fledged military.

Barack H. Obama———“The Jimmy Carter of the 21 st Century”!

MICHAEL GOODWIN: Obama’s Slip Is Showing

June 21, 2009

By Michael Goodwin
New York Daily News Columnist/FOX News Contributor

One ofPresident Obama‘s favorite words is “unsustainable.” It also happens to be the perfect description of his standing with the American people.

Polls consistently find he is personally more popular than his major policies. That situation is unsustainable – something has to give. The first law of politics says the two must eventually get in sync.

Bet that Obama’s popularity will give. In part that’s because, even if he wanted to, he can’t undo the big policies the public doesn’t like, especially his adding to the deficit and his aggressive push to get government more involved in private industry.

Another reason is that Obama doesn’t want to change course and ridicules those who think he should. At a Democratic fund-raiser Thursday, the President reportedly mimicked a robot as he called criticism of his policies “predictable.”

His partisan audience yukked it up, but the last laugh may be on Dems who follow their audacious leader too closely. Dem gains in the last two elections came primarily from conservative-leaning districts and some members already are worried about re-election. If the tide turns against Obama, they could be in trouble.

Yet Obama, likeGeorge Bush, seems to be digging a foxhole and insisting he is right and the public is wrong. We know how that worked out for Bush and theGOP.

While it’s too early to say Obama’s honeymoon is over, the public is waking up to the danger of uncontrolled government power and spending. Three separate polls last week had similar findings, and they weren’t pretty for theWhite House.

Two found decline in Obama’s job approval rating. AWall Street Journal/NBC Newspoll pegged it at 56%, down five points. Most important, independents dropped dramatically, from nearly a two-to-one approval to closely divided.

Nearly 70% of those polled are worried aboutWashington‘s intervention in the economy and 58% said Obama and Congress should focus more on the deficit. Most disapproved of Obama’s decision to close the terrorists’ prison atGuantanamo.

Similarly, thePew Research Centerfound Obama’s approval on the economy has declined from 60% in April to 52% now.

A third poll, by theNew York TimesandCBS, found 60% of Americans believe Obama doesn’t have a plan to deal with the deficit. Less than half approve of how he is dealing with health care and automakers.

In the short term, Obama is prevailing with nonstop campaigning. From daily TV speeches to political-style town halls, he is using his best weapons – his charisma and the power of the office. It’s haveTelePrompTer, will travel.

But facts, such as rising unemployment, are stubborn things and Obama’s long-term problem is that he is giving only lip service to public doubts. He says he wants government to have a “light touch,” yet every move is heavy-handed.

He says the deficit keeps him awake at night, yet he spends his daytime hours adding to it, most recently with a health bill that would cost at least $1 trillion over 10 years.

Obama dares call this reform and says it will save money. Wisely, the public doesn’t believe him. And just wait till voters get the bill for his carbon tax.

Even Congress is getting rebellious. The health bill is proving too expensive for some liberals who clamored for it and Obama’s overhaul of financial services was met mostly with skepticism.

The most dramatic rebuke came when the House voted 405-1 to condemnTehran‘s crackdown on demonstrators protesting the election. The bold, bipartisan statement stands in contrast to Obama’s wishy-washy comments, when he said he didn’t want to be seen as “meddling.”

He is guilty of far worse – of looking weak while a democracy revolution unfolds in a dangerous Muslim nation.

That’s not where an American President should be, even one certain he always knows best.


http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/columnists/goodwin/index.html#ixzz0J45ZeVQh&D

Obama is showing, more and more, he is nothing more then a huckster. A blowhard without any plan or direction. Worse yet, he doesn’t have the backbone to do what is right whether it is popular or not.  He is to busy wanting to be “loved” and being known as “Barack, the benevolent”. He is getting us deeper and deeper into debt. Using the classic liberal “just throw money at it” strategy. Now, we have a situation in Iran where it looks like the Iranian people have just about enough of those maniac mullah’s and what does “Barack the benevolent” do??????? Well? We are waiting…….(tick tock tick)

DAN GAINOR: The Left’s Daily Hate-a-Thon

June 18, 2009

By Dan Gainor
Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture

You’re a hater.

Face it. You wouldn’t even be reading this right-wing, reactionary claptrap if you weren’t. After all, I’m a hater as well. So are countless conservatives from Sean Hannity to Rush Limbaugh. Ann Coulter? Was that a question? Michelle Malkin. Of course, she’s a conservative star! Bill O’Reilly? The left has secured a special place in secular hell for him because he dared to criticize the practices of partial-birth abortion doctor George Tiller.

———-

The media label conservatives as haters and ignore how hate-filled the left is. It’s a ridiculous double-standard.

———-

In fact, all conservatives are considered haters unless they agree with President Obama –- on everything. Scary, dangerous haters who “cling to guns or religion,” as the president once put it. Especially guns because we are having an epidemic of political killings in America.  — Or so we are told.

It’s not true. The fact that lefties are desperately trying to link Holocaust Museum murder suspect neo-Nazi James von Brunn to the right shows how desperate they are for examples – any examples.

Remember, the GOP didn’t love everything Reagan did, but a loyal conservative taking up arms against the U.S. and the Gipper? Are they nuts?

Don’t answer that.

Yes, partial-birth abortion doctor George Tiller was killed. Conservatives didn’t support that or any murder. So far it appears it was one lone gunman. Just like the one lone gunman who shot President Reagan. Or the two separate left-wing gun-women who tried to assassinate President Gerald Ford.

In a nation of 300 million people, you need more than one or two examples to prove a trend. That’s my cue to show there are better responses. I’m a hater, so this is part of my soon-to-be government-mandated re-education.

Look at the travesties the right is inflicting on decent, God-unfearing liberals:

•    First, we have the CIA director attacking a former vice president saying, “he’s wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point.” Poor Mr. Gore. It’s horrible that Republicans treat him in such a hateful manner.
•    Then there’s beautifully bigoted actress Megan Fox who is set to fight the equally evil Megatron in her new “Transformers” movie. She was asked how to stop Megatron and said she would urge him to take the “Independence Day” approach and wipe out urban areas – “instead of the entire planet, can you just take out all of the minorities, the urban poor, the gays, and those crazy Bible-hating atheists in America?”
•    Finally, there’s the disrespect accorded Hillary Clinton. One vile, rightwing comedian said she had purchased new makeup to update her “‘slutty flight attendant’ look.” That same moron joked about getting her 14-year-old “knocked-up.” Or maybe it was her 18-year-old.

I’m not a hater, but I’m a liar. Not one of those quotes was targeted at liberals. In the first case, CIA Director Leon Panetta told The New Yorker magazine that Dick Cheney was using “dangerous politics.” But Panetta wasn’t being hateful. Liberals are never hateful.

Or take Megan Fox, please. The mega-beauty showed her mega-ugly side when interviewed about her upcoming film. She went after conservatives, urging Megatron to spare the Earth “and instead of the entire planet, can you just take out all of the white trash, hillbilly, anti-gay, super Bible-beating people in middle America?” Hateful? Her?

Lastly, we have David Letterman. First Letterman mocked Sarah Palin’s attempts to upgrade her “‘slutty flight attendant’ look.” Next he bashed her 14-year-old daughter, then amended his attempt at humor to say he was trying to bash a helpless 18-year-old instead.

Even the National Organization for Women sided with Palin and inducted Letterman into its Hall of Shame. In the testosterone-less world of “The View,” most of “the ladies” agreed Letterman was wrong. Barbara Walters summed it up by declaring critics can say whatever they want about a person but “don’t talk about my child.”

In every case, it was lefties holding their everyday hate-a-thon. Of course, it’s not real hate. Real hate happens in countries where hundreds of thousands die because someone wants to wipe them out.

Most American hate pales by comparison –- thank God.  While other nations get lost in civil war, pogrom or genocide, American hate ends up a twisted update of the Barney song: “I hate you, you hate me.” Americans misuse the word. We don’t hate broccoli, we just dislike it. And most sports fans don’t hate their opponents – except for the New York Yankees.

Hate in America is a marketing tool and the left is milking it for all it’s worth – to push a liberal agenda. The New York Times’ Paul Krugman and others are laying the groundwork to go after conservative speech –- on talk radio, on TV and maybe even in print. Other liberals, like the supposedly neutral journalist Bill Moyers want Obama to target guns, too. “Enough’s enough,” summed up Moyers.

In each case, the media are blaming conservatives as haters and ignoring how filled with hate the left is. It’s a ridiculous double-standard.

Don’t you hate that?

Dan Gainor is The Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Businessand Culture. His column appears each week on The Fox Forum and he can be seen each Thursday on Foxnews.com’s “Strategy Room.”

The expression “doth protest too much, methinks.” applies. I have contended for awhile, that liberalism is used as a mask to cover  deep seated hatred. They project it on to others and, in this case, that means Conservatives.

Obama’s Wimp Factor

June 16, 2009

By Liz Peek
Financial Columnist

President Obama is like the starving cheapskate at a smorgasbord; he wants it all, but refuses to pay for it. Health care reform, climate control, smarter schools, “fairer” taxes, greener vegetables and fat-free ice cream for everybody –- they’re all on the agenda. (Okay, so I snuck in the last two, but no one’s really counting.) Our ambitious young leader isn’t drawing tight the purse strings; he’s refusing to spend the real coin of the political realm – his personal popularity.

———-

Obama continues to refuse to dip into his treasure chest of popularity but he needs to be prepared to lose some of the “love” in the love fest that surrounds him.

———-

Obama knows, as has every president before him, that he has a window of opportunity. When first elected, each new commander-in-chief has a store of goodwill at his disposal. Some presidents have more, some have less. There’s no question that Mr. Obama has a veritable warehouse of public enthusiasm available, but astonishingly, he’s as tight as a tick about spending it.

Soon, Obama’s window will begin to close, and he knows it. His panicky call to supporters about health care reform from Air Force One the other day said it all. “If we don’t get it done this year, we won’t get it done,” he said. He’s right.

Yet, Obama refuses to dip into his treasure chest of popularity. Every time he has to offend some constituency, he shies away. Take the recent, much-ballyhooed tobacco legislation. One of the facets of the bill was that it banned flavors which supposedly make smoking more appealing. The only flavor of any importance – menthol – was, however, left off the list. Why? Because the Congressional Black Caucus lobbied for the omission, knowing that three-quarters of black voters prefer mentholated cigarettes.

This was simple (and unhealthy) pandering to a group that is unlikely to snub President Obama come Election Day. But, Obama couldn’t bring himself to spend even a nickel of his popularity passing legislation that might actually reduce smoking.

This thriftiness is even more visible in Obama’s plans to overhaul financial regulation. There has been building sentiment that the cut-and-paste approach to financial regulation in this country is disastrously confusing and inefficient. Some attribute the subprime mortgage catastrophe and subsequent recession in part to the ability of financial institutions to shop for the friendliest regulator, and the inability of overseers to see from a top-down perch the excesses building in the system. There has been universal agreement that we need to simplify and streamline the dozens of regulatory authorities that have sprung up as the financial services industry has evolved.

The Obama plan, to be rolled out this week, incredibly adds a layer of regulation by proposing two new structures – a “council of regulators” which will apparently be made up of those in charge of the existing agencies – and a new body to oversee consumer products like mortgages and credit cards.

I doubt that anyone in the Obama administration could possibly imagine that this is an improvement over the existing messy status quo. But – surprise! It turns out that the Congressional committees that are charged with regulating the regulators enjoy those powerful positions, and refuse to give them up. Who would Barney Frank be if he couldn’t excoriate the titans of Wall Street in his Financial Services Committee? Who would have ever heard of Collin Peterson, except for his oversight of the House Agricultural Committee, which just happens to manage the Commodities and Futures Trading Commission?

Instead of pressing his allies in Congress to accept some diminishment of their responsibilities, Obama caved, perpetuating a dysfunctional regulatory system. Some might welcome this tendency of the president, since it reduces many initiatives to mere gestures. However, the concern for taxpayers is that this proclivity is bound to generate bad legislation. Among Obama’s strongest supporters are union members who have already been favored on a number of important fronts. The worrisome disregard for established bankruptcy proceedings in the treatment of Chrysler and GM bondholders, the inclusion of a “buy America” provision in the stimulus bill, the threat to cut off aid to California if the state lopped off some union employees, the elimination of a pilot program allowing Mexican trucks to operate in the U.S., the idiotic “cash for clunkers” program that will give buyers the opportunity to trade up to a distinctly un-green Hummer – these are just a few examples of union-friendly moves that raise costs and guarantee votes.

Among our greatest challenges is improving the public education system in the U.S. Most would agree that any significant gains will threaten the powerful National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers whose nearly 5 million members ponied up generously for Obama’s campaign and worked hard to get out the vote. Arne Duncan, Obama’s Education czar, comes with an excellent reputation, and a notable history of championing charter schools that can often skirt union rules. To be successful, Mr. Duncan will have to roll back the insane practice of guaranteeing automatic life-long tenure and extinguish other measures which embrace mediocrity. Unfortunately, one of his first moves was to derail a prized voucher program in Washington, D.C. – not an auspicious start.

I wish Mr. Duncan good luck. To make any real progress, he will have to persuade President Obama to unlock his treasure chest of popularity, and to lose the love-fest. That may be his biggest challenge of all.

Obama whimpy? Obama all talk? Hmmmm, where have I read that before?

Christian Man Raped, Murdered for Refusing to Convert to Islam, Family Says

June 13, 2009

Saturday, June 13, 2009

By Nora Zimmett

A young Christian man was raped and brutally murdered in Pakistan for refusing to convert to Islam, and police are doing nothing about it, the victim’s brother and minister told FOXNews.com.

Pakistani police reportedly found the body of Tariq “Litto” Mashi Ghauri — a 28-year-old university student in Sargodha, Pakistan — lying dead in a canal outside a rural village in Punjab Province on May 15. He had been raped and stabbed at least five times.

“They have sexually abuse him, torture him with a knife on his testicle and genitals,” Ghauri’s brother, 24-year-old Salman Nabil Ghauri, said. “They have tortured him very badly, and after that they have stabbed five times with a knife and killed him.”

The family believes Litto Ghauri was murdered by the brothers of his Muslim girlfriend, Shazi Cheema, after they found him in a compromising sexual position with their sister.

The Rev. Haroon Bhatti, a Christian clergyman in the village and a friend of the Ghauri family, said Cheema’s three brothers came to Litto Ghauri’s house on May 11 and gave him an ultimatum: Marry their sister and convert to Islam.

Ghauri agreed to the marriage but refused to accept Islam, and the brothers kidnapped him at gunpoint and drove him to a remote farmhouse, where they tortured and murdered him, the minister said.

“On that farmhouse — four days there — we all, Christians and family, were searching for him,” the Rev. Bhatti said. “I was with him. I was searching for him.”

After police discovered the body, Ghauri’s death was declared a homicide and the family filed paperwork with the Atta Shaheed police station in their small village, Adda 44SB. But Ghauri’s brother said police still have not arrested the alleged killers and have refused to meet with his family.

“They don’t want to meet us, and the three of them who are murderers are outside,” Salman Nabil Ghauri told FOXNews.com. “They are free. Nothing is happening to them. No investigation is running.”

The Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C., told FOXNews.com that they knew nothing of the incident but were looking into it.

But one embassy official questioned the truth of the report.

“On the face of it, this appears to be exaggerated,” said the Pakistani official who asked not to be named. “This does not happen over there.”

The official said that minorities are very well represented in the Pakistani Parliament, and if someone in fact were murdered for not converting to Islam, “it would have been reported hugely.”

The embassy official added, “if an incident of that nature happened over there, there would have to be an investigation.”

Yet human rights watchdog groups say that what happened to Litto Ghauri is not uncommon because Christians in Pakistan are looked upon as the dregs of society. Pakistan’s population is 97 percent Muslim, and Christians are only a very small part of the remaining 3 percent.

“What the Muslim society has done in Pakistan is just associate low caste with being Christian,” said Jeremy Sewall, Advocacy Director of the International Christian Concern, which first reported the killing. “Many of these people, they clean human waste and that’s their job, and that’s what Christians are known for in Pakistan.”

The Rev. Bhatti says that radical Muslims frequently try to trap Christian men into converting to Islam by using a woman as bait — and Ghauri suspects the involvement of his dead brother’s girlfriend in trying to entrap him.

“It’s common to offer things — money, women — to Christians to convert,” Bhatti said.

Pakistan is one of the most hostile countries in the world for minority religions. The country still has blasphemy laws on the books that forbid saying or writing anything against Islam or the Koran. Punishment can include death.

“You basically have a situation where people can kind of act with impunity in the public,” said Paula Schriefer, advocacy director at Freedom House, a human rights group. “They use these laws to sort of settle scores … or, in situations like this, actually engage in kind of forced conversions.”

The U.S. State Department’s 2008 International Religious Freedom Report on Pakistan says, “Government policies do not afford equal protection to members of majority and minority religious groups.”

The Ministry of Religious Affairs, which is supposed to protect religious freedom, has a verse from the Koran on its masthead, the report said: “Islam is the only religion acceptable to God.”

While the U.S. government has provided millions of dollars in public outreach programs to help teach religious tolerance in Pakistan, human rights watchers say it’s not sufficient.

“There’s probably not enough that the U.S. government is doing to really talk about this issue because it’s such an important issue in Pakistan because faith is so important to them,” said Sewall.

The small Christian community is hoping that Ghauri’s death will bring attention to the plight of minority religious groups in Pakistan.

“Several incidents of Christian persecution go unnoticed in Pakistan because they occur in the furthest parts of Pakistan,” the Rev. Bhatti said. “This is Pakistan — predominantly Muslim. So they’re the rulers. They rule us.”

For Christian families like the Ghauris, living in a remote village in Pakistan, options are few. Because of their poverty they can neither leave nor help secure their own safety.

“We have very little family,” said Salman Nabil Ghauri, whose mother died years ago and whose father worked as a day laborer until the killing. “My father was a daily worker. Now he is earning nothing. He is fully mad now. He cannot understand anything — he is still in the shock of death.

“My elder son is dead, and I am only one person. Where can I run? I cannot start my studies or run after my case. What should I do?”

Ah……..the “religon of peace” once again proves it is really the church of Satan!

N. Korea Threatens Military Action if U.S. Imposes Blockade

June 13, 2009

From the

SEOUL, South Korea —  North Korea vowed Saturday to step up its atomic bomb-making program and threatened war if its ships are stopped as part of new U.N. sanctions aimed at punishing the nation for its latest nuclear test.

North Korea’s Foreign Ministry also acknowledged for the first time that the country has a uranium enrichment program, and insisted it will never abandon its nuclear ambitions. Uranium and plutonium can be used to make atomic bombs.

The threats, in a statement issued through the official Korean Central News Agency, came a day after the Security Council approved new sanctions aimed at depriving the North of the financing used to build its rogue nuclear program.

The resolution also authorized searches of North Korean ships suspected of transporting illicit ballistic missile and nuclear materials.

The sanctions are “yet another vile product of the U.S.-led offensive of international pressure aimed at undermining … disarming DPRK and suffocating its economy,” the North Korean statement said.

Pyongyang blamed Washington for the nuclear tensions, saying it was “compelled to go nuclear in the face of the U.S. hostile policy and its nuclear threats.”

Washington says it has no intention of attacking the North and said its concern is that North Korea is trying to sell its nuclear technology to other nations.

Saturday’s threats made clear North Korea’s refusal to back down from international calls to give up its nuclear ambitions in the wake of its April rocket launch and underground nuclear test last month.

The statement also raised concerns of a military skirmish.

“An attempted blockade of any kind by the U.S. and its followers will be regarded as an act of war and met with a decisive military response,” the North said.

As a precaution, South Korea has dispatched hundreds more marines to two islands near a western maritime border with North Korea that was the scene of deadly naval clashes in 1999 and 2002, officials said Friday.

North Korea’s acknowledgment that it has a uranium-enrichment program appears to confirm that it has a second source of bomb-making materials in addition to plutonium.

North Korea is believed to have about 110 pounds of plutonium, enough for half a dozen bombs, Yoon Deok-min, a professor at South Korea’s state-run Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, said Saturday.

Reprocessing 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods stored at North Korea’s Yongbyon complex could yield additional 18 to 22 pounds of plutonium — enough to make at least one more atomic bomb, he said.

More than a third of the spent fuel rods have been reprocessed and the rest of its plutonium will be weaponized, North Korea said Saturday.

Those moves would mark a significant step away from a disarmament pact between North Korea and five other nations in wake of its first nuclear test in 2006.

Under the deal, North Korea agreed to disable its main nuclear complex in Yongbyon north of Pyongyang in return for 1 million tons of fuel oil and other concessions. In June 2008, North Korea blew up the cooling tower there in a dramatic show of its commitment to denuclearization.

But disablement came to halt a month later as Pyongyang wrangled with Washington over how to verify its past atomic activities. The latest round of talks, in December, failed to push the process forward. The negotiations involve China, Japan, the two Koreas, Russia and the U.S.

North Korea walked away from the talks in April after the Security Council condemned its April 5 rocket launch, seen by the U.S., Japan and others as a cover for a long-range missile test.

North Korea has said it will test another long-range missile and is suspected of preparing for a third nuclear test, but there is no evidence that either plan is imminent.

Washington had anticipated a strong North Korean response to the U.N. sanctions. Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, cautioned Friday that North Korea could react to the resolution with “further provocation.”

“There’s reason to believe they may respond in an irresponsible fashion to this,” she told reporters.

Analyst Kim Yong-hyun of Seoul’s Dongguk University said North Korea was sending a stern message to Washington before President Barack Obama sits down with South Korea’s Lee Myung-bak for summit talks at the White House on Tuesday.

He said North Korea is engaging in a game of “chicken” with the U.S. that he predicted would eventually end in talks.

Well, it looks like Kim Jeong (mentally)Il is trying to find out just how wimpy President Obama is. Will the President “cave” and throw a whole bunch of financial inscentives at Kim? Or will he “act tough” and show him that “messing around” will only get him hurt? My guess? I think the President will “feel his pain” and “cave”. Just setting the stage for more, Stay tuned…………….

Will New Jersey Prefigure Obama’s (and Republicans’) Futures?

June 8, 2009

By Jon Kraushar
Communications Consultant

Is New Jersey’s 2009 governor’s race, pitting incumbent Democrat Jon Corzine against Republican Chris Christie, a foreshadowing of the future for President Obama and Republican challengers?

Like Obama, Corzine:

  • Moved from a legislator’s job as a U.S. senator to a chief executive’s job, with a mandate to turn around a disastrous economic situation.
  • Linked his opponent to President George W. Bush and continues to blame the Bush administration for anything and everything while claiming disputable accomplishments by Democrats.
  • Indulged public employees’ unions and organized labor, lavishly rewarding them with taxpayers’ money.
  • Promised economic development through government-supported “green” businesses.
  • Envisioned public-private partnerships that would yield jobs and growth.
  • Pledged to hack away at wasteful government spending.
  • Enjoyed a Democratic majority to carry forward his agenda.
  • Campaigned to expand the role of government in health care, education, energy and the environment.

In Corzine’s case, his efforts have hardly made the Garden State bloom. As The Wall Street Journal points out, in New Jersey, “…spending, taxes and debt all keep rising. According to the Tax Foundation, New Jersey had the highest local-state tax burden in the country last year, and it was the ‘least business-friendly’ state in the country.” New Jersey ranks third highest nationally in losing population and, increasingly, more of its wealthiest citizens—tired of being treated like ATMs by the government—are relocating to states with lower taxes.

New Jersey’s government is virtually bankrupt and Corzine is struggling, with an approval rating of about 40 percent—this in a state that is one of the most “blue” (Democratic) in the country. Corzine and Obama are close allies, both as prior members of “the world’s most exclusive club”—former U.S. Senators—and as “progressives” (Big Government liberals). Corzine is relying on Obama to campaign vigorously for him.

Christie is a former U.S. Attorney who made his reputation convicting over 100 corrupt Democrats andRepublicans. If he can sell a reform agenda that convinces voters he can relieve the state’s taxation and economic crises while he also comes across as likable, Christie just might win over enough disgruntled Democrats and Independents to beat Corzine.

In his primary night victory speech, Christie said, “You no longer want a governor who will promise and then disappoint. You just want someone that will tell the truth about the road ahead. So I will. The road ahead will not be easy. It will be filled with tough choices and sacrifice. But I know if we get back to the basics that have always made us great, that we can restore for people the hope and the faith and the trust that we want in our government.”

In the 2010 mid-term elections, take Christie’s first sentence and slightly adjust it to read, “You no longer want a president who will promise and then disappoint.” Rephrased that way with the rest of Christie’s statement, you just might have a preview of the Republican script for the 2010 elections ifObama’s economic recovery efforts go the way of Corzine’s.

Wouldn’t it be ironic if only a year from now Republicans are resurgent by running against the record of the opposing party’s president, stealing Obama’s and the Democrats’ playbook from 2008?

In politics, history has a way of reversing itself on the way to repeating itself.

Communications consultant Jon Kraushar is at www.jonkraushar.net.

The thing that worries me about my home state———-yes, I am a proud “Jersey boy”, is the shift in thinking with the influx of New Yorkers wich begain in the late 90’s. Although Northeast N.J. is  heavily Democratic in such predominately urban counties such as Hudson, Essex, and Union, as well as the Southwest county of Camden and Mercer in the west central area, most of N.J. is more Republican.

Since this influx, N.J. has only elected Democrats as Govenor…..and the debt has been growing. Unfortunately, N.J.has had a sad history of corrupt Democrats who treated the population as there “serfs” rather then their “employers”. I grew up with my elders telling me things like “the walls have ears” . Meaning that there were people who would mention anything, said by a naive 8 or 9 year old, to their Democratic bosses, so members of his or her family would be punished. That punishment usually meant loss of their job.

It was not only safe to be a Democrat but, you had to support the “right Democrat”. If not,  there was a punishment that would be invoked. I saw members of my family, literally, looking over their shoulders worrying who was listening to any conversation that involved local politics. NOBODY, in my family had the luxury of supporting,  publicly, anybody in politics. No campaign buttons, signs, bumper stickers, etc. It just was too politically “dangerous”.

The end finally came when a United States Prosecutor, Herbert J. Stern, took them on (the “Machine”) and won. He successfully prosecuted the mayors of Jersey City, Newark, and Atlantic City. The Democratic “Machine” was finally broken up when their “Godfather”, if you will, John V. Kenny, the Hudson County Democratic “Boss” was also indicted. Along with him,  Jersey City Mayor Thomas J. Whalen and former City Council president Thomas Flaherty, were indicted for conspiracy and extortion in a multi-million dollar political kickback scheme on city and county contracts.

Growing up in that situation, left me seeking for something else, politically speaking. My epiphany came the day I heard Ronald Wilson Reagan say, I should be proud to be an American and here is why…… He then proceeded to show me  all the good things this country has done for, over, 200 years and how it can be even better. I never looked back. I became a Republican, a “Reagan Republican”.

My time growing up in N.J. never left me. Even as I have travelled half way around the world. My hope is, my beloved home state will NOT fall back in to that quagmire known as the “Democratic Machine”. Unfortunately, it has been in Democratic hands again. AND……… as expected, the Democrats, once again, embarrassed New Jersey.  Gov. Jim McGreevy decides to have a homosexual affair with an Israeli extortion artist while in the Governor’s mansion and resigns office. N.J. elects Sen Jon Corzine, who looks like Karl Marx, and who’s policies aren’t much different. He has N.J. of the brink of bankruptcy.

Guess nothing much has changed………………………………..

Spy Charges May Complicate Obama’s Efforts to Engage Cuba

June 7, 2009

Some fear the arrest of retired State Department official Walter Kendall Myers and his wife could erode congressional support for easing tensions with the communist nation.

FOXNews.com

Saturday, June 06, 2009

President Obama’s efforts to engage Cuba and promote reform on the communist island may have been damaged Friday by federal charges against a former State Department intelligence analyst for allegedly spying for Cuba over a 30-year period.

Walter Kendall Myers and his wife are accused of using grocery carts among their array of tools to pass government secrets, according to an indictment unsealed Friday.

The arrest comes two months after the Obama administration acted to relax a trade embargo imposed on Cuba since 1962 and days after the Organization of American States revoked the island nation’s 1962 suspension.

Some fear the arrest could erode congressional support for easing tensions with the communist nation.

“I think it might be too early to know but it can’t good,” said Ted Piccone, a senior fellow and deputy director for foreign policy at Brookings Institution, who knew Myers when he worked at the State Department.

“I think the timing is certainly bad,” he said, noting how the OAS’s decision to readmit Cuba led some U.S. lawmakers to express their strong disapproval of lifting sanctions on the island nation.

“This is only going to fuel the fire for those who are opposed to a closer relationship with Cuba,” Piccone said. “I don’t know if it’s enough to put the brakes on it but I think it will slow it down.”

Sydney Weintraub, a Latin American analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies agreed but added, “The fact that Cuba has a spying mechanism, no one is surprised about that. Who the person is is surprising.”

State Department officials say Myers had been under investigation for three years, since before he retired in 2007. He had access to highly sensitive material, officials said.

Their methods of communicating with the Cubans included Morse code on shortwave radio, changing shopping carts at the grocery store and a face-to-face meeting with President Fidel Castro himself, court documents say.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has ordered a damage assessment of what the couple may have revealed.

David Kris, assistant attorney general for national security, described the couple’s alleged spying for the communist government as “incredibly serious.”

Philip Peters, a Cuba specialist and vice president of Lexington Institute, a public policy research center, said the arrests shouldn’t stop Washington from pursuing diplomatic efforts with Havana.

“I think it’s a fact of life, they have espionage against us and we do against them,” he told FOXNews.com. But he added U.S. interests dictate renewing talks with Cuba.

“Just as we didn’t stop negotiating arms control with the Soviet Union, our interests dictate we should engage with Cuba and that doesn’t change because the spies were caught,” he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

I think it is time for us to return to a policy of executing convicted spies. Does ANYBODY really believe that we can mitigate any damage these lowlifes do? What makes the Government think that they will tell you the complete truth after they are caught? Obviously, giving them life in a minimum security Federal prison isn’t a deterrent.

The “King” of Paranormal Media dissed by U.S Government

June 7, 2009

Below is a letter radio “Hall of Fame” member Art Bell sent to Sen. Harry Reid on a situation regarding Art’s Filipina wife. It makes you wonder why the U.S. government would go to such lengths on an immagration visa for a wife of a U.S. citizen unless………………

Airyn Bell, wife of radio talk show legend Art Bell, has been denied a U.S. Visa. Read about their incredible struggle against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). [Click the image on the left for proof the USCIS received the necessary documents from the Bells.]

Please also help Art plead his wife’s case. Contact the President and his staff at whitehouse.gov.

Here’s the letter Art Bell wrote to Senator Harry Reid on behalf of his wife Airyn Bell:

My name is Arthur W. Bell. My Wife is Airyn R. Bell. We have been Married over (3) Years now and have a (2) Year old Daughter who was born in Las Vegas, Nevada. My Wife is Philippine. In December 2006 she was given a CR1 Visa which was processed by the American Embassy in Manila, Philippines. We arrived in Las Vegas Dec 26, 2006.

In Oct 2008 (Oct 10th, 2008) we sent USCIS a I-751 with evidence of our Marriage and the fee ($545.00). My Wife went to Las Vegas and did the Bio-Metric. We were given case Number WAC0900851515. In early January 2009 we received a notice from the California service center to send MORE evidence. Within a few days we responded with much more evidence, it was RECEIVED by USCIS on Jan 15th 2009 (See POSTAL RECEIPTS – click for enlargement). Then in early March we received a notice that USCIS had not received our additional evidence and moreover that there was NO appeal and it was case CLOSED! So of course I called USCIS and they told me to send the evidence that they in fact received our package in a timely fashion which I did. They returned a letter saying they were sorry and had sent us the wrong form response and that we should send them $575.00.00. That was all they requested, so that’s all we sent. At this point we had already sent $545.00 (which was cashed) with the original application and I thought even though this sounded wrong, what the heck, rather than argue with USCIS I just sent the money. They returned the check saying it was incomplete, but that was all they had asked for, most of the responses from USCIS seemed to refer to other cases, not ours, but I was tired of fighting.

In both sets of evidence we included:

– Our Marriage License
– Our Daughter’s Birth Certif.
– Our JOINT bank accounts (2)
– Health insurance
– Joint car registration
– My Last Will (With my Wife and Daughter as receiving sole benefits)
– Social Security paperwork for all of us.
– Pictures (Trips we have taken etc.)
– The (2) homes I own in Nevada, payed in full
– (2) signed (Notarized) statements from friends attesting that our marriage is indeed in good faith
– Many additional documents proving it is a real Marriage entered to in good faith and still healthy

Then we had to return to the Philippines because of Family concerns and property there. Prior to leaving we went to USCIS in Las Vegas and had my Wife’s Passport stamped because her Conditional green Card had expired at the end of December 2008. They stamped it for another Year, they told us it was OK to travel, just be sure to get her Passport stamped.

So, we are now in the Philippines with this horrible mess behind us. We will be here until we get the Family issues resolved and decide what to do with the property we own (A Condo) here in Manila.

We left the U.S. on March 10, 2009.

I think of myself as a good American, however I do not feel as though I have been treated as one. Can you possibly help out in trying to untangle some of this mess? I have no idea what my Wife’s status is currently and no idea what steps to take next. I have called the USCIS, I have faxed them, I have sent return receipt required letters, all with no response, or with a response that does not relate to our case.

We have now been told my Wife can not return to the U.S. Please see response from USCIS. This was the FINAL step before they were to issue her 10 Year GREEN CARD, now they want us to start a two Year process ALL OVER AGAIN BECAUSE OF THEIR MISTAKE. THIS IS JUST WRONG. Please help us, it may take direct legislative action because the following was received following a letter sent by a congressional aide:

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

Thank you for contacting the Congressional Liaison Team within the California Service Center. Since the applicant is out of the country after the case was denied. The petitioner will need to start from filing the I-130 petition again for the beneficiary.

The reason for the denial was explained in the denial notice that your constituent received. The evidence was not received.

The applicant’s status has been terminated at this point, and she will not be able to return to the United States using the stamps in her passport.

Sincerely,

Yining Wu
Adjudication Officer
Congressional Unit
DHS/USCIS/CSC

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

As you can see, they say they did not receive the evidence, but in fact THEY DID. Does the truth even matter?

Yours Truly,

Arthur W. Bell & Airyn R. Bell

Evidence

Evidence

Is this “payback”? Has Art hit too close to home in all these years? Or is it because his Pinay wife isn’t one of Obama’s favorites, i.e. Mexican? Could it be that Filipinas are conservative and we dare not let in another person who may not “worship” the saviour-in-chief? I am concerned for an even more selfish reason. My Filipina wife and Filipino son. Will his savior-ness do the same to them?